The wind is caused by the sun and is thus an extension of solar energy, not Earth's rotational energy, I think. And the Coriolis effect only applies to and explains regional/local phenomena, not the whole atmosphere's interaction with the outer empty vacuum space, I think.

@@theaman1786 I believe that both of you are correct, but I’m not sure and I’m no expert. The atmosphere is a complex enough system so that both statements can be true, or at least partially true.

The Coriolis effect is absolute bullshit. No sniper shoots 70 feet to the left to accommodate for the spin of the earth. No arplane or flying craft of any kind has earth rotation factored in to its navigation.

We also use this for launching spacecraft.

if we chose to extract energy from earth's revolution it will just fall towards the sun. Remember kids, energy is always conserved.

That’s what I was thinking. The wind currents and ocean currents. Water is way denser than air though. Edit: My favorite is a start up called Eco Wave Power. It‘s on the NASDAQ.

True, but tidal energy is effectively useless when you consider the cost/kw and energy density.

@@g.4279 Yup, solar will be much cheaper. Yet at some point manufacturing might become cheap enough so that tidal can have its application in dark and cold environments, or where wind turbines would suffer too much, like the Arctic for instance.

@@g.4279 Tidal power accounts for less than 1% of world wide electrical generation, but that still represents a few gigawatts on average. Tidal power is easiest to harvest where the geography funnels tides through a small channel. This concentrates the energy making it cost effective to harvest.

Ig that's moons kinetic energy

Russian nesting gyro's

Not gonna do anything. They all will stay stationary with respect to each other

What if we used gasoline to power a gyroscope to make it look like it is free energy and scam the government for billions in funding… oh wait wind and solar did that already. 😕

Then you'll have a gyrogyroscope

What if you put a gyroscope in the sandwich known as the gyro?? You could eat it completely flat without stuff spilling out

That would also cancel and net gyroscopic action. Of course they would still react to changes in orientation but the forces would only act on the axle.

@@whatelseison8970 Can you explain what you mean by "net gyroscopic action". The idea was to harvest energy from the rigidity in space. Two flywheels, or "gyros" on the same axle spinning in opposite directions would "help" each others rigidity in space, but the directions of their precession that was claimed to be the problem would be in opposite directions, and thereby canceling each other out. Replying to you I just realized the idea has a much more fundamental problem. Rigidity in space is relative, rotating flywheels doesn't resist turning, they resist changes in direction and speed of turning. Their idea was fundamentally flawed.

Unfortunately he got the physics and his conclusion dead wrong. The educators need to understand the topic before they are helping. As I and other commenter pointed out, conservation of angular momentum means you can't extract energy from the earth's spin this way

LOL

But the balancing pendulum requires some energy to go forth and forward (unless I didn't understand what you meant). It will be strongly slowed down by the magnet.

I went to the exploration place and they had one and yea it knocked down pegs. It was used as a clock so it must be fairly consistent.

Using that as a magnet moving to generate current in a coil seems an interesting idea

Maybe with a modification you could extract rotational energy rather than extracting the kinetic energy of the pendulum swinging. If the pendulum mass was on a solid rod (like a hammer for example) and the end was hinged to a disk or something that could rotate at the pivot point, then you could extract rotational energy as the earth rotated under the pendulum. Operating the thing in a vacuum would help reduce friction losses. Using magnetic bearings at the pivot point would be beneficial too to reduce friction losses.

@@mb-3faze If this method was true we would need multi ton swinging balls on a large scale, vacuum chambers that large are not feasible.

No You are extracting energy at 90 degrees to the disk So a frictionless disk held at the proper locations would not extract any energy from the disk It extracts it from the earth

Yes, if you turn a spinning gyroscope, it drastically slows down

The amount of energy available is tiny, any attempt to exploit it will kill it.

@@aspiringscientificjournali1505 ..Ight google babe..)/* only reason to extract energy would be to keep the day constant length.. and there's a point to that..)/* might as well run copper around the equator and see if we can tap some ether....) but hey, it seems to have formed a magnetic field of it's own and she happens to give us life, so how about you quit f'n with her magnetosphere, AY?

@@YouGloomy don't know enough to answer your question but I've been thinking about making some flywheel based batteries and the water idea is very interesting.

The Sun is cool

Is it cold welding. I guess he has one video.

That is a very interesting question I remember i had the same thoughts when i was studying 12th grade chemistry I would be interested to find it out as well

Yes but, as @The Action Lab stated, you'd have to extract truly titanic amounts of energy in order for the slowdown to even be measurable, let alone catastrophic.

