What about "Free Energy" machines?

[dapifo]

quote name='D H' timestamp='1340303599' post='685582']

In other words, an over unity device. Sorry. It doesn't exist. Learn some physics.

 

 

Please, open your mind !!! and read all I am saying ....by transforming "unknown energy" into a "known energy".....!!!!

 

You know that most (80 %) of the energy existing in Our Universe ... we don´t know were it is ... it is unknow (dark) energy.

 

Possibly this knowledge is too high for you?

Edited June 21, 2012 by dapifo

[JustinW]

Just to put my two cents in here, and not that there has been a plausible machine built thus far, but a form of free energy could be the vacuum energy of space. I'm waiting on the next big idea that comes along to make it possible to extract energy from space itself. If this could be done, it would be an infinite supply. So therefore would be free.

[D H]

Just to put my two cents in here, and not that there has been a plausible machine built thus far, but a form of free energy could be the vacuum energy of space.

Vacuum energy and the Casimir effect are perennial favorites of cranks and charlatans. One problem: It won't work. There's no way to extract energy from it; vacuum energy is the lowest possible energy a system can have. Tapping energy out of vacuum energy would violate conservation of energy. No matter what physicists come up with to further explain the nature of the universe such as melding quantum mechanics and general relativity, those conservation laws will almost certainly remain inviolate. Google "Noether's theorems".

 

If not vacuum energy, what other explanations for dark energy could we take advantage of? The easiest explanation of all is that dark energy is Einstein's cosmological constant. There's nothing there to tap. Nothing. How about some conjectural explanation from string theory, quintessence for example? There might be promise there, but only if you can recreate the energy conditions right after the big bang, and only if you do so with a machine that spans hundreds of galaxies. There might be something there, but it is so far, far out might as well say that it doesn't exist. And it still wouldn't be free energy. Conservation of energy is as close to being sacrosanct as any concept in physics can get.

[dapifo]

When JustinW says: "a form of free energy energy Could Be The vacuum of space", I thought it was a joke ... I did not know about the Casimir effect.

 

You see that strange energy! ... How many different types of energy such as this one can find in the universe? ... And out of our Universe or System?

 

When I speak of Our System I refer to the system we know and that we have modeled (with laws and theories that work within). But for me, this is our open system, and sometimes distortions may appear that will be unexplained by current models.

 

 

"Our System" is different hat "Our Universe":

 

"Our Universe" is all the Universe (space) that we know nowadays (from 10 exp -35 to 10 exp +27). But inside this Universe, we don´t know every thing nowadays, we only know the part that we have modeled (about 20% of total). This 20% is "Our Sytem".

[InigoMontoya]

Please, open your mind !!! and read all I am saying ....by transforming "unknown energy" into a "known energy".....!!!!

 

You know that most (80 %) of the energy existing in Our Universe ... we don´t know were it is ... it is unknow (dark) energy.

 

Possibly this knowledge is too high for you?

 

And we could have warp drives on our flying cars if only we could find those damned Dilithium Crystals!

 

The point: If you want to use nothing but your imagination and wave your arms around and talk of mystical energies and state that our understanding of physics is flat out wrong? OK, sure. You could have your free energy machine. But if you want to stick to anything that resembles the laws of physics as we currently know them... Nope. Not gonna happen.

 

So... If you want to talk free energy devices, might I suggest you drop into a forum that caters to creative writing and not a forum that caters to engineering. 'Cause if you want to base your discussion around known engineering principals, you're not going to get far.

[ACG52]

quote name='D H' timestamp='1340303599' post='685582']

In other words, an over unity device. Sorry. It doesn't exist. Learn some physics.

 

 

Please, open your mind !!! and read all I am saying ....by transforming "unknown energy" into a "known energy".....!!!!

 

You know that most (80 %) of the energy existing in Our Universe ... we don´t know were it is ... it is unknow (dark) energy.

 

Possibly this knowledge is too high for you?

