Maybe there is some truth in this Free Energy claim? - Page 2

NatCh · 07-05-2007, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CommanderROR

oh btw...I got through my exam today...I'm now officially entitled to study in the "Masterclass"...^^
Totally unrelated, but I just wanted to get rid of that message...

CommanderROR · 07-05-2007, 01:02 PM

watch that smilie addiction NatCh...

NatCh · 07-05-2007, 01:06 PM

Bob Russell · 07-05-2007, 02:37 PM

Congrats Roland! But I think I missed an "episode"... what's the MasterClass?

And that smiley stuff is very dangerous. It's highly contagious!

yvanleterrible · 07-05-2007, 02:40 PM

The new ones are kinda fun!

____________________________________________ _____

NatCh · 07-06-2007, 02:26 PM

Well, looks like we'll have to wait for an answer, they've postponed their demo, no word on for how long: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2...eorn-orbo.html

nekokami · 07-06-2007, 08:45 PM

The most charitable spin I can put on this kind of delay is that in doing the final checks before running such a public demo, someone finally noticed a way in which current physics can, in fact, explain what's going on-- perhaps some "we'll fix that later, it can't account for much anyway" kind of thing, and they haven't been able to get the demo working without whatever they needed to change or fix or remove.

Bob Russell · 07-06-2007, 09:17 PM

I am reading (very slowly) "Warped Passages" about physics and string theory and extra dimensions. It's a great book, and one of the examples was about how hard and how precise the experiments can be for super colliders. Apparently, there were two unexpected nearby events that were biasing the results in an unaccountable way until they were discovered. One was the moon's tidal effects on nearby Lake Geneva, and the other was a French train. It's effect was only noticed after a strike shut it down for a period of time!

I suspect that experiments related to "free" energy can be sensitive like that also.

yvanleterrible · 07-07-2007, 11:36 AM

I don't have the references but last year there was a biography released on Nikola Tesla. A fact that fascinated me was that at the end of his career he was obsessed in finding the Earth's magnetic fields and tapping into them. He wished in this way to furnish every one over the planet with free energy.

It saddens me to witness the struggles of that many people putting so much faith in concepts that are totally unattainable such as the perpetual movement or the perfect free energy or the San Graal for that matter. So much talent wasted!

Nothing pertaining to phenomenons originating of this planet is free. To every action there is a reaction, how ever unprobable it may seem.

I have a friend who is a civil engineer for the city I live in. One of his personal goals and private research is to find the secrets of antigravity. When one is confronted to his goals for the first time, one faces two options; the guy is a cukcoo or a genius. The limit is that narrow. You really have to tame your first impressions and spend a lot of time trying to see things through his points of view before you can really make yourself an idea of the reality of his goals. His sensitivity towards problems we face energy-wise is such that you can't even consider he'll fail. He brings you arguments to every problem showing how thorough his thinking is. Example: I pointed to him that if we built and installed wind turbines across the world, 1.5 million was the estimated number of units needed to cover for all energy needs including transport and heating and electricity for the whole of earth's population. Without hesitation he said, that would slow down the actual wind movements of the whole planet, then create a greenhouse effect and in a couple thousand years even change the rotation speed of the planet! That answer really startled me!

He was the person who told me that the best source of energy should come from a source other than our planet. That makes sense, a lot of sense. The closest source is the sun. If every roof top of every man made construction was covered with PV panels, all our energy needs could be resolved with a surplus. In this way we would not encroach further on Nature. Why are we not going that way?

Mystery and fears have always had a knack to cloud simple judgement calls and this newer free energy claim is perfect proof.

BruceW · 07-07-2007, 12:10 PM

Quote:

I pointed to him that if we built and installed wind turbines across the world, 1.5 million was the estimated number of units needed to cover for all energy needs

I believe in wind turbines also but in the California they have documented significant micro climate changes under and in the immediate area of the wind farms. Multiply this by 100 of thousand of wind farms and WOW.

In Ontario Canada, one of the leading environmental groups, I can not remember which, have looked into wind power and stated that it is not a valid option. When Ontario needs the power because of heat waves we have no wind.

NatCh · 07-07-2007, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

He was the person who told me that the best source of energy should come from a source other than our planet. That makes sense, a lot of sense. The closest source is the sun.

If there were a way to beam energy (electricity, or some other viable form), even if it were relatively in-efficient, could we not put solar "furnaces" up in near space that could collect the sun's energy directly and beam it back to the planet. So what if we lose 40% or so, it's not like we had to burn something to get it in the first place.

