Electroboom: How Right IS Veritasium?! Don't Electrons Push Each Other??

[gnuarm]

And as usual, he literally can't understand the principles, so he wants to use a diagram that doesn't even show the movement of the fluid or the pump which is the result of the major movement of the fluid.

He has to be putting us all on.  No one can be that consistently wrong.

Floyd was a guy who worked at a place I did.  I never met him but I heard the stories.  Once, someone was calculating the area of a room, length times width.  He insisted that was wrong, it was length divided by width.  He argument was, "How many quarters in a dollar?  How many quarters in two dollars?  See?" 

His other claim to fame was in front of customers where he said the antennas should be put at the bottom of the hill, rather than at the top because electrons run down hill.  It took a moment, for everyone to eventually laugh... but he was serious. 

He wanted people to call him Tom, but his name was Floyd.  Maybe that's what ED should be called, Floyd.

If the fluid flow in the opposite direction of the pump ? Just a simple yes or no will be fine.

Which fluid flow?  The fluid flow in the pipe is in the direction of the movement of the pump, because that is what moves the pump and causes the pump to work.  Then the pump moves a lesser amount of fluid in the reverse direction, which because the fluid is incompressible, means the pump has to move a bit further and therefore is moving faster than the fluid. 

You are using a diagram that does not show the movement of the pump, because it is a stationary pump operated by some driver, and the movement of the fluid through the pump is the only fluid movement. 

WRONG DIAGRAM, FLOYD!!!  "How many quarters in a dollar,...?"

[electrodacus]

Which fluid flow?  The fluid flow in the pipe is in the direction of the movement of the pump, because that is what moves the pump and causes the pump to work.  Then the pump moves a lesser amount of fluid in the reverse direction, which because the fluid is incompressible, means the pump has to move a bit further and therefore is moving faster than the fluid. 

You are using a diagram that does not show the movement of the pump, because it is a stationary pump operated by some driver, and the movement of the fluid through the pump is the only fluid movement. 

WRONG DIAGRAM, FLOYD!!!  "How many quarters in a dollar,...?"

Why even use a more complicated design than this that I already posted

You just make assumption on how that vehicle will work.

[gnuarm]

Which fluid flow?  The fluid flow in the pipe is in the direction of the movement of the pump, because that is what moves the pump and causes the pump to work.  Then the pump moves a lesser amount of fluid in the reverse direction, which because the fluid is incompressible, means the pump has to move a bit further and therefore is moving faster than the fluid. 

You are using a diagram that does not show the movement of the pump, because it is a stationary pump operated by some driver, and the movement of the fluid through the pump is the only fluid movement. 

WRONG DIAGRAM, FLOYD!!!  "How many quarters in a dollar,...?"

Why even use a more complicated design than this that I already posted

You just make assumption on how that vehicle will work.

Is English not your first language?  Sometimes your sentences are a bit tortured.

I have zero interest in shifting to yet another analog for the basic problem.  We have many, many analog models and you always find yet another way to pervert them.  I have given you a relatively simple model that shows a vehicle moving faster than the wind and you insist on saying silly things to "prove" it doesn't work.  As long as you are going to be silly, there's no reason to engage you in dialog.

In other words, go away, until you are willing to talk sense.  Silly boy.

This model is actually very complex, because you omit two very important forces.  So the equations can not be solved.  Figure out what F5 and F6 are, and you may understand the design.  But the real mistake is talking about forces, when that is not the issue.  The issue is movement.  At steady state, with no friction and no air resistance, all these forces can be zero and the vehicle will still move.  Movement does not require force, acceleration does.

Assign numbers to the diameters (hopefully simple integer ratios) and the movement can be shown.  Here, I'll do that for you.

D1 / D4 = 3.  D2 / D3 = 1.333  So when D2 rotates 1 m, D3 and D4 rotate 0.75 m and D1 rotates 2.25 m.  So when the treadmill moves 2.25 m to the left, the car will move 1 m to the right.  The car moves up wind.

[electrodacus]

Is English not your first language?  Sometimes your sentences are a bit tortured.

