Subj: [Tilley_Fans] Fw: Tilley DOOMED - comments from Bill Dube
Date: 9/20/02 11:28:33 AM Central Daylight Time
From: sterlingda@greaterthings.com
Reply-to: Tilley_Fans@yahoogroups.com
To: Tilley_fans@yahoogroups.com
CC: remyc@prodigy.net
Sent from the Internet (Details)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Remy C" <remyc@prodigy.net>
To: "ETList" <ETList@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 10:20 AM
Subject: Tilley DOOMED - comments from Bill Dube
From: "Bill Dube" bdube@ boulder.nist.gov
Friday, September 20, 2002
Subject: Re: Is Carl Tilley DOOMED ???
At 07:29 AM 9/20/2002, you wrote:
From:
>http://www.escribe.com/science/keelynet/m13385.html
William Beaty wrote in reply to Jerry Decker:
Thu, 19 Sep 2002
"But as I was telling Eric Kreig, the guy is doomed. Tilly is secretive. As long as nobody can build their own version of his device to verify it's reality, he's just another Dennis Lee or Joe Newman. He can put on national
demonstrations and collect millions of bucks from supporters, but as long as it stays secret... he's DOOMED.
He is secretive AND he has yet to actually put on a successful national demonstration. He is doubly doomed.
From what you researched below, it looks like Tilley is doing something like the classic "alternator on the wheel" approach. (But I could be wrong because there is not much information given.) This has been tried many, many, many times without success.
>>>>> Alternator on the wheel and why it doesn't work <<<<<
The idea is that you put a generator on the wheel of an EV and use it to charge the batteries as the car runs down the road. It sounds very plausible to the uninitiated, but it can't possibly work. What most folks don't understand is that the mechanical energy needed to spin an alternator is always greater than the electrical energy it produces. There is just no way around this, but most folks do not have direct experience with generators and also do not understand the basic principles involved. They don't understand that the more electricity a generator produces, the harder it is to turn the shaft.
Anyone that understands regenerative braking fully understands why the alternator on the wheel scheme cannot possibly work. In regen braking, you are, in fact, connecting an alternator to the wheel to charge the
batteries. By connecting an alternator to the wheel and charging the batteries, you are drastically slowing down the car. Braking is your goal, after all. You are returning some of the energy stored in the inertia of the
car. That is, the mass of the car is at some speed. The energy stored in a moving mass is equal to 1/2 M * V ^2. Regen reduces the speed of the car, thereby reducing the inertial energy stored in the car, and changes a good
fraction of this inertial energy into electrical energy.
When you operate the regen system, it drastically slows down the car. This is because it is changing mechanical energy into electrical energy and storing it in the batteries. If you operated the regen system continuously, the car would be much harder to move down the road. The electric motor that propels the car would have to overcome this extra drag. To do so, you would have to put more power into the electric motor. The extra power you have to put in the motor is always MUCH MORE than the power
you extract from the alternator on the wheel. There is just no way around this.
>>>>> Complicated systems versus simple systems <<<<
If you somehow convince yourself that an alternator on the wheel could somehow work, you need to stop for a moment and ask yourself, "Where does the energy come from?" You must conclude that it comes from the
alternator on the wheel. That is the only thing producing power. You next step is to eliminate parts of the system that are not directly related to the energy cycle.
Does it matter what wheel you use to drive the alternator? It shouldn't. They are all turning the same speed. Lets drive the alternator from the same wheel that we are using to push the car down the road with the
electric motor. Everything is turning the same speed, so it won't matter.
Next, lets make the system more efficient by reducing the size of the car. Let's get rid of the three other wheels, the body, and the driver. We now have a battery pack, a motor and an alternator moving down the road. This will be much more efficient that hauling all that useless stuff along.
Next consider, "Why must the tire contact the road?" The road does not provide power. The spinning wheel is all we need. Lets eliminate the road. Now we have a spinning wheel with both an alternator and a motor. The motor is powered by the batteries and it spins the wheel. The alternator spins with the wheel and charges the batteries. No car is involved because we don't need a car to demonstrate the basic principle.
If the alternator is producing power greater than the motor is using it, why do we need the batteries once the system is running at the proper speed? Once the system is spinning steadily, we should be able to disconnect the batteries. Now we have an alternator providing power to a motor that is spinning a wheel that is spinning the alternator.
If the alternator on the wheel works, then this simple demonstration system should work. All the things we removed had nothing to do with producing power and had nothing to do with the basic principle upon which the system worked.
The trouble is, none of this works. This is because the basic principle is flawed and does not work. It takes quite a bit of time and money for you to finally discover that the alternator on the wheel of an EV doesn't work, but you will discover this eventually. Conversely, it only takes a few hundred dollars and a weekend's work to discover that the motor driving the alternator does not work.
Actually, most people understand immediately that the alternator running the motor spinning the alternator will not work. That is why you must insert the complicated EV in the middle for folks to pay any attention
at all.
If a demonstration fails (as it always will) the failure will be blamed on some part of the system other than the basic principle. EVs are complicated and you can lay blame on all sorts of things. If you pared that system down to is basic components, it would fail and there would be nothing to blame this failure on but the basic principle. That is why these systems are never pared down to the basic components.
>>>>> Scientific Principles, patent rights <<<<<<
Scientific principles are not a set of regulations to prevent creative thought. Simply put, the basic idea is that the device must work for most everyone that makes one that follows your recipe. If no one else can make a duplicate demonstration work, then something is wrong and the basic principle is deemed flawed. It is a simple, effective, and fair system.
First, you must publish the information in enough detail for someone else to do their own demonstration of the principle. Once someone else can duplicate your device (or experiment) then you have passed the test.
None of the free energy folks do this. It's not difficult and no rights are given up by doing so. There is no legitimate excuse for not making a full public disclosure of your device.
>>>> Patent rights <<<<<<
You can publish the information without giving away the rights and protections of a patent. For US patents, you have a full year after public disclosure to file a patent. For international patents, you must first file an official disclosure before public disclosure. This official disclosure is not reviewed. It cannot be rejected. It is merely filed. As soon as it is submitted, you may publicly disclose without losing international patent rights. You should file a patent within a few months of disclosure to fully retain international patent rights.
============
119293!! |
