Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

I moved water uphill against gravity


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
106 replies to this topic

#1 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:20 PM

Why did it work?

GO HERE:




  • 0

#2 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:34 PM

because the water is moving. you can get it to go uphill by converting kinetic energy to potential energy. much the same thing happens when a skateboarder uses a quarter pipe to get some air time.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#3 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:42 PM

I thought Force1 at pipe inlet is greater than Force2 at pipe outlet.
  • 0

#4 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:59 PM

yes, the pressure is greater at 1 than 2 because of depth. but that isn't the cause.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#5 John Cuthber

John Cuthber

    Chemistry Expert

  • Resident Experts
  • 9,816 posts
  • LocationEngland

Posted 14 September 2009 - 08:05 PM

I can't be bothered to look at the vids. Is the bloke taking a bucket of water up a hill?
  • -1

#6 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 14 September 2009 - 08:11 PM

nah its a sloping pipe in moving water.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#7 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 03:15 AM

I can't be bothered to look at the vids. Is the bloke taking a bucket of water up a hill?


Correct it is moving uphill. The video proves it. A pressure differential is created.
  • 0

#8 D H

D H

    Physics Expert

  • Resident Experts
  • 3,631 posts
  • LocationHouston, Texas

Posted 15 September 2009 - 03:38 AM

So? Do you think you have found a flaw in the laws of physics?

Hint: You haven't. Google the phrase "dynamic pressure" to see why.
  • 0

#9 CaptainPanic

CaptainPanic

    Usually himself

  • Moderators
  • 4,726 posts
  • LocationThe little swamp at the end of the river Rhine

Posted 15 September 2009 - 08:28 AM

So? Do you think you have found a flaw in the laws of physics?

Hint: You haven't. Google the phrase "dynamic pressure" to see why.


I don't believe that Cyclonebuster actually attempts to point out a flaw in the laws of physics. He's merely trying to find out what the physics are behind his "trick". And I believe that this has been answered by now.
  • 0
Veni, vidi, modeli - I came, I saw, and I modeled it

#10 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 11:55 AM

So how far uphill can I move it this way?
  • 0

#11 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 15 September 2009 - 11:57 AM

depends how fast the water is moving relative to the pipe.

look up bernoullis equation. this will allow you to calculate it for a specific velocity.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#12 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 12:18 PM

What about cold deep water? How cold of water can I move uphill?
  • 0

#13 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 15 September 2009 - 12:26 PM

as long as it isn't ice you can do it.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#14 CaptainPanic

CaptainPanic

    Usually himself

  • Moderators
  • 4,726 posts
  • LocationThe little swamp at the end of the river Rhine

Posted 15 September 2009 - 12:27 PM

The density hardly changes, so it doesn't matter how deep or how cold the water is.
A certain velocity will translate into a certain height above the water level.

Look up the equations and new words that you learned in this thread... You cannot learn physics without studying, I'm afraid. You really have to put a bit of effort :D
  • 0
Veni, vidi, modeli - I came, I saw, and I modeled it

#15 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:05 PM

The density hardly changes, so it doesn't matter how deep or how cold the water is.
A certain velocity will translate into a certain height above the water level.

Look up the equations and new words that you learned in this thread... You cannot learn physics without studying, I'm afraid. You really have to put a bit of effort :D



I did do the effort and built the pipe to show the naysayers! Watch the video it proves it.

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
What if the surface water is 90 degrees and the water at depth is 60 degrees?
  • 0

#16 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:13 PM

yep, it'll still work. and you should specify what temperature scale you are using. i'm going assume you mean degrees farenheit as 90*C water isn't usually found in nature.

we'd preffer it if you used celsius here as it is the most common measurement scale globally anda lot of our membership is international.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#17 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:32 PM

yep, it'll still work. and you should specify what temperature scale you are using. i'm going assume you mean degrees farenheit as 90*C water isn't usually found in nature.

we'd preffer it if you used celsius here as it is the most common measurement scale globally anda lot of our membership is international.



I mean in F not C correct!

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
What if the surface water is 90 degrees and the water at depth is 50 degrees? I am looking for an average temperature of 70 degrees F..
  • 0

#18 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:42 PM

it'll work even if the lower water is at 32*F (0*C) and the upper water is 212*F(100*C).

if the water is liquid, it will work.
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#19 Cyclonebuster

Cyclonebuster

    Quark

  • Senior Members
  • 86 posts

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:49 PM

Can you show me the math proving it works? My math is very basic.

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
Or is the video proof enough?
  • 0

#20 h4tt3n

h4tt3n

    Baryon

  • Senior Members
  • 163 posts
  • LocationDenmark

Posted 15 September 2009 - 07:23 PM

You might want to look at the "hydraulic ram", which uses the kinetic energy of streaming water to pump a smaller volume of water to quite great heights.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Hydraulic_ram

Cheers,
Mike
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users