I have zero interest in shifting to yet another analog for the basic problem.  We have many, many analog models and you always find yet another way to pervert them.  I have given you a relatively simple model that shows a vehicle moving faster than the wind and you insist on saying silly things to "prove" it doesn't work.  As long as you are going to be silly, there's no reason to engage you in dialog.

In other words, go away, until you are willing to talk sense.  Silly boy.

This model is actually very complex, because you omit two very important forces.  So the equations can not be solved.  Figure out what F5 and F6 are, and you may understand the design.  But the real mistake is talking about forces, when that is not the issue.  The issue is movement.  At steady state, with no friction and no air resistance, all these forces can be zero and the vehicle will still move.  Movement does not require force, acceleration does.

Assign numbers to the diameters (hopefully simple integer ratios) and the movement can be shown.  Here, I'll do that for you.

D1 / D4 = 3.  D2 / D3 = 1.333  So when D2 rotates 1 m, D3 and D4 rotate 0.75 m and D1 rotates 2.25 m.  So when the treadmill moves 2.25 m to the left, the car will move 1 m to the right.  The car moves up wind.

You can add any other forces you think are necessary to explain what happens and also you can choose whatever diameter's you think are useful.
As long as you do not consider both energy storage and stick slip or similar trigger to discharge the stored energy that vehicle will not move from left to right at any speed.
That simple vehicle has just two points of contact the bottom part of the front and back wheels.
Any force applied by the treadmill to the front wheel F1 will require an equal and opposite force at the back wheel F2.
There is nothing else to say about that vehicle other than F3 and F4 are also equal and opposite.
You (most of you) are to used with vehicle that have an onboard engine/motor.

As for blackbird I never claimed it will not exceed wind speed and similar designed vehicle could do the same but the reason they can exceed wind speed is energy storage so wind speed is exceeded for a limited amount of time proportional with the amount of stored energy.

The wheels only example in Derks video drives on the lumber and that is a fact and input is on the small wheels so it is powered by the floor again a fact.
There are ways to test that is the case if you do not believe the small wheels (input) drive the large wheel (output).

That hydraulic device is a bit more complex and I think it will likely not move at all so basically a plug. If it moves it will sure not move faster than the flow speed in the same direction as the flow as that will violate the energy conservation law.

[gnuarm]

Is English not your first language?  Sometimes your sentences are a bit tortured.

I have zero interest in shifting to yet another analog for the basic problem.  We have many, many analog models and you always find yet another way to pervert them.  I have given you a relatively simple model that shows a vehicle moving faster than the wind and you insist on saying silly things to "prove" it doesn't work.  As long as you are going to be silly, there's no reason to engage you in dialog.

In other words, go away, until you are willing to talk sense.  Silly boy.

This model is actually very complex, because you omit two very important forces.  So the equations can not be solved.  Figure out what F5 and F6 are, and you may understand the design.  But the real mistake is talking about forces, when that is not the issue.  The issue is movement.  At steady state, with no friction and no air resistance, all these forces can be zero and the vehicle will still move.  Movement does not require force, acceleration does.

Assign numbers to the diameters (hopefully simple integer ratios) and the movement can be shown.  Here, I'll do that for you.

D1 / D4 = 3.  D2 / D3 = 1.333  So when D2 rotates 1 m, D3 and D4 rotate 0.75 m and D1 rotates 2.25 m.  So when the treadmill moves 2.25 m to the left, the car will move 1 m to the right.  The car moves up wind.

You can add any other forces you think are necessary to explain what happens and also you can choose whatever diameter's you think are useful.
As long as you do not consider both energy storage and stick slip or similar trigger to discharge the stored energy that vehicle will not move from left to right at any speed.
That simple vehicle has just two points of contact the bottom part of the front and back wheels.
Any force applied by the treadmill to the front wheel F1 will require an equal and opposite force at the back wheel F2.
There is nothing else to say about that vehicle other than F3 and F4 are also equal and opposite.
You (most of you) are to used with vehicle that have an onboard engine/motor.

