I don't understand how this car works.

Come on any wheel power produce thrust have only have one and only one place to come from the kinetic energy of the car IE 1/2MV^2 and guess what going to happen to V when you do so?

Assuming that there is no hidden energy storage such as a fly wheel that is.

Yes, let's.

Below is a link to the record report for the rather recently set Greenbird land speed record ratified by NALSA. You will see a similar in-depth report for the Blackbird record once it is published.

http://www.nalsa.org/MeasuremantReport/MeasuremantReport.html

But the question asked by Cycloptichorn remains unanswered by you -- he has manned up and said he can say he was wrong ... can you? If an independent and experienced organization like NALSA issues a report and record saying that no stored energy was used and that we kicked the winds ass downwind by more than 2x and did it while not tacking back and forth will YOU apologize for calling us liars and hoaxters?

JB

Not a problem DD.

Thanks
JB

The NALSA seem like a first rate hobbie group similar to such groups aim at promoting the ultralight and skydiving sports.

Second the report for a world speed record you gave the link to seem well done.

Now with that said I would far happier if there was some people with advance engineering degrees and physics degrees also taking part in the oversight of any testing involving your group faster then the wind car.

If the test come off with nalsa I will at the very least be very interest indeed in reading the complete report.

There is nothing new under the sun.


THE KEELY MOTOR HOAX
by Daniel W. Herring.
After the search for perpetual motion was abandoned by true scientists, and the fallacy became too generally recognized to make it a means of coaxing money from the credulous investor, the idea took the no less insidious character of a machine which required a constant moderate supply of power from an outside source, but would return this many times over.

This result was to be accomplished by means of special mechanical actions or reactions which were declared to be either wholly new discoveries, or else actions that were not commonly understood. Practically unlimited supplies of power could be produced at little cost.

These special actions were, of course, the inventor's secret, but among them `vibration' was one of most potent, and twin brother to this was `radiation.' A celebrated instance of this phase of perpetual motion vagary was the Keely Motor. This while not claiming to be a perpetual motion machine, did purport to furnish motive power with a minimum expenditure of energy upon it.


It comes therefore in the class that legitimately succeeded the efforts to secure perpetual motion; but instead of being a sincere attempt to advance mechanical science by a genuine discovery of a new principle or some new application of old principles it was a fraud, although masquerading for a long time under the garb of honesty. It possessed so many of the characteristics of this kind of foible as to justify a somewhat extended account of it.

The inventor John Worrell Keely was a carpenter, who was born in Philadelphia in 1837 and died there in 1898. He was a good mechanic and a very clever talker, but not a highly educated man.

With a claim to have discovered a new force in mechanics which was to work wonders, he succeeded in inducing a dozen engineers and capitalists to organize a Keely Motor Company in New York in 1872, and to subscribe ten thousand dollars to begin the construction of the motor. He immediately applied his money to the purchase of material and the construction of machinery, and began to attract the attention of the public in 1874 when he gave a demonstration of the motor before a small company of prominent citizens of Philadelphia, November 10th of that year.

Among the expedients resorted to in exploiting a scientific fraud, mystifying lingo is one of the commonest, and in this Mr. Keely was an adept. At this demonstration the machine, or so much of it as was then to be exhibited, was called a "vibratory-generator"; in a later demonstration it was a "hydro-pneumatic-pulsating-vacu-engine" and changes in nomenclature were being rung continually always vague, delightfully general, and suggesting unlimited possibilities.

The inventor's funds began to run low, but his plausibility sufficed to keep him afloat and he so completely deluded his supporters, especially his most ardent one, Mrs. Bloomfield Moore, that he continued to hold their interest, and was kept on his feet financially. By 1890, however, the stockholders had become too weary (or wary) to be put off by evasions or tricks.

Mr. Keely declared he was now on the eve of success; he had arrived at that crucial stage, lacking just the one slight adjustment which, in all such cases, proves the insurmountable bar to final achievement. His "generator" had now become a "liberator" which would disintegrate air and release an etheric force of cyclonic strength.

One spectator at a demonstration said that a pint of water poured into a cylinder seemed to work great wonders. " The gauge showed a pressure of more than fifty thousand pounds to the square inch.

Great ropes were torn apart, iron bars broken in two or twisted out of shape, bullets discharged through twelve inch planks, by a force which could not be determined.

In the glory of his exuberance Keely now declared that with one quart of water, he would be able to send a train of cars from Philadelphia to San Francisco, and that to propel a steamship from New York to Liverpool and return would require just about one gallon of the same." (Julius Moritzen, in the The Cosmopolitan for April 1899.)

His technical terms were bewildering, intentionally so ; `molecular vibration, ' `sympathetic equilibrium,' `oscillation of the atom, ' `etheric disintegration,' `quadruple negative harmonics,' `atomic triplets,' came glibly from his lips to confuse or to enthrall his auditors.

