Industry experts contacted indicated that the volume of a Bourdon tube does not change while flexing or they had no data on this consideration. If the industry consensus is true, work output can exceed work input (Wout ˃ Win) as per an APS experiment.” APS could not confirm or deny the experts’ opinion, but developed a means of measuring a .0001 of a liquid drop change. Further investigation is required in a superior lab.
This investigation was intended as a stepping stone to methods significantly addressing the Climate Change issue. We wish to partner with the R & D division of a major manufacturer, regularly using bourdon tubes, based on three scientific facts they currently accept.
Practical application must be finalized. To survive together, we must work together.
The three accepted facts are:
- Pascal’s Principal (page 5) is valid respecting fluid pressure in a contained volume.
- The volume of a bourdon tube does not change on being pressurized. (Industry experts contacted confirm this fact or state they have no data on this matter.)
- The tip of a bourdon tube exerts a force at its tip as it travels through a distance.
The three facts combine into a concept challenging physical laws. When the potential working capability of a bourdon tube with a lesser range exerts its force on the non-compressible surface of a second bourdon tube, with a higher range, the work output of the second bourdon tube is greater than the work output of the first bourdon tube. (illustrated page 13)
The concluding fact is Work input ˂ Work output. (Winput ˂ Woutput)
I urge you to consider the basis for accepting the physical laws established in the 1800’s. If the claim is made that anything is unachievable, those making such claims must have all knowledge regarding the subject; past, present and future.
There are two recently patented inventions directed at challenging these laws. (Patent office links page 2). I’m quite confident the men from the 1800’s did not time travel and refute inventions that challenge their claims. Multiple engineers/scientists/professors have assessed the inventions, which contest the opinion from the 1800’s, but their current challenges contained nothing more than statements of blind faith in the “Laws” or a no contest position.
None refuted the mechanical design, control circuitry or logic in the reports given to them.
Quoting Einstein: “ A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.”
If the scientific community does not adjust to thinking creatively and support their opinions with actual science, humanity is headed for disaster.