 

 

As has been amply shown, both here and on other forums you post on, you are totally ignorant of any kind of science, much less physics.

 

IOW, you have no idea what you're talking about.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

ACG - please keep your comments directed towards the content of the post rather than the poster - Thanks.

As has been amply shown, both here and on other forums you post on, you are totally ignorant of any kind of science, much less physics.

IOW, you have no idea what you're talking about.

[dapifo]

As has been amply shown, both here and on other forums you post on, you are totally ignorant of any kind of science, much less physics.

 

IOW, you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

I agree with you ythat I´m not an Phisics Expert (like you?), and that is possible why my mind is open to learn and understand.

 

I am Industrial Engineer with a large experience in making multidisciplinary projects, and I am not an expert in academic knowledge of basic and theoretical phisics science. But possibly, that is why I'm not a slave of the bonds of conventional science.

 

Some times "trees will not let you see the forest"

 

Also closed ideas from an Expert (??) science officer like you are wellcome !!...This makes the discussions that we have most interesting...and we can contrast with the state of the art of science.

 

All I ask is some education and, above all, learn to listen to ideas and knowing how to refute them with sound arguments and not insults (typical of the Inquisition).

Edited June 22, 2012 by dapifo

[swansont]

All I ask is some education and, above all, learn to listen to ideas and knowing how to refute them with sound arguments and not insults (typical of the Inquisition).

 

Then learn about Noether's theorem, as it applies to energy. Conserved properties like energy and momentum (linear and angular) derive from a symmetry. To not conserve energy means having physics change over time. i.e. the laws are different today than they were yesterday. The symmetry and the conservation law are equivalent.

 

(And a bit of advice: if you want to avoid insults, such as they are, it might help if you didn't disparage the intelligence/knowledge level of others in the conversation)

[hypervalent_iodine]

Possibly this knowledge is too high for you?

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Further to imatfaal's note, dapifo, you'd be wise not to provoke members by insulting their intellect.

[Greg H.]

I am Industrial Engineer with a large experience in making multidisciplinary projects, and I am not an expert in academic knowledge of basic and theoretical phisics science. But possibly, that is why I'm not a slave of the bonds of conventional science.

 

 

There is a significant difference between being a slave to dogma, and failing to grasp the basic laws of nature.

[robheus]

In other words, an over unity device. Sorry. It doesn't exist. Learn some physics.

 

Would you not say a heatpump (electricity IN, heat OUT) is a over-unity device? You can get more heat enery out as electricity put in. But it doesn't defy physics laws, because you extract heat from the ground.

[Greg H.]

Would you not say a heatpump (electricity IN, heat OUT) is a over-unity device? You can get more heat enery out as electricity put in. But it doesn't defy physics laws, because you extract heat from the ground.

 

No, because the total amount of energy in (electricity + heat) is greater than the amount out (heat). You can't just ignore one of the energy inputs into the system and say it generates more energy than it consumes.

[D H]

I agree with you ythat I´m not an Phisics Expert (like you?), and that is possible why my mind is open to learn and understand.

 

I am Industrial Engineer with a large experience in making multidisciplinary projects, and I am not an expert in academic knowledge of basic and theoretical phisics science. But possibly, that is why I'm not a slave of the bonds of conventional science.

Do not take the following the wrong way. That the car of today is much more reliable, cheaper, and better than was even dreamed of half of a century ago is a mostly due to you industrial engineers. Cars are but the tip of the iceberg. Industrial engineering has played a key part in the vast improvements in reliability, quality, and cost. And a whole bunch of other -ilities.

 

That said, your field, industrial engineering, is a bit faddish and imprecise. It has to be. You are dealing with very complex systems, with economics, and with that most fickle, unpredictable element of all, people. You IEs are inevitably grasping for straws a bit. Some of that grasping: "TQM!" "No! Six Sigma!", "ISO 9000!" "No!! CMMI!", "Top down!" "No!!! Bottom up!" It's all a bit reminiscent of the "Tastes great!" "No! Less filling!" campaign.