As for blackbird I never claimed it will not exceed wind speed and similar designed vehicle could do the same but the reason they can exceed wind speed is energy storage so wind speed is exceeded for a limited amount of time proportional with the amount of stored energy.

The wheels only example in Derks video drives on the lumber and that is a fact and input is on the small wheels so it is powered by the floor again a fact.
There are ways to test that is the case if you do not believe the small wheels (input) drive the large wheel (output).

That hydraulic device is a bit more complex and I think it will likely not move at all so basically a plug. If it moves it will sure not move faster than the flow speed in the same direction as the flow as that will violate the energy conservation law.

I already explained how this wheeled vehicle will move to the right when the treadmill moves to the left.  It can't move any other way because of the connection of the wheels by the belt.  For the car to move to the left would require both wheels to turn counter clockwise.  There is no force acting to make that happen. 

What more do you need???

The forces will balance when the car is not accelerating.  In steady state, the net forces on the car will be zero.  If we imagine there are no losses, the forces will not be balanced and the car will accelerate to the right because F2 > F1 in magnitude. 

Maybe you don't understand that the only part of this that determines the movement of the car, is the left wheel rotation, which will be clockwise, same as the right hand wheel, as propelled by the treadmill.

You seem to be really, really bad at understanding which parts of a design are relevant and which are not. 

[electrodacus]

I already explained how this wheeled vehicle will move to the right when the treadmill moves to the left.  It can't move any other way because of the connection of the wheels by the belt.  For the car to move to the left would require both wheels to turn counter clockwise.  There is no force acting to make that happen. 

What more do you need???

The forces will balance when the car is not accelerating.  In steady state, the net forces on the car will be zero.  If we imagine there are no losses, the forces will not be balanced and the car will accelerate to the right because F2 > F1 in magnitude. 

Maybe you don't understand that the only part of this that determines the movement of the car, is the left wheel rotation, which will be clockwise, same as the right hand wheel, as propelled by the treadmill.

You seem to be really, really bad at understanding which parts of a design are relevant and which are not.

In real world wheels are allowed to slip.
F2 can not be higher than F1. The F2 only exist because of F1.
It is also very hard to get rid of energy storage in real life.
I already shown (video) and described what happens and why the vehicle can move to the right.
The front wheel moves while back wheel is not. That means the belt is stretched so energy is stored as elastic potential energy.
All forces F1=F2 and F3=F4 increase until front wheel will slip (just for a fraction of a second) and that is enough to allow vehicle to move to the right powered by the stored elastic energy.

If you eliminate the energy storage then the forces F1 and F2 will be instantly high but equal and they will be limited to whatever is needed for the wheel to slip. The vehicle will not move but there will be friction so energy lost as heat.
Pout (back wheel) can not be higher than Pin (wheel on the treadmill) not without any energy storage.
There is nothing wrong with my setup is just done so that what happens is much more visible https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/wheel-cart-energy-storage-slow:8

[gnuarm]

I already explained how this wheeled vehicle will move to the right when the treadmill moves to the left.  It can't move any other way because of the connection of the wheels by the belt.  For the car to move to the left would require both wheels to turn counter clockwise.  There is no force acting to make that happen. 

What more do you need???

The forces will balance when the car is not accelerating.  In steady state, the net forces on the car will be zero.  If we imagine there are no losses, the forces will not be balanced and the car will accelerate to the right because F2 > F1 in magnitude. 

Maybe you don't understand that the only part of this that determines the movement of the car, is the left wheel rotation, which will be clockwise, same as the right hand wheel, as propelled by the treadmill.

You seem to be really, really bad at understanding which parts of a design are relevant and which are not.

In real world wheels are allowed to slip.
F2 can not be higher than F1. The F2 only exist because of F1.
It is also very hard to get rid of energy storage in real life.
I already shown (video) and described what happens and why the vehicle can move to the right.
The front wheel moves while back wheel is not. That means the belt is stretched so energy is stored as elastic potential energy.
All forces F1=F2 and F3=F4 increase until front wheel will slip (just for a fraction of a second) and that is enough to allow vehicle to move to the right powered by the stored elastic energy.

If you eliminate the energy storage then the forces F1 and F2 will be instantly high but equal and they will be limited to whatever is needed for the wheel to slip. The vehicle will not move but there will be friction so energy lost as heat.
Pout (back wheel) can not be higher than Pin (wheel on the treadmill) not without any energy storage.
There is nothing wrong with my setup is just done so that what happens is much more visible https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/wheel-cart-energy-storage-slow:8

Blah, blah, blah, energy storage, cold fusion, UFOs and ghosts.  Total and complete BS!

You know nothing of physics or mechanics and just make up whatever appears in your mind, to treat it as fact.

You are either the biggest idiot in the world, or the biggest troll.  Your fantasy of forces means nothing, because you don't understand them.  Bottom line is the wheels move as I described, which makes the car move to the right as the treadmill moves to the left. 

You are an idiot, inside a moron, wrapped up in an ignoramus. 

[electrodacus]

Blah, blah, blah, energy storage, cold fusion, UFOs and ghosts.  Total and complete BS!

You know nothing of physics or mechanics and just make up whatever appears in your mind, to treat it as fact.

You are either the biggest idiot in the world, or the biggest troll.  Your fantasy of forces means nothing, because you don't understand them.  Bottom line is the wheels move as I described, which makes the car move to the right as the treadmill moves to the left. 

You are an idiot, inside a moron, wrapped up in an ignoramus.

Guessing that vehicle moves to the right doesn't mean you understand why.
A better guess will be that vehicle is not moving at all or move to the left if you ignore the effects of energy storage
Here is what happens if you reduce traction to back wheels so that front wheels can not slip first and allow the stored energy to discharge
https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/stick-slip-removed-from-front-wheels:0
I can not eliminate the energy storage but by eliminating slip at front wheel the vehicle can no longer move to the right.

[gnuarm]

Blah, blah, blah, energy storage, cold fusion, UFOs and ghosts.  Total and complete BS!

You know nothing of physics or mechanics and just make up whatever appears in your mind, to treat it as fact.

You are either the biggest idiot in the world, or the biggest troll.  Your fantasy of forces means nothing, because you don't understand them.  Bottom line is the wheels move as I described, which makes the car move to the right as the treadmill moves to the left. 

You are an idiot, inside a moron, wrapped up in an ignoramus.

Guessing that vehicle moves to the right doesn't mean you understand why.
A better guess will be that vehicle is not moving at all or move to the left if you ignore the effects of energy storage
Here is what happens if you reduce traction to back wheels so that front wheels can not slip first and allow the stored energy to discharge
https://odysee.com/@dacustemp:8/stick-slip-removed-from-front-wheels:0
I can not eliminate the energy storage but by eliminating slip at front wheel the vehicle can no longer move to the right.

Why the vehicle moves to the right is very, very simple.  The treadmill pushes to the left.  The only two possibilities are for the car to go to the right which would be essentially upwind (against the treadmill), or to the left, which would be downwind, faster than the wind (with the treadmill). 

You only need to understand simple mechanics to realize the force on F2 will be greater than the force on F1 due to the leverage of the mechanism.  So the car will accelerate to the right at an ever increasing speed until dissipative forces equal the imbalance. 

Change the gearing so F2 is smaller than F1 and the car will go downwind faster than the wind... i.e. turn the car around.  This is what they did with the Blackbird, by tweaking the pitch of the prop. 

You either can't understand the simplicity due to some mental disorder, or you still wish to troll forever and ever.

[electrodacus]

Why the vehicle moves to the right is very, very simple.  The treadmill pushes to the left.  The only two possibilities are for the car to go to the right which would be essentially upwind (against the treadmill), or to the left, which would be downwind, faster than the wind (with the treadmill). 

You only need to understand simple mechanics to realize the force on F2 will be greater than the force on F1 due to the leverage of the mechanism.  So the car will accelerate to the right at an ever increasing speed until dissipative forces equal the imbalance. 

Change the gearing so F2 is smaller than F1 and the car will go downwind faster than the wind... i.e. turn the car around.  This is what they did with the Blackbird, by tweaking the pitch of the prop. 

