It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Answer / Discussion of Question, "What is Free Energy"

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
generating power from the tether could potentially be an good way to do so -- a way that at least uses that kinetic energy, rather than just firing the thrusters backward to slow down.


Oddly enough, there are investigations into exactly that. Sometimes as a way to help other peoples' satellites fall out of orbit.




posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius
Force is power if you can harness it. ie. What creates force? There is talk it's gravity or magnetism, either way it is a form of energy that could be used.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Hmm free energy? . Its not a feature of our universe unless you can stop time



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam
Ah, your replies come from the collective conscious minds of modern scientists "it can't be done so don't even try looking". That answer is peurile in the extreme. If everyone believed that answer, nothing at all would have been discovered and we'd still be living in caves.
How many times has the scientific establishment said those words? Too many times to count. And been proved wrong many, many times over.
As for The Matrix, I was using that film as an allegory not as a film but as a concept for a system whereby an a small item giving off a small amount of energy could be collectivised to provide a usable amount.
As for the power of planets or stars, the objects are far off but the energy is all pervasive throughout the universe. Take quasars, black holes, how do we know what they are and what energy they give off? Because we can measure x rays, radio waves etc. This is power. We just have to find a way to harness it.
So, my last statement stands. there are a lot of very powerful people do not want free energy and they will do their damndest to make sure it never, ever happens.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
Take quasars, black holes, how do we know what they are and what energy they give off? Because we can measure x rays, radio waves etc. This is power. We just have to find a way to harness it.


Good grief, you really do not know much about how much power is received by a radio telescope measuring those things! Ever heard of the inverse-square law?



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Bedlam
Ah, your replies come from the collective conscious minds of modern scientists "it can't be done so don't even try looking". That answer is peurile in the extreme. If everyone believed that answer, nothing at all would have been discovered and we'd still be living in caves.
How many times has the scientific establishment said those words? Too many times to count. And been proved wrong many, many times over.


Other than in every matter regarding: conservation of energy, conservation of momentum, relativity, the Heisenberg-Bohr equation of motion, and the laws of thermodynamics in macroscopic systems.


edit on 27-11-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Magnetism is a consequence of polarity.


Magnetism is a consequence of moving electric charges (charge is an intrinsic property of some elementary particles), moving electric fields, and intrinsic magnetic properties of some elementary particles.

edit on 27-11-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2015 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence


Free energy is when we don't have a large corporations metering the energy we use.

Energy is basically all free.



posted on Nov, 27 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: Bedlam
Ah, your replies come from the collective conscious minds of modern scientists "it can't be done so don't even try looking". That answer is peurile in the extreme.


Puerile. If your putative energy source is a few hundred light years away, then, no, it can't be done.



If everyone believed that answer, nothing at all would have been discovered and we'd still be living in caves.


Who do you think has been doing all the discovering? Scientists and engineers. If we had to stop and rediscover basic basic physics over and over and over and over for every project, THAT'S when nothing would ever get done. By now, we have enough understanding that if someone says "hey , there's a bunch of STARS that are putting out energy!!!11! Let's somehow (miracle occurs here) harvest it!!11!", we know enough to say, "get back to me when you find a way to do it" and just ignore the time-wasting bits. Like that.

Trust me, if some scientist came up with a way, she'd be publishing so fast your head would spin.



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Tell me how long it takes to wear out a neodymium magnet without using heat. If you can't you are just painting black an elephant in a room with semantics.
Don't waste your time saying that they are not for free and there's an energy needed to put them into their "quantum state" and to freeze them in this state but how much? Show me the numbers.
edit on 28/11/2015 by PapagiorgioCZ because: grammar



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: machineintelligence

My definition of a "free energy device" would be a machine or system that either emits energy that can be absorbed and converted or a machine or system that you can tap for energy but requires no fuel to run it. That would mean little to no upkeep while powering your energy needs.

I personally don't believe in "free energy".



posted on Nov, 28 2015 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: SurfinUSA
a reply to: machineintelligence

My definition of a "free energy device" would be a machine or system that either emits energy that can be absorbed and converted or a machine or system that you can tap for energy but requires no fuel to run it. That would mean little to no upkeep while powering your energy needs.

I personally don't believe in "free energy".



Wasnt the topic what is free energy?!?!?
Not about devices...
And if you think OUTSIDE the monetary system
free energy IS POSSIBLE... Bad attitudes are
preventing it though...



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:02 AM
link   
well according to steven green its simply a device thats out of reach unless we give him more money.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: PapagiorgioCZ
Tell me how long it takes to wear out a neodymium magnet without using heat. If you can't you are just painting black an elephant in a room with semantics.
Don't waste your time saying that they are not for free and there's an energy needed to put them into their "quantum state" and to freeze them in this state but how much? Show me the numbers.
Your point being? What's that got to do with free energy?

Gravity doesn't "wear out", but that doesn't mean this RARenergia contraption will produce energy from gravity:



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I hope your first shot was rather promotional.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: PapagiorgioCZ

You're free to make sense whenever you're ready.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: PapagiorgioCZ
I hope your first shot was rather promotional.
So I ask you to explain your post and instead of explaining it, you make another post that's even more cryptic? This is a discussion board, where we discuss things, not a "post cryptic messages nobody can understand except me" board.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Funny. However if you hadn't understand why did you post a reply referring to gravity which has nothing in common with magnetic generators I was obviously referring to? I'm expecting most members to be at least familiar with this kind of devices using repulsive force of the magnets for rotational movement of a coil.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: PapagiorgioCZ
That was my guess, but whether the field is attraction of gravity or the repulsion of magnetism, you have the same problem: the net energy out of such a cyclical system is zero, less frictional losses. You may have less frictional losses with magnets than the gravity contraption, but that's the only advantage. The net energy out still can't exceed zero so it's not over-unity and not free energy. Do you have a working magnetic motor/generator and are you now off the grid from power supplied by it? If not, why not?



edit on 20151129 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I have no prototype but mainly because I'm lazy or busy not that my mind is blocked with any paradigma.
You seem to accept there are working prototypes so it will spare time. Now all we need is the numbers I asked for, don't we? You seem you need to have a theory before the experiment and your current theory prevents you from both the experiment and the new theory. Show me the numbers JUST to be sure even if your theory says it's useless.
How do you know the net energy can't exceed zero? Someone else told you so and you kinda enjoy being in this crowd. I'm talking in general so don't take it personaly. The same guys puzzle over the abundance of dark matter and dark energy. Can you have a closed system without counting the whole universe as the system? Is the universe closed system of given mass?
I'm ready to rewrite my books every morning. Are you? What if I told you that gravity is dualistic force as well as electromagnetism and that the "opposite vector" is their mysterious dark repelling force? You don't have a theory for this, no theoretical particle or equation but it doesn't mean it isn't exactly like this. However now I wished to put the experiment before the theory. That's what I wanted to say. Is anyone able to tell me the numbers? If not, why not?
Is it because the actual field strengths used in production is protected information? Or because their properties won't change for many decades so you have no way to know?
I think you need to stop thinking about the magnets as some kind of energy storage. Where is the equation? If you had to slow down a truck going downhill with electricity you'd need many kW. (Most likely enough kW to produce a new magnet)
With a magnetic/aluminium brake or even a common friction brake you spend only a few calories and gain only some heat from friction brakes. The magnets won't loose their properties after one hill. I don't see any equation here while breaking so why would I demanded any equation while accelerating?
edit on 30/11/2015 by PapagiorgioCZ because: grammar




top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join