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.

 

Free Energy - somebody prove it!

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


I think the hesitation in building all of this out is that it needs to be economically feasible. No one is going to pay a bunch extra for electric in a free market. I could see how you would hesitate on any of these. Like what if you build a wind farm and wind currents change and now you dont get the output you planned on. Or, what if you build a solar array now, but a year from now some guy builds one that is 2x efficient for the same cost or lower. Its kind of a catch 22. You want to invest in semi-mature tech but it cant mature if very few people buy it.




posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by yeahright
 


This is interesting. So lets say we put the pole this thing slides up and down on at a 45 degree angle. Then we get more distance at less depth, then does it become feasible. Probably not, but it was just a thought I wanted to throw out there.



Like it,that could be a way around it with the help of rollers so the tank does not get stuck or lose too much upward motion.I not really a scientific kind a guy just an ideas type of person.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Yeah you would definitely have to alleviate the friction as much as possible because its going to tend to want to grind into the pole when it is at an angle like that.

Also, you may not have to pump air in. Maybe you could just have a pump on the "ball" itself and let the pump suck out some of the water. I wouldnt think it would take much water removal before it wants to start floating.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by justsomeboreddude]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


I agree! Ideas are better than accusations, denial and apathy!
We need these ideas! Usually the investment is a one time thing.
While the costs are significant, the payoff is the promise of a future.
One not dictated by energy terrorists!



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Nothing wrong with some speculative thinking. That's the traditional point behind the old Lockheed Skunk Works, ya know.


Although it's not the same thing, you might find this info about Ocean thermal energy conversion interesting.

Tesla was all over that, too.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Well dont give up. No one is saying it isnt possible that you are correct. I think maybe you should find a way to test it on a small scale. You could create a "pole" with wiring inside and put magnets on the inside of the tank so as it slid up it would produce electricity I believe. It would only take a bit of air to get this thing to want to float up. It is worth a try.



Thanks for the advice, my weird sense of logic says it should work however I am not sure how much energy it would take to get even a slow stream of air say 500ft or more down.I was thinking more of constant trickle of air that would then mean that if you had many of these doughnut tanks on columns that one would always be either ascending or descending even though it may have taken a while to fill it with air.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 

Thanks for the reply! The costs are competitive actually.
Sorry but its a cop out. We are duped by big oil & big coal into
thinking we dont have a choice. The technology is there,
so is the money. The only thing lacking is the will to do it.
Let them make their money on plastics and tires.

How bout the money spent on a foolish war to secure more of
the very same thing that got us into trouble in the first place?

Round and round like a race track while the problems come faster....


[edit on 15-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


The thing is you may try it and fail but in failing you may learn some things that give you a better idea. Also, if you succeed the first time well then you just created one heck of an invention. Plus you will have some fun building it and testing it.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


I agree that the costs are getting closer every day. But we have to look at this through the eyes of an investor. If they can invest in technology that is proven over the last 50-100 years vs investing in technology that is on the cutting edge in most cases and these two methods yeild more or less the same return in the next 5 - 10 years then it is safer to invest in the old tech, because it is proven.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Yeah you would definitely have to alleviate the friction as much as possible because its going to tend to want to grind into the pole when it is at an angle like that.

Also, you may not have to pump air in. Maybe you could just have a pump on the "ball" itself and let the pump suck out some of the water. I wouldnt think it would take much water removal before it wants to start floating.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by justsomeboreddude]



Again great idea about having an "in tank pump".There has got to be some math that would prove this one way or the other.I am out for a beer with some pals in a few mins so will tap their brains on this too.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


I'm not sure one can prove what you seek. Surely you understand that IF such a device existed, it would either have been mass produced making the owner filthy rich or, yes, supressed making the supressor filthy rich.

There are pleny of concepts and people trying to achieve this, but I have yet to hear of *the* breakthrough. I'm not sure our technology is advanced enough as of yet.

That being said, I believe Tesla was on to something....



