Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 132
perpetual energy and other promising inventionsPage 9 of 10    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

If this is wrong then take it up with the guy/gal who put it in the wikipedia or change it to what it should be and/or please direct me to the correct info. Both of us can't be right.


No - the three of us can't be right. Your own reference to wikipedia states:


Because zero point energy is the lowest possible energy a system can have, this energy cannot be removed from the system.


So wikipedia agrees with what I wrote in msg 171 among other msgs. Stop trolling. You don't even bother to read the articles from which you cut and paste text, selected specifically to contradict what the articles really say by taking it out of context. You free energy guys are way too easy. Go find someone who can at least make a credible go at it to the level of an undergraduate fallacy.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 134
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 12/7/2008 7:04:44 AM

You'll need a bit more than popsicle sticks and rubber cement.
And it HAS been done, but it's not perpetual motion yet, but overunity.


Overunity, is, by definition, perpetual motion. You can extract energy from it without shutting down the system eventually. Perhaps what you really mean is, "nearly unity."


Take a look at http://www.mullerpower.com
or do a web search on Bill Muller and his generators.


And then wait approximately forever for any sort of controlled, accurate measurement of this supposed "overunity" generator. Remember how wrong you were on the cavitation water heaters, solomon? Once the actual controlled measurements were done, it was about 85% efficient. 85% is just about infinitely far from "overunity." Efficient, yes, especially for an electrically-driven water heater, but not over unity.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 135
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 12/7/2008 7:09:16 AM

Isn't methane a greenhouse gas? (and it stinks too)


Yes, and that's why burning it rather than releasing it into the atmosphere is a good idea. (Or perhaps you simply don't understand how greenhouse gasses "work.")

As for the smell, methane is completely odorless. It's the sulfur- and nitrogen-containing decomposition products associated with methane in rotting trash that smell bad.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 136
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 12/21/2008 9:36:14 AM
Solomon, I suggest you invest all your money in Muller Machines of any sort. Seriously. Put your money where your mouth is. I'd avoid selling them to anyone, though. Fraud is not something I'd want to flirt with... and those machines are a fraud.


If this fellow or anyone else even bothered to look at the site I quoted


Oh, I looked, and in that 1991 Square D report, they do not describe their methodology or protocol, and they make an overtly false statement in their conclusion, to wit: "The unit was opened for inspection and no evidence of an additional power source was found." I can see, in the published pictures, at least 2 possible sources of additional power, depending upon the test protocol. There is an enormous flywheel which can store significant energy in the device itself (so it would be important to know how long the test values were maintained, and whether they were from a dead stop of the machine), as well as a significant bank of capacitors which are capable of storing a fair amount of electricity, certainly enough to defeat a short-term load/test.

Show me a reproducible result, with "controlled, accurate measurement" by which I mean "controlled." Controlled for that capacitor bank. Controlled for the kinetic energy stored in the flywheel. Controlled for other factors that are not immediately apparent from the published pictures.


If this fellow or anyone else even bothered to look at the site I quoted they would have read the independant test that has already been done on this generator which DOES overunity.
Instead he prefers to ignore the true facts and perpetuate his own lies.
This is the typical way these people try to perpetuate misinformation, but all they do is really perpetuate their own lack of credibilityand show themselves up for the liars they really are. Why they bother to try BS people this way is beyond me because the true facts cannot be hdden.
They seem to think (I don't why) that people are going to take their word for what they say without actually checking the facts. I'm sure they don't realize that most people are not sheep and do not believe the first bit of BS presented to them.
Some of these people who have PhD's are deluding themselves greatly because some PhD's may have applied at the time but are now not worth the paper they are written on because most of what they have learned is superceeded by ongoing science which they have neglected to keep up with not to mention that much of what they have learned is censored so much (in science) that they may as well be doing PhD's in flat earth science.
Another dogmatic nonsense statement by another no-nothing troll


As for the ad hominem attacks... not at all surprising.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 138
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 12/25/2008 3:51:33 PM
There's probably plenty in money in funeral parlours or garbage collection and or recycling/disposal. At least they wont run out before oil derivatives.


Right. If you really believe your own press, have the courage of your convictions and invest in those devices. All of those things are so simple to manufacture that anyone with a lathe and milling machine could whip one up in short order. Therefore, it ought to be inexpensive and trivial to manufacture and sell the devices the devices and prove the rest of us are wrong. Let me know when you have a device for sale that you can prove works as clamed.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 140
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/7/2009 2:25:18 PM
Mainstream scientists (or most people for that matter) are NOT educated in antigravity, electrogravity research or gravitational propulsion systems.