You either can't understand the simplicity due to some mental disorder, or you still wish to troll forever and ever.

"very, very simple"

This vehicle is a locked gearbox as demonstrated in the video linked last and also clearly seen from the diagram showing the forces acting on vehicle.
If you eliminate the energy storage or the slip on the front wheel vehicle will be dragged in the direction that treadmill moves (clearly shown in the video).
Changing the gearing as you mention will do nothing as you have the exact same vehicle rotated 180 degree and all you do is move the generator wheel (the one with smaller pulley) on the fixed surface.
The small pulley will always be the input so the same thing will happen.
Vehicle is locked until force is large enough so that generator wheel the one with small pulley slips then stored energy allows the motor wheel the one with large pulley to move the vehicle.

This are facts and demonstrated in real world tests.
So no matter if you flip the vehicle around or not this is always the same vehicle and the equivalent of the direct upwind version.
You can look at it as a direct down wind if you only consider that small few millisecond cycle where energy is stored and the vehicle is accelerated for maybe 100ms
In any case you are very confused regarding the reasons this vehicle moves and prefer no to think and just say all is "very,very simple" and while it is simple it is completely different from what you are thinking.

[gnuarm]

It's not like you can provide a rational explanation of how the vehicle moves.  You literally can't even think in terms of physics. 

[electrodacus]

It's not like you can provide a rational explanation of how the vehicle moves.  You literally can't even think in terms of physics.

Speak for yourself.  You watched the video read my explanation and still prefer to believe something else happens and I just faked that video.

[gnuarm]

It's not like you can provide a rational explanation of how the vehicle moves.  You literally can't even think in terms of physics.

Speak for yourself.  You watched the video read my explanation and still prefer to believe something else happens and I just faked that video.

I didn't say you "faked" the video.  I just think your test methodology is BS... I mean not up to standards.

[electrodacus]

I didn't say you "faked" the video.  I just think your test methodology is BS... I mean not up to standards.

OK so what part is wrong ? What should I have done different ?

[gnuarm]

I didn't say you "faked" the video.  I just think your test methodology is BS... I mean not up to standards.

OK so what part is wrong ? What should I have done different ?

First assure your wheels don't slip.  Use materials with some friction.  Don't use elastic belts.  Better yet, use a different model, like mine with sails the fold up.  That should keep you busy.

[electrodacus]

First assure your wheels don't slip.  Use materials with some friction.  Don't use elastic belts.  Better yet, use a different model, like mine with sails the fold up.  That should keep you busy.

The only way no wheel will slip is if the force applied is lower than the force needed to make the wheels slip.  So that will mean treadmill has not enough power to move at all.
Vehicle as it is designed is locked meaning wheels can not rotate.
That is what you see when front wheel only rotates is because the belt is stretchy so energy can be stored there.
If you use a belt that stretches less than less energy will be stored and then vehicle will move less at each charge discharge cycle.
If you make the front wheel have better traction than the back wheel so that back wheel slips first the vehicle moves in the direction that treadmill moves so right to left in my example.
So what you say is basically make this effects less visible. They will still be there even if less visible as without both energy storage and slip stick hysteresis the vehicle will not work.


When I first done the experiment my expectation was that vehicle will not move at all or maybe be dragged in the direction the treadmill is moving so I was fairly surprised as while same belt was used when you move the paper faster and you watch things happen at normal speed (no 5x slowed down with high speed camera) the motion looks fairly fluent and you can not see the stop and go behaviour.
I was lucky that belt was fairly stretchy as I moved the paper (treadmill equivalent) slower to try and see what happens and I barely noticed that front wheel was moving while the back wheel did not and then realized what happened. After taking that video that you also seen everything was even more clear.

In theory if you can not use energy storage and stick slip hysteresis you can not prove that vehicle can move from left to right against the direction of the force applied so whatever intuition you have is wrong. Both the theoretical analysis and the real world test shows that without energy storage and stick slip hysteresis this will not work.   

[gnuarm]

Of course the wheels can move.  I've already explained how they will move. 

