Free energy

1,380
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
So I listened to a....pretty crazy segment on Radio 4 a few weeks back about the pursuit of "free energy" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09rzs61)

Apparently there are people out there who have invented machines capable of requiring no energy input (or something like that, my physics is hazy), but the "men in black" have always got to them before it has gained widespread attention. Has anyone heard of these rogue "scientists"? And is there a big conspiracy to keep us hooked on other forms of energy?
 
536
Australia
Vic, Australia
Nicola Tesla the inventor of AC power, the radio (even though Marconi stole the attention for years) and the world's longest lightening bolt, using his Tesla Coil, thought free energy was possible. He had several theories on ways of achieving this from generation to harnessing from the atmosphere. The antenna collecting solar radiation seems like the most feasible. We have had huge radiation storms in the past that have wiped out electrical systems it's just a question of collecting.
 

Dennisch

Humongous member
Premium
28,714
Netherlands
Hilversum
Dennisch
If that was possible, the internet would have been filled with it. You can't hide it anymore. Information travels too fast.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,438
United States
Mile High City
Nicola Tesla the inventor of AC power, the radio (even though Marconi stole the attention for years) and the world's longest lightening bolt, using his Tesla Coil, thought free energy was possible. He had several theories on ways of achieving this from generation to harnessing from the atmosphere. The antenna collecting solar radiation seems like the most feasible. We have had huge radiation storms in the past that have wiped out electrical systems it's just a question of collecting.

That's not really "free energy" any more than harnessing energy from the sun or harnessing it from the earth's heat or harnessing it from the flow of water or harnessing it from oil sitting in the ground or harnessing it from atomic bonds.
 
22,409
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
I had no idea that's all it took to get past the second law of thermodynamics. Does that also invent faster-than-light travel?
I don't know, but it sure lends credence to the flat-earth belief.
 

Dotini

Premium
15,130
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
That's not really "free energy" any more than harnessing energy from the sun or harnessing it from the earth's heat or harnessing it from the flow of water or harnessing it from oil sitting in the ground or harnessing it from atomic bonds.
Tesla presumably invented a form of "free" energy generation that his financial backer Westinghouse couldn't charge for or profit from. So Westinghouse pulled the plug on his project.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,438
United States
Mile High City
Tesla presumably invented a form of "free" energy generation that his financial backer Westinghouse couldn't charge for or profit from. So Westinghouse pulled the plug on his project.

I don't know what you're referring to, but searching "tesla free energy" yields some discussion of a heat exchanger that relies on ambient solar heat.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,438
United States
Mile High City

ryzno

Slowest of the Fastest!!
Premium
5,548
United States
Dahlonega, GA
ryzno
While it isn't free energy as Danoff pointed out I've had a theory.
I've had a theory similar to an automotive charging system.
Why can't we create an electric motor efficient enough to power a generator yet power itself?
As usual in electric systems the most power used is starting the system and the amperage drops to a running level.
I'm sure with the right combination of pulley sizes it could be done.

Another invention I can't attempt... Y'all better pay me if you figure it out!
 

zzz_pt

Premium
8,125
Germany
Porto living in Hamburg
zzz_pt
Apparently there are people out there who have invented machines capable of requiring no energy input (or something like that, my physics is hazy), but the "men in black" have always got to them before it has gained widespread attention. Has anyone heard of these rogue "scientists"? And is there a big conspiracy to keep us hooked on other forms of energy?

Is this about perpetual motion machines? If so, I think it's a lie.

There are people who invent perpetual motion gadgets or objects like spinning fans and so on. But those are not machines. The moment you'd harness any energy from those "close" perpetual systems, they would eventually stop / stop immediately. They're only perpetual if no energy is being harnessed, which make them useless.
 
Last edited:

Dotini

Premium
15,130
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
The EmDrive is said to actually work, but physicists don't understand it (actually they hate it), since it violates Newton's 3rd law, conservation of momentum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_thruster

Zero point energy is quantum technology promising free energy, but its time has not yet come.

There is much, really most, of the universe we don't understand, such as dark matter and dark energy. Our current materialistic science is the lowest step on a ladder of what may be possible.
 
22,532
United States
Arizona
HamiltonMP427
That's what the host kept saying, but invariably the response was "rules could be broken"

You don't just say Entropy is gone because you want it to be...there are isentropic cases but that doesn't mean one they're more than theoretical most times and two they aren't reversible thus use some sort of energy.
 

Liquid

Fission Mailed
Premium
25,164
Slovakia
Bratvegas
GTP_Liquid
While it isn't free energy as Danoff pointed out I've had a theory.
I've had a theory similar to an automotive charging system.
Why can't we create an electric motor efficient enough to power a generator yet power itself?
As usual in electric systems the most power used is starting the system and the amperage drops to a running level.
I'm sure with the right combination of pulley sizes it could be done.

Another invention I can't attempt... Y'all better pay me if you figure it out!

Hypothesis. You have a hypothesis.

Newton, Darwin and Einstein had theories.
 
1,380
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Is this about perpetual motion machines? If so, I think it's a lie.

There are people who invent perpetual motion gadgets or objects like spinning fans and so on. But those are not machines. The moment you'd harness any energy from those "close" perpetual systems, they would eventually stop / stop immediately. They're only perpetual if no energy is being harnessed, which make them useless.
Those are the ones!
 
952
Belgium
Belgium
So I listened to a....pretty crazy segment on Radio 4 a few weeks back about the pursuit of "free energy" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09rzs61)

Apparently there are people out there who have invented machines capable of requiring no energy input (or something like that, my physics is hazy), but the "men in black" have always got to them before it has gained widespread attention. Has anyone heard of these rogue "scientists"? And is there a big conspiracy to keep us hooked on other forms of energy?

That's what the host kept saying, but invariably the response was "rules could be broken"

Like said it's called a perpetual motion machine and it's impossible according to the second law of thermodynamics. If you'd be remotly interested learn a bit about thermodynamics it's a very intersting domain of physics.

The EmDrive is said to actually work, but physicists don't understand it (actually they hate it), since it violates Newton's 3rd law, conservation of momentum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_thruster

Zero point energy is quantum technology promising free energy, but its time has not yet come.

There is much, really most, of the universe we don't understand, such as dark matter and dark energy. Our current materialistic science is the lowest step on a ladder of what may be possible.



Look I really do think this is intersting technology to research but currently it's not applicable in practice.
 
1,380
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
I think the best part of the program honestly were the excuses (or rather lack of) given as to why these machines couldn't be shown....

"He says he's done it, and I've seen the proof but he can't show it to you"

Also I was surprised that there's a reward put up by someone that will pay out on proof of such a machine which would involve taking it apart to make sure there was no actual hidden source of energy. The prize money remains untaken.
 
12,250
Australia
Adelaide
GTP_Imari
That's what the host kept saying, but invariably the response was "rules could be broken"

They could be. Nobody has actually done it yet, though.

While it isn't free energy as Danoff pointed out I've had a theory.
I've had a theory similar to an automotive charging system.
Why can't we create an electric motor efficient enough to power a generator yet power itself?
As usual in electric systems the most power used is starting the system and the amperage drops to a running level.
I'm sure with the right combination of pulley sizes it could be done.

Not sure if serious...

Is this about perpetual motion machines? If so, I think it's a lie.

There are people who invent perpetual motion gadgets or objects like spinning fans and so on. But those are not machines. The moment you'd harness any energy from those "close" perpetual systems, they would eventually stop / stop immediately. They're only perpetual if no energy is being harnessed, which make them useless.

They're not even perpetual, just very low energy loss. They would stop even if you never attempted to tap the energy.

The EmDrive is said to actually work, but physicists don't understand it (actually they hate it), since it violates Newton's 3rd law, conservation of momentum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_thruster

Physicists don't hate things that seem to violate known laws. They find them fascinating. But when you're up against very well established laws of physics, you better bring some damn good proof that you're actually violating them or you'll be viewed as another snake oil salesman trying to dupe the public and bring good science into disrepute.

