Why can't we harvest the power of gravity?

gonedrinking · 11-02-2011 02:20PM #1

We could build a massive hole in the ground, like 30 or 40 miles deep. Then have a bloke at the top of the hole drop a brick down into it. Now the brick will be attached to a rope which will be part of a type of pulley system, then somewhere along the pulley system will be a box which converts the movement and friction of the rope into energy. Would this work? No one steal my idea cause I haven't copyrighted it yet.

tricky D · 11-02-2011 02:23PM

Dam it.

Wish I'd had that idea.

phasers · 11-02-2011 02:23PM

Why don't you get digging and find out!

tman · 11-02-2011 02:25PM

Wouldn't you have to use up a similar amount of energy retrieving the brick...

yeppydeppy · 11-02-2011 02:25PM

Stay drinking!

Dutch Roll · 11-02-2011 02:25PM

Build a hole?

I think it would probably get very hot and liquid-ey after about 20 or 30 miles. I also think the effort and energy put into building the hole would far outweigh any potential gain from throwing bricks down it

Nuclear is the way to go methinks. When will the people realise goddammit

Duggy747 · 11-02-2011 02:27PM

Just dig a hole right through the earth to the other side, have 2 guys at either end throwing the one brick back and forth.

RichieC · 11-02-2011 02:27PM

tman wrote: »

Wouldn't you have to use up a similar amount of energy retrieving the brick...

F*ck thermodynamics!

they're an asshole anyway.

tman · 11-02-2011 02:27PM

Dutch Roll wrote: »

Build a hole?

Dig yourself a bridge and get over it!

Jesus Wept · 11-02-2011 02:27PM

tman wrote: »

Wouldn't you have to use up a similar amount of energy retrieving the brick...

It's a brick. Do we need really need to retrieve it?!

Humans eh! · 11-02-2011 02:28PM

Some skanger would steal the brick. :pac:
Then where would we be?

FatherLen · 11-02-2011 02:28PM

google perpetual motion.
in summary you cant create energy only convert it.
the energy used to raise the brick would be the same energy gathered from its kinnetic energy.
so no positive energy just a lot of time wasted.

throwin down some knowledge yo.

Dutch Roll · 11-02-2011 02:28PM

tman wrote: »

Dig yourself a bridge and get over it!

gonedrinking · 11-02-2011 02:30PM

Duggy747 wrote: »

Just dig a hole right through the earth to the other side, have 2 guys at either end throwing the one brick back and forth.

that could work, but once the brick gets to the centre of the earth would it not stop dead then? or would it keep falling until it came out the other side?

Jesus Wept · 11-02-2011 02:30PM

tman wrote: »

Wouldn't you have to use up a similar amount of energy retrieving the brick...

FatherLen wrote: »

google perpetual motion.
in summary you cant create energy only convert it.
the energy used to raise the brick would be the same energy gathered from its kinnetic energy.
so no positive energy just a lot of time wasted.

throwin down some knowledge yo.

Len, ya big bollix!
Why do we need to raise the brick?! It's a brick, leave it.
I love my brick.

Humans eh! · 11-02-2011 02:32PM

FatherLen wrote: »

google perpetual motion.
in summary you cant create energy only convert it.
the energy used to raise the brick would be the same energy gathered from its kinnetic energy.
so no positive energy just a lot of time wasted.

throwin down some knowledge yo.

If you wet the brick, it would dry on the way down and be lighter to pull back up.
eh?

FatherLen · 11-02-2011 02:32PM

ok let me rephrase. the energy needed to remove the mass of earth needed to create a hole would be larger than the energy gotten from throwing a brick down.

Lumen · 11-02-2011 02:34PM

Better still, just fire a brick 40 miles into space and catch it on the way back down.

Rockets are free, right?

FatherLen · 11-02-2011 02:35PM

Humans eh! wrote: »

If you wet the brick, it would dry on the way down and be lighter to pull back up.
eh?

good point but you would have to take into consideration the actual energy of wetting the brick, which i know is very small but the energy you would get from the wet brick over the energy would get from a dry brick is very small.

gonedrinking · 11-02-2011 02:35PM

FatherLen wrote: »

ok let me rephrase. the energy needed to remove the mass of earth needed to create a hole would be larger than the energy gotten from throwing a brick down.

in the short term yes

Humans eh! · 11-02-2011 02:36PM

FatherLen wrote: »

ok let me rephrase. the energy needed to remove the mass of earth needed to create a hole would be larger than the energy gotten from throwing a brick down.

Can't we just use the hole that the bank bailout is throwing our money into its massive. I've heard it described as"a bottomless pit" :eek:

tricky D · 11-02-2011 02:36PM

tman wrote: »

Wouldn't you have to use up a similar amount of energy retrieving the brick...

You do it at night when the rate is cheap and with excess capacity. Incredible you might think, but it's how Turlough Hill works.

Zulu · 11-02-2011 02:36PM

In a way - we already do: the water mill.

frag420 · 11-02-2011 02:37PM

why dont we harness bunjee jumpers instead and have fun while we are at it...........................

frAg

Standman · 11-02-2011 02:41PM

its all well and good, but its a waste of a good brick. I'd use a large rock instead. Actually a better idea would be to role a magnetic ball down the side of some big mountain like the alps or some shít, have a battery inside the ball which charges from the rotation of said ball. That's prime gravity harvest

Humans eh! · 11-02-2011 02:41PM

FatherLen wrote: »

good point but you would have to take into consideration the actual energy of wetting the brick, which i know is very small but the energy you would get from the wet brick over the energy would get from a dry brick is very small.

Just leave them uncovered in the rain = no energy expended.
I have loads of wet bricks in my garden and I didn't use any energy wetting them at all.

And small is better than nothing! no point being greedy.
I call it my wet brick energy ratio solution.

Humans eh! · 11-02-2011 02:44PM

Standman wrote: »

its all well and good, but its a waste of a good brick. I'd use a large rock instead. Actually a better idea would be to role a magnetic ball down the side of some big mountain like the alps or some shít, have a battery inside the ball which charges from the rotation of said ball. That's prime gravity harvest

I like it!

Why would the ball be magnetic?

jester77 · 11-02-2011 02:46PM

You should join Steorn, they would love that idea!

Earthhorse · 11-02-2011 02:49PM

We're already harnessing the power of gravity to keep things from floating off into space.

Captain_Generic · 11-02-2011 02:54PM

The power of gravity has harvested many a laugh on YouTube

PCPhoto · 11-02-2011 02:56PM

RichieC wrote: »

F*ck thermodynamics!

they're an asshole anyway.

isnt is simple physics ... "every action has an equal and opposite reaction"....Isaac Newton I think !!

(uh oh ...nerd hat off and run to the corner)

Why can't we harvest the power of gravity?

Comments