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 

I agree in some instances. However with proper testing
I would have to say it would be worth investing in the new regardless.
Could you imagine what kind of free energy advances we could make
with oil company profits alone? In just one year?
If they put as much money into it as they do on advertising,
we would already have free energy machines.
Have you ever seen "who killed the electric car?"
Thanks again for the reply! Good job on the thread!


Edit to add: another plus for panels, they been in use awhile AND have proven themselves dependable, safe and they produce reliable,(free after initial investment)power!


[edit on 15-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


I agree that our technology is probably not advanced enough yet in regards to what I call the mythical free energy.

My question is if Tesla was even close to something, why in the last 50 years hasnt someone taken his work and ran with it to create something that works?



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


I will say it more clear.
Because it is not in the best interests of the current energy status quo!
Is this a long enough post? I mean you do understand were I'm coming from right?
Do you know what the American Petroleum Institute is?
Just a question, I'm curious how many are even aware of it(propaganda).


[edit on 15-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


Thanks for you kind comments. I do agree that it MAY be a good idea to start increasing the scale and number of these types of alternative energy sources.. wind, solar, wave, etc.. This appears to be happening to some degree on its own. I still expect that the people that build these will want to make a profit. They will still have to advertise etc.. Not sure why, because I am not sure why they advertise now.
I never bought gas for my car or electric for my house because of some great commercial.

From what I see the venture capital firms are getting involved so that mean progress should pick up pace. Probably another few years of product development and then it becomes increasingly feasible to build out this stuff.

As far as solar panels go, they work and have been tested. However, I think they are starting to make some leaps in efficiency of these and that is what the big dogs are waiting for.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by dodadoom
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


I will say it more clear.
Because it is not in the best interests of the current energy status quo!
Is this a long enough post? I mean you do understand were I'm coming from right? Do you know what the American Petroleum Institute is?


Well it can be, because these companies could view themselves as energy providers and invest in other methods to produce energy. In the modern era, business models get flipped upside down all the time. So its hard to imagine that these companies could or would want to hold back a trully revolutionary idea. They could just as easily find a way to increase profits from it.

A good example of this is the digital picture industry vs. the paper picture industry. Kodak, Polaroid, and others may have tried to stall digital picture tech but the idea was so good it became very popular very fast. I am sure it was painful for Kodak and Polaroid but they really had no choice because the market had mades its choice. Now Kodak is learning to profit from the new model. I think Polaroid may have gave up the ghost, but I cant remember.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by justsomeboreddude]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Thanks to everyone for posting. Sorry to the ones I didnt personally thank. This is a very interesting discussion and I have learned a lot from eveyrones posts.



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
 


I think you're right!

The advertising is just to keep it in your subconscious.
Just keep letting us provide you with what we think you need.........

I try to not be skeptical but man you only gotsta turn over a few rocks
in the world to find some ugly snakes.

People(in control and otherwise)will stop at nothing to enable the rich to make even more, it seems. In other words. Paid for by the working class.
Its always always about money first, period, before ANYTHING else is even considered! That explains more than just this!
Thanks for the room! Sorry if I veered off topic, or did I?......



[edit on 15-4-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 

My question is if Tesla was even close to something, why in the last 50 years hasnt someone taken his work and ran with it to create something that works?


That's precisely what happened! The government took a great deal of his work immediately after he died and THEY ran with it.


Think electrogravitics.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Freenrgy2]



posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   
I'm surprised no one brought up the Steven Mark's TPU device yet.



This guy has produced a number of different videos demonstrating his TPUs (Toroidal Power Units) in action, handling all kinds of loads from light bulbs to power drills and vacuum cleaners..

A few things to note on this posted vid, some of it has been cut to make it shorter, the tables are clear glass, the device makes high pitched noises as he puts them down on it.

His videos have been highly discussed over the past years, many attempts have been made at duplicating them, but i dont remember it ever being debunked.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join