Application Proposal - Free Energy Motor
- Thread starter Schnure
- Start date
Crazycowbob
Bovine Overlord
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 1,384
Solar cells are an awesome and effective solution, if the price would just come down. I recently set my dad up with a system for a guard shack, a set of cells, regulator, and battery, rated at about 50 watts. Price: >$600. And unfortunately, it doesn't get better as you scale up. Maybe one day they'll get the prices down, and it will get cheaper than dealing with power companies... 
Check out http://www.nanosolar.com
One can only imagine what will happen when somebody starts selling cheap solar power. http://www.nanosolar.com/about.htm
You might think the Governments and industries of the world would be behind this, cheaper power, less pollution, freedom from oil in the Mideast!
Cheap free energy!
Not a chance.
One can only imagine what will happen when somebody starts selling cheap solar power. http://www.nanosolar.com/about.htm
You might think the Governments and industries of the world would be behind this, cheaper power, less pollution, freedom from oil in the Mideast!
Cheap free energy!
Not a chance.
Just to clarify for people who don't know, quadrupole magnets are not classified, or anything special at all, they are simply magnets with four poles. Imagine a square with north poles at two opposite corners and south at the other two, this can easily be made using two horseshoe magnets placed with opposite poles facing each other. They are used as focussing devices for charged particles, in the same way that lenses focus light, and in fact the maths is exactly the same. They are found in nuclear labs and particle accelerators, but they are also used in many other places such as hospital x-ray machines and can even be in normal CRT TVs.
The Tesla is indeed named after Nicola Tesla, but it is the SI unit of magnetic field strength, and nothing to do with energy at all. 1 Tesla = 10000 Gauss, which is another commonly used unit. Tesla are not normally used at all in relation to quadrupoles because it is the magnetic field gradient that is important for focussing, not the strength.
Einstein did not get a Nobel for a free energy machine, since he never invented one. The photo-electric effect is simply when a photon knocks an electron out of an atom. Since Newton's time it had been thought that light was made of waves, so this effect could not be explained. Einstein explained it by simply saying that light was made of particles, although we now know that it can actually behave as both. It was not even a new idea, since it had previously been thought that light was particles, but until the begginings of quantum theory it was not possible to explain this effect properly.
Plutonium does not power all nuclear plants, uranium is a much more common fuel since it occurs naturally while plutonium must be produced in a nuclear reactor.
This thread may be a dead loss, but no reason we can't have some real science here as well.
The Tesla is indeed named after Nicola Tesla, but it is the SI unit of magnetic field strength, and nothing to do with energy at all. 1 Tesla = 10000 Gauss, which is another commonly used unit. Tesla are not normally used at all in relation to quadrupoles because it is the magnetic field gradient that is important for focussing, not the strength.
Einstein did not get a Nobel for a free energy machine, since he never invented one. The photo-electric effect is simply when a photon knocks an electron out of an atom. Since Newton's time it had been thought that light was made of waves, so this effect could not be explained. Einstein explained it by simply saying that light was made of particles, although we now know that it can actually behave as both. It was not even a new idea, since it had previously been thought that light was particles, but until the begginings of quantum theory it was not possible to explain this effect properly.
Plutonium does not power all nuclear plants, uranium is a much more common fuel since it occurs naturally while plutonium must be produced in a nuclear reactor.
This thread may be a dead loss, but no reason we can't have some real science here as well.
Except the efficiency is too low (and the average amount of sunlight in Germany too low) for me to recover the costs of the solar cells and associated equipment from the savings on my power bill - at least not before I have to replace batteries or broken cells, or before a storm sweeps the damned things off the roof. Not to mention the the effin "building" codes that dictate what color of paving blocks I can use, never mind that I can hang something like solar cell on the roof.
Larry Lovage
Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2006
- Messages
- 220
nanosolar's error number one:robinson said:
Cars have to take their power source with them. That is why the equivalent motto of Benz and Daimler (or even Henry Ford) would be "An oil-driven internal combustion engine in every car". It's simply no way on earth to achieve cheap energy.
We're stuck with it with cars, but we don't have a coal- or oil-fired generator in every house, the electricity we use is generated centrally. The point is to make that energy come from the Sun. If everybody has to have their own solar power source, there is no way in hell that you can reasonably expect to earn back energy cost savings from your initial outlay in anything less than decades.
The only true solution to free energy is to use solar power collectors in space, which transmit the energy down to earth via microwaves.
None of these suggestions are "free" though. They are reaping energy whish is being generated by well-understood methods elsewhere.
Even at the practical level, energy reaped in space and beamed to Earth fro redistribution will incur significant transmission and maintenance costs network-wise. So there would be a cost.
By free energy I've always understood zero-point and over-unity devices.
None of which can be demonstrated.
Even at the practical level, energy reaped in space and beamed to Earth fro redistribution will incur significant transmission and maintenance costs network-wise. So there would be a cost.
By free energy I've always understood zero-point and over-unity devices.
None of which can be demonstrated.
Zero-point energy has been demonstrated by the Casimir effect. Unfortunately it hasn't done more than move a few atoms a few nanometres, and it is quite likely that it never will do more than this, but it definately does exist.
Yes, real science. Anywhere, anytime.
Yes, even THEN. Where do you think contraceptives and all the spiffy toys come from?
FarmallMTA
Muse
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2007
- Messages
- 746
Man, that is TOTALLY legitimate!
And it's free energy! a true perpetual motion machine! At last!
Um, that is until you notice the fingers turning the black thingy beside the shiny thingy spinning on the axis.
And, if I remember my physics and anatomy and human physiology and biology correctly, fingers turning means energy being expended. So the energy being expended by turning the black thingy is being transferred by magnetic action to the silver rotating thingy which is perfectly capturing the energy, except wait, you've got friction loss of the spinning shiny thingy rotating on the axis generating heat which is means energy is being lost so....
Dang it! Just another inefficient motor. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
And it's free energy! a true perpetual motion machine! At last!
Um, that is until you notice the fingers turning the black thingy beside the shiny thingy spinning on the axis.
And, if I remember my physics and anatomy and human physiology and biology correctly, fingers turning means energy being expended. So the energy being expended by turning the black thingy is being transferred by magnetic action to the silver rotating thingy which is perfectly capturing the energy, except wait, you've got friction loss of the spinning shiny thingy rotating on the axis generating heat which is means energy is being lost so....
Dang it! Just another inefficient motor. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.