It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Then, by all means - use your knowledge of the extra-box to transcend our boxy existence.
This, honestly, is why the average person should not be allowed to think. It is not that they are incapable of occasionally being 'right' - it is that they feel their insignificant views are somehow absolute. Animals, as I have said before, need to learn their place.
The universe is many billions of years of -continued- motion. This is different from -perpetual- motion. Within the universe, solar system, etc; there has, to this date, only been evidence of conserved motion. Planetary orbits slowly degrade as planets exchange energy through tidal interactions and viscous friction of the materials composing those bodies. Those planets eventually end up as part of the central body - thereby behaving according to the known laws of entropy.
Uninterrupted? Where the hell did the craters on the moon come from? What do you call the tidal forces acting on our planet? How about the moon's orbit - gradually receding from our planet as it will be doomed to be 'pulled' into the sun?
You claim that existing laws of science are both arrogant and incorrect while supporting the same failed concepts and ideas with a blind fervor. This displays a startling amount of self-ignorance by being incapable of recognizing your own arrogance.
Even I - wielding a monstrous intellect backed by a nearly infallible memory, recognize my own incomplete perspective and take the time to poke humor at my own inconsistencies and vulnerabilities. I routinely assail my own opinions (sometimes openly - creating for a quite interesting display of schizophrenia) and develop multiple theories for any given phenomena.
Originally posted by trollz
This guy is gonna get assassinated.
It will never be allowed into production and circulation.
Everyone, "acquire" this video and spread the knowledge. Firefox has certain uh... Addons that allow you special controls over various web content, if you catch my drift.
I already have but it seems to have gone right over your head...
And apparently you have not learned your place since you are obviously having trouble thinking...
Perhaps you can explain the difference of billions of years of continual motion compared to perpetual motion and provide some evidence of degrading orbits etc?
A world at rest at distance infinity has escape velocity. The kinetic energy of a world going at escape velocity is equal to the potential energy lost because of being close to a sun. Since the kinetic energy of escape velocity is twice that of a circular orbit, and the kinetic energy required for a circular orbit approaches infinity as distance goes to zero, we see that the maximum potential energy that can be lost is infinite. Potential energy has to be measured as a negative quantity, with zero being the potential energy of a world at rest at distance infinity.
The potential energy between two worlds is -mass1*mass2/distance1,2. (The potential energy between n particles is the same formula for all particles i,j where i is not j). The kinetic energy energy of two particles is 0.5*mass1*velocity12 + 0.5*mass2*velocity22. Total energy is kinetic plus potential energy.
The total energy of a system remains constant. Momentum is conserved. Angular momentum about the center of gravity is also conserved.
Since the earth and its oceans are continuously deformed by the tides of the moon and sun, the earth's rotation is also being slowed. Each century, the day increases by about 3 milliseconds. This seems small, but over 100 million years (not long in geological time), the day will increase by about an hour.
The tidal forces on an orbiting body slowly change the character of the orbit. For example, assume an orbiting moon which is also rotating about an axis perpendicular to the orbital plane. The tidal force stretches the moon along the line joining it with the planet, and then that stretching relaxes as that diameter rotates away from the line. There is frictional resistance to the stretching, and energy is dissipated to heat in the stretching and in the relaxing of the deformation, gradually taking energy away from the rotating system.
Ceasing their motion would be an interruption. When has their motion stopped? You guys are really reaching and creating false arguments to try and discredit the simple facts. As for being pulled into the Sun that is speculation. Orbits can change slightly over billions of years but that does not prove they will end up in the sun.
The height of arrogance is calling someone ignorant based on something you claim they said and not even being correct about what was actually said.
Do you think your fickle words are all that is necessary to obfuscate your beliefs? Take the resources I have given you and apply them. Then, you will understand that you have been refusing to understand.
I see no point in continuing the discussion since you refuse to see outside your box and continue to stroke your limitations by reviewing data that only reinforces the walls of your box/
When ever I ask you a question you just hand me your box and claim these are the answers and you use your box as the the reference for you answers.
It called circular reasoning of course you won't agree and think me mad for you think your box holds all the answers so good luck and one day you will break out of the box believe it or not.
