(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

ELECTRIC TRACTORS CARS AGAIN

W

Wild Bill Caldwell

Member
Yeah..I KNOW , LONG extension cords and all that....One disclaimer before I start, If mnjoe replys I ask that You ignore mnjoe, from this point on just call it the mnjoe DISCLAIMER, You know what He drug the last post down to.

Last post concernin' this topic, it seems the odds were 5 to 1 I was a fool for suggestin' a fifth wheel( I think 12 replys, 2 seem to think the idea might have merit. An I am okay with that, "There's been a whole lot of people thought I was a fool,Been a time or two I thought that I was one too"....Seems the general line of reasonin' was Fifth wheels use too much energy and that may be true but no one gave any data to support this, Now good people, I did the math on this a few years back, MY MATH, MY WAY...I've shot the American Handgunner World Championship match out in Co. several times, long pull from North La., Most of the time drivein' a 1996 Cherokee six cyl. inline engine, pullin' a single axle trailer loaded with 1500lbs or more of gear. No trailer , flat ground, mileage 21 mpg....Trailer 20.4 mpg ( two axle trailer gives me a 5th and 6th wheel)( so I don't think it takes a lot of energy to turn a 5th wheel) this is actual data, no advanced math. Like I've said before some of You on this forum are real thinkers...Those are the ones I'd like to see reply to this PRO or CON

Food for thought, What about hookin' the 5th wheel up with a lot of gearin', with the right gearin' the power to pull the 5th wheel could be reduced, How about belts and pullies, What about Hyd. Pumps bein' turned by the wheel???? And There are more ideas , just throwin' these out there

Lookin' back a bunch of years, If I had listened to the naysayers I would have never forge welded the high carbon steels I was usein' into the Damascus billits and then forged into knives, "THEY" said it couldn't be done....If Rocky Gibbs had listen to the naysayers He would never have reduced the taper in a 30/06 case, blown the shoulder forward, changed the shoulder angle to 37 degrees, shortened the neck to .250 and had a cartridge that out ran the 300 Holland and Holland, with less recoil. Then "THEY" said the 30 Gibbs is inaccurate , the neck is too short, Rocky won ever match He shot the 30 Gibbs in. If Danny Gatton had listened to the naysayers He would have never became one of the greatest TELECASTER players the world has ever known. "THEY" said his fingers were too short to play a TELECASTER...to keep playin' the pedal steel......Clessie Cummings would not have invented the "JAKE BRAKE"...I could go on and on , by now You get the idea....I posted the earlier post and this one to start the thinkin'...There are better ways.....WHAT ABOUT TESLA'S TURBINE ENGINE????What about usein' it to turn BIG alternators . WE MUST DO SOMETHING, THE OIL RICH ARAB nnalert ARE KILLIN" US

Wild Bill
 
If Google has anything like an index of magazines like Pop Science or Pop Mech and such, or if any website does, that'd be a place to look, to see if anyone's tried it already.
Got several boxes in the basement, and when I try to get them out to list 'em, I get lost looking thru them.
Lots of things were impossible until someone figured out how to do it, or until technology caught up (things like less friction in the bearings, less electrical resistance in the wiring, etc).
 
FORGET THE NAYSAYERS and just do it. The so-called laws of physics would be better titled the "suggestions" of physics. Wouldn't your 5th wheel energy maker work better in a vacuum (less friction)? How about if you used the engine (gasoline only) on your tow vehicle to pull the vacuum? Fellow I used to know.........now deceased........was in the septic tank-pumping business. He used the vacuum from his truck engine as a power source; it sure made the engine run rough, but it worked. If you can pull a little more than 30 inches Hg, that'd be close enough to a 'perfect' vacuum............
 
That is an interesting concept,How about vaporzing gas before combustion.Dangerously explosive but that'll make'er go.
 
The best thing you could probably do is go out and load up on a bunch of oil stocks and make yourself rich because your ideas about generating power going down the highway dragging an alternator just aren't cutting it. Right up there with the guys that put the magnets on their fuel lines to line up the fuel molecules to give them 100 mpg.
 
They make a little cute gizzmo to fit into reciver hitches that looks like a boat prop, it spins as your going down the road. Faster you go the more it spins. Might try rig'n something like that up to turn the alternator.