Whatever.  You clearly do not want to conduct a reasonable experiment.  You are like Andrea Rossi demonstrating the e-Cat.

[electrodacus]

Of course the wheels can move.  I've already explained how they will move. 

Whatever.  You clearly do not want to conduct a reasonable experiment.  You are like Andrea Rossi demonstrating the e-Cat.

You will need to twist the belt (infinity symbol) for the wheels to move freely as it is it is a locked gearbox. In order to move in any direction as it is it will require for wheels to slip.
You realized that with your sail vehicle when you added another set of wheels to reverse the direction.

[Naej]

What's the difference between "in reality" and "the energy flows in the copper"?

In that the properties of the dielectric (insulator) and the geometry of the coaxial cable affect the energy transfer capabilities of the coaxial cable more than the core conductor does.

Really? If you replace the core by some plastic, what happens?

[Naej]

Any force applied by the treadmill to the front wheel F1 will require an equal and opposite force at the back wheel F2.

Newton's 420th law of mechanics.

[electrodacus]

Any force applied by the treadmill to the front wheel F1 will require an equal and opposite force at the back wheel F2.

Newton's 420th law of mechanics.

So you disagree with my statement that is basically Newton's 3'rd law ?
You can apply 5N on the front wheel if back wheel slips at 4N as that extra 1N can be from accelerating the vehicle backwards.
But if you want that vehicle to move forward the front wheel will need to slip and there is a hysteresis between the wheel when it sticks to surface and when it starts to slip.  This stick slip hysteresis is what allows the charged energy (belt elasticity but can be many other things it will work with many other mechanisms not just belts) to be discharged then charged again.

[Naej]

Any force applied by the treadmill to the front wheel F1 will require an equal and opposite force at the back wheel F2.

Newton's 420th law of mechanics.

So you disagree with my statement that is basically Newton's 3'rd law ?

Do you know what Newton's third law is?

[Nominal Animal]

What's the difference between "in reality" and "the energy flows in the copper"?

In that the properties of the dielectric (insulator) and the geometry of the coaxial cable affect the energy transfer capabilities of the coaxial cable more than the core conductor does.

Really? If you replace the core by some plastic, what happens?

It becomes a wave guide.  It is only practical at microwave ranges, because in the absence of a conductive core, the dielectric absorbs the energy in the EM field at most frequencies; and the characteristics of the outer "ground" become absolutely crucial, as full reflectance is needed for a viable waveguide.  (We are talking about alternating currents here, after all; since as I already wrote earlier, for direct current, the energy does indeed flow in the conductor.)

More interesting is to examine what happens when you have flaws, say a short break, in the core conductor.  If "the energy flows in the copper", then even a micrometer wide break in the core conductor would stop the energy flow, wouldn't it?  It doesn't (for AC; it would if this was steady-state DC).  It does cause all sorts of reflections and whatnot in AC, but a large fraction of the energy still flows.

This is an excellent example of why it is the geometry and not just the conductor that matters.  It is silly to even attempt to say where the energy flows, unless we exactly specify the geometry of the system we're talking about, since it really does vary from system to system.  The movement of charge carriers, current, is just the easiest way we can exploit the energy flow, make it do useful work; but it isn't exactly how the energy is always transferred within the system.  Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't: it depends exactly on the geometry/setup of the system.

Naej, I can't tell if you're agreeing with me and just directing the discussion using the Socratic method, asking genuine questions, or whether you have observed a flaw in my reasoning but are unwilling to point it out.  Would you mind telling me? 

[electrodacus]

Do you know what Newton's third law is?

Yes. Do you know?

[gnuarm]

Of course the wheels can move.  I've already explained how they will move. 

Whatever.  You clearly do not want to conduct a reasonable experiment.  You are like Andrea Rossi demonstrating the e-Cat.

You will need to twist the belt (infinity symbol) for the wheels to move freely as it is it is a locked gearbox. In order to move in any direction as it is it will require for wheels to slip.
You realized that with your sail vehicle when you added another set of wheels to reverse the direction.

As I said, you don't understand the mechanics of the car at all.  Zero, nah-dah, zip, zilch. 

Sorry, please play again.