At that time one of the greatest steamships in operation the Teutonic of the White Star line, crossed the Atlantic in six days, driven by engines of 17000 H.P., expending about 2,500,000 H.P.- hours of energy. That is just about the amount of energy now estimated to be liberated if the hydrogen in a half-pint of water were converted into helium. Keely was far within bounds!

Public interest in the Keely Motor dates from 1874. From the first, with the use of no agents but air, water, and the machine, its inventor made pretensions and promises that were more extravagant than those of any visionary or faker that preceded him.

The claim to produce magical results by means of a thimbleful of water with appropriate juggling was not new, but, as Mr. Benjamin wrote in 1886, "a power-creating machine of no known form or mode of operation, when based on notions upset eighty years ago, is a wonderful thing. To the confusion of the skeptics, the Keely motor is here, that is, not here but to be here three weeks hence. It has been going to be here three hence for twelve years." ("The Persistence of the Keely Motor," by Park Benjamin, The Forum for June 1886.)

He ascribes the persistence of this delusion to sheer psychological perversity in that portion of the public that hesitates to put any limit to the possibilities of science, as it understands the term science.

The New Science Review for April 1895, nine years later, has an article discussing the action of the motor, entitled "The Operation of the Vibratory Circuit," by Mr. Keely himself, that is an almost incredible jumble of terms.

He anchored his analysis of nature to a fundamental "trinity." Every force and practically everything else was "triune." For him the sacred number was not seven but three.

The basic idea of Keely's theory was that if one could catch and impose upon matter, by sympathetic vibration, the extremely rapid vibration that characterizes every atom and molecule, then, by the resonance of atoms, he could effect a recombination that would liberate an incalculable amount of energy.

At the time of these experiments radioactivity and the highly radioactive substances were not known; radio-telegraphy and radio- telephony had not dawned upon us and yet, how near each other wisdom and folly may sit!

Keely's pretensions appear to have anticipated the very phenomena and powers now associated with radioactivity and wireless signaling; and when we consider the discussions and revelations of atomic energy coming as genuine science within the last two or three years, these seem like an Alpine glow of which he had some glimmering, upon inaccessible peaks which he vainly strove to reach; but again when we recollect that within a week of the close of the year 1920, a Leipsic engineer fooled many savants by fraudulent claim to have discovered a way to `liberate' (Keely's own word) and yet control that same atomic energy, we can see what an easy path to notoriety the charlatan finds along such lines.

It was not until after Keely's death that the fraudulent nature of his scheme was established. It was then brought out by an examination of his laboratory after the motor had been removed, and it was found that the extraordinary performances of his complicated machinery were controlled from a cellar in which a source of motive power was operated.

This source of power was not actually identified but pipes and connections seemed to indicate pretty plainly that it was compressed air, which could be manipulated by the demonstrator in the laboratory. Yet his real secret has never been revealed.

The motor was taken to Boston and set up, but it failed to exhibit any "etheric force" when subjected to any vibratory influence, after its removal form the laboratory in Philadelphia. For a period of more than twenty-five years did this remarkable trickster not only keep his chicanery hidden but escaped the discovery that his pretensions really were impostures, and this in the face of experts and others who witnessed tests of his machine.

Many an untrained witness was astounded by `ocular' evidence, and to such an one the doubting smile of one who had not `seen' was irritation , to say the least.

Perpetual motion continues to be achieved, but the `working model' does not appear. The machine is set going, soon comes to a stop, and consistently refuses to operate without help, a failure""the souvenir of a delusion""of no more use than the Millerite's ascension robe after the twenty-second of October, 1844. [1]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There has been those folks all along -- they're from the San Jose State University AeroSpace Engineering Department. Check out the bio of the Professor on the project blog. Stanford Phd, etc.

JB

That like saying the cold fusion project had advance degree professors from the University of Utah.

I mean people with advance degrees not in bed with the project or to put it somewhat nicer not part of your project from it beginning.

Yeah, people like Dr. Mark Drela -- the MIT Professor and legend in the world of aero. Dr Drela produced the following math treatments in defense of DDWFTTW and you will find the following quote in the treatment.

"This confirms that the DDWFTTW condition V/W > 1 is achievable with a wheeled vehicle without too much difficulty."

You are on the wrong side of the one Bill.

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/attachments/propulsion/28167d1231128492-ddwfttw-directly-downwind-faster-than-wind-ddw2.pdf

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/attachments/propulsion/28168d1231128492-ddwfttw-directly-downwind-faster-than-wind-ddwe.pdf

Bill,
This isn't perpetual motion because there is energy being added from the wind. It is only a question of how that energy is used not whether it exists or not.

Bill,

I suggest you investigate the physics of iceboating.

The physics of iceboating have zero to do with the claims here.

Repeat zero to do with the claims that you can head directly down wind with no tacking and somehow go at a greater vel. then the wind.

When an iceboat or sail boat is tracking from one side of the wind to the other it is using it store energy in the mass of the boat to beat the wind.

On each side of the tack if is storing up energy in the form of 1/2 mv^2 and at the point of cross over there is zero energy being added to the boat and it is losing speed as the wind can not add energy when there is zero wind in relationship to the boat. See a text book on vector math,

I had said over and over and over if you add a device to store energy you can indeed beat the wind for short periods.

In the case of the old iceboat if you point it directly down wind then it can not go go over the vel. of the wind.

The fact that thinairdesign know that fact and throw in the old iceboat tell me that all he is trying to do in confused people.

When there is zero wind in relationship to the craft all the king men and all the king horses and all the internet hoaxers can not get energy out of that wind.

Poor Bill just can't seem to get on the right side of any part of this brainteaser.

Ok DrewDad, since I plugged the wrong number in at one point in my previous scenario I'm going to start all over here and make sure I've got it right for you.

First, the things we agreed on:

1: The 'work = force * distance' calcs for the work a propeller does on the air are independent of any motion over the ground, but rather use the distance through the air alone.
2: A 100% efficient propeller can produce 10lbs of thrust at 27.5 ft/sec (through the air) but will need 1/2HP provided to its input shaft to do so.

The question on the table at the moment is this ... We have a small cart on the ground with a 100% efficient generator on board geared to its wheels. Ignoring all real world losses for the moment (we'll get to those, I assure you) if we hook a string to this 'GenCart' and pull it with 10lbs of force at 55ft/sec, how many HP can the generator produce?

Thanks.

JB

Poor thinaridesingsn tell me that you are claiming that an iceboat can head directly down wind and go faster then that wind unlike your claims for your craft.

Hell is it not when waving your hands in the air does not work at least for a small number of people.

No air in relationship to your craft mean no pressure/force on your prop mean no added energy of motion added and the wheel or the ground can not add energy it can only subtract energy no matter how must force of the wind in relationship to the ground is or is not. To claim otherwise you are back to the idea that you can recharge a battery from the energy in that battery.

Oh well, I never in a million years would had dream I would meet a perpetual motion saleman on the internet or for that matter he would be able to sell this nonsense to a large percent of readers of this website.

Just as a bit of an interlude between now and when DrewDad comes back with what I'm sure will be the correct answer above, I'm going to show the simple calcs for a problem similar (but importantly different) to the one that DD and I are stepping through.

The problem I'm going to show below involves the wind NOT blowing:

1: We have the same scenario as above ... 100% efficient propeller producing 10lbs of thrust at 27.5ft/sec through the air. This propeller of course needs 1/2HP to its input shaft to be able to do this.

2: We have our previously described and 100% efficient 'GenCart' on the ground only this time there is no tailwind -- in fact there is no wind at all. In this scenario, the propeller can only pull the generator across the ground at 27.5ft/sec rather than 55ft/sec.

Of course we know from our propeller calcs that if we pull the generator across the ground with 10lbs of force at 27.5ft second, we can pull exactly 1/2HP from our 'GenCart'.

3: So our perfectly efficient prop needs 1/2HP to move at 27ft/sec while towing the generator - and the perfectly efficient generator can produce exactly 1/2HP while be towed. That's all very convenient except that we all know that in the real world there is no free lunch and no such thing as 100% efficient.

Since there are real world losses between the generator and the propeller, the 1/2HP turns in to closer to 1/4HP by the time it get through to do work on the air -- thus the entire 'vehicle' grinds to a stop (just what our vehicle does when the wind stops blowing).

DrewDad asked last night "why do you need the tailwind" -- I'm guessing he may have figured it out by now. If he hasn't, once he calculates what the generator will produce with the prop in the 27.5ft/sec tailwind, I betting a light bulb will go off (powered by the extra energy he will find is available from the tailwind).

JB

I'm sorry Bill -- that sentence just doesn't make any sense and thus I can't answer it to any degree of certainty.

I will say this -- I have never claimed and never will claim that an ice-boat (or an other traditional sailing rig) can go DDWFTTW steady state.

JB

Are BillRM and Gungasnake the same person?

Why must you persist with this idiocy? It isn't a perpetual motion machine, Bill, and nobody is claiming that it is!

It is a machine that mimics the actions and physics of a tacking sail, without actually requiring the vehicle itself to move from side to side. That's it. How hard is that to grasp?

Cycloptichorn

Because such a device is not possible as if you have zero wind in relationship to the craft when you have zero wind in relationship to the craft. The only way to get any added force is to place the craft in a position to enjoy a wind in relationship to the craft and all the hand waving in the air is not going to change that fact.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?