As a scientist, I'm also not educated in the various ways alchemists believe they can turn lead into gold. Based on the science which has proven to be correct, my judgment regarding the potential for success in that endeavor is that it's nil, regardless of what secret materials are stirred into a special cauldron or the secret words one chants while doing it. Therefore, I choose to pursue my own path to discovery based on my own judgment and leave alchemy to those with the courage of their convictions to pursue it. If they don't believe in their own ideas enough to pursue them, they are just whining if they object to me pursuing my own ideas over their empty claims. In science, it's put up or shut up.

Scientists have done experiments in ``anti-gravity.'' I happen to know someone who did an experiment to try and determine if anti-protons ``fall up.'' Just because the experiments are created to exploit what is considered the best way to observe an effect instead of what you think is best, doesn't mean they aren't looking for the effect.


Physics has come to a standstill since quantum was added to the vocabulary and went off in an opposite direction.

John Wheeler wrote an article prior to his death in which he noted that quantum theory is responsible for 38% of the U.S. GDP, and growing. Pursuing theories which arise from quantum theory can only be considered a standstill by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.


Science has been responsible for more destruction of everything than any other disaster,

Science is the study of how nature works. If you attribute science and/or scientists to destruction then you are really pissed off at nature for giving us the means for destruction and/or scientists for discovering that. In addition, you are contradicting your own (rather empty) argument about science not being open to discovering anything new.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 142
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/7/2009 9:40:25 PM

However in the pursuit of science, some destruction occurs. Examples are many including the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as many 'peaceful' atmospheric atomic bomb tests....including the Aleutian Islands.


Politicians elected by US citizens made the decision to build and deploy atomic weapons. Many scientists were convinced it was necessary, but many were not. Few considered the goal to much to do with science.

Other examples which are relevant include the use of animal test models for a wide range of scientific tests including pesticides, vaccines, drugs, vivisection, et cetera.

Although that is a valid criticism of things which take place in ``softer'' sciences, that isn't really the issue here. As soon as you start making value judgments to determine if those things are justified, you're talking about things that are irrelevant to the natural sciences.
 fly_boy1
Joined: 10/10/2008
Msg: 144
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/17/2009 1:10:19 AM
Well I have worked on a variety of ideas, theory’s that involve free energy or cheaper energy. I am currently working on a perpetual motion machine but here is the deal. If I called up CNN tomorrow and told them my machine worked they wouldn’t come. For the past 1000 years 1000's of people have claimed to have a perpetual motion machine and all of them have been lying... If you friend does have a working machine tell him to start pumping power into the grid and then he will get noticed... Until then it’s not going to get noticed. Unless you have seen the machine running with no outside power source I think he is blowing smoke.

-Jim
 uvray313
Joined: 7/15/2007
Msg: 145
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/17/2009 10:19:38 AM
Energy production and use comes down to several basic principles.

Cost/benefit

Matching supply to demand or energy storage somewhere in between the two.

Energy transmission infrastructure

There are infinite possibilities but the devil is in the details.

The major difficulties facing alternative energy are existing hydrocarbon based infrastructure, oil/gas extraction subsidies, and a failure to account for the environmental costs.

Interestingly enough, most green energy technology to date was developed for practical reasons rather than environmental concerns. Denmark adopted wind energy for national security (to reduce it's dependence on imported energy) and Iceland, geo-thermal and hydrogen due to the high transportation costs of imported oil

Tidal/current based energy sources are definitely an option but an option among many facing the same obstacles.

Barry
 Orion67
Joined: 12/29/2005
Msg: 149
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/18/2009 10:14:22 AM
OP, you have posted an interesting topic to share ideas and comments. There are many things in science that have yet to be discovered. I am making the assumption that your "promising inventions" phrase is only related to "energy" inventions?

I have just discovered this thread and have not yet read all of the previous comments.
My belief in perpetual energy is that it can exist. I view gravity as a "force" that can be used or harnessed to power a so called "perpetual" motion machine or to create electricity by using piezoelectric devices and other devices. I have some ideas using the force of gravity with something else to create "perpetual motion" that I don't want to discuss until I have had some time to research and experiment with it.

The force of gravity is currently used with water to create electrical power at Niagara Falls and at many dams. As long as there is water used with the force of gravity, there is "perpetual motion" that creates electricity by use of turbine generators. Take the water away and perpetual motion stops.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 150
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/18/2009 11:02:36 AM
wow. Orion, you REALLY don't understand what "perpetual motion" means and implies.