Good luck.

Dave
 

The nay-sayers thought Cyrus McCormick had been out in the sun too long, but if he had not persisted, where would we be today? Henry Ford had this crazy idea about mass producing automobiles. Did that one work?

I had a crazy idea when I was in high school that an actual perpetual motion machine could be built, and energy from this machine could be harnessed and made to do real work. My shop teacher told me it couldn't be done. I still entertain the idea, but lack the means to pursue it.

Your fifth wheel idea has merit, but if the fifth wheel will be used to power a current generating device, why not just drive that device off of the driveshaft?
 
There was a carb called POGUE patented in the US
that did just that it vaporised the gas using the heat of the engine. The announcement of Pogue’s invention caused enormous excitement in the American motor industry in 1933, when he drove 200 miles on one gallon of fuel in a Ford V8. However, the Winnipeg was never manufactured commercially and after 1936 it disappeared altogether amid allegations of a political cover-up.
 
I have no idea what you're proposing.

You are correct that naysayers are often proved wrong. But if you're proposing to circumvent the first, second and third laws of thermodynamics, I'm gonna side with the naysayers.

As for Tesla, he certainly built a number of devices that aren't well understood today, but he certainly understood thermodynamics. I've never read any account where he claimed to build a perpetual motion machine or claimed to have beaten the laws of thermodynamics.
 
On one of your front wheels of a rear wheel drive make it into an alternator,the other one make into an electric motor,as you are moving the alternator can supply the motor with power to pull the car while your gas engine idles,then when you push on the gas the alternator and electric motor freewheel so the gas engine speeds up the car easier.
 
Urban legend.
No matter what you do there is still only 125,000btu in a gallon of gasoline. High hopes, good intentions and vapourizing the fuel prior to metering. It still doesn't extract 200,000 btu's of energy from that one gallon of gasoline's 125,000 btu's. Doesn't work any better than you can pump 8 gallons of water from a one gallon tank.
 
How do some people let high hopes and emotions take precedence over the fixed and unchanging rules of physics?
You shouldn't be trusted with a gun shown your lack of understanding of the basics.
What you are suggesting is coupling a motor and generator together on the same shaft with the motor driving the generator. Then using the generator to drive the motor. And having surplus power left over to run other loads…………………….
Excuse me but I can't ask this question any other way. In the face of centuries of complete and total factual laboratory tests to prove perpetual motion impossible.
How can you be such a stupid moron to believe otherwise?
 
Yup and dragging things to make power to propel you is like lifting yourself by your bootstraps, you'll never get ahead.

RE those propellers on the trailer hitch, if you really want to save gas, take it off, it takes gas to drag that thing through the air.

Now if you had a little windmill in your bed that you erected every time you stopped then put away while driving, you might get somewhere.
 

Not too many years ago it was believed the world was flat, man could not fly, and it was totally unthinkable that man could ever walk on the moon.

Never give up on your hopes and dreams.
 
Maybe it's because he doesn't realize that he's comparing apples to oranges?!

IF self perpetuating exists, it must be in dreamland since the applied natural laws (physics)cannot allow this to happen

EVERYTHING gets used up, and EVERYTHING dies.
 
Dream and try all you want. Face into the wind while p**ing and you will still get wet. It will never change.
Flight to the moon used and took into consideration the laws of physics.
Nasa didn't find a way around the laws of phyics, how can you with wishing and trying?
Can you fill a one gallon tank with water. Then pump two gallons of water out of that tank? Yes or no?
How can you public school science class dropouts expect a river to run uphill against the force of gravity?
 
I know many people that built and installed the Pogue "magic" carburetor (including me). I'll add that much of the story about the historical excitement over it is nonesense and hype.

It uses exhaust to heat the gas into a vapor stage and makes a vehcile undriveable in many ways. Works OK in a straight-line highway trip. Best fuel mileage I ever witnessed was with a slant-six Duster. On the highway it got a best of 40 MPG using the Pogue. Not very impressive considering we have cars now doing the same, that are a lot less dangerous and easier to drive.
 
