Libertarian promotes free energy device

http://www.libertariannews.org/2013/11/05/brazilian-firm-goes-to-market-with-free-energy-generator-capable-of-powering-two-average-size-houses/ said:
...The site claims the input power needed to run it is around 2% of its output power.

...The product looks legit.
Click to expand...

lol - people amaze me.
 
bobwtfomg said:
Got to be a scam. why do people fall for this?

http://www.libertariannews.org/2013...-capable-of-powering-two-average-size-houses/
Click to expand...
I don't know why people fall for any scheme too good to be true. But people always have, and IMHO, always will. There are 7 billion people on Earth; you only need a few to buy into a scam to make a profit for yourself.

Why do some people successfully sell "money printing machines" because the seller "needs some cash?" This seems inane on the face of it.

I feel the sorriest for people who do not seek out a personal profit, like those elderly who "loan" their savings to "Federal agents" to obtain evidence on an "embezzling" bank teller.
 
Well right away, if it requires a small amount of continual energy, why can it not produce this itself after an initial hand crank or two?

People are so gullible.
 
You want gullible? I'll give you gullible:

from the link said:
The product looks legit. If this is for real, it will replace Dark Wallet as the second most important creation in the history of man, behind Bitcoin of course. The petro-dollar will surely topple in the face of this invention.
Click to expand...
 
I see Michael Suede, who started the bitcoin thread here is in the comments. He seems to believe it.

Do people just not read or something? Or was half the population born yesterday?
 
Doubt said:
I see Michael Suede, who started the bitcoin thread here is in the comments. He seems to believe it.
Click to expand...
If you look at the top of the page, you will see that he actually wrote the article.
 
Come on guys, they have a blurry video of a noisy box with lights on it! What more will it take to convince you?!@?!? :D
 
blutoski said:
I'm curious about whether libertarians might have a special attraction to free-energy machines, since it played such a critical role in Galt's ability to disconnect from the rest of civilization.
Click to expand...

I'm a registered libertarian and I can vouch for you that we all are actively in search of the most attractive, fullest, financially independant, and young free-energy machine out there.

Wait, I'm confusing that with a romantic partner. Sorry, free-energy machines are woo. I don't waste my time with that.
 
Bitcoin? I must have missed something; last I heard libertarians wanted to do everything with gold and silver coin. Bullion. Proper money.

Bitcoin's not even a thing.
 
ben m said:
You want gullible? I'll give you gullible:
Click to expand...

And it is also amazing that they simply don't seem to understand the scale of change that would follow this invention - if it worked! To put it behind some alternate money scheme like Bitcoins! :jaw-dropp
 
blutoski said:
I'm curious about whether libertarians might have a special attraction to free-energy machines, since it played such a critical role in Galt's ability to disconnect from the rest of civilization.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

First, Galt's motor was never described as a free energy motor. It was described as transfering energy from one form (atmospheric static electricity) to another (mechanical energy). You may as well call nuclear power free energy.

Second, Libertarian=/=Objectivist. In fact, Objectivists have quite deep problems with the Libertarian movement. This is akin to confusing Christians with Literary Theorists because they both accept that Christ had something worthwhile to say. Objectivism isn't even a political movement, and specifically argues AGAINST being a political movement right now.

Third, no Objectivist has ever pretended that the motor was anything more than science fiction. It was a plot device--it could have been anything. I have heard a few Objectivists jokingly refer to technical developments as something from Atlas Shrugged, but it was always in the form of "Hey, this is neat!" and never in the form of "This supports our political ideals".

Fourth, the fact that some people fall for crackpot ideas in no way proves that the rest of us are irrational ("us" only because people insist on combining two very different groups).

Fifth, this is a SCIENCE subforum. If you wish to discuss politics, there are places for that. This ain't it.
 
blutoski said:
I'm curious about whether libertarians might have a special attraction to free-energy machines, since it played such a critical role in Galt's ability to disconnect from the rest of civilization.
Click to expand...

F Paul Wilson ( a libertarian author ) also wrote about a free energy device in one of his Repairman Jack stories, but near the end he chickened out and said it was just energy freely transmitted through the air without losses, which is just as unbelievable.

There does seem to be an attraction to the concept. I've also notice my libertarian coworkers seem to be drawn to big conspiracy theories...

( before someone objects, I don't think ALL libertarians are represented by the few that I actually know )
 
Last edited:
Cayvmann said:
There does seem to be an attraction to the concept.
Click to expand...
Has anyone done a study to see if such beliefs are actually more prevalent among Libertarians? At least THAT would be a topic legitimately called "science", even if it's soft as marshmellow fluff (again, the definitions are going to be a nightmare, particularly for people antagonistic to the political stance). Because right now, you and I have provided the most data on this topic, and I'll be the first to admit that my data rises to the level of anecdote only beacuse there's no lower-quality category for data.

In other words: Let's see if there's something to explain before we go offering explanations.
 
I'm less than impressed by the quality of the article.

It says "roll" when it clearly means "role".
It uses the slang word "legit" instead of "legitimate".
It says that the generator is capable of "Powering Two Average Size Houses" instead of "Powering Two Average Households". (Houses can function just fine without power.)

When you consider that it uses statements such as "I’m not sure if that number is accurate, and if it is accurate, what currency it is denominated in", it seems clear to me that the writer is not a professional journalist.

But ignoring this, I ran the site that the article links to through Google translate. If anyone's interested, here's the result...

This is an electromagnetic device that, depending on how binding to be connected to ground grid, shall move particles of energy for performing work instantly via electromagnetism. The sensor requires only a small amount of power continuously supplied from an external power source, which may be the local power utility. With this small amount of electricity consumed the sensor generates a large electromotive power. Depending on your constructive manner, the sensor can generate a power hundreds of times greater than the energy that was consumed for generation.

The Captor Electron can be used to generate energy in any part of the power grid, according to the needs of the project, in low, medium or high voltage (the final consumers or the electric utilities, but always depending on a power plant primary).

The sensor generates electricity through the movement of electrical particles in constant motion, regardless of whether or not doing work. A magnetic dipole being connected to the load, there arises the sensor / ground circuit, causing the current generated and used to perform work is injected into the network, the phase in the form of electricity corresponding to the same active power consumption of the loads . This effect enables the integration of power generation among consumers, utilities and power plants.

In the capture process no mass or chemical transformation process, only electricity generating electricity, natural and simple way.

Examples prototypes obtained by

1) - Consuming only 21 W 220 V the sensor generates an output 12.1 KW to feed a load of 6000 W 220V
Weight: 1.5 Kg
Measurements: 20x30x15 cm

2) - Consuming only 2000 W 220 V the sensor generates an output of 282 700 W 220V
Weight: 40 Kg
Measurements: 60x40x20 cm

Results socio-environmental and economic:

Environment
With the use of technology to capture electrons to generate electricity no harm to the environment because there is no mass transformation processes, chemical processes or devices that cause environmental impacts.

Energy consumption
A single-phase consumer unit requires only around 2% of its total electricity demand is supplied by the utility. This small consumption keeps Captor Electron running, generating electricity corresponding to the total demand of this consumer.
Click to expand...


No detailed explanation of the physics underlying the function of their machine, which is disappointing as that's usually the fun part when looking into over-unity claims.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom