Please help me debunk my COP1+ idea

[krzysiek]

Hey guys,

Will make this a short one, it is 3.35AM here and have been studying for a full 12 hours or more, so I need some rest.

Have a bit of a sore throat so just made a cup of tea before going to bed.

Anyway, as I took the tea bag out of the mug (and went to put it into the sink - that's just what I do) I had a bit of a play with it (yes, I was bored!).

I was just swinging it around, ie - holding it by the end of the string and using the tea bags mass / momentum to keep it, almost effortlessly (or so it seems) spinning around.

So at that point, I became kind of curious. If we were able to somehow have a 'ball' of 'coil' (the ball of coil being a direct replacement for the tea bag in this case) and were somehow able to have it attached to a string, wouldn't it very easy to have some mechanism to which the string would be attached to (above), which would replicate the same movement my hand was making to keep the tea bag spinning?

It seems that it was almost effortless to keep the bag spinning. Now I don't know how much energy can be manifested from a 'coil ball' spinning through a semi-opened curved tube of magnets will generate, but in either case it seems the energy required to keep the ball of coil in circular orbit is very little?

Sorry if this makes no sense, could make a drawing if needed. The idea is probably useless and has absolutely no merit to it at all, but hey... blame it on my 3.30AM thinking style!!

Hope this isn't too "dumb" for you guys, I know you're all relatively smart!!!

[Joit]

Debunked,
That will not work to mount your Arm on a Lever, to swing a Weight the whole time, because the costs for the Food for you would be to high compared to the Gain.

But anyhow, its no bad Idea, even the Fact, that you move only one Weight and keep it balanced with the opposite Movement. Hitting with a Ball another Mechanism, what can store the Energy to give that Pulse again.
The Weight even can be then a bigger one also, figure, when you put there 500 wet Bags and swing it.
It will take more Power to start it swinging a while, and you will see the Force working on your 'Arm', but maybe there can be a lot Gain.
But the Point where it can be tapped need to be in a certain Angle at the Movement too, or the Bags will get unbalanced, and start swinging in uncontrolled Circles. Therefor you may need a tube or something what force it into a path.
I can figure that even with 2 Coils, where the 'arm-coil' is 90° to the direction of turning the Weight.

Anyway an interesting Model to think about it.

[Slider2732]

I believe it to be the same COP > 1 effect that an angry woman uses to swing a handbag lol

It's centrifugal force, but you mean that with a certain weight, length of moment arm etc, the effect may increase beyond normal ?

Many folks write ideas down at the weirdest times, then look at them again and discard them...you've presented it anyway and I applaud that

[boguslaw]

It will work when the arm of momentum is variable in synchronization with period of oscillation.I think many will agree,parametric oscillator is one of a ways to overunity if variation manipulation require only small expenditure of energy,

[krzysiek]

Hey guys, thanks for the replies. I knew it wasn't really a 'great' idea but more just wanted some reasoning for how it was not going to work. So it seems that it probably wouldn't generate the same, or more energy, if the moment arm was kept constant.

However, as noted just above, perhaps if the moment arm was varied in length respectively to the period (which I have not done enough research on to verify, but it seems that from above) it might somehow be possible. I wonder if there would be anything we could do to 'force' the coil in place (ie - keep it afloat somehow) or "something" to at least help keep it afloat.

Either way, more of an interesting idea for myself to ponder with. I'm only 20 but quite interested in this type of stuff, however I do not yet have the sound knowledge to really be able to do too much. I am thinking of taking up Electrical Engineering at Uni (I have the choice to do it, as I am already in Uni) or do specialise in some type of Physics. Would Electrical Engineering help my understanding best when it comes to building/understanding the energy requirements/gains of such models?

[wayne.ct]

Physics is the way to go

Physics tries to answer the WHY? questions and Engineering is more directed toward the HOW? questions. So, if you really want to understand why your idea will NOT directly create COP > 1, you ought to study physics. The truth is you will end up studying BOTH, because your university will require this. You can decide which side you want to emphasize. I hope this helps you. BTW, there remain questions for which physics can NOT provide a complete answer.

[krzysiek]

Thanks Wayne. I understand your comment about over-lapping or doing both of those in the long run due to Uni requirements. Truth is, I really love Physics!!

However, I am of the idea that I can be a Physicist but I am worried I won't have a job? Whereas with Electrical Eng, I think I could potentially line up a job easier compared to just some research-based work a Physicist might do?

I actually don't intend on (hopefully) ever getting a 'real job'. I do just fine selling products online and I am already developing an online based service for a lot of businesses which will hopefully pick up, and if it does, will bring me enough residual income to sustain myself quite comfortably. But, if worst comes to worst... and if I do one day actually need to get myself a 9-5 Job, I would want a good chance of getting one.

Perhaps I am very ill informed about what a physicist does or is able to do, and maybe I am making my choice (of E Eng) based on wrong ideas about where physics could take me!