Hydroelectric is in no way "perpetual motion," it's trading potential and kinetic energy for electrical... at a significant loss.
 Orion67
Joined: 12/29/2005
Msg: 151
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/18/2009 12:12:36 PM
Actually desertrhino, I do in fact know what "perpetual motion" means and implies. If I take the term "perpetual motion" literally, then it means movement that goes on forever. From a science standpoint, a perpetual motion machine cannot exist due to the law of conservation of energy.

Most people who discuss perpetual motion machines are taking the term "literally" as to them, it means movement that goes on forever. But in reality, nothing goes on forever. Even the revolving planet Earth is viewed by some as being a perpetual motion machine. Earth had a beginning and will some day have an ending.

Harnessing potential or kinetic energy for motion can be "literally" viewed to power so called perpetual motion machines. A so called perpetual motion machine will in time break down due to wearing of parts. Why waste potential and kinetic energy? Gravity, light, lightning, water flowing down hill, the waves of oceans, wind and other forms of potential or kinetic should not be wasted but should be used.

That water that powered the turbine generators will in time seek its own level and in time return as water vapor back into the atmosphere, come down as rain and again power the generators.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 152
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/18/2009 12:29:59 PM
Yeah, but this thread is all about "actual" perpetual motion, and there have been numerous posts claiming the same or some very close variant thereof.

So, you are at the very least badly off-topic, re-defining the terms to suit your thoughts on the matter, rather than discussing the ridiculousness of the perpetual motion ideas so far proposed. Perhaps your first post would have been better-phrased thus: "the closest we can get to perpetual motion is harnessing the renewable sources of energy on this planet, like hydroelectric."

But hey, YMMV.

 Orion67
Joined: 12/29/2005
Msg: 153
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 1/18/2009 1:11:20 PM

Yeah, but this thread is all about "actual" perpetual motion


I went back to the OP and read the comments again and did not see the word "actual" in the title. But I will agree that "the closest we can get to perpetual motion is harnessing the renewable sources of energy on this planet, like hydroelectric."

The part of the OP title is also "promising inventions" which I take to mean inventions that can be used such as alternative energy machines. This to me means harnessing the available potential and kinetic energy available for use by mankind.

I was going to start up a new thread about perpetual motion or energy but found this thread to post my comments and opinions to. Had I started a new thread, it would have been deleted by the moderators for being redundant since similar threads are already in existence.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 157
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/1/2009 6:33:35 AM
Ah hey, folks, all we've got to do is dig out the Ancients' arctic outpost and use their ZedPM and we'll have all the energy we'll ever need.

Oh wait! That's science fiction...hmm.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 158
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/1/2009 7:12:45 AM


How does a motor not slow down when it produces energy?

Well for one thing, my car motor does not slow down while it produces energy at idle, for a start.

You mean {gasp} it burns fuel to keep turning? Lord have mercy.

Or are you still making completely unsubstantiated claims to have an "oxyhydrogen" powered car that requires no further energy inputs in the way of fuel or plugging in?
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 161
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/2/2009 6:58:08 PM

The programme regarding Stanley Meyer was aired 1994 on the BBC/CBC
The programme Equinox "It runs on water" UK 1995
Sadly Stanley is dead, they say it was an Anurysem? or poison? I guess he got close to the truth hey?


Or, alternatively, he was a con-man and a fraud who was never able to provide any independent corroboration for his ridiculous claims, and he just happened to die. So sad.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 163
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/3/2009 7:02:23 PM

Back in 1982/83, I was a DJ at a golden oldies radio station. At the top of the hour we would give the weather and read news headlines from the AP ticker. One headline I read was about a man from Arkansas who had invented a perpetual motion machine and for several days afterward we read expanded reports on this story that the machine had been taken to a local university and tests had been positive.Then the stories stopped. I never saw anything again. I wonder if anyone else has heard of this story and could share. I googled this the other day and came up with nothing.

Obviously, the inventor was killed and his invention hidden away in Warehouse 13 by the corrupt Big Oil/Washington conspiracy.

Or, maybe, just maybe, his testing didn't pan out once the data was actually analyzed, and like Every. Single. One. of these crackpot scams and frauds, it was laid to rest without much fanfare.

Unless you can produce the evidence, of course, like we've asked Solomon999 to do time and time again.


Because if they ridicule everyone they can somehow reaffirm their own ignorance by trying to make everyone else believe as they believe. New information scares them. It might change the world they've become comfortable in.

Actually, perpetual energy, including the "oxyhydrogen" scam, *IS*, start to finish, bullsh!t and a scam.