The EmDrive, while interesting, still hasn't made it out of the phase where they're actually sure that the effect is from the EmDrive rather than some artifact of the test. Attempting to duplicate the "successful" experiments has been a mixed bag, which usually isn't a great sign of a solid effect.

Zero point energy is quantum technology promising free energy, but its time has not yet come.

Zero point energy is woo. If you could extract energy, it wouldn't be a zero point any more.

That begs the question: Who, then, does understand it?

There's two ways of looking at this, considering that the effect isn't universally accepted.

If it's not producing net force, any decent scientist understands it. If it is producing net force, then nobody understands it and a lot of people will be looking to make their names by explaining it. The person who did so in a rigorous manner would probably be the next Einstein in terms of the revolution in science it would bring.

As it stands, there are a few people doing tests and the rest of us waiting for more information to come forth.

"He says he's done it, and I've seen the proof but he can't show it to you"

Anyone who says this is a charlatan. A real perpetual motion machine would have the inventor rolling in cash for life, hailed as a genius by every country in the world, and offered jobs and opportunities by anyone and everyone.

"I can't show you" is code for "you'd immediately realise that it's a fraud".
 

Dotini

Premium
15,130
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
Your clickbait headline writing game is weak.
I formed that particular idea and phrase a few years ago when I was following a PhysicsForum thread on the subject of the EmDrive. This was a high end forum with super-strict moderation, posts mainly by credentialed scientists known to the moderators, and tries to be a mentoring forum for college science majors. The ultimate consensus by the site was the EmDrive violated fundamental laws of physics, was not a fit subject for discussion on its forum, and the thread closed. The EmDrive seriously offended them; they had very strong and assertive reactions against it. That thread gave me the idea how disagreeable the EmDrive was to them. Was it a constructed hoax by an engineer and not a scientist with sound theory? I don't know. Of course I don't know if it works or not. The China Academy of Space Technology claims it has got the EmDrive working in the lab, and has been testing it in space on the Tiangong 2 for several years. But governments can and do lie. Our X-37 program has been testing somethings secret off and on for years.

https://www.popsci.com/emdrive-engine-space-travel-china-success


The OTV-1 X-37B in April 2010, inside its payload fairing prior to launch
Role Uncrewed spaceplane
National origin United States
Manufacturer Boeing Defense, Space & Security
First flight 7 April 2006 (first drop test)
Introduction 22 April 2010 (first spaceflight)
Status
  • In service
  • 4 spaceflights completed[1][2][3]
Primary user
 
11,016
United Kingdom
West Yorkshire
Tired_Tyres
I formed that particular idea and phrase a few years ago when I was following a PhysicsForum thread on the subject of the EmDrive. This was a high end forum with super-strict moderation, posts mainly by credentialed scientists known to the moderators, and tries to be a mentoring forum for college science majors. The ultimate consensus by the site was the EmDrive violated fundamental laws of physics, was not a fit subject for discussion on its forum, and the thread closed. The EmDrive seriously offended them; they had very strong and assertive reactions against it. That thread gave me the idea how disagreeable the EmDrive was to them. Was it a constructed hoax by an engineer and not a scientist with sound theory? I don't know. Of course I don't know if it works or not. The China Academy of Space Technology claims it has got the EmDrive working in the lab, and has been testing it in space on the Tiangong 2 for several years. But governments can and do lie. Our X-37 program has been testing somethings secret off and on for years.

https://www.popsci.com/emdrive-engine-space-travel-china-success


The OTV-1 X-37B in April 2010, inside its payload fairing prior to launch
Role Uncrewed spaceplane
National origin United States
Manufacturer Boeing Defense, Space & Security
First flight 7 April 2006 (first drop test)
Introduction 22 April 2010 (first spaceflight)
Status
  • In service
  • 4 spaceflights completed[1][2][3]
Primary user
In other words scientists acting as teachers rejected something on valid grounds aggressively is somehow the same as a scientist studying the same thing themselves when they are not acting as teachers?