If I recall correctly, Tesla had notions about this too, and the notional tech has made appearances in some of David Weber's work. They're getting fairly close to being able to do some of this sort of thing on the micro-scale (a few feet), and while it's grossly inefficient, it does seem to be somewhat viable. How long before somebody follows this sort of approach on the macro-scale?

HeffeD · 07-07-2007, 04:39 PM

I don't know much about their methods, but they mention that the device output is mechanical, which in turn requires generator technology to harness any power output. If the output is mechanical, they're doomed until they can overcome gravity and friction, which is of course, a very tall order...

Permanent magnets can fool you into thinking they can do this on a small scale, but will ultimately fail when the prototype is scaled up to a size that can output any useful electrical current. Large scale devices will require electromagnets, which will very likely consume a great deal of electricity. (Size dependent) Much more than the device can produce.

Many small scale magnetic devices can function for a very long time before halting. This doesn't cut it... Nor does a device that needs to be "started". If a device can't make itself go from the beginning, it's not able to overcome the laws of physics, as a free energy device must. A simple, but often overlooked concept. After all, the original impetus to start the device is not 'free' is it? How much energy will be required to start the large scale device?

Robert Marquard · 07-08-2007, 12:42 AM

Sorry, energy beams with 40 percent loss do not work. Think where the loss is really happening. In the atmosphere. Guess what happens if you heat the area where your beam hits.
The problem with beams is that they are light or electromagnetic waves. Both interact with any substance in their way. In the concentrated beam we need it interacts catastrophically.

NatCh · 07-08-2007, 08:30 AM

Yes ... that would be a problem, wouldn't it?

nekokami · 07-08-2007, 10:01 AM

Supposedly the power transmission that's making the news these days only interacts with an antenna of the same length as the wave, and the extra energy returns to the source. I'm not prepared to bet the planet on that idea, though.

Has anyone heard any more recent news on the Walmart plan to add solar panels to 1/3 of their stores? That could radically alter the solar panel market, and make investing in developing cheaper panels very attractive.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Free Book (Kindle) - The Truth About Getting the Best From People	koland	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	7	05-07-2012 04:57 PM
Free Book (Kindle) - The Truth About Confident Presenting	koland	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	08-24-2010 01:11 AM
Free ebook about sustainable energy	pietvo	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	0	04-04-2010 03:51 PM
Free ebook (pdf) Sustainable Energy – without the hot air by David JC MacKay FRS	JayCeeEll	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	2	10-24-2009 04:07 PM
Truth About Cheating - Free Oprah Download	BurBunny	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	9	02-19-2009 06:36 PM

07-05-2007, 01:02 PM	#17
CommanderROR eink fanatic Posts: 2,022 Karma: 4924 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Germany Device: STAReBOOK, iRex Iliad, Sony 505, Kindle 2	watch that smilie addiction NatCh...

07-05-2007, 01:06 PM	#18
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3

07-05-2007, 02:37 PM	#19
Bob Russell Recovering Gadget Addict Posts: 5,381 Karma: 676161 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Device: iPad	Congrats Roland! But I think I missed an "episode"... what's the MasterClass? And that smiley stuff is very dangerous. It's highly contagious!

07-05-2007, 02:40 PM	#20
yvanleterrible Reborn Paper User Posts: 8,616 Karma: 15446734 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Que Nada Device: iPhone8, iPad Air	The new ones are kinda fun! ____________________________________________ _____

07-06-2007, 02:26 PM	#21
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	Well, looks like we'll have to wait for an answer, they've postponed their demo, no word on for how long: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2...eorn-orbo.html

07-06-2007, 08:45 PM	#22
nekokami fruminous edugeek Posts: 6,745 Karma: 551260 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northeast US Device: iPad, eBw 1150	The most charitable spin I can put on this kind of delay is that in doing the final checks before running such a public demo, someone finally noticed a way in which current physics can, in fact, explain what's going on-- perhaps some "we'll fix that later, it can't account for much anyway" kind of thing, and they haven't been able to get the demo working without whatever they needed to change or fix or remove.