@@GumbootMan yeah, kinda like you'd have to extract truly titanic amounts of energy from oil in order for the effect on climate to be measurable... yep, we humans are capable of that

@@vincentletard7379 Once humans see the amount of energy, they will see a way to use it...

@@vincentletard7379 He says at the beginning of the video that with the US consumption it would take thousands of years to even slow the earth by 1 second

​@@vincentletard7379 literally millions of orders of magnitude of difference. Windmills are already extracting rotational energy from Earth

@cåññâbëār Don’t feed the troll!

Wrong well idea is right application is wrong Motors word specifically by turning angular momentum into heat an electricity Allow me to prove it It I had a motor in space Rotating body and head 1rpm With a small battery on the head and a gyroscope on the head face 90 degrees in the direction of rotation If the gyro turns on its resistance to motion would cause the head to rotate or “not rotate” and that energy would be quickly converted to electrical

and jk about dingus part .. but Darren ..please check it out

​ @aspiring scientific journalist Also a cow _"Motors word specifically by turning angular momentum into heat an electricity."_ 1) Motors turn electricity into work. Generators turn work into electricity. 2) You are confusing angular momentum with rotational kinetic energy. Kinetic energy can be transformed into other forms of energy. Angular momentum can't be converted to energy but it can be transferred from one object to another. If you see a generator stop moving it's because the angular momentum of the rotor was transferred to the Earth via the stator. The kinetic energy was transformed into electricity and heat. _"If the gyro turns on its resistance to motion would cause the head to rotate or “not rotate” and that energy would be quickly converted to electrical"_ Maybe. It will also cause the whole system to rotate around a third perpendicular axis as shown in the video. If you want to call this a proof you should at least show that the energy generated is higher than the energy used to spin up the gyro.

@@aspiringscientificjournali1505 gyros do not resist turning, they just turn 90 degrees offset to the direction you try to make them turn. With clever arangements, bunch of gymbals and low friction bearings, you can use that to keep track of direction, but the moment you try to apply force on it, it will turn around on some axis. Also, if you run a motor in space, the shaft will rotate one direction, while the casing will rotate the opposite direction, perfectly in line with the law of conservation of angular momentum.

I thought the conclusion at the end would be this. This is a theoretically unsolvable problem, not just an engineering challenge.

It doesn't, this is pseudoscience.

It doesn't. The video is kind of nonsense. Or at least the "this perpetual motion machine doesn't work, but maybe you can invent one"

Agreed

Extracting a second of rotational speed from the Earth yields enough energy to power the US for 83,000 years. The US consumes about 4 GW/h/yr of energy, which is 1/6th of entire planet energy consumption at 24 GW/h/yr. So divide 83,000 years by 6, and you can power the entire planet for 13,833 years and you'll have slowed its rotation by only 1 second at the end of of those 13 millenia. Even factoring in increased efficiency with technological progress and greater energy demands, that amount of drag on the planet's rotation is negligible on climate.

Better than fossil fuel

Maybe if we like, actually significantly slowed the Earth. But he said at the start, only slowing it by one second yields an insane amount of energy that we'd use over thousands of years. Obviously we'll grow in energy needs but for the time being, the effect is minimal on the Earth.

Actually, the effects probably wouldn't really be noticeable. The 2011 Earthquake in Japan slowed the Earth's rotation by like 1 degree.

The Moon is already slowing it down. That's why we have leap seconds on occasion.

Our lives also depend on clean energy. The Earth has a rotational kinetic energy of 2,138×10^29 J. World primary energy consumption fell to 556,63x10^18 in 2020. At that rate it would take approximately 384.097.156 years for the Earth to stop. If we can use Earth's rotational energy as an environmentally friendly alternative to carbon based fuels right now, in a million years or so we can start to put energy back into the system.

It's already happening and has been for a very long time, 3.5 billion years ago years ago a day was ~12 hours. Tidal forces from the Sun result in the Earths spin slowing down over time. The Earth has already stopped the Moon's rotation via the same process. Given enough time the sun will do the same to the Earth.

Well, actually no. The winds used for windturbines have mostly nothing to do with earths rotation. Tidal powerplants on the other hand do in fact kinda use earths rotation indirectly to harvest energy.

@@matthiaskritzinger5509 Cyclones and anticyclones are formed from the Coriolis force on the movement of air from the equator to the poles in Hadley cells - this directly converts energy from the motion into heat which ultimately gets radiated to space. Wind turbines capture this energy and do useful work for us in the process, converting more of this energy to heat. Converting kinetic energy to radiation *must* cause the Earth to slow down, however imperceptibly. Tidal powerplants work because the Moon's and Sun's gravity potentials have different magnitudes on the near and far sides of the Earth causing it to deform to raise and lower a large mass of water which can be made to do work, as energy is transferred from the Earth to the Moon. However, a rotating body that doesn't have tides can't generate energy in that way, but the Coriolis force could be exploited using water turbines in the Gulf Stream.

@@ahaveland Thx for your reply. Of course in aware of the effect the coriolis force (and so earths rotation) have on global windstreams. However windturbines mostly dont use these kind of windstreams as they can be to strong and/or are way to high in the air or far in the open sea (early sailers used jetstreams to get across the atlantic for example). Of course im not an expert on windturbines, but thats the point i wanted to get across. Also as you said correctly tides are a direct energy transfer between earths rotation and the moon slowing the earths rotation down till earths rotationspeed is at the same angular momentum of the moon falling around earth. At that point the tides no longer exsist making tidal powerplants useless. So in the end - to get my second point across - tidal powerplants harvest a bit of that energytransfer between moon and earth which in turn is caused by earths rotation meaning that they practically do harvest energy from earths rotation itself. Anyways, thx for your reply! Have a nice day :)

@@matthiaskritzinger5509 I never claimed that the air produced by the coriolis effect was the ONLY source of air whose energy wind turbines convert. But whatever little part of that air's energy is converted, it still makes wind turbines machines that, at some level, indirectly turn earth's rotation into energy. So, actually, yeah. My point is still valid.

Except Earth is not a sphere. Since the poles are squashed AKA downhill AKA closer to the center, Earth's gravity is not perfectly perpendicular to the surface along the "slope" from equator down to the poles. This gravitational force component along the surface perfectly cancels out with the force you described above. Otherwise Earth's surface would not be in equilibrium (ignoring Lunar tides).

@@JWQweqOPDH You mean someone actually calculated that ? If you have any link, I'd be interested. That's quite surprising, considering that earth is not even symmetrical so if what you say is true, it can't work for both sides anyway. But it's a good point.

The average surface of the ocean over time MUST be perpendicular to the net force, or the water would move until it was.

@@JWQweqOPDH That's not related to the curvature-centripal ratio (unless you have a more detailed answer). The best case to highlight your claim would be to imagine a planet made only of water with a uniform density. If in that case, the difference between centripetal forces at the equator and any other point can't be used as a source of energy, then yes your hypothesis is valid.

@@En_theo Putting it a different way, harvesting energy requires a lowering of energy within the source. We need to reduce the rotational energy of Earth by some miniscule amount. We can change the moment of inertia by moving mass closer or farther from the axis of rotation. We can't change the angular momentum since we are part of Earth and momentum is conserved unless there is a force interaction with something beyond Earth (such as Lunar tides, which I will be ignoring for now). With angular momentum constant, rotational energy is directly proportional to angular velocity. We want to reduce Earth's rotational energy, thus we want to reduce Earth's rotational velocity. To do so, we can increase the moment of inertia of Earth. For example, space rockets IRL might be trucked/flown closer to the equator prior to launch. Since the equator is "uphill", as I discussed previously, the truck does not roll there naturally. The truck drives normally. However, the rocket now has more kinetic energy near the equator, in relation to an outside reference frame, and the Earth has a miniscule amount less. We could steal rotational energy from the Earth by simply lifting heavy objects, such as pumping water to a mountain reservoir, at the equator, since at the equator "up" is away from Earth's axis of rotation. However, we couldn't harvest that energy as it takes more energy to lift than is stolen from Earth's spin. Instead, we can move mass along Earth's surface from the poles to the equator. However, moving the mass will be difficult, as we'll need many ton-miles moved just to generate some energy. Even worse, we have to store everything we move permanently at the destination. If we let move water and dump it in the ocean, it will just move back. So we will move mass onto land, like a landfill, from the poles to the equator. As the Earth's rotation slows, the centripetal force at the equator lessens. The ocean levels there lowers and ocean levels at the poles rise. The even worse part is, that's where our harvestable energy is! The space rocket needs energy within an external reference frame to get into space, but we're still here on the ground. A mountain at the equator contains more kinetic energy than one at the poles, but it's still a mountain just sitting there. Sure if we built rockets out of it, they'd be slight easier to launch, because it's already moving, but we don't care that it's moving because it's moving with us. We could harvest the movement of the oceans toward to poles, but the oceans already move without human intervention (Lunar tides) why put so much effort into moving them?

yeah i was thinking of similar stuff... like isn't part of what we extract from wind and ocean energies somewhat originated from earth's rotation.... yeah probably not that big compared to all other factors but just thought it'd make sense that overall wind blowing west is stronger than the other direction.

Wind is caused by heat and pressure differentials via the sun. At least the vast majority of the wind

Coriolis forces don't add energy. The energy of wind comes from convection currents from solar heating. Coriolis forces just redirect that energy, conserving angular momentum in the process.

Even if you can harness the power of hurricanes you are NOT taking away from the spin of earth by one bit. The angular momentum of the earth in the end is still perfectly conserved. The total angular momentum of the earth and hurricane combined, plus all satellites in orbit, is still perfectly conserved regardless of how you look at it.

The atmosphere does NOT take the rotational energy out of earth. The wind is blowing because the sun heats it up, the convection causes currents, and then earth's rotation turns those currents into different directions. But the energy that the wind has is not coming from earth's rotation. Conservation of angular momentum is a thing, just as real as conservation of energy.

For this to work out the coil would have to move relative to earth magnetic field.And if we assume that earths magnetic field does nearly not move relative to earths surface,the coil would have to move relative to earths surface. So since initially it would move due to conservation of momentum, you would have to spin it up first. And this will take the same energy to do as you could theoretically extract from it afterwards, cause by doing so, you would slow it down relative to earths surface. So no it would not work.

Nice idea, but as soon as you would take energy from the coil, the coil will begin to spin with the earth because of the electromagnetic force that generates the energy. Eventualy it wil become in sync with the earth and you will need to put as much energy back into it (probably even more due to losses) to get it stationary again. So you would need to tie a rope around the sun or moon to anchor it to something. But getting energy from the moons rotation is much easier as it already creates the tides in the sea which we can use to extract energy from, another question would be how much are we slowing the moons rotation by harvesting tidal energy ;-)

You need alternating magnetic fields...

@@AndreVanKammen we will not slow down the moon, but the earth,since earth has higher angular speed, than the moon has. (in fact, earths day once where roundabout at 12hours, and it slowed down, due to the tides, while the moon got faster,and is constantly moving away from earth.

@@AndreVanKammen None much? We aren't making moon waste more energy for tides by using them. Tides are already there,.

Oh we'd find a way to cut that in half lol

ya and its even worse if you try to scale it up. imagine the weight of a gyroscope large enough needed to extract energy from the earth. Imagine spinning that thing up super fast and KEEPING it spun up. ya dump idea

I have two gyro balls that produce energy when shaken for a few minutes and it doesn't take much external energy. Very efficient.

@@BIindsid3 flywheels don't have any interent reason that they would slow without external force. Resistance from air or friction or any other way of transferring the rotational energy to anything else basically. Locking the flywheel orientation to the rod takes the force and applies it to the entire rod instead of just the the flywheel. It TWISTS the rod. The one thing I've noticed hands-on that makes it hard to to extract EXTERNAL energy... the gyro slows down if you resist the twist. Not sure why, but I think it's either transferring the rotational energy of the flywheel into the torque on the rod, then that force ultimate travels into the ground... Or it increases the friction on the axle of the flywheel. Can't really tell with the cheap setup I have. (A toy gyroscope held in my hands with no modifications or measurement devices.) In other words, in my experience this is only a way to DEPOSIT energy, not really extract it. Maybe there is something I'm missing, but it seems to me that it would be like trying to recover the energy of a rocket by firing the thruster in the opposite direction. It's using energy to resist energy. Actually... Now I'm wondering if such a setup could be used to desaturate flywheels in space by swinging them them back and forth while locked... Each swing would reduce the speed of the flywheel and cause a torque on the spacecraft. If you then swing it the other direction the flywheel slows more, but counteracts the torque from the previous swing reducing the rational energy of the entire system... That would violate conservation wouldn't it? I must be wrong. Maybe the energy would become heat or something? Either way I'm gonna have to build out the experiment and see what's up. Saturated flywheels in space is a big ol problem for long term missions.

@@wrencharmratchet7629 Wow that must have taken an eternity to write down lol

@@leolipasti maybe... I lose track of time extremely easily. I had fun. If I wanted to actually play with this, it would be good to actually do some physics. Maybe simulate. But really, it'd be so cheap to set this up, and the rig could be used for a bunch of different demonstrations.

🗿 He did say just a Lil bit can power up America for 83k years so Who says we need to stop the frickin earth

@@hellstorm3132 ok, but it would most likely used as a primary World energy source if we could harvest energy from it. I dont think that it would take this much years if everyone uses it. And btw. If we had access to this much energy, sciene would eventually get much more progress and things will use more energy.

