Thread: Hello Scientific People

I am expecting some help from u.

I have a strong belief that using a simple technique, we can reduce the fuel consumption in vehicles and other machineries to less than 10% of what we have been consuming now. Unfortunately, I do not have any resources and importantly funds to implement it.

I wonder whether I can get help from any organizations or from whomever so that I can give a structure to my idea.

I would be very grateful if anybody responds to my query.

Thank you

That is a dramtaic and amazing claim. It seems unlikely that a single person would have conceived of an idea that would deliver the savings you describe. Consequently most people will not even consider your proposals since they will assume you are a fool. You will need to provide some details (not many) of how this remarkable improvement could be achieved before anyone will give it a second thought.

Indeed, you are absolutely right. Even just thinking about this kind of things appears absurd, but I am confident that it is possible.

Well, let me explain it briefly. Everyone knows, Archimedes told he could move the earth if he had been given a place to stand on. Then, why are we struggling so hard to move a bus? Why are we poring fuel into the atmosphere all along its way?

Of course, levers are being used in the vehicles long since, but we are not seeing any effect that Archimedes had uttered. It has been believed that in quest of speed, the effect of lever is being lost.

I do not believe this. The belief that in order to gain the speed we need to lose the effect of lever is nothing but totally prejudice. It is so hard to come out of this prejudice that none of us even think that there may be a way to get both the speed and the effect of lever. In fact, to say simply, we never go beyond this prejudice.

My hypothesis is that, it is possible to get both speed and effect of lever just using some techniques that needs to be considered at present.

I hope this gives you some thought. Otherwise, I may be definitely a fool.

If you think you've discovered/invented something important, and are afraid that someone else might steal your idea, the best thing would be to patent it at your nearest patent office.

The trouble is that patents are not granted if you can't prove 3 things: novelty (nobody must have published it before), inventiveness (it must not be an obvious adaptation of existing things) and applicability (you must be able to show how your idea is used in practice).
You can still try, some people say incomplete description of applicability is not necessarily going to kill your patent application.

However, if you're still working on it and need more time, I'd advise you to write down your ideas as clearly and completely as possible, and then have a lawyer or notary public to store it safely for you.
So you can look for help in developing your idea at universities, companies, etc., and your priority will be safe.

I'm not a lawyer, though, you could ask one for advice on this matter.

Thank you very much for your kind advice Mr ? Actually I have been trying to implement this project since 2000. The first and foremost mistake I have been doing is I am not keeping any record of what I have been doing. In fact, keeping a written record will keep highlighting our own mistakes we have been doing without our knowledge. I will take your advice and make a complete record of how I got this idea and what are the steps taken by myself in implementing this. Then, I will take necessary help from people like you to make progress.

Thank you a lot.

You're welcome.
Indeed, keeping accurate records is essential for both science and intellectual property matters.
The better you can document what you did, the more chances you have to get recognition for it.

Hi..
Thank you very much for your kind advice Mr ? Actually I have been trying to implement this project since 2000. The first and foremost mistake I have been doing is I am not keeping any record of what I have been doing.

Originally Posted by Purushothama

Indeed, you are absolutely right. Even just thinking about this kind of things appears absurd, but I am confident that it is possible.

Well, let me explain it briefly. Everyone knows, Archimedes told he could move the earth if he had been given a place to stand on. Then, why are we struggling so hard to move a bus? Why are we poring fuel into the atmosphere all along its way?

Of course, levers are being used in the vehicles long since, but we are not seeing any effect that Archimedes had uttered. It has been believed that in quest of speed, the effect of lever is being lost.

I do not believe this. The belief that in order to gain the speed we need to lose the effect of lever is nothing but totally prejudice. It is so hard to come out of this prejudice that none of us even think that there may be a way to get both the speed and the effect of lever. In fact, to say simply, we never go beyond this prejudice.

My hypothesis is that, it is possible to get both speed and effect of lever just using some techniques that needs to be considered at present.

I hope this gives you some thought. Otherwise, I may be definitely a fool.

nice that you published the idea. Now you can't patent it any more.

Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey

nice that you published the idea. Now you can't patent it any more.