07-06-2007, 09:17 PM	#23
Bob Russell Recovering Gadget Addict Posts: 5,381 Karma: 676161 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Device: iPad	I am reading (very slowly) "Warped Passages" about physics and string theory and extra dimensions. It's a great book, and one of the examples was about how hard and how precise the experiments can be for super colliders. Apparently, there were two unexpected nearby events that were biasing the results in an unaccountable way until they were discovered. One was the moon's tidal effects on nearby Lake Geneva, and the other was a French train. It's effect was only noticed after a strike shut it down for a period of time! I suspect that experiments related to "free" energy can be sensitive like that also.

07-07-2007, 11:36 AM	#24
yvanleterrible Reborn Paper User Posts: 8,616 Karma: 15446734 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Que Nada Device: iPhone8, iPad Air	I don't have the references but last year there was a biography released on Nikola Tesla. A fact that fascinated me was that at the end of his career he was obsessed in finding the Earth's magnetic fields and tapping into them. He wished in this way to furnish every one over the planet with free energy. It saddens me to witness the struggles of that many people putting so much faith in concepts that are totally unattainable such as the perpetual movement or the perfect free energy or the San Graal for that matter. So much talent wasted! Nothing pertaining to phenomenons originating of this planet is free. To every action there is a reaction, how ever unprobable it may seem. I have a friend who is a civil engineer for the city I live in. One of his personal goals and private research is to find the secrets of antigravity. When one is confronted to his goals for the first time, one faces two options; the guy is a cukcoo or a genius. The limit is that narrow. You really have to tame your first impressions and spend a lot of time trying to see things through his points of view before you can really make yourself an idea of the reality of his goals. His sensitivity towards problems we face energy-wise is such that you can't even consider he'll fail. He brings you arguments to every problem showing how thorough his thinking is. Example: I pointed to him that if we built and installed wind turbines across the world, 1.5 million was the estimated number of units needed to cover for all energy needs including transport and heating and electricity for the whole of earth's population. Without hesitation he said, that would slow down the actual wind movements of the whole planet, then create a greenhouse effect and in a couple thousand years even change the rotation speed of the planet! That answer really startled me! He was the person who told me that the best source of energy should come from a source other than our planet. That makes sense, a lot of sense. The closest source is the sun. If every roof top of every man made construction was covered with PV panels, all our energy needs could be resolved with a surplus. In this way we would not encroach further on Nature. Why are we not going that way? Mystery and fears have always had a knack to cloud simple judgement calls and this newer free energy claim is perfect proof.

07-07-2007, 04:39 PM	#27
HeffeD Enthusiast Posts: 35 Karma: 270 Join Date: Feb 2007 Device: Palm Z22	I don't know much about their methods, but they mention that the device output is mechanical, which in turn requires generator technology to harness any power output. If the output is mechanical, they're doomed until they can overcome gravity and friction, which is of course, a very tall order... Permanent magnets can fool you into thinking they can do this on a small scale, but will ultimately fail when the prototype is scaled up to a size that can output any useful electrical current. Large scale devices will require electromagnets, which will very likely consume a great deal of electricity. (Size dependent) Much more than the device can produce. Many small scale magnetic devices can function for a very long time before halting. This doesn't cut it... Nor does a device that needs to be "started". If a device can't make itself go from the beginning, it's not able to overcome the laws of physics, as a free energy device must. A simple, but often overlooked concept. After all, the original impetus to start the device is not 'free' is it? How much energy will be required to start the large scale device?

07-08-2007, 12:42 AM	#28
Robert Marquard Delphi-Guy Posts: 285 Karma: 1151 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Berlin, Germany Device: iLiad, Palm T3	Sorry, energy beams with 40 percent loss do not work. Think where the loss is really happening. In the atmosphere. Guess what happens if you heat the area where your beam hits. The problem with beams is that they are light or electromagnetic waves. Both interact with any substance in their way. In the concentrated beam we need it interacts catastrophically.

Advert

Advert

07-08-2007, 08:30 AM	#29
NatCh Gizmologist Posts: 11,615 Karma: 929550 Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Republic of Texas Embassy at Jackson, TN Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3	Yes ... that would be a problem, wouldn't it?

07-08-2007, 10:01 AM	#30
nekokami fruminous edugeek Posts: 6,745 Karma: 551260 Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Northeast US Device: iPad, eBw 1150	Supposedly the power transmission that's making the news these days only interacts with an antenna of the same length as the wave, and the extra energy returns to the source. I'm not prepared to bet the planet on that idea, though. Has anyone heard any more recent news on the Walmart plan to add solar panels to 1/3 of their stores? That could radically alter the solar panel market, and make investing in developing cheaper panels very attractive.