 

Just because your field is a bit (more than a bit) ephemeral does not mean that physics is. Physicists have very solid reasons to think that there is no such thing as "free energy", where "free" means energy is not conserved. You've already seen conservation of energy and Noether's theorems in multiple posts before this. If you truly are interested in learning, you have already googled these phrases. Another set of things you should look into are the laws of thermodynamics. A humorous summary:

• Law #0: Any source of energy must abide by the following laws of the game.
  
• Law #1: You can't win.
  
• Law #2: You can't break even, except on a very cold day.
  
• Law #3: It never gets that cold.

The first law of thermodynamics is conservation of energy. The second law is even more stringent; it says that the only way to get 100% efficiency is to have zero friction and a heat sink at absolute zero. The third law says there will always be some losses somewhere. You can't get 100% efficiency no matter what. No matter what twists to the laws of physics need to be made to describe some weird results from some experiment, the laws of thermodynamics will almost certainly remain unscathed. This is why the patent office automatically rejects any patent that claims to bypass the laws of thermodynamics. The only exception is a working device. No such device has been built. No such device can be built.

[robheus]

Except that in both cases you either have to own the land (in which case you pay taxes) or pay rent to the land owner. Even if you want to define "free" as an economic term rather than the engineering term usually used around here... Even then there ain't no such thing as a free lunch (or free energy).

 

Correct. But you can use your roof top for solar panels. They are becoming cheaper and reduce cost of electricity bill.

 

No, because the total amount of energy in (electricity + heat) is greater than the amount out (heat). You can't just ignore one of the energy inputs into the system and say it generates more energy than it consumes.

 

I didn't say that there was no other source, just that you don't have to pay for that source. It is a way of extracting some 'free' energy from under ground.

[ACG52]

My kid is an electrician and knows how to bypass the meter.

 

Does that qualify as 'free energy'?

[Greg H.]

No, because the total amount of energy in (electricity + heat) is greater than the amount out (heat). You can't just ignore one of the energy inputs into the system and say it generates more energy than it consumes.

I didn't say that there was no other source, just that you don't have to pay for that source. It is a way of extracting some 'free' energy from under ground.

 

That doesn't make it an over unity device. It just makes it cheaper to operate.

[dapifo]

The idea of this thread was to know the STATE OF THE ART , and also some scientifics opinions about the "free energy machines"... but never go against the "first principle of thermodynamics: law of conservation of energy".

But you forget one small detail of the definition of this law: "the total amount of energy in any single physical system (without interaction with any other system) remains unchanged with time".

 

Really I don´t know these other possibe systems, but I don´t forget that they could exist !!!..And I try to have my mind open to this possibility !!!

 

Scientific advances may have two ways:

 

- One is the trying to prove in reality that scientific models predict (could be the case of the Higgs boson at CERN).

- And other, trying to scientifically explain a phenomenon has been observed in the reality.

It is this second that I mean, if there are so many "free energy machines", only intend to analyze with an open mind to understand where they get this extra energy. Some will be a scam, or an error. But some may be able to get this unknown energy ... And we have not surprising, nor should it contradict the law ...

[InigoMontoya]

If you want to talk about gaps in our current understanding of physics that could be exploited... Fine. Then do so (although even then I'd argue that an engineering forum is the wrong place). But to talk about the hows of exploiting such a gap when the gap hasn't even been identified? That's the very definition of putting the cart before the horse.

[swansont]

It is this second that I mean, if there are so many "free energy machines", only intend to analyze with an open mind to understand where they get this extra energy. Some will be a scam, or an error. But some may be able to get this unknown energy ... And we have not surprising, nor should it contradict the law ...

 

But there aren't any actual free energy machines to analyze. They are all scams or errors.

[StringJunky]

With apologies to Banksy :

 

 

http://ryanproof.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/121.jpg