heres my theory on everything. enjoy

[Sensei]

If you have voltage difference f.e. 2.5 V and you will attach to it f.e. green LED which is emitting green photon with 532 nm.

Energy of single emitted photon is E=h*c/wavelength=4.135667*10^-15*299792458/532*10^-9=2.33 eV.

 

Electron in such circuit has kinetic energy 2.5 eV at the beginning.

LED is emitting photon with 2.33 eV.

So electron after emitting such photon will have 2.5-2.33 = 0.17 eV kinetic energy.

It's called voltage drop on element.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_drop

If you will start playing with voltage of circuit, you will see that if electrons have too small kinetic energy (less than 2.33 eV in our case), LED will simply stop emitting light, and no current will be flowing through whole circuit (electrons can't pass through LED, which is blocking them).

 

So, electrons flowing in circuit from negative electrode through electronic elements they lose their kinetic energy (emitting photons etc.), giving part of energy to wires heating them up a bit, and at the end, they end up in positive electrode. Quantity of electrons that was at beginning (on negative electrode), matches quantity of electrons at the end (positive electrode).

Edited May 23, 2014 by Sensei

[swansont]

this explanation cant be correct because the physical ammount of electrons in the coil/wire increases somehow

This would be magic, making electrons appear out of nowhere. But no, there's no magic — electrons are already there. The induction merely moves them around. Moving electrons is current, current is moving charges and electrons are charged.

 

or else electromagnetic inuction wouldnt seem to generate electricity like voltage to fuel lights or voltage to fuel a pendulum with coils attatched to it which moves through a magnetic field to produce those volts. and this cycle as mentioned before can go on perpetually seemingly generating free energy. but i theorize that this energy comes from energy orbiting a magnet which makes more sense in my oppinion.

Making sense to you, or not, is not a persuasive argument to anyone else. You are not the arbiter of what other people understand.

 

i dont believe magic or lack of explanations cut it. also again mainstream physics doesnt account for where the volts and electrons come from during electromagnetic induction and my theory on electromagnetism does. im sure youll avoid my point again and say all the volts come from the coils which is obviously nonsense.

Where the "volts come from" is the mechanical work on the system. All a volt is is a joule of energy per coulomb of charge, so this is no more than a statement of energy. And a generator will not work unless someone expends some effort turning a crank or exerting some other mechanical force. Any time there is relative motion between a magnetic field and a charge, there is a force on the charge — that's something that is experimentally confirmed. A generator is a way to exploit that effect. It's all pretty standard and not particularly new, so there's really not much of an excuse for someone interested in the field to be ignorant of it.

[anonymousone]

This would be magic, making electrons appear out of nowhere. But no, there's no magic — electrons are already there. The induction merely moves them around. Moving electrons is current, current is moving charges and electrons are charged.

 

 

Making sense to you, or not, is not a persuasive argument to anyone else. You are not the arbiter of what other people understand.

 

Where the "volts come from" is the mechanical work on the system. All a volt is is a joule of energy per coulomb of charge, so this is no more than a statement of energy. And a generator will not work unless someone expends some effort turning a crank or exerting some other mechanical force. Any time there is relative motion between a magnetic field and a charge, there is a force on the charge — that's something that is experimentally confirmed. A generator is a way to exploit that effect. It's all pretty standard and not particularly new, so there's really not much of an excuse for someone interested in the field to be ignorant of it.

so even if im wrong about magnets transfering their orbital electric energy during electromagnetic induction thats just one tiny modification ill make to my theory and itll be changed so that the orbital energy arround and in magnets doesnt transfer like i originally thought it did. orbital energy will still cause magnetism according to my theory and the same is true about gravity(dark energy forces) what ive seen with my own eyes is a "free" energy system that runs on magnets and it generates enough energy to keep itself producing energy perpetually. and theres videos im going to go find thatre free energy magnetic motors which seem to do magic but it isnt mystical at all because i know whats going on.

Edited May 23, 2014 by anonymousone

[swansont]

so even if im wrong about magnets transfering their orbital electric energy during electromagnetic induction thats just one tiny modification ill make to my theory and itll be changed so that the orbital energy arround and in magnets does transfer like i originally thought it did. orbital energy will still cause magnetism according to my theory and the same is true about gravity(dark energy forces) what ive seen with my own eyes is a "free" energy system that runs on magnets and it generates enough energy to keep itself producing energy perpetually. and theres videos im going to go find thatre free energy magnetic motors which seem to do magic but it isnt mystical at all because i know whats going on.

 

 

Go and build it then. Do what nobody else has ever been able to do. Come back when you can run this without input and can power a load as well. Nobody here will be holding their breath.

[anonymousone]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=wn1wnkm2_zc what i saw worked like this except the spinning part had coils on it that produced electricity as the coils moved through the magnetic field. and this electricity was used to make the system spin faster and "generate"even more electricity and spin. and this seems to work magically but it isnt magic electrons come from the magnets orbital energy.

[Klaynos]

There's a big prize you can win too.

 

You also just did the classic no maths but "I have a theory" trick of when something opposes your idea you just fiddle with the words and change the goalposts. Maths doesn't let you do that. I'm out, nothing to discuss here.

[swansont]

Maths doesn't let you move the goalposts. Very succinct. I like that.

[anonymousone]

math is on the way.

[Sensei]

None of your youtube video links work (posts #45 #55).

"Movie doesn't exist" etc. comment I see.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Sensei

[anonymousone]

#55 search youtube for "how to build free energy magnetic motor" this "magic" isnt mystical its all science. and i have no idea why the links dont work cuz i double checked them.

[Sensei]

So the correct link is

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN1Wnkm2_Zc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN1Wnkm2_Zc

 

You can't change size of letters in links (it had all characters lower case).

 

Do I need to mention it doesn't work?

I have just tried it with 18 powerful neodymium magnets.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Sensei

[Endy0816]

The electricity generated is coming at the expense of demagnetization.

[anonymousone]

basically part of my theory is that magnets contain vast ammounts of orbital energies and this energy can be tapped with what i call accelerated electromagnetic induction batteries. and i think this is the next level of energy technology.

[pwagen]

One of the reasons I replied in this thread was because of the "show me any errors I've made" attitude. Unfortunately, I see no such thing when others explain why certain things in your idea needs more explaining, or when they've been shown to be false.

 

Always be humble when it comes to knowledge.

[Sensei]

basically part of my theory is that magnets contain vast ammounts of orbital energies and this energy can be tapped with what i call accelerated electromagnetic induction batteries. and i think this is the next level of energy technology.

 

Take piece of iron.

It doesn't attach to any other iron.

It's no magnet, yet.

 

Attach to one of its end small neodymium magnet.

Now whole piece of iron is attaching to iron.

 

Take off neodymium magnet, and it's no longer attaching to iron.

 

 

Take piece of iron, roll up wire on it.

Pass current through wire.

Whole piece of iron is becoming magnet (electromagnet).

Until current is flowing through wire, it's attracting or repelling to/from other magnets or iron.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Sensei

[swansont]

#55 search youtube for "how to build free energy magnetic motor" this "magic" isnt mystical its all science. and i have no idea why the links dont work cuz i double checked them.

 

No, it's not science. Those people are charlatans and/or crackpots and their devices do not work.

basically part of my theory is that magnets contain vast ammounts of orbital energies and this energy can be tapped with what i call accelerated electromagnetic induction batteries. and i think this is the next level of energy technology.

 

Then give us a model and evidence that you can do this.

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

anonymousone

 

It is time to either pony up some maths, a working systematic set of equations, maybe a bit of evidence, or start taking on board these criticisms. Youtube videos do not count as evidence.

 

Klaynos and Sensei asked two very simple one line questions - our current model allows us to answer those questions to terrifying levels of accuracy - unless you are willing to return to this thread with a viable mathematical model that starts to show that you may have the basis of a theory (let alone answer those two simple questions) I will consider locking this thread as non-compliant with the rules of the Speculations Forum.

 

You have had lots of posts and discussion with some very knowledgeable members so it is time to either bring a mathematical basis for your idea to the table and engage with the criticisms above or to admit that all you have is pipedreams.

 

Do not respond to this moderation within the thread (replies will just be split off to the trash) - Do respond with more maths and less verbiage.

 

 

 

[anonymousone]

total ammount of fusion thats taken place in the universe plus cumulative attraction dark energy forces that cause gravity too = x total ammount of universal expansion thats taken place in the universe = y total ammount of gravity in the universe = z x = y and x = z also equations for gravity are newtons except dark energy causes the gravity....with the addition of his gravity formula being = to universal expansion forces(multiplied by a variable which represents dark energy antigravity forces) note the force of universal expansion is related to the force of gravity which = a. this relationship is a so a is a formula... and a = b + c and b is the ammount of fusion a star has done (how much mass has converted to energy over that star/blackholes life span from start to present) c represents the ammount of dark energy forces in a star/blackhole/planet/object that exist due to cumulative attraction. which is what causes gravity on planets. this causes gravity in stars too along so a = y and a = z and a = b + c and b + c = x

i hope this all clarifies what im saying better and most of my equations are contain the same math thats being used in current universe models with the addition of some dark energy forces that cause universal expansion and the galaxy rotational curve. so when ppl say my math wont work thats confuing to me because i use alot of math thats being used in current universal models.

 

also thanks for the critcism because it was constructive just like greek philosophers arguments about the earth being round or flat were too. im really trying to have a constructive debate and hopefully thisll continue so try and prove me wrong as best u can k.

Edited May 24, 2014 by anonymousone

[Klaynos]

So can you use this to answer my question?

[pwagen]

You can't just throw a bunch of variables this way and equate them. What's the value of the "force of gravity", a, and in what unit? Same for the other letters, what are the units and, preferably, values?

[Klaynos]

You can't just throw a bunch of variables this way and equate them. What's the value of the "force of gravity", a, and in what unit? Same for the other letters, what are the units and, preferably, values?

Indeed, which is why I want a worked example.

[anonymousone]

im demonstrating correlations in the universe mathematically and i use the same formulas that work now except i just say dark energy forces + orbital energies cause these forces so mathematical equations will be very similiar with newtons gravity formulas (d) multiplied by e which represents a value. then theres f which represents universal expansion ed = f so e is a value which represents the relationship between gravity and antigravity so e is a formula(dark energy forces) so you take the gravity force of a galaxy (d) and multiply it by e to get f because of dark energy forces. and the antigravity aspect of dark energy forces cause universal expansion. and this all works as long as its understood that newtons equations calculate dark energy forces that are gravity and antigravity. today it is understood by science that newtons equations calculate mass bending spacetime but i dont think thats whats happening because of how x = ed = f. where x = total ammount of fusion thats taken place in a variable plus the dark energy forces thatre caused by cumulative attraction

and this gets rid of the need for darkmatter to be present in the universe.

Edited May 24, 2014 by anonymousone

[Sensei]

anonymousone, so you have basically no idea what we are talking about when we are saying about providing math formulas to confirm theory..

 

Equation must have correct units.

You cannot mix length, with mass, and time, and energy, forces, charges etc. just like that.

 

Show units of a,b,c,x,y,z etc.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Sensei

[anonymousone]

i dont have numbers which are equal to x for example because that requires new data thats not been collected yet. but i do use alot of the same math used by mainstream physicists except this math represents different stuff such as newtons equations accounting for orbital dark energy forces. so if i use math thats been proven to work already im not wrong. so x = ed = f is like saying what causes gravity also causes antigravity with a specific mathematical correlation between gravity and antigravity in the universe where dark energy laws = newtons gravity laws and more. i find it imperative that i explain myself mathematically like this to avoid any coonfusions and to solve universe puzzles better.

Edited May 24, 2014 by anonymousone

[Sensei]

What are UNITS of your variables..

 

Is that too hard question?