Mascons

[jajrussel]

Would it be possible to take advantage of mascons on the moon to generate electricity?

[elfmotat]

What do you mean? Normal matter is electrically neutral. There's no net charge on the Moon.

[jajrussel]

Actually I was thinking of a giant ferris wheel strategically placed on the moon where the Mascon would cause one side to be heavier than the other thus the wheel turns. I figure a mechanical genius and a structual genius might be able to figure out how to build it and make it work?

Edited November 6, 2014 by jajrussel

[elfmotat]

Actually I was thinking of a giant ferris wheel strategically placed on the moon where the Mascon would cause one side to be heavier than the other thus the wheel turns. I figure a mechanical genius and a structual genius might be able to figure out how to build it and make it work?

 

No, that would constitute a perpetual motion device. Plus gravity is extremely weak. Same reasons we can't do this on Earth.

[swansont]

No, there is no such thing as free energy. (edit: x-post with elfmotat)

[jajrussel]

I am not talking about perpetual motion.It would need energy to get it started, and keep it going, but it should get a gravitation assist in the Mascon side since things on that side will be heavier.

 

Actually heavier is not the right term. The gravitational force is greater on the mascon side. This might assist in turning the wheel. We would still need to supply energy to turn the wheel, but with the gravitational assist we might use less resources.

Edited November 6, 2014 by jajrussel

[swansont]

I am not talking about perpetual motion.It would need energy to get it started, and keep it going, but it should get a gravitation assist in the Mascon side since things on that side will be heavier.

 

You will have to explain the distinction between a gravity assist and perpetual motion/free energy.

[Strange]

It appears to be equivalent to this: https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm#gravshld

 

And won't work for the same reasons.

[jajrussel]

It appears that I edited between post. I believe I have explained in the editing.

 

I read recently that an astronaut in fifty pounds of gear equivalent to moons gravity would weigh fifty pounss, four ounces in the center of a Mascon.

 

I am talking about taking advantage of a natural condition of the moons gravity, and using it to assist in creating electricity.

It appears to be equivalent to this: https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm#gravshld

 

And won't work for the same reasons.

Cool article, but I am not talking about creating gravitational shields, or perpetual motion. I am talking about taking advantage of natural conditions that exist on the moon to assist in creating electricity.

 

If it is not feasible it will not be because I am trying to defy physics by designing a perpetual motion machine. It will be because it is not mechanically, and or structurally feasible.

 

What I am talking about is no different than slingshoting around the moon to get the extra energy needed to get a satellite home to earth. Except I am taking about putting that little bit of energy back into turning a wheel.

 

I just figured that if the mascons have enough force to take a satellite out of orbit there might be some way to take advantage of that force on the moons surface.

Edited November 6, 2014 by jajrussel

[Strange]

Cool article, but I am not talking about creating gravitational shields, or perpetual motion. I am talking about taking advantage of natural conditions that exist on the moon to assist in creating electricity.

 

But it is exactly the same result: more gravity on one side than the other. (You could do this on Earth by putting a large lump of lead (or, better, osmium) under one side). And it won't work for the same reasons.

 

If it is not feasible it will not be because I am trying to defy physics by designing a perpetual motion machine.

 

That is exactly why it won't work.

[jajrussel]

I had not read the article until you posted it. The conditions are no where near the same. The earth is not the moon. Mascons exist on the moon. They do not exist on earth. The ones on the moon are large. You have it in your head that because something won't work on earth it won't work on the moon, and if I were taking about perpetual motion I would agree. It won't work.

 

But I am not talking about perpetual motion. I am talking about one spot on the moon having a greater force of gravity than another spot. Enough of a difference that for every fifty pounds on one spot an acceleration difference of four ounces exist on the other spot. That is a difference in force. It exist.

 

I am talking about a machine that uses that difference in force to transform that difference into something usable. The machine might not be feasible, but if the source exist it is just a matter of figuring out how to feasibly use it.

 

I don't expect the wheel to turn on its on. What I do expect is that a difference in force might somehow be used to assist in that turning.

 

If we ever get to the moon to live, taking advantage of every natural resource would seem reasonable to me if it is feasible.

 

Though I could be misunderstanding what you are saying. Are you saying that a difference in force can not be transformed into work, and using the article as proof?

Edited November 7, 2014 by jajrussel

[swansont]

I don't expect the wheel to turn on its on. What I do expect is that a difference in force might somehow be used to assist in that turning.

How would you have one but not the other? A force is a force.

[jajrussel]

How would you have one but not the other? A force is a force.

If I understand your question. The wheel would have to be large enough to span the the greatest difference in gravitational forces. Half in the Mascon, half out.

 

It would not turn on its own because because the g force on the Mascon side won't be enough to push the other side up, but if the wheel is made well, using energy you can start it turning then as its rotational force increases the slightly greater g force on the Mascon side would assist in the downward momentum on the Mascon side. This would result in less fuel being required to maintain the wheels momentum.