I find it hard to believe that your Jeep pulling a trailer with a 1500 payload is getting 20 MPG. What's the trailer weigh ? - I suspect at least 1000 lbs. My 17 foot long Ditchwitch trailer weighs 3200 lbs. empty. So, maybe your Jeep pulls 2500 lbs. and gets 20 MPG with a gas engine? If that is true, you're already way ahead. My diesel won't do that well. I'll have to admit though, I've never lived anywhere totally flat. If you have no hills - maybe?

There has not been a dynamo invented that puts out more power than it takes to run it. If somebody finds one, it will be "magic" or perhaps put here by God just to confuse our scientists. The only way you idea can gain anything is - if you drop your fifth-wheel alternator down when gravity is pushing you down hills. If you use your gas or diesel engine to do the pulling, all you've got is a fuel powered-generator.

If you want to get off your addiction to the Arabs - buy some woods and build a car that runs on wood-smoke. It's been done overseas for many years. But, even the wood-smoke powered rigs need some gasoline.
 
The energy to spin a generator (and alternators) is horsepower. If generators produced electricity without any effort, we could have tiny steam engines turning the powerstation's big generators.
The electricity is made by draging magnetic lines of force through a coil of wire. This takes mechanical energy. That comes from the shaft going in, that trys to slow the shaft, that slows (your) wheel.
What if there were dragging brakes on the trailer you discussed in your remarks above! Would your milage remain the same? No it would be reduced by the amount of (heat) energy being wasted. The same applies to the generator hooked to the fifth wheel. It drags on the axle, taking power from the pull vehicle. All of the methods of making electricity (or any source of power) comes from the conversion of other sources.
An alternator of high efficiency might make 60% of its output in electricity and the remainder in heat and bearing friction (heat). Wild, I hope this explains why people are reacting to your idea in the way they are.
with respect, Jim
 
One of the most innovative automotive thinkers of
the last century was Smoky Yunick. He tried most of the incremental development approaches to building faster NASCAR and Indy racecars with many successes and some grumpy opponents.

His best known quantum leap in engine technology
was his adiabatic engine that used a lot of ceramic parts, no radiator(?), 50mpg, 250hp out of a small 3 cylinder; very little heat loss. In the articles about it in Hot Rod magazine, he said the materials and technology were too costly to be feasable at that time.

He wasn't afraid to challenge the known limits and make new ideas work. However brilliant he was
he didn't have any 200mpg carburetors.
 

The technology of today exists because someone, somewhere, had the courage and determination to challenge science and physics. We may not be able to break the laws of physics, but by challenging those laws, we gain a much better understanding of exactly how they work, and in the process, may just find a way to make physics work in our favor. And for what it's worth, Bill Gates was a high school drop out, which proves that sometimes a formal education CAN get in the way of developing new technology. And no, I am not saying that anyone should drop out of school.
 
Washington DC money machine gets some of its external energy in the form of hot air supplied by multiple sources. RN
 
It"s not about defeating the Laws of Physics....but harnessing them in a useful manner.

The Earth is surrounded by gravitational fields and also electrical fields. Someday, somebody, will figure out how to harness these invisible energy fields and we"ll all stand amazed at how simple it works and that it was around us all the time and there for our benefit. It just takes minds willing to think outside the box...it"ll happen, by and by.
 
about 15 yrs ago my neighbor started his life long quest of perpetual motion.. He has built a machine 16ft tall ,,still needs refining .......he does have a US patent for it that technically specifies the movement of weight with magnets on a wheel. i humored him and myself trying to help out ,,til my head began to hurt ...I just have little to offer any more except encouragement ...........
 
Jim : I keep saying that a permanent magnet has a power of its own. But it seems I get cut down for saying it. If you hook the field termenal of an alt to the battery it will draw about 5 amps. this will cause full charge. If you replace the rotor windings with a permanent magnet , it will put out full charge without the 60 watt imput. The reason we don't use a permanent magnet is because it would keep charging full charge & there is not a good way to control (regulate) it.
 