If you believe so strongly that it's just the ossified sensibilities of people scared of new information, buy some of these scams. Invest. Let us know how it works out. Unless you're willing to put your money where your mouth is, you're just trying to sound new age and enlightened. Superior. How's that working out for you?

Solomon999 has been invited again and again and again to provide corroborative evidence of his bullsh!t claims, and has yet to do so, with the exception of some popular media propaganda clips, completely devoid of any analysis, evidence, or "proof." If this is "new science," why can none of these perpetual energy proponents provide so much as a single scrap of independent confirmation?

It's called a scam. A con. A confidence game. Fraud. Feel free to buy in, but anyone with the sense god gave a weasel will wait for at least SOMEthing resembling "proof of concept."


He did provide references, but just as you've implied above, his arguments/references were based on outdated information, and yet when I provided more current references validating my point he vanished from the thread. Sadly many people like him don't want to expand their knowledge base, they are content to live in their own boxed in little worlds.

As for your stalkerish cross-thread bashing, I started my work week Wednesday, and I haven't had time to investigate the information you provided. I figured it would be rude to not give it some proper attention, and 12-hour days don't leave me much time to get up to the library on campus. But, since it makes you feel superior to think I vanished from the thread, you keep right on with your delusions, mmmkay?

Besides, I'm only allowed 5 posts per day. Should I have given you a "placekeeper," letting you know I was planning to do some research as time allowed? Sorry, I didn't know your patience and self-esteem were so limited that you needed immediate feedback.


If only some of us can learn to play nice.

The irony inherent in this statement is staggering. Perhaps a mirror would be useful to you.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 164
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/4/2009 11:37:40 AM


A Dr of medicine demonstrated on worldwide television recently a method he discovered to instantainiously turn salt water into a slow burning oxyhyrdgen gas, using a high frequency scanning device he was experimenting with . The OHH gas produced burned with a flame about the same form and speed as alcohol.

The media clip of this is NOT properganda ! So how do YOU explain this discovery of a REAL scientist ? And don't cry I WILL wait for answer.

I'm still waiting for you to show us how this produces more energy than it consumes. Any 9th-grade chemistry student with a battery and some salt water has made hydrogen and oxygen and then burned them. ...and it takes more energy to generate the hydrogen/oxygen than you could ever possibly get back by burning it.

You DO understand how to test this, right? You measure the amount of energy you're putting into the system to generate the gas, then you burn the gas, perhaps use it to turn a motor, and you measure the amount of energy you get out. The ratio of output:input is ALWAYS going to be less than one. If you can show otherwise, in a controlled, repeatable manner, then we'll listen.


I suppose it might be propaganda to those wanting to discedit it like history book readers, pencil pushing clerks and those living in the dark ages or the deaf and blind.
Also I see you wish to ignore real facts and masterbate about the rest. Can't you keep your problem sexual proclivities at home where they belong and not clog these forums with them.

Keep up the personal attacks. You'll just get this thread deleted like the others.



And then wait approximately forever for any sort of controlled, accurate measurement of this supposed "overunity" generator.

Go away and talk your preposterous rubbish to those at the morgue . At least they wont argue with your nonsense , or perhaps a garden or farm or somewhere where they can use your fertiliser.

And we are STILL waiting for any sort of proof of your claims. You can make personal attacks all day long, and keep repeating the same completely unsubstantiated bullsh!t lies about these overunity/perpetual energy devices, and claim conspiracy and victim status, that you're being picked on and "trolled," but unless and until you can show some PROOF, you're doing nothing more than perpetuating (like the pun?) a fraud, a con, and a scam.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 169
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/7/2009 2:24:15 AM

John Searl maybe perhaps the discoverer of anti gravity in the 1940's.
Joseph Newman , who should have a Knighthood and Nobel prize unveiled his Unified Mechanical Field theory in 1965. He explained gravity, electricity, magnetism, the wave and particletheory of light etc.
One of Joseph's machines produced 65 TIMES more energy than it consumed.
Can you understand this ? Let me explain it simply for you . Joseph's machine outputs 65 times the energy it uses to drive it. In other words power input of 1=power output of 65. And don't worry, you wont find an explanation for it in your kindergarten physics books because they are ANCIENT HISTORY BOOKS !!!

Norman Wootan and Joe McLain's MRA device produces 256 TIMES the energy it consumes. Independantly tested by no less than SIX different agencies.
This figure was verified and provided by the National Security Agency !!!

Reider Finsrud's beautiful device has NEVER ! ! ! stopped since it was developed and the speed of it remains constant within one twenty fifth of a second , with NO conventional energy imput. But wait there's MORE !


