dcsimg

free energy

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 57 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #264610
    Toolshead
    Pro
    In the Rice Fields, South TX

    <P>He didn’t use the same physics book that I did.</P>

    <P>True, but most physics books leave a lot out – unfortunately science is as susceptible to politics and backstabbing as any other field. In the 1920’s Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck found that electrons spin at 1.37 times the speed of light…
    … a lot of powerful people stand to lose a lot of money if fuel-less generators become available.</P>

    I PMed you to keep from getting too far OT.
    A lot of people stand to GAIN a lot of money if this could be scaled up – or down. How about a cordless drill with no batteries that will run forever?

    #264767
    ChadM
    Moderator
    Rogers, Ohio

    <P>He didn’t use the same physics book that I did.</P>

    <P>True, but most physics books leave a lot out – unfortunately science is as susceptible to politics and backstabbing as any other field. In the 1920’s Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck found that electrons spin at 1.37 times the speed of light…
    … a lot of powerful people stand to lose a lot of money if fuel-less generators become available.</P>

    I PMed you to keep from getting too far OT.
    A lot of people stand to GAIN a lot of money if this could be scaled up – or down. How about a cordless drill with no batteries that will run forever?

    Yes, some people could profit hugely off technology like this – electric generation companies for example. But right now that isn’t going to happen for the same reason that nuclear generation has kind of stalled. The companies that generate electricity are too deeply invested in coal powered generation to deviate too far from that path right now. Several of the large generation companies have a big hand in coal mining too so leaving coal behind would hurt two revenue streams.

    Once coal generation is too expensive because of environmental regs and if/when the costs of building a large scale magnet motor would have an equal or greater ROI than the ROI on building nuclear generation plants then we will see certain industries branching off in this direction.

    I also replied to your PM.

    Chad

    A Working Pro since 1993

    Member since 12/07/2013

    #264770
    cranbrook2
    Pro
    Belgrave, Ontario , Canada

    I had a hard time understanding what he was saying 🙂

    #264818
    TimelessQuality
    Pro
    Central America, (Kansas)

    There will always be energy lost from overcoming friction..

    Those motors are close to net zero energy to run, but to be useful, it would have to be a net producer of energy

    --Steve

    #264853
    staker
    Pro
    #264868
    jdw1865
    Pro
    Dewey, OK

    I see no mention of friction robbing out the energy. Anytime something moves friction takes its share. Friction with air or friction with other surfaces.

    #264905
    staker
    Pro
    #264914
    staker
    Pro

    I see no mention of friction robbing out the energy. Anytime something moves friction takes its share. Friction with air or friction with other surfaces.

    there was no friction it was heated through magnet energy.

    #265233
    DirtyWhiteBoy
    Pro
    Honolulu,, Hi.

    The main problem to the motion energy consideration, like the pudendum, is once you place measures to harvest the kinetic energy of the ‘swing’ it won’t recover energy sufficient to start the swing again at the end.

    Is that like a –PENDULUM–???

    Why are you yelling at me

    #265234
    DirtyWhiteBoy
    Pro
    Honolulu,, Hi.

    I,ve seem that saltwater one before but how does saltwater burn??? I don’t get it?

    #265340
    Toolshead
    Pro
    In the Rice Fields, South TX

    <P>The main problem to the motion energy consideration, like the pudendum, is once you place measures to harvest the kinetic energy of the ‘swing’ it won’t recover energy sufficient to start the swing again at the end. </P>

    <P>Is that like a –PENDULUM–??? </P>

    <P>Why are you yelling at me</P>

    Sorry, not yelling.
    I was emphasizing what may have been (or not?) an interesting typo. Maybe it was missed, even so?

    #265344
    ProTom
    Pro
    Bear Lake, MI

    If I understood what they were saying I would not be a carpenter.

    Always learning, and some teaching along the way.

    #265345
    Nyx
    Pro
    Pittsburgh, PA

    pretty interesting concept, very neat. makes as much sense as windmills do. let nature do the work naturally.

    #265377
    Toolshead
    Pro
    In the Rice Fields, South TX

    I’m all for free energy.
    No mention is made of the energy it takes to run the motor that spins the magnets or to run a radio transmitter with enough power to disassociate water into oxygen and hydrogen. With the radio transmitter, salt water doesn’t burn – the salt gives a more controlled amount of impurity to the water – sort of like antifreeze does. The hydrogen burns. You can do the same by letting steel wool rust in water and capturing the gases generated – it’s just a lot slower.
    TANSTAAFL. (There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)

    #265388
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Those motors are close to net zero energy to run, but to be useful, it would have to be a net producer of energy

    That’s it right there in a nut shell

    #265562
    staker
    Pro

    TANSTAAFL. (There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)

    You should come here during black fly season, when working in the bush no need to bring a lunch.

    I believe there are motors designed already that are can produce power without paying for some kind of fuel, free energy

    #265606
    KenW
    Pro

    <P>The main problem to the motion energy consideration, like the pudendum, is once you place measures to harvest the kinetic energy of the ‘swing’ it won’t recover energy sufficient to start the swing again at the end. </P>

    <P>Is that like a –PENDULUM–??? </P>

    <P>Why are you yelling at me</P>

    Sorry, not yelling.
    I was emphasizing what may have been (or not?) an interesting typo. Maybe it was missed, even so?

    Of course it is a typo 😛

    #265611
    ChadM
    Moderator
    Rogers, Ohio

    I believe there are motors designed already that are can produce power without paying for some kind of fuel, free energy

    I think what @Toolshead is saying by “There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch” isn’t that it is impossible to create “free” energy in regards to a monetary value. The first law of thermodynamics says that energy in a closed system (the universe) is a constant, energy does not increase or decrease due to outside forces (us). Energy can’t be created or destroyed – it simply changes forms. There is no source of energy, light, matter, etc that does not draw resources from something else – that drawing of resources is the “cost” I believe Phil is talking about…

    Chad

    A Working Pro since 1993

    Member since 12/07/2013

    #265838
    DirtyWhiteBoy
    Pro
    Honolulu,, Hi.

    TANSTAAFL

    I thought TINSTAAFL Was a mod across the street. I dam good one at that.

    #287132
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    If you want free energy you’ll have to make it for yourself. If someone else makes it they won’t give it to you free. There is some amazing technology out there. I visited a lab once where they were working on making electromagnets. Their theory was the colder the conductor are the less resistance there is so the cooled this experimental magnet with liquid nitrogen. I wasn’t able to stay for the tesing, but these guys were pretty crazy or maybe genuis.

Viewing 20 posts - 21 through 40 (of 57 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
© Robert Bosch Tool Corporation 2014, all rights reserved.
queries. 0.503 seconds