Since you called for comments from the thinkers(one of my old AKAs)- About your mileage figures pulling trailer and empty, Empty your Cherokee as a wagon design with squared off back would have a large low pressure area- a vacumn bubble- behind to about twice the distance of the hieght of vehicle, a drag factor affecting mileage empty. The small trailer would fill this 'bubble' and reduce drag effect alsmost as much as its own rolling resistance and lower drag bubble- the term used in NASCAR is drafting, same affect in minimal air resistance total and increased fuel economy for both cars and a touch extra speed for the pair. I used to draft semis on motorcycle- got 60+mpg on R69 compared to 45/50MPG fighting head wind not drafting. Airstream trailers have some mileage figures showing affects of drag on various vehicles.
Gibbs cartridge? Compare it to the Ackley Improved and you see similar results using fine ball powders as compared to Cordite used in early H&H. The .308 case taper, shoulder angle , short neck and higher pressures should be compared to 30-06 and its original powder and pressures with a 10 gram bullet- performance is similar and .308 case is about a 1/2 inch shorter- allows shorter reciever and bolt travel in automatic/self loader firearms using the modern powders.
Rough figures for drive trains- chain and shaft drives about 97/98 % effecient, V belts about 95/96%, a right angle drive is about 97%, a straight cut gear is about 98%, a bevel gear/hypoid drive is about 96/97%. The usual figure for engine power at flywheel compared to wheel power is 10% loss through drive train. A SAE rating is also roughly 10% more than a DIN rating on same engine- example : the old VW beetle 1200 engine was advertised in US as a 36HP, in Germany DIN was a 30/32HP. Your 5th wheel drive generator would have mechanical loss before driving alternator. Electrical power loss due to heat and mechanical loss I'm not so sure about figures- the one figure that comes to mind is a 35% loss of input shaft power compared to output energy from a couple examples on generator usage and railroad engines doing EMD 3000hp diesels with electric drive to wheels compared to engine shaft output. Battery storage seems to be another 30% or so loss.
Laws of physics are self enforceing observations of what seems to happen. Congress may pass a law saying laws of physics rescinded--but mama nature will show the congress critter and you wrong for trying to break her 'laws'.
Any body else want to contribute a chuckle? RN
 
You had me until "stupid moron"- intellecual arguments are never strengthened by pointless insults. But I've watched your posts on here for years, and I will say you are consistent- You are obviously very intelligent, but your lack of tact can be jarring, and certainly doesn't add to the interplay of ideas.
 
Buickand deere, I agree completely. One of the reasons the Pogue APPEARED to work is because a carb is so inefficient in converting gas to vapor. New cars with computers and fuel injection get more efficiency out of the same size engines, but still can only use what is available (125,000 BTU). Anyone who claims more is just a dreamer or stupid.
 
The lines of magnetic force can no more be fooled into free energy. Than you can use gravity force on 1 lb of weight over a distance of one foot. To raise two lbs of weight one foot.
Magnetic lines of force without movement do no work.Gravity without movement does not work. A post holding up 100 lbs is not doing work. Raising that 100lbs to the top of the post is doing work. Lowering that 10 lbs to the ground has potential to do work.
A magnet does not force electricity through wires. Unless the magnet or wires are moved so the magnetic field cuts through the wires. That takes force on the shaft which takes power.
You have lots of hope and belief. Hope and belief with wire wrapped around a magnet sitting on the table won't make free energy either.
Work/energy is force, distance and time. Take away either force, distance or time and you are multiplying by Zero. 1 X zero or 1 billion X zero is still zero.
Why is it that you want to cling to utopian hope of free cheap easy energy when if flys in the face of how the Almighty built the universe.
 
I may be wrong, but I think that's the principle that the Prius and other hybrids use to charge their batteries- without the fifth wheel, of course- but when you take your foot off the accelerator or apply the brake, some of the braking force is supplied by the drag of the alternator producing power to charge the batteries.
 
I was patient with him for a long time and tried to explain a few basics. In return he keeps calling us all liars and spreads false hope.
Any idea how many people have been duped by these "snake oil" salesmen.
The guy is a dumb as a box of rocks when it comes to logic and physics. He’s as good at numbers as I am at singing. He won't admit it and prefers to live in a la la land of denial.
Wouldn't the military be using something other than nuclear, fossil and chemical energy?
I’m calling a spade a spade.
 
I dont know. I am not a engineer. But you have to figure there is alot of energy that is not being utilized with the internal combustion engine. We get like 10% efficiency out of what we use right now. 90% is lost in heat.

We already can use turbos to use waste to improve performance.

One thing we could do that would be a easy improvement. Would be to also use waste heat to preheat the fuel. With out Oxegen you could preheat that fuel to really high temps. It would be prevaporized and ready to blow. Inject that into a cylinder and get a ready made improvement in effeciency.

Also could use ceramics to allow more heat tolerences and then figure out a use for all that waste heat.

Got to be a way they just need to get after it.
 
Wm Gates was a UNIVERSITY, not a high school dropout. Mostly because he was ahead of the curve developing technology beyond his prof's knowledge.
And because Gates was so busy developing MS dos and making a fortune. He didn’t have time for school.
And surprise, surprise. Not a single development of Gates ever broke the laws of physics.
 
Mechanical energy extracted by the engine is from pressure due to expanding gasses. Delta P
Gasses that are already hot and placed into the engine do not expand. In fact they would contract.
The pressure increase Delta P in the engine that does work is when you take cold air and heat it.
Work is change. Making hot Delta T pressurized air delta P from cold air at atmospheric pressure requires energy. When that hot pressurized air becomes cooler/lower pressure air. It's giving off energy.
The losses in conversion is why 60-70% of the heat in the fuel is lost as heat in a typical engine.
Really large combined cycle gas turbines, reciprocating engines and steam boilers. Are really stretching to achieve 50% efficiency.
 
Hay, I made that challenge identical to clueless about 60 year ago. And I found out it didn't work then. It won't work now.

Gerald J.
 
No ,but he had a Pontiac Fiero that got 100 Miles per gal.Remeber the TV show Performance Plus.It was featured on there.[then there is the folklore that a young guy invented the 200 mpg carb but was mysteriously killed by the oil companies.The guy not the carb]I dont really believe that one myself.Smokey also had a wind driven alternator or generator that was immediatly outlawed by NASCAR upon seeing it.He also reversed engine rotation for oval tracks.When NASCAR wanted to inspect the cam he would throw firecrackers and break the cam,just giving tech a piece of it, so they never caught on to it was ground in reverse.I hear there is a new book about Smokey.
 
Then it will still be using the laws of physics. Rotating the earth magnetic fields through electrical conductors.
Of course this conversion of kinetic energy to electrical energy will slow the earth rotation.
There is no "Free Lunch" .
A magnet holding onto something is no different than gravity holding something down. A corner post of a fence is under strain from the tensioned wires. However the post is doing no work.
 
Heres my ideas;Internal combustion engine,lighter car through more use of aluminum for better power to weight ratios.Very light wheels,tires on vehicles.and areodynamic as feasible while still comfy in passenger compartment.And a bunch of those little generators you had rubbing on the wheel when you were a kid.Ok no little generators on wheel.This is not rocket science its been known for years by anyone racing.What I think comes into play against lighter cars is saftey concerns.If you ever see the cars built for these high mileage competitions from MIT or whatever college they are not really streetable.I did see a very small,efficient car the other day but it annoyed me and I ran it over with my Cadillac.
 
Ok you just showed why I am a phone guy and not a engineer. You just made my brain twist in a knott. I have a vauge understanding of what you just wrote.

So please bear with me with my ignorance. I can visualize the pressure issues you brought up.

The solution I see is in the molecular use of the fuels. The fact that so much energy is lost in heat. Tells me that more fuel is being used to push that piston down than what is really required to do the job.

Some one smarter than me. Needs to jump out of the box and look at the problem from a new angle. Things are they way they are because the solution we have was the easiest and cheapest way to solve it at the time. not because it was the best way.
 
If the water jacket could be sealed to withstand pressures of 200 pounds or so, why not elemenate the radiator, let the water change to steam and use it to run a steam engine? Inject a small amount of water back into the system as the steam is exausted. The internal combustion engine would have to be built to stand higher temperatures but I think it could be done with better materials.
 
Are you saying that if you put a permanent magnet in the rotor that it will take more power to turn the pulley to get the same output? You are wrong and have been influenced by false teachings.
 
Inital price, compleity and long term maintencence costs.
There is talk of a six cycle engine with lower costs, fewer additonal parts and not requiring $pace age alloy$.
After the top of the exhaust stroke when the intake valve would normally open. A wee mist of water is injected into the hot combustion chamber.
Heat that would otherwise be soaked out into the water jackets isn't. This heat from the piston,head and combustion chamber walls turns the water mist into steam which expands approx 1700 times. The steam works on the extra power stroke.
 
Replacing the electromagnet in an automotive alternator increases the efficiency of the alternator a wee bit as there isn't 40-50 watts of power used to excite a magnetic field.
Being that an alternator is making approx 500watts while cruising down the highway. And it takes approx 900watts of shaft power to spin the alternator. Saving 50 watts to energize the field while it takes 30,000watts to push your empty truck down a flat highway???
You are not going to see the 50 watts.
If a PM magnet in an alternator gives free power. Why don't we just set a PM alternator under the hood and take the drive pulley off it. And use the output from this PM alternator to drive an electric vehicle?
Do you think you can swap out the electric rotor from an alternator? Replace it with a PM magnet. Then set the PM alternator on a bench and get free power???
Why not just take a vehicle with the permanent magnet starter. Throw away that heavy wasteful gasoline engine. And drive around on the starter while it also charges the battery with free magnetic energy.
Influenced by "false teaching"? Is there some great conspiracy to keep the world under bondage to "false" rules of thermodynamics?
Did you used to live down at Wako Texas with David Koresh
 
It's absorbing energy from the room.The guy's description is misleading but in the end he fesses up and says the energy came from somewhere.
 
Smokey was a very smart and genuine man . I met him a few times at some trade shows and seminars . Very down to earth . I have a 3 volume book set about him , very good reading . What an amazing life he led . I'd like to find out more about his "Hot Vapor Engine " Buddy of mine has been to his shop in Daytona once.. What a museum !
 
Now you just admitted it would increase the efficiency by a little bit. Back to my first statement and that is , a permanent magnet has a power of its own!
 
A magnet with an intense magnetic field produces no output at all. It has a magnetic field, but does no work. If a person spins that magnet in open air away from all things it will spin easily, and again do nothing but move a little air Because it is an objest, not a magnet).

Put the magnet in a coil of wire with the ends not connected to anything, nothing moving, there will be no electricity in the wire at all.
Rotate the magnet such that the moving lines of force are cut by the wires, and elecrticity will be produced. If we just measure this electricity, it will have volts, If we connect the wires to a lightbulb, we will find that it has volts and amps, but because it now has current flow, it will put rotational resistance on the shaft of the magnet. This force will be overcome by turning harder on the shaft. (work in). The electricity that comes out will be measurably less than the energy needed to turn the shaft. (internal losses in the wires, and frictional losses) The Work in (in HP on the shaft is more than the Work out (KW) from the coil. The ratio is 1 HP= 0.7456 KW.
The use of an electro magnet in alternators and generators, is only convienient, not needed. Magnetos, alternators of many brands and types use permanent magnets. Motor cycle alternators in particular use PM rotors. The regulation is more difficult, but the size and complexity is reduced, so it is not done in cars.
Old fashoned bicycle generators (actually alternators) use permanent magnets, Switch it on and pedal harder. Break the wire to the light, and the pedaling gets easy again. Look this material up. We have no agenda to pound on you, there is no way around the facts/physics. JimN
 
Not to take anything away from him because he was and is brilliant, but he was also in the right place at the right time. He got a contract to develop an operating system for IBM. IBM wanted to bypass the dominant operating system seller at that time. MS-DOS was sort of backward-engineered (polite term) from that other operating system and ran on the same chips as the other operatin system.

The technology developed later and Gates was smart enough to make some good choices among the many developments made available to him. He didn't really develop much on his own but he was a much better judge of competing ideas than most of his peers.
 
Did I read this wrong? jdemaris, do You have Your own oil well and refinery? Are You not addicted to the Arabs? Or are You sayin' You don't mind being addicted to the Arabs?

Wild Bill
 
They probably got that idea from the two footed drivers that I hate to follow.

Guess it would charge most of the time then.
 
B&D,

Harnessing and using are in the same context.

I don't know about slowing the earth's rotational force, I doubt that using some form of electrical generation to power even a major grid would have a substantial effect on the Earth's rotation...perhaps the atomic clock could detect it. I would suspect sun spots and their surge release of energy would have about as much effect.

Either way...it's entirely theoretical mumbling at this state in time.

But, me thinks, that some day...we shall see quantum leaps in energy development and sources....much the same as humankind witnessed the extreme advance in technology during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
 
Alright,what you need to do is read about that guy that built a castle down in Florida all by himself.There is more to electricity than meets the eye,especially in anti gravity or even levitation.If you could levitate your car and somehow just defy gravity,you could have the answer.I see what you are trying to say about the belts and pullies.I even thought about that for a while myself.What you have to do,and this is what gets everybody,is reduce friction to nothing.If you didnt need friction to spin it but maybe to get it started your idea would come a lot closer to working.So you need to read some stuff by Tesla too.Tesla supposedly said(I heard it on Art Bell years ago so I have no proof Tesla said this)that if he could put a copper wire around the Earth at the equater,I think an inch in diameter solid wire,he could move the Earth anywhere in the universe he wanted to.I see what you are saying about the drop down wheel,but actually to do this right your vehicle needs to be the generator,alternator,or motor,maybe a combination of the three,to where it levitates and creates a magnetic field of its own that is opposite of the Earths so it will fly.As for the naysayers,the planets spin,they are held by gravity in an orbit,that wobbles so seasons change.
 
The "low hanging" fruit has already been picked. Energy source development has slowed. Much the same as aircraft development has slowed.
The lack of room temperature super conductors is a major stumbling block.The lack of dilithium crystals is holding us back too.
Just because we see it on Star Trek doesn't mean it's possible.
 
respectfully, the season's change because th earth rotational axis is inclined relative to it's plane of rotation about the sun.
 
Without going too deep into it because I am not an engineer or anything,There is plenty more for human beings to learn.The fact that the Earth is where it is from the Sun,and that it spins at a thousand miles an hour almost,and all that there is to the solar system,there is much to learn.Heck we dont even know really what we even are,or what we are doing here.I wouldnt say that someday we wouldnt levitate vehicles that were like flying saucers.I wouldnt by myself,because I dont know how,but I have seen a video of where some university levitated a frog,why not a car?But if a bunch of us worked together on it we could probably do it.Better yet maybe we could make something like on those Star Trek shows where you step into a room,a computer memorizes everything that makes you into who you are,dematerializes you then makes you materialize somewhere else.Besides all the"known facts"there are lots of things that were forgotten from the past.Call whatever you want fiction,but every time you think something cant or wont be done,it is.A bomb,H bomb,countless other things that were "fiction"100,and even more 150 years ago,are common today.Sometimes theres a time to look to the future and not see it as something that wont happen,but something that will happen.Unless you are a scientist how do you know the stuff they taught you is true?Maybe they lied to you to discourage you from learning all you could?
The future is going to be some kind of electric vehicle,transfer chamber,or flying saucer.Some day,if we dont self destruct,we wont need oil,we wont need power lines,and we wont need lots of things we do now.The biggest reason there werent already electric cars is batteries need to be so big and dont go far before they have to be recharged and big oil wants you to burn gas.The newer electric cars are better all the time and if they were serious about making electric cars they could make them a lot better yet.
So since everything in the universe is electric,and magnetic,and spinning,and pulling just so it stays in place,maybe a copper wire somehow cuts the magnetic field to where it allows the planet to move??????I dont know and my poor little mind cant grasp all of what would be going on with the wire,but I wont say its fiction because I dont think anybodys going to do it anyway.Tesla was a genious.He somehow had a way of generating electricity using the Earth and catching static electricity somehow,and what he was trying to do was get it where he didnt need wires except right in the house or even a generator to light up a town.I think it was something like a capacitor or a group of capacators that charged from static electricity that used something kind of like a lightening rod on a building.I dont remember what all Tesla did but he did a lot with electricity and some high up people like Edison tried to discredit his work.He invented alternating current and our lives would not be as good as they are without his inventions.Things might be lots better if his work wasnt suppressed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MarkB_MI
Is that trailer battery getting charged?
Replies
15
Views
729
MarkB_MI
MarkB_MI
RedMF40
Sticking brakes question
Replies
15
Views
503
RedMF40
RedMF40
MarkB_MI
EZ-Lube hubs
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
MarkB_MI
MarkB_MI
C
Didn't get home until almost 2am this morning
Replies
8
Views
603
Crashfarmer
C
N
Galion 104H
Replies
10
Views
513
Nolbyone
N
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top