Prove any one of these assertions. They are all scams. (I will gladly apologize for the preceding statement should you ever be able to provide proof for their veracity.) Might as well throw in the Perendev motors that have failed to materialize despite being 2 weeks from release back in 2004.


My claim is that this 'watergas' can be produced for next to nothing to supplement or run fossil fueled engines at a much lower cost than conventional fossil fuel.
If you can't understand that or by how it increases the fuel economy of said engines, then whatever so called physics you have learned was wrong or perhaps you didn't understand it correctly.

Again, you have never demonstrated either of these assertions are true. Until you can provide independent controlled confirmation that this "watergas" (aka: mixed hydrogen and oxygen produced by electrolysis), it too is a scam. At a minimum, confirmation would require an accredited testing site which takes at a minimum three approximately identical vehicles and installs the electrolysis/injection system in one, tunes up the second, and just runs the third, providing before and after mileage/efficiency data.

And call me a troll all you want. Saying a falsehood one hundred times doesn't make it more true. :roll: (It does, however, make it an obvious attempt to divert attention from your inability to provide proof for your impossible claims.)
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 171
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/7/2009 9:02:08 AM



The proof of the claim is in the testing, ...why no testing?

I quote one of my previous statements.

Norman Wootan and Joe McLain's MRA device produces 256 TIMES the energy it consumes. Independantly tested by no less than SIX different agencies.
This figure was verified and provided by the National Security Agency !!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If this is not testing then I don't know what is .

I see where the problem lies: You don't understand what proof is. This is the CLAIM or ASSERTION, and then what you provide to show this is a true statement is the PROOF.


You may confuse others and yourself with your avoidence and misquotes and pathetic attempts to confuse the issue , but not me my friend.

If you wish to discuss science then do , but why bother us with your own confusion.

Sorry mate , I'm sad to say you wouldn't even make an assistant to an assistant to an assistent to a laywer.

I'm sure scorpiomover would immediately see the truth in Joseph Newman's figures . And he's not even a physicik physsisisst . Sorry how do you pronounce that.

I'm tired now and finding it boring dealing with people with certain disabilities. Don't get me wrong , I have many disabilities also, as my good friend ith has pointed out many times to my lighter side.

Thankz guys but you are too boringly stone age for me. Or maybe

Yeah, trying to keep you on-topic is definitely distracting and confusing the issue. Your continued attempts to deflect the discussion through ad hominem attacks is lame and pathetic. Try to stay on-topic for 5 minutes and provide SOME PROOF. You claim there is "truth in Joseph Newman's figures," but you never provide the source of those figures, the figures themselves, or any independent confirmation of those figures.

And... choosing Scorpiomover as your fallacious "appeal to authority" is ... weird. At best.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 173
view profile
History
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 9/14/2009 11:36:36 AM
You know, I heard there were a few companies doing something with regenerative braking... like Toyota, Ford, Honda... You might know the cars as the Prius, or anything else mainstream that has "hybrid" in the name.

Yep. It works. But I can't find anything about Azure Dynamics using any sort of hydraulic regenerative system... they seem to be solely a hybrid gas/electric, diesel/electric vehicle provider. Which is a proven technology and quite awesome (see the vehicles above).

http://greenchektech.com/report/GreenChekReport.pdf

This is more interesting. Of course, the testing company that showed something like a 19% increase in fuel efficiency also noted they didn't have control over the vehicle for 2-3 months between the initial tests and the post-alteration tests. They suggest at least 3 identical vehicles, one which would remain unaltered and two for alteration and testing under more controlled conditions.

The testing was conducted a year and a half ago, and nothing since... Nothing in the news or changes in the website since November of last year. I'm sure it's just Big Oil keeping the little guy down.
 acuddler
Joined: 10/30/2009
Msg: 174
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 11/13/2009 12:43:15 AM
Perpetual energy is not an invention. It is a myth. It would violate the laws of thermodynamics, and so can't exist in this universe. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool, or a fraud. R.Buckminster Fuller did not create any perpetual energy inventions. I know people who live in dome homes, so there are no laws banning them. What did you drink this morning, instead of coffee?
 acuddler
Joined: 10/30/2009
Msg: 175
perpetual energy and other promising inventions
Posted: 11/13/2009 12:50:14 AM
The way to prove that a perpetual energy machine works is simple...hook the output up to the input, start it going, remove all other sources of power, and see how long it runs itself. Not long is my bet...certainly not perpetually. So far, no perpetual energy/motion machine has passed this test. They have all stopped working.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >