It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Frosty's Three Laws of Fraudulent Perpetual and Free-Energy Machines

page: 2
0
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 02:07 PM

Originally posted by kungfoo
Anyway, the second law is an approximation, and has been broken, rendering it obsolete (as a law, not as a statistical measurement).

The Law IS based on statistics.

Therefore, the fact that it is possible to isolate a small enough sample that does not follow the law does not invalidate the law.

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 02:58 PM
Ho hum...here we go again.

regarding the first law:

"The law states that the total inflow of energy into a system must equal the total outflow of energy from the system"

OK, when perpetual machines are spoken about, the "critics" knock perpetual machines based on the FACT of a closed system...and here, they are 100% right - you CANNOT get more energy out of a closed "system" than you put in.

Considering that 99.9% of "perpetual machines" operate in a simulated closed system, they are right. What I mean here is that the supposed claims regarding a "perpetual machine" are not "interacting" with the environment, per se.

Now, if you interact with the environment (be it ZPE, the "ether" or whatever), you are operating in an OPEN system and perpetual motion (in terms of something that keeps going) CAN exist (well, until the universe blows up and, well, it's a completely different ball game then)

Therefore, the first law should read something like:

"The law states that the total inflow of energy into a closed system must equal the total outflow of energy from the system"

For more information about open and closed systems and how some of our current "laws" of physics are flawed, see:

www.cheniere.org...

Cheers

JS

[edit on 7-9-2005 by jumpspace]

posted on Sep, 7 2005 @ 03:53 PM
It's not very difficult to understand that perpetual motion machines will never work. All one needs to understand is the 3 laws of thermodynamics.

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 12:38 AM
I've argued this topic before on ATS several months ago. The point I tried to make was that free energy and perpetual motion are not necessarily related to one another.

It all comes down what your definition of "free energy" is. If you speak of "free energy," as in, energy that has no source, obviously this type is unobtainable.

If you look at it another way; Can energy be obtained from our medium without the consumption of resources, other than those used to create the energy extraction means? The answer is yes. Solar power, hydroelectric systems, wind turbines are all examples of it.

This is exactly what Tesla was trying to do. He was trying to extract energy from the ambient medium in the most efficient way possible.

Tesla's first "free energy" device was nothing more than a bunch of magnifying glasses and mirrors heating water using the Sun's energy. There's nothing mysterious about this.

Tesla's radiant energy device has never been validated or debunked, but it too is simply a solar energy device. The idea is that cosmic rays from the Sun that ionize the upper atmosphere can be turned into useable electricity, in a similar way to which the photoelectric effect produces electricity.

There's a point where energy extraction from the medium could be so efficient that it might almost be considered "free." It's certainly not perpertual though.

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 03:00 AM
Just to disagree with Frosty
:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is linked with the concept of irreversibility. If you have a certain quantity of gas it will spread uniformly across a volume. Suppose that we separate this volume in two parts. We want to push all the molecules into one part (hot), leaving a void in the other part (cold).
The second law states: "no device operating in a cycle can transfer heat from a cold to a hot body". Therefore this can't be done.
So far, so good.
But, if ever we find a way of directly manipulating quantum waves (remember that the quantum wave is a very real object, not just a mathematical fiction) then we could make certain situations reversible. We could shape the wave so that the gas could have only certain spatial distributions, which would violate the 2nd law. I am no physicist and don't know if this is possible, but it would be nice.

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 03:01 AM

Originally posted by Raideur
Hail the Law of Conservation of Energy!
Debunker of more crap than any other statement in the history of man!

Conservation of Energy is only useful if you understand all the other physics within a device.

nothing can go forever, the universe is going to burnout someday.

Forever doesn't really exsist, All there is, is this thing were stuck in called "now". Imagine life if you were able to perceive time like you perceive lxwxh.

He has claimed in his book that he has patents in countries all around the world, except the US. He has spent over 1 million dollars trying to patent his machine in the US.

he has been "almost" ready to release his machine for about 10 years. this guy is a complete idiot, there is a movie on the internet where he had an interview on the discovery channel. During the presentation, he asked for questions, someone asked a question he couldnt answer and he got mad and threw them out of the room (forcefully). Then he gets on to do the tv interview, and speaks complete giberish. 100% fraud.

How the heck would a big bang theory explain where matter came from.

I heard a theory that the big bang was actually a war between matter (in its purest, raw positive energy form) and anti-matter (in its purest negative form). Energy won, because there was more of it (this is where the theory gets vague).

I've argued this topic before on ATS several months ago. The point I tried to make was that free energy and perpetual motion are not necessarily related to one another.

Ahmen. Perpetual motion is a fraud. Free energy is anything but, its just converting what exists naturally into usable form. I bet 200 years ago they would've thought that solar panels were magical!

Tesla's radiant energy device has never been validated or debunked, but it too is simply a solar energy device. The idea is that cosmic rays from the Sun that ionize the upper atmosphere can be turned into useable electricity, in a similar way to which the photoelectric effect produces electricity.

There's a point where energy extraction from the medium could be so efficient that it might almost be considered "free." It's certainly not perpertual though.

Cosmic waves, gamma waves, radio waves, light waves, x-ray waves, etc. Imagine if you had a device that could convert all those wavelengths into usable 60hz AC. You'd effectivly have yourself a black hole. I'm suprised i havent heard more about the casmir effect in "free energy" circles.

There is one thing i would like to note while you all are tossing about theories at each other. Just because something seems to "break" one law of physics doesn't mean that it cant be explained by another. Black holes as described by stephen hawking defy a few laws of physics, but the "breaking" of the laws was explained with quatum theory. To give a brief overview, he figured out using quatum theory that black holes actually emit clouds of quatum particles, which eventually leave the black hole massless and it disintigrates. Scientists argued this was impossible due to the overwhelming gravitation field. Stephen hawking was the first person to ever (and only i believe) to united quatum theory and em theory. This opens up a whole new realm of possibilites.

So, just because something might break the law of thermodynamics, or whatever law. It doesnt mean that it cant be explained with another theory that works hand in hand with the theory in question.

[edit on 8-9-2005 by senseless04]

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 06:10 PM
senseless04:

Don't know if u know this, but Henry T. Moray invented a device that converted cosmic rays ( between 8 and 10 MHz) to 60Hz "waves" that powered lights. Apparently the lights gave off a different light than normal.

He effectively created a horizontal antenna, around 30' off the ground and 300' in length (or thereabouts) that used the ground as a reflector. He then "tuned" his device so that he created a resonant standing wave and then stepped down the standing wave of around 10 MHz down to 60 Hz.

He had a special device that did this too and I've been doing research on this tech. for quite some time...it's amazing how easy it is really. You have to do a bit of reading, however Moray gives lots of cryptic hints on his notes.

One thing I found out is that when he initially sets up the standing wave, he used a large horseshoe magnet that transmits a wave from his antenna that effectively "triggers" the standing 10 MHz wave.

Good luck with it if you're interested going in that direction. As far as I'm concered, this is one of the easiest ways to generate "free" energy from the environment.

Cheers

JS

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 06:45 PM
I have been thinking about such things. If we put a magnetically levitated rod (I KNOW it can be done I have seen it being done) or top (like the Levitron) and made it magnetically levitate, put it into an opaque vacuum chamber and then had it in outer space where no magnetic or gravitic forces could act on it... Wouldn't that work?
I am no expert for sure and there are probably forces that act upon it anyway.... But that would be pretty close, wouldn't it?

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 07:18 PM

Originally posted by Darkpr0
I have been thinking about such things. If we put a magnetically levitated rod (I KNOW it can be done I have seen it being done) or top (like the Levitron) and made it magnetically levitate, put it into an opaque vacuum chamber and then had it in outer space where no magnetic or gravitic forces could act on it... Wouldn't that work?
I am no expert for sure and there are probably forces that act upon it anyway.... But that would be pretty close, wouldn't it?

The sun, the earth and the moon would all effect it. I'm not sure what the point of such a device would be.

If you're looking to go to space to collect energy, all one would have to do is drag a 2 mile long cable through space behind a sat. The movement of the sat around the planet would generate a pretty large current in the wire. You'd then tap the current to a microwave transmitter or some other such transmitter, which would be received and converted to energy back on the ground. Nasa did an experiment with this awhile ago, (1997 or 98 i believe) when they deployed the line, it charged up to several hundred thousand volts and became red hot. They had to cut the line for fear of losing the sat.

Henry moray is like tesla, whatever he may have done is pretty much lost. ALl we have is what has been passed on from person to person in notes and books. Cosmic rays are deflected by our atmosphere, if they werent we'd all be dead. I haven't read up too much on moray though, i just know he invented the moray generator and some pretty sweet capacitor banks. I'm sure within the next 10 years or so we'll find answers to our current problems.

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 09:03 PM
senslesso4:

Um, I thought I'd let you know that all cosmic rays aren't reflected.

Here's a VERY interesting article, based on my previous comment:

home.netcom.com...

Cheers

JS

posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 01:23 AM
I usually don't agree with yayo but hes right in this case, it did seem like you guys were laying on alot of skeptisiam regarding a device ever being built. I like skeptisiam, but not when it turns into absoloutes regarding technology and the future.

The laws we currently have in place, are perceptions. Some have stood for along time, and some which we though would never fall; fell.

Were moving ahead, and faster everyday. A device of this type is not impossible just improbable.

posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 01:51 AM

Originally posted by jumpspace
Um, I thought I'd let you know that all cosmic rays aren't reflected.
Here's a VERY interesting article, based on my previous comment:
home.netcom.com...

www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov...

We're both right.

What sort of particles are these? On the ground one rarely encounters the "primary" cosmic rays, because they generally collide high in the atmosphere and all we get below is a shower of very fast fragments.
....
Those energies are indeed huge. The atmosphere shields us from cosmic rays about as effectively as a 13-foot layer of concrete, yet a large proportion of cosmic ray particles manages to send fragments all the way through it. Some have much, much higher energies, though as one goes up in energy, the numbers drop drastically.
....

Heres what produces them.

imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...

...

After a little more reading i found that severe lightning storms also produce gamma ray (low end cosmic ray) bursts, which is weird to say the least. One day we're all going to go to sleep, wake up in the morning, and everything around us is going to be incinerated.

[edit on 9-9-2005 by senseless04]

posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 07:01 PM

Originally posted by jumpspace
Don't know if u know this, but Henry T. Moray invented a device that converted cosmic rays ( between 8 and 10 MHz) to 60Hz "waves" that powered lights. Apparently the lights gave off a different light than normal.

...

Good luck with it if you're interested going in that direction. As far as I'm concered, this is one of the easiest ways to generate "free" energy from the environment.

Cosmic rays and gamma rays are electromagnetic waves that HAVE energy, and lots of it. In this experiment, the already existing energy in those waves was captured and brought into the electrical system.

So, in essence, instead of using a battery, he used another natural energy source. You could get the same effect from using a river to power a wheel that turns a generator. It's the same thing, except one form of energy is electromagnetic and the other is mechanical.

So it's "free" in the sense that you are not paying money for it. The energy, however, is being taken from one form to another.

posted on May, 22 2012 @ 11:45 PM
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

new topics

top topics

0