Without doing this experiment but using what I have done and what I am currently doing I will  say that the "rate" of discharge will be the same and the total volume will be the same,,

I think you mean flow of water will neither be accelerated nor be decelerated due to air flow.

* but* now you have the air volume replacing some of the water volume so your water will drain slower due to the decrease in water volume per\minute passed through the pipe.

Obviously discharge (flow per sec) will be reduced due to presence of air which is same as draining the water using a smaller pipe  which is not of any concern.

But what about total energy?  Whether you drain out water using a smaller pipe or bigger pipe all the water in the container has to come  out due to available water head 'H' and total energy developed in both cases will be the same. By using smaller pipe you will be dissipating the energy slowly and with a bigger pipe energy is exhausted quickly.

Total energy = Energy stored in water with head 'H'  +  Energy developed by air (kinetic) coming out of pipe.

Hence you will get additional energy in the form of kinetic energy developed by air.

Energy will be conserved only if air decelerates the speed of water coming out of pipe. Reduction in water flow per minute (discharge) is not of any concern.

So, if you conform that flow of water is neither accelerated nor decelerated  due to air flow then it is a definite case of overunity!

@Gabriele


Thanks for your observation.    I didn't get the idea clearly.   Air can fill in the hose only upto  some extent.  Once the air pressure in hose builds up,  air automatically escapes from the opening on the left side.  (ie., from the end where you are letting the air inside the hose)

I think This experiment has an interesting analogy with flow of electric current.

When electrons flow through a wire under electric potential just as water flows through tube under hydraulic potential,  something very lighter than electrons surrounding the wire should flow into the wire just as air which is very mcuh lighter than water enters the tube when water is flowing in the tube.

If you compare vaccum surrounding the wire to the atmosphere surrounding the water tube,   vaccum should 'inject' something to the wire when electrons flow through the wire which can be nothing other than magnetic field!!

So, it leads to a question  whether the magnetic field is created by moving electrons or the vaccum itself?   Because if moving electrons produce magnetic field then we have to get a moving magnetic field or rotating magnetic field around a wire or a wire coil but as we know we get only static magnetic field around any coil or permanent magnet.

Whether the magnetic field is produced by moving electrons or vaccum?

Funny or interesting question?

Anybody who has ever tried to suck up a chocolate malt through a drinking straw with a crack in it knows the result of this thought-experiment.

I'm not a scientific person. But i do use this principle.

I use some kind the same principle to aerate my fish tank.
The moving water creates a negative pressure at the opening, as longs as it is not in the flow path , related to the flow speed.
You don't even need the cotton, just use a t-joint pointing sideways or higher and the falling water will drag the air along. Even a well placed hole will do, put there are more efficient shapes, depending on the use.
It works as well with the outlet above as under the water.
If you attache a small pomp, you can circulate the water and add air at relative low cost.
Myself I use it in a gravity based aquaponics system




I vaguely remember some claims of energy gain when using only the created vacuum , with one high speed waterflow and multiple openings.  It always intrigued me!


A bit of the same principle as the "River Compressor"  were they use a minor height difference to create usable compressed air for factory use.





If i ever could afford a place along a small stream, personal energy crises would be over ; )