Tony Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 You see satellites and the space station using solar panels to fuel themselves. Is it not possible to generate electricity in space. Knowing that if you spin something in space it spins forever unlike earth where it takes a force to move something. and a conductor cutting the flux in a magnet produces current. Unless I am missing some information, it should be real easy to produce a great deal electricity in space. So why do they use monster size expensive solar panels instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 How do you mean? If the conductor is passing through an electric field then the resistance of the field will slow the spinning, then again I have a spectacular habit of being wrong when it comes to physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPHgravity Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 NASA and other space agencies do use and are developing space based generation systems based on rotating magnetic fields. A rotating loop of conductor will produce alternating current. This is not effective for space systems for a host of issues. Therefore, the ac would have to be converted to dc through the use of commutators that are not only ineffecient, but very restrictive. You would aslo have to establish and control a set rmp of the spinning loop in order to produce desired output voltage. In any case, these systems are generally not used directly and are only for the purpose of charging batteries. Having an infintite of electrical supply is useless if you do not have infinite storage or infinite use for it. A system is even being designed to extend a conductive tether from the space shuttle that will cut through the ionosphere and the Earths magnetic field. Cathodes along the tether will conduct electrons and create a potential to anodes at the vehicle that will collect the current into battery sets. Solar cells are still by far the best use of natural resources for the generation of electrical enrgy in space. Earth base systems are becomming more and more effiecent and cost effective everday. In ten years, solar generation will be second only to dinasaur fuel generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 Originally posted by Tony You see satellites and the space station using solar panels to fuel themselves. Is it not possible to generate electricity in space. Knowing that if you spin something in space it spins forever unlike earth where it takes a force to move something. and a conductor cutting the flux in a magnet produces current. Unless I am missing some information, it should be real easy to produce a great deal electricity in space. So why do they use monster size expensive solar panels instead? You're talking about a perpetual motion machine, and that breaks the law of thermodynamics. Yes, objects in space can rotate for an incredibly long time. But if you were to use it to produce electricity, you take energy away from it thus slowing it down. Skye is essentially right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 28, 2003 Author Share Posted June 28, 2003 I think that's a matter of design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted June 28, 2003 Share Posted June 28, 2003 Originally posted by Tony I think that's a matter of design. How's that? You can't remove energy from an object and have it keep the same net energy. You're converting rotational energy into electical energy and extracting it, thus slowing down the rotating object. There's really no argument about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 29, 2003 Author Share Posted June 29, 2003 First of all you have never been to space. I had to say that. e.g you could re-spin it mechanically, if it slows down. say you're the generator is spinning at 10,000 rpm, over time due to resistances it may slow down, it so you then mechanically re-spin the gen back to 10,000rpm. I am thinking you would get much more energy out of the generator, some of that energy could then be used at given time used to keep the rpms up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 that is perpetual motion. I may not have been into space, but I can do the calculations. basically when you cut the field, there is a resistive foce which slows the spinning opbject down as you convert it into electrical motion. what is more, if you are not in geostationary orbit, you don't even need to spin it, you just stick out a wire and extract lectricity. Nasa did this recently, but they blew the device up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1917 Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 The machine will be never be 100% efficient thus energy will be lost somehow to the surroundings. the energy required to keep the thing spinning will be more than has been gained from it due to this inefficency. Second of course he hasnt been to space, what kind of comment is that. It doesnt mean his argument is flawed in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Originally posted by Tony First of all you have never been to space. I had to say that. e.g you could re-spin it mechanically, if it slows down. say you're the generator is spinning at 10,000 rpm, over time due to resistances it may slow down, it so you then mechanically re-spin the gen back to 10,000rpm. I am thinking you would get much more energy out of the generator, some of that energy could then be used at given time used to keep the rpms up. No I haven't been to space. But you haven't been to many physics classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPHgravity Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by Radical Edward ...but I can do the calculations. basically when you cut the field, there is a resistive foce which slows the spinning opbject down as you convert it into electrical motion... What exactly is this resistive force you are talking about, and can you show these calculations? When the electromagnetic field is produced, and magnetic flux lines cut through the conductors, electrical current is created through electromagnetic induction. I do not see what force acts to resist the rotation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Originally posted by BPHgravity What exactly is this resistive force you are talking about, and can you show these calculations? When the electromagnetic field is produced, and magnetic flux lines cut through the conductors, electrical current is created through electromagnetic induction. I do not see what force acts to resist the rotation? Remember Lorentz Force Law: F = qE + qv X B qE being the electric force which is in the direction of the electric field if the charge q is positive. qv X B is the magnetic force that follows the RHR (Right Hand Rule). Think of holding your hand flat while your thumb is pointing straight up. Your thumb is the direction of the charge velocity perpendicular to the magnetic field force which would be like your middle finger pointed to the left. This leaves your index finger to stick straight out from your hand in the direction of the magnetic field. So every time a wire moves through a magnetic field, a current is inducted (Faraday's Law) in the wire giving the wire a circular magnetic field. As this magnetic field interacts with the magnetic field of the magnets, there is a force acted on the wire perperdicular to its movement. Remember the right hand rule. There is restistance between the magnetic fields as they interact. Because I don't want to try to add equations, I'll give you a couple sights that show this. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/magnetic/magfor.html http://www.wvic.com/how-gen-works.htm http://www.slcc.edu/schools/hum_sci/physics/tutor/2220/em_induction/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 Do any of u know of the earth creating its own energy when its spins (in space) 9x10^19 powergrams/cm^3 bring anymemories bac. the earth is supposed to create its own potential energy (which is often forgotten because of its useless ness). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dr Hans Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 Check out the tether experiment with the shuttle. At about the ionosphere there is 500,000 volts static charge available for use. The Earth is the other plate of this capacitor. > Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted July 1, 2003 Share Posted July 1, 2003 yes quite right but the ionsphere just like the other succession levels of earth is not quite space this static is due to movement of particles were as in space there is only about 1 atom (mainly H) per metre^3 and electricty needs two things to be electricty a) charged particles andb) has to have a electric field to move so where as space has alittle particles not enouugh for convential electricty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPHgravity Posted July 5, 2003 Share Posted July 5, 2003 Nikola Tesla had some of the greatest ideas and theories for electrical generation and distribution, but most have never been developed. The powers that be (oil companies) are not big fans of alternative power sources. Many of these companies hold the patents and research dollars for alternative power develpoment. Besides, in space, there is no better power source than the Sun. Spin generators, tether conductors, fuel cells; none of these have the potential of solar energy collection and photvoltaic processing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted July 7, 2003 Author Share Posted July 7, 2003 Stick and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me. On earth it takes constant force to move something. If you take a look at a hydro power station, water is used to spin a turbine. The water tide, gravity is also used as well as added pressurized pipes. When the water stops the turbine quickly comes to a halt. In space things are totally different. When you initially move something in space it does not slow down. But keeps moving. The only resistances you are talking about are the load on the circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by Tony In space things are totally different. When you initially move something in space it does not slow down. But keeps moving. Unless another force acts on the system. Last time I checked, electromagnetic fields and forces were taught at a very basic level of physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by Tony Stick and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me. On earth it takes constant force to move something. If you take a look at a hydro power station, water is used to spin a turbine. The water tide, gravity is also used as well as added pressurized pipes. When the water stops the turbine quickly comes to a halt. In space things are totally different. When you initially move something in space it does not slow down. But keeps moving. The only resistances you are talking about are the load on the circuit. no. this is really fundamental stuff. If you could have a perpetualy motion machine in space, someone would have built them by now and have them powering an ion drive to Andromeda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted July 8, 2003 Author Share Posted July 8, 2003 Not so, science is still relatively new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by Tony Not so, science is still relatively new. Tony you're an idiot. This is basic, verified stuff. How do you expect to extract energy from something and keep it spinning without adding anymore energy. Ever taken a magnet and run it by another magnet? There is a FORCE there. The same is with a generator. The interaction of magnetic fields will eventually stop the spinning cylinder. As the saying goes, "You can't get something from nothing" or did you miss that class on the 2nd law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted July 9, 2003 Author Share Posted July 9, 2003 Are you hearing things, no there just radio waves. That's perliminary physics, da. If you spin something in space, it spins forever unless something stops it. So if I put a simple generator in space, initially spin the magent at about 10million rps, it will spin a very long time. Copper is a conductor but is not attacted to magnets. Thus the copper will not stop the magnet spinning, more so if you use superconductor new superconductive wire. can you finish this for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 F = B x v that is all I am going to say to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Originally posted by Tony If you spin something in space, it spins forever unless something stops it. So if I put a simple generator in space, initially spin the magent at about 10million rps, it will spin a very long time. Copper is a conductor but is not attacted to magnets. Thus the copper will not stop the magnet spinning, more so if you use superconductor new superconductive wire. You are trying to use the benefits of electromagnetic induction while ignoring any of the physics that stops it working. And what R_E said ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg1917 Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Tony, this is becoming farcical. The reasons why this generator would not work have been clearly explained - the reason you fail to understand them is that you do not understand the laws of electromagnetism and the associated phenonomen therein; you would do well to learn more about Newtonian motion as well. Nothing would change if you used a superconductive piece of wire apart from the fact that the machine would be considerably more effecient. however it will still be <100% effecient. if it was to create its own energy it would need to be >100% efficient. Which, believe it or not, is impossible. Copper isnt magnetic BUT THE CURRENT INDUCED IN THE COPPER WILL HAVE ITS OWN MAGNETIC FIELD. GET OVER IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now