 

The moons gravity is 1/6 ours large structures might be feasible. There is no atmosphere to resist the wheels turning. The moons rotation might interfere with the wheels rotation if the wheel is large enough, but then again strategic placement might assist rather than hinder.

 

I don't know what a four ounce difference translates to in terms of g force, but with enough mass behind it, it might be significant enough to make a difference in how much fuel we need to carry to the moon in order to thrive.

 

This is not perpetual motion, but a difference in forces.

 

And, it's probably no more feasible than actually living on the moon.

[Endy0816]

The mass concentration will effect both sides of the wheel bringing it to a stop as the initial energy provided to it is spent.

 

You can make a mock up with magnets if you want to prove the logic to yourself.

[jajrussel]

So, don't stop providing energy. The idea is to provide just enough energy to keep the wheel going, which should be less than the energy that would be needed if the gravitational forces were the same on both sides of the wheel.

[Endy0816]

Your set up wouldn't be an energy source. It'd be a version of a flywheel which only permits energy storage. I think it would actually stop even quicker than otherwise due to gravity differences.

 

You can only obtain energy from gravity if there is a separation between masses. You want more energy out, better put more energy than you are planning to take out, back into the system.

 

Brain is kind of fried tonight. Some of the others can probably explain it better.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Endy0816

[Fuzzwood]

I had not read the article until you posted it. The conditions are no where near the same. The earth is not the moon. Mascons exist on the moon. They do not exist on earth. The ones on the moon are large. You have it in your head that because something won't work on earth it won't work on the moon, and if I were taking about perpetual motion I would agree. It won't work.

 

Gravitational field of the earth. Look at the higher gravitational constant around Indonesia. 'nuff said.

 

Suppose you HAVE built this wheel around the moon with part of it in the mascon. It moves a bit in any direction. Some mass moves into the mascon, the same amount of mass moves out of the mascon. Has anything changed force-wise? No! Therefore the wheel won't rotate or it will rotate indefinitely at the same speed as you gave it. There will be no further acceleration or deceleration coming from the mascon. The amount of energy supplied in getting the wheel to turn at a certain velocity is independent of there being a mascon underneath it.

Edited November 7, 2014 by Fuzzwood

[swansont]

If I understand your question. The wheel would have to be large enough to span the the greatest difference in gravitational forces. Half in the Mascon, half out.

 

It would not turn on its own because because the g force on the Mascon side won't be enough to push the other side up, but if the wheel is made well, using energy you can start it turning then as its rotational force increases the slightly greater g force on the Mascon side would assist in the downward momentum on the Mascon side. This would result in less fuel being required to maintain the wheels momentum.

I don't think you did understand the question. "assist in the downward momentum on the Mascon side" is a description of a force. So, if you had sufficiently low friction on the wheel, it must turn on its own. Your claims contradict each other. If you did the math, it might be more obvious.

 

 

 

[imatfaal]

Can you think of it this way? The moon provides the same force on all the cars of the "ferris wheel" - the local mascon seems to upset this. So think about it without the moon just the mascon - do you still think there would be an imbalance of forces that would make the wheel turn? (draw a picture and align your view so that the mascon and the axis are on your line of sight if you are still unsure). And I guess you would agree the moon by itself with no mascon wouldn't make it turn either? (for same reason)

 

The force from the moon is balanced - the force from the mascon is balanced; there is no net force in order to turn the wheel

[jajrussel]

I don't think you did understand the question. "assist in the downward momentum on the Mascon side" is a description of a force. So, if you had sufficiently low friction on the wheel, it must turn on its own. Your claims contradict each other. If you did the math, it might be more obvious.

 

 

 

Okay,I am beginning to think that the answer to my original question has to be no.

 

I was in a sense thinking of the whole structure as an equation, but probably to simple an equation to start. Basically x=x+1. Where the equal sign represents the axis of the wheel,x represents gravity, and the plus one represents the difference between the left side of the equation, and the right. Now put a downward arrow on both sides of the equation simply to signify the direction of force as it is applied. It seemed to me that the right side would accelerate faster than the left side, and that the axis would force a clock wise shift in mass, an effort to seek balance.

 

Anyway, this was my thinking, and why I wanted to know if it would work.

[elfmotat]

Basically x=x+1.

 

Oh, the irony.

[jajrussel]

The sides aren't balanced that's kind of the point. Nature seeks balance.

Everyone keeps telling me that the two sides are balanced, but I can not see how they are, and that is why I cannot understand what they are saying.

Edited November 8, 2014 by jajrussel

[elfmotat]

Maybe this will help you visualize it:

 

[I-try]

jajrussel.

 

Don't waste effort and material building a wheel, build a balance instead at right angle to the neutral point of the differing gravitational effects, then rotate it 360 degrees. It will remain in balance for the same reason the rotating Earth stays in perfect balance as it orbits the Sun.

[jajrussel]

Are you saying that each arrow on the wheel has the same acceleration value?

 

Without regard to what the acceleration value is over the moons surface?

 

Without regard to the wheels position?