Gravity as source of energy?

If you throw a ball vertically in a vacuum-chamber with velocity=1x 1m high, how high would you throw it with like v=5x?

5^5=25 - you need 5x the velocity/energy and get it 5 times back in 25 single steps.
(Doesn't include convertion loss)

Force = Gravity * Time.
The less time you need to move something, the less the gravity affects it.

Do you think we could use gravity for infinite motion?

only spring..

It can be used...For example space probes like voyager 1 and voyager 2 used the gravity of planets when they passed by and theyr speed was increased.Do we see a potentail in using this kind of gravity?Black holes for example can be a far more strongher slingshot then the gravitation planets have.If you have so much time NeonSturm just think a way to capture energy produced when you slingshot pass by a planet with something(that stores energy to).

Examples:





This is how the space probes Voyager 1 and Voyager 2increased theyr speed and now are flying away from our solar system at the speed of 14-17 km/s.

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1997/PatricePean.shtml

@forever
one problem... said planet will eventualy fall into the sun because of this

@[de]Rick
in theory if you had 100% efficiency... yea we don't :P now if you could pull ambient heat out of the vacum chamber wour device is in and pump that into the boiler at no energy cost :D

Forever
They use gravity to alter the direction and speed of a satelite in order to spare fuel. However no energy is created during this proces since the energy of the system as a whole will still be the same.

Kyubey
Not even close to why it isnt a perpetuum mobile :)

Fusion is nice and all but it wont be commercial until ~2050. Current fusion reactors are used for experiments rather than energy production. They dont produce much energy yet.

From what i know it has to do with the size of the torus once you go past a certain diameter fusion efficiency rises high enough so that it will actualy produce more energy than it consumes. Guess it has to do with volume and area.

if only there was pease on earth, and our leaders weren't stupid nubs

Note: I removed the image posts because they cluttered what could be an informative thread for some people, while adding nothing to the discussion.

quote: They use gravity to alter the direction and speed of a satelite in order to spare fuel. However no energy is created during this proces since the energy of the system as a whole will still be the same.

Absolutely correct; some of the angular momentum of the planet is transferred to the vehicle. The planet has such huge amounts of energy compared to the vehicle that the transfer is imperceptible. But no energy is created.

Well rick obviously knows the answer.
But yes, his "paradox" is sort of complex to disprove. Let me try:
Let's assume the water is already steam in the first place, you just make it warmer (like in a hot air balloon). Just so we don't have to discuss phase transitions.
We can also assume the steam to stay in a bubble and not mix with the air (you sort of did that already).

When you expand the steam, you are working against the air pressure at that level. Then the steam rises, because the pressure gets lower the higher you go (that's what's generating lift, the pressure below the steam is higher than above, so the steam gets pushed up). If you then contract the steam, you get energy back, but less than you put into it to expand.
The difference between energy used for expansion and energy gotten from contraction comes in the form of potential energy: The water can fall down.

Note that while this is not a perpetuum mobile, we don't necessarily have to be the ones who invest into expanding the steam (or heating the water): The sun does that, conveniently. Rain comes from exactly this "paradox", the sun is the energy input though. People have used it for thousands of years. Thank the sun for watermills!

Lemme give you another one:
Imagine a 747 is sitting on a conveyor belt, as wide and long as a runway. The conveyor belt is designed to exactly match the speed of the wheels, moving in the opposite direction (the plane is stationary relative to the ground around the treadmill). Can the plane take off?

But why does the conveyor belt move? :P