Thanks but why would i want to revisit a box I broke out of long ago.
Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by president
There is a fuel sorce, GRAVITY, and a secondary fuel source, MAGNETISM.
Perhaps you could explain how gravity is a viable "fuel."
Because, from where I stand, gravity is not even a force. It is an entropic principle. When I throw a ball into the air, it occupies a position allowed by its vector and velocity (technically, a vector includes velocity - but I'll separate the two for the common man's sake). Since I am He Man - the ball will, of course, go into orbit when I throw it. The elevation and characteristics of that orbit depend entirely upon how much energy is put into accelerating that ball.
This is the same any time you lift an object. It is occupying a new energy state. In order to extract energy from an object utilizing gravity, you must lower its energy state, whereby it will shed all or a portion of its energy, assuming a different position based on the energy it has.
Magnetism is not much different. When dealing with permanent magnets, their function is more entropic than it is anything else. Any object attracted to a magnet will require energy to increase the separation from that magnet. Further, permanent magnets tend to have their magnetic properties weaken as they are exposed to like-poles. It is, at least in theory, possible to create "perpetual" magnet arrangements that will never find an equilibrium and end up causing the magnets to de-magnetise - effectively drawing the energy they do generate from the energy used to create the magnet in the first place (using it as a form of battery).
I do recall a device that was talked about a few years back that was an arrangement of magnets along a disk. It was -claimed- that the disk would cool down while the device was in operation, and there were some theories floating around about how the interaction of the magnetic fields would somehow create a zero-point reference at the subatomic level, allowing the device to be powered from volumetric/radiant heat sources.
If that, truly, is what the device was doing - then it would be quite phenomenal - but I believe the claims were over-hyped, and I haven't seen mention of the device since (it could be built for under $1,000 - depending upon how elaborate you wanted to get). The thing is - there is no such thing as a "permanent fuel" - even a zero-point machine is limited to the density of energy existing above the zero-point reference.
What you have to ask is, what is the source of the energy used to create the mechanical motion?
Originally posted by mhc_70
If you look at all forms of energy they all have a source , except mechanical energy, science says we can only covert other forms of energy into mechanical energy, it has no source. Could it be that putiing air, water and solid objects in motion is the source of mechanical energy ?
Originally posted by primoaurelius
Originally posted by playswithmachines
reply to post by blah yada
"Backyard inventors are the scourge of the nation"
You mean people like the Wright brothers, Baird, Benz, Edison, Tesla, Faraday, Curie, Harvey, Newton,Hubble, Marconi, Pasteur, Sinclair,Gates,Thompson, Brunel, etc, etc......
thank you for putting this, because if you didn't, i certainly would have. ive seen some wacky mad scientist looking inventors here in america that have come up with amazing inventions. backyard inventors are what made us what we are, human ingenuity is inside us all, and backyard inventions are the beginnings of some of our greatest achievements. not just physical inventions either, amateur astronomers and physicists creating and finding new ways and theories too look at the world. from a cave man making a knife out of rocks, to franklin and his seemingly casual kite flying experiment, or Galileo inventing his telescope to newton inventing modern physics. an inventor is an inventor regardless of where he works or what his qualifications are. a good idea is a good idea, period. just because an inventor has long wild hair doesn't mean he shouldn't have a chance to explain his invention. i saw a story not too long ago about a guy who invented this thing that was basically a trashcan that vaporized whatever was put into it, it shot a HUGE amount of electricity into it and it apparently vaporizes competely the stuff inside, and the guy looked like a straight up mad scientist, so it took him a while to get people to take him seriously. just goes to show that you dont need to be a certified scientist to make and contribute to humanity's scientific development.
Originally posted by Raelsatu
So far I'm not too impressed, primarily because the name throws things off. Alpha Omega Galaxy generator? Seriously? That name would be deserving if he made a generator that could tap into space-time and siphon 'infinite' energy or something else revolutionary. Putting some magnets onto a fan...sorry, but change the name. Anyway, Rossi's energy catalyzer is far more impressive and so far seems to be the real deal. He also gave it a humble title.
Originally posted by choppedbrisket
Could it be that the wobble of the machine is integral in it's performance?