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

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaleshchand

Oh yeah let me see ALL the OIL companies (BP, Shell, etc) ALL the worlds electricity companies having those huge dams and whatnot, All the nuclear energy companies, are all simply going to close shop and lose the BILLOINS of dollars/year profit. I think not.


Why not think this through a bit? Let's start out with the idea that there is a free lunch and that these free energy devices can be built. Do you honestly think the oil companies and electricity companies would just disappear overnight? Do you think that suddenly no one would need oil, that evryone would instantly get another automobile with a free energy engine, that everyone could easily afford a free energy device which would instantly be delivered to their door?

It would take decades to switch to a completely new infrastructure and it would not result in no demand for oil, which is used for a whole lot more than just energy production. The devices themselves would have to be manufactured, installed, and serviced. They would be built by companies that have to make a profit. There's plenty of opportunity for companies to switch in an orderly manner.

Now we get to the crux of the matter. There are over 6 billion people on the planet. Plans for these devices are all over the Internet. Tesla's patents, among many others, are freely available. There are any number of places where these ideas are freely discussed in depth. The rewards for making one of these things actually work would be huge. It's an attractive thing for someone to pursue and could be done in secrecy without attracting attention until it was working.

Yet no one has managed to do it. All we have are people like Greer who say that Real Soon Now, as soon as you invest a few million dollars more, we'll have these devices. yet year after year after year nothing happens. Nothing. It's always just around the corner, just out of sight.

So maybe, just maybe, you cannot violate the laws of physics with impunuity. Maybe, just maybe, there's no such thing as a 'zero point energy device.' Maybe, just maybe, the fraud is with these so-called devices, not the oil companies. Maybe, just maybe, "free energy" is an oxymoron.




posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I starred your post because you bring up great points. And to add to that:

People forget how many products are made from petroleum, a large amount of chemicals used in industry, not too mention every kind of plastic there is.



posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
Yet no one has managed to do it. All we have are people like Greer who say that Real Soon Now, as soon as you invest a few million dollars more, we'll have these devices. yet year after year after year nothing happens. Nothing. It's always just around the corner, just out of sight.


How do you know that no one has managed to do it?

What if there are devices that do work but mustering the requisite funding, security, media support, support from the scientific community, governments and industrialists is a lot harder than people think?



posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
If any of you do invent... discover... etc... any brilliant energy device... system.. whatnot... Remember this Golden Rule.... Be very very wise and clever.... and MAKE it PUBLIC DOMAIN. The want of money bewilders some... but giving something FREE bewilders this thread. lol



posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by laslidealist
reply to post by bhornbuckle75
 


Please research the American coup of 1933 and General Smedley Butler (5 star general) and you might change your mind and see it is true.
This is indeed fact and he names those involved and wrote a book called "War is a racket"
Those names just so happen to be Rothchild, JP Morgan, Dupont, Chase, etc.
This man is very real and his story is very real.
Also please research about Prescott Bush and his ties with Thyssen and to Hitler.
To deny this is to deny the truth.

I am well familiar with all of those stories, so I have no need to research any of it, but thank you for the suggestion. These are all links to a conspiracy that worked to install a fascist government in America. These people are all AMERICAN FASCIST THEMS....and although their conspiracies were not necessarily connected one to another, I would go so far as to say that they succeded to a large degree by first gradually changing America from a Democratic Nation to a Capitalistic one...and then by slowly subverting the ideas behind Capitalism. What you fail to realize is that there are also COMMUNIST THEMS, RADICAL ISLAMIC THEMS, CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALIST THEMS, CAPITALISTIC COMMUNIST THEMS (China), etc, etc, into infinity.


"Yes, there is a conspiracy, in fact there are a great number of conspiracies that are all tripping each other up. And all of those conspiracies are run by paranoid fantasists and ham-fisted clowns...


The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy or the grey aliens or the 12 foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control. The truth is more frightening, nobody is in control. The world is rudderless."
The Mindscape of Alan Moore (2003)



posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Well, aren't you a silly boy?

Trying to interject logic and reason into an ATS conspiracy thread, I mean REALLY!



posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
The electrons in the molecules of rock formations have been spinning steadily for millions of years without stopping - at what point will you agree that they are in perpetual motion? So, why don't electrons run out of energy and just slow down to a standstill


Because there is no lower energy state they can transition to. It is not possible to have a spin 0 electron.

You know, Neils Bohr solved this problem in the 1910's.

Energy is not really the problem, entropy is the problem. We need cheap lack of entropy.
edit on 16-4-2011 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-4-2011 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   


The electrons in the molecules of rock formations have been spinning steadily for millions of years without stopping - at what point will you agree that they are in perpetual motion?

Yes, and planets have been spinning around stars for millions of years.

But perpetual motion is not free energy!!! Perpetual motion is a direct consequence of momentum and energy conservation. As long as no work is done on a body it will move or rest perpetually.
edit on 16-4-2011 by moebius because: typo



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Okay, I might as well end this argument.

Why we haven't had any of these sent out into mass production is because of two things: Money and Power. Some people say, "Hey we have a free lunch!" and everyone flocks around them. while others say "Hey I have the best fuel there is!" and they pay their way in.

These Free Energy sources, are free because you have two choices in front of you: the first one being that you build one and get beaten on those in power along with threatened by them or the second thing is you don't do a thing and you join the mindless/smart people who pay their way in for energy. So there you have it, one group has just plain smarts but are beaten on while the other group are mindless or smart and pay their way through.

I'll state my ground, I am slowly getting to the point where I don't have to pay one more cent to those who want power, because I take it away from them slowly. How? I don't need to tell you nor want to.
edit on 17-4-2011 by FreedomCommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


No one?

You've obviously missed ALL the buzz about cold fusion from Italy then.

Here's a link to a thread talking about the latest developments.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And a quote from the thread (by Discl0sur3)



"The evidence in support of Andrea Rossi's "cold fusion" or "LENR" (low energy nuclear reaction) based Energy Catalyzer continues to grow. For those who are not aware, his system combines nickel powder, hydrogen gas, and an input of pressure and heat to produce a large output of thermal energy. On March 29th, 2011 yet another test of the technology was performed at the University of Bologna. Like previous tests, the outcome was a complete success. However, this time a smaller version of the E-Cat was tested and two new observers were present.

Some well known players were present during the test. These include Andrea Rossi (the inventor of the E-Cat), Professor Sergio Focardi, Dr. David Bianchini, and of course Dr. Giuseppe Levi. Two guest observers were also present. One of the guest observers was Hanno Essen, associate professor of theoretical physics at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology. He is also the chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society. The other guest observer was Professor Sven Kullander of Uppsala University. He is also chairman of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Energy Committee."


It's one thing to genuinely believe that this technology couldn't possibly exist, it's another to do the oil industries dirty propaganda work for them. Whether parroting 'tried and tested pro oil propaganda', is done consciously or through ignorance, the end result is the same...propagation of ignorance and suppression of energy advancement.

Don't be a parrot mate, there are plenty of devices that i feel are going to be coming on line very soon...this Rossi Cold Fusion is just one avenue of research among many others.

Oils days are well and truly numbered...thankfully.






edit on 17/4/2011 by spikey because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by schuyler
 


I starred your post because you bring up great points. And to add to that:

People forget how many products are made from petroleum, a large amount of chemicals used in industry, not too mention every kind of plastic there is.



Over 100 years ago, Henry Ford built his 'Model T' from plastic panels made from HEMP...not oil.
(HIGH quality plastics i might add, that offered superior performance, cheaper production costs, and were biodegradable to boot)

Even the first cars to be invented didn't use petroleum, they were ELECTRIC...but were killed off by the early Oil industry...surprise, surprise.

Yes, Oil is used widely in production of many goods, but can EASILY be replaced entirely by natural, non polluting and cheap, sources such as HEMP.


edit on 17/4/2011 by spikey because: added info



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 




Over 100 years ago, Henry Ford built his 'Model T' from plastic panels made from HEMP...not oil. (HIGH quality plastics i might add, that offered superior performance, cheaper production costs, and were biodegradable to boot)


Ford's "Hemp car" was built 100 years ago? Quick Link. There is more comprehensive information out there but I am just posting this so you can get an idea.

Now, the funny thing is that we are supposed to believe free energy is being suppressed, but someone suppressed Henry Ford in his efforts to release new stuff to? Is he the good guy or bad guy?

These stupid conspiracies have taken things so far out of context they don't resemble reality.




Even the first cars to be invented didn't use petroleum, they were ELECTRIC...but were killed off by the early Oil industry...surprise, surprise.


Surprise surprise they used something more reliable.... Henry Ford must have been in on it... erm... no, he was working on new stuff to, he must have been fighting it... uh...


edit on 17-4-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by bhornbuckle75
 


Yes i totally agree that there are several agendas and no i don't buy into the alien or reptilian agendas as right now man's agenda is what's here and now.
I perhaps did not detail the intent of my reply to reflect that.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


True the plastic was made from HEMP and not petroleum oil... But Hemp is an oil plant and the plastics made from it are from the OIL... Just to clarify things a little. The reason HEMP was made illegal was EXACTLY because of this. Hemp was / is a competitive model for Petroleum.