It would indeed speed up Earth's rotational deceleration in relation to [dark matter flow] Astronomically eventually. However, celestial bodies slow down Earth's rotation more effectively. Remember, Tidal power generators rely on Moon orbiting the earth to stir the ocean in a way that causes least resistance to it's longitudinal movement, however applying artificial resistance (imagine ocean suddenly being more viscous due to generators decreasing it's mobility, again, on astronomical scale in relation to Moon) would just as well mean that it would be "pulled backwards" by the lagging ocean just a tad bit, which in return means deceleration of moon's velocity, and slow down of speed at which the Moon, currently, very slowly escapes Earth's orbit. Imagine how heavy these Tidal generators are in total throughout the planet, it definitely would not make sense to spin up the equally massive gyroscopes to such speed, and inefficiency of spinning (resistance of joints) would only apply it against the Earth's crust, returning the "stolen" rotational energy unless the entire massive spun-up Gyroscope is somehow relocated onto a different part of the planet. This exactly shows how much humans are more efficient at converting Moon's kinetic energy relative to Earth into electricity.

If we get all the people to run from east to west at the same time we could speed it up. Rotational crisis.

@@Mansory811 obviously it will but because of the science development we would probably find another source of energy by then,and slowing down of the earth isn't that bad considering if it's slowed down like an hour or so, Slowing down by an hour would be too much energy we probably won't need more than that

1) converting light to heat is not novel, it's what a piece of black paper does when exposed to sunlight 2) overunity is impossible

@@matthewmullin8168 Over-unity is indeed possible. The exponentially expanding space with distance is empirical evidence that it is possible, IE dark energy. Scientists just don't know why or how it is possible in space. I figured out how to recreate the effect on Earth to produce clean energy on demand, without having to use radioactive particles or rare elements. Research sonoluminescence. More energy is produced than what does into the experiments. They take sound with low energy and send it into an air bubble suspended in water and the air bubble expands and collapses to the point where the sound converts into visible light and heat, 50,000° F. Proof that over-unity of energy is possible. Ignoring the evidence for any reason would be an act of ignorance.

That's exactly right.

The bane of mechanical engineering.

Brainfoo coming in with the ideas of the future. I dont know if I missed it but I gotta see a video on this idea with someone

@@thatsketchyboi6688 I am aware of companies now working on quantum based batteries through a quadcopter racing company called "airspeeder". Independent companies and university's separate from the gas and oil giants who dare to think different. The attention and support of you guys is what we need now ❤️

I think you wrote "two magnets stuck together to give infinite quantum energy "thing in a sarcastic way. right?

"I believe two magnets stuck together are the most simple example of infinite quantum energy." No, they're not.

@@AmanDeep-yc4iz No I'm quite serious.

Yeah the last thing we need is that kind of catastrophe. We already fucked earth big time for the next thousands of generations ...

I thought the same thing. I'm all in for researching new forms of energy but not at the cost of everything else... messing with the rotation of the Earth is asking for trouble. "Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should." - Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park

Did you not hear how much energy we can get just from one second slowdown ? Do you think we would need anymore energy in the near future after the first day ?

No it takes 80000 years of extracting energy before we a day is increased by 1 sec.

He said that slowing Earth's rotation by 1 second permanently would provide energy for 80k years. You do it once. What you say doesn't make any sense.

@@SC-zq6cu @Morteza Habibpoor umm your assuming total and perfect efficiency in energy extraction. Never happen. The laws of physics snags it. And how much of that energy will be used just to keep the gyroscope aligned for peak energy extraction. And the energy potential he mentioned was only for the United States. 330 million people, or if 8 billion. Ummmm it eithe tags so many gyroscope, the negative effects of all those gyroscope would multiply factorially.

This

The Earth wouldn't slow down sense gravity makes it spins, slowing down the speed of the Earth only works by moving it away from the sun, making the earth free fall to the sun would take moving it closer

at this point, then nuclear energy becomes much cheaper compared to wrapping earth in a metallic ball.

@@diamondcreeper0982 by far lol, but to be fair we have spent decades making nuclear better/cheaper. And this wouldn’t necessarily need a full ball wrap around the earth, but a ring would do(even though thats still insane). You could basically just build a tower up to the ring with a roller on top to roll along the ring as we rotate and generate energy…would probably be cheaper than nuclear at that point. Buuut the “point” of having a planetary ring is ridiculous, and to make it not rotate with us would be basically impossible

Well, before you even have the magnet acting on the gyroscope, the ferrofluid inside the gyroscope would start to slow it down due to friction because it's not a solid mass, so the two masses would rub up against each other, converting kinetic energy into heat energy. The magnet would increase this affect massively, most likely bringing the gyroscope to a halt after a few seconds, since now the ferrofluid inside doesn't even want to attempt to spin along with the gyroscope and instead pool up against the side closest to the magnet.