I have not revealed my idea. None can implement my real idea using this text.

does it involve storing energy generated during braking?

Originally Posted by Purushothama

Indeed, you are absolutely right. Even just thinking about this kind of things appears absurd, but I am confident that it is possible.

Well, let me explain it briefly. Everyone knows, Archimedes told he could move the earth if he had been given a place to stand on. Then, why are we struggling so hard to move a bus? Why are we poring fuel into the atmosphere all along its way?

Of course, levers are being used in the vehicles long since, but we are not seeing any effect that Archimedes had uttered. It has been believed that in quest of speed, the effect of lever is being lost.

I do not believe this. The belief that in order to gain the speed we need to lose the effect of lever is nothing but totally prejudice. It is so hard to come out of this prejudice that none of us even think that there may be a way to get both the speed and the effect of lever. In fact, to say simply, we never go beyond this prejudice.

My hypothesis is that, it is possible to get both speed and effect of lever just using some techniques that needs to be considered at present.

I hope this gives you some thought. Otherwise, I may be definitely a fool.

Let's examine what Archimedes meant by what he said. He meant that, if given a long enough lever he could lift a weight as heavy as the Earth. He could do this by placing the fulcrum very close to the weight and putting himself at the end of a lever arm very far from the fulcrum. In this way the relatively small force that he exerts on the lever can produce a much greater force at the other end. The trade off is that the other end of the lever will move less by the same factor.

For instance, if he is 1,000,000 times farther from the fulcrum than the weight is and exerts 1 Newton of force at his end, this will produce 1,000,000 Newtons of force at the weight's end. If he moves his end 1 meter, the weight will move 1 millimeter. Now since energy is force x distance, and he exerted a 1 Newton force for a distance of 1 meter, he expended 1 Joule of energy. At the other end 1,000,000 Newtons acted over 1/1000,000 of a meter, resulting in 1 Joule of energy. The energy at one end of the lever will always equal that at the other.

So how do we use this principle with say a bus? A bus engine might idle at 750 rpm And the wheel might run about 36" in diameter. That means that if you were to directly connect the wheels to the engine, it equates to a speed of 80 mph.

That means that at the instant to engage the wheels to the engine, even at idle, the tires will spin at 80 mph. This brings up two problems. There are very few instances where you are going to want your bus to go immediately from a standing start to 80 mph, and trying to to do so will stall the engine, as it doesn't have the torque to do so.

To get around this, we put a gear box between the engine and wheels.

Reduction gears work on the lever principle. A large diameter gear is attached to the same axis (which acts as the fulcrum) as a smaller diameter gear. As the larger gear turns through its circumference, the smaller gear turns through a smaller one, magnifying the force. This smaller gear then turns a larger gear, resulting in a lower rpm. By adding these reduction gears in series, we can get our bus tires spinning at a couple of mph at a engine rpm of 2000, while at the same time reducing the force the engine needs to exert, preventing it from stalling.

The gear box is designed such that as you speed up, you change gear ratios in order to keep the engine rpm in a certain range (Where the engine is most efficient.)

Again energy output of the engine equals energy used in turning the wheels to move the bus. This energy is used to overcome friction (both air and road) and to overcome potential energy when climbing hills.

The upshot is the while the lever principle can be used to magnify force, it cannot be used to magnify energy as the energy in always equals energy out.

On the other hand, it can be used, as it is already being used in cars, to allow the best use of that energy. In the car or bus, this is done by using the various gears to keep the engine running in its most efficient range over a wide range of vehicle speeds.

Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey

does it involve storing energy generated during braking?

Not at all

Originally Posted by Janus

Let's examine what Archimedes meant by what he said.........

I agree, energy at both ends is equal in a lever and whatever you have explained here is true for sure, but my theory stands over all of these. As I said before, you too are a victim of bias. The concept ‘energy in one end of a lever is always equals to the other end’ itself pushes us into the bias that none can use levers to reduce the energy required in vehicles or in any other machines.

If we try to think beyond this, we can definitely get a solution. From my point of view it is really possible and I cannot reveal that theory here, the reason for this I think you know.