Great Post Man.... a star



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Serafine
 



Great Post Man.... a star
Why would you commend someone on a post where they say:



Over 100 years ago, Henry Ford built his 'Model T' from plastic panels made from HEMP...not oil.


and in the following post information was posted that is sourced from hemp.com, which says:



The car was exhibited at Dearborn Days in 1941. It was also trucked to the Michigan State Fair Grounds for display later that year.


I mean, if anyone was to boast the greatness of Hemp, you would think it would be hemp.com, no?


One article claims that they were made from a chemical formula that, among many other ingredients, included soybeans, wheat, hemp, flax and ramie; while the man who was instrumental in creating the car, Lowell E. Overly, claims it was “…soybean fiber in a phenolic resin with formaldehyde used in the impregnation” (Davis, 51).





posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by laslidealist
 


No problem...sounds like we probably agree, more or less then.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 





In the 1910s, Henry Ford tried experimenting with using agricultural products in the manufacture of his automobiles, encouraged by 3 main factors; trying to find a use for the huge food surplus at the time, trying to find an alternative to using metal which was in shortage at the time, and he also said that the plastic body was safer that a steel body, and that it would be difficult for it to be crushed.[5]

He initially hired a member of the Ford Styling Department, Eugene "Bob" Gregorie;[6] however Ford was not fully satisfied with his work, so the task was given to the Soybean Laboratory in Greenfield Village.[5] He was also helped by a chemist, Robert A. Boyer in trying to find the perfect mixture of materials for the body.[7] Finally, they came up with the perfect solution.

The frame of the car was made of tubular steel, and had 14 plastic panels attached to it. The exact formula of the car is still unknown; however one article claims that they were made from soybean, hemp, wheat and flax, amongst other chemicals.


Link: en.wikipedia.org...

The natural fibre composite plastic panels were being experimented with, as you can plainly see, in the 1910's...which is around 100 years ago.

The same article goes on to say the car with the plastics that incorporated Hemp fibre among other fibrous materials was not put on display *until* 1941...not manufactured in 1941.

I would assume 'Hemp.com' doesn't bleat on and on about the Model Ford incorporating Hemp, as it was a long time ago, not exclusively made from hemp alone, and there are far more innovative products and materials that can be made *exclusively* from hemp materials today. If it bothers you, perhaps you could ask them why yourself.

The key point here, which i suspect you know and are, for some reason avoiding, is that the plastics used 100 years ago, were made from a composite natural fibre, and not petrochemicals.

The early electric cars, as are modern electric cars, are almost twice as efficient in terms of energy use than petroleum cars are.

A ICE is between 20-30% efficient in it's fuel use...this means between 70 - 80% of every gallon of fuel is wasted as heat and unburned fuel.

An electric powered vehicle, while still requiring mainly fossil fuels to generate the electricity needed to recharge the batteries, has an efficiency of 25-50%...it doesn't take a genius to work out which is more efficient in terms of fuel use.

Still no positive posts from you i notice boncho...you on a bit of a downer or are you always negative?



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 


Simple. Take your entire street off the grid. Your neighbours would love you for it and it would be a deal clincher as far as proving the concept. Problem is, it doesn't exist...



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by alfa1
[
It's one thing to genuinely believe that this technology couldn't possibly exist, it's another to do the oil industries dirty propaganda work for them. Whether parroting 'tried and tested pro oil propaganda', is done consciously or through ignorance, the end result is the same...propagation of ignorance and suppression of energy advancement.

Don't be a parrot mate, there are plenty of devices that i feel are going to be coming on line very soon...this Rossi Cold Fusion is just one avenue of research among many others.

Oils days are well and truly numbered...thankfully.


They've been "numbered" for decades., except nothing ever comes from it. Do you honestly think that if "free/zero point energy" existed, it would be resigned to the domain of crackpot pseudo-scientists and snake oil salesmen? Why is it ALWAYS people with extremely questionable practices (faking credentials/institution affiliations/papers etc.) touting this stuff? Surely that should be a big red warning light, no? Why are no legitimate scientists verifying these wild claims?



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 




A ICE is between 20-30% efficient in it's fuel use...this means between 70 - 80% of every gallon of fuel is wasted as heat and unburned fuel.

An electric powered vehicle, while still requiring mainly fossil fuels to generate the electricity needed to recharge the batteries, has an efficiency of 25-50%...it doesn't take a genius to work out which is more efficient in terms of fuel use


Would you like to explain how you got the 25-50% efficiency for the EV's? And how it is any better than current models.

edit on 25-4-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join