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.
originally posted by: charlyv
"Limitless" is a word that does not belong in the description of any closed system, otherwise it invokes the Perpetual Motion dogma, where the Laws of Thermodynamics forbid it.
Friction = Heat = Resistance = Loss.
The theory is cool, but it needs to be explained outside of the "something for nothing" context and shows where the entropy, which is in everything, comes into play.
originally posted by: Fools
Although I love hearing this news, I remember reading something similar about 10 or more years ago. It convinced me so much that I invested some money into some graphene enterprises. So far they have lost almost all of their value, but who knows? Maybe someday they will be worth something.
originally posted by: buddha
originally posted by: Fools
Although I love hearing this news, I remember reading something similar about 10 or more years ago. It convinced me so much that I invested some money into some graphene enterprises. So far they have lost almost all of their value, but who knows? Maybe someday they will be worth something.
DONT do IT!
Free power! the THEM will make this go away.
like so much from the past.
they are parasite that feed on us.
Most investments are to Bleed You.
whatch most investments for years.
learn the paterns.
they use investments like fishermen.
with You on the hook.
“People may think that current flowing in a resistor causes it to heat up, but the Brownian current does not. In fact, if no current was flowing, the resistor would cool down,”
“What we did was reroute the current in the circuit and transform it into something useful.”
originally posted by: MerkabaTribeEntity
a reply to: LookingAtMars
I won't pretend to understand everything in your OP, but I do know that when it comes to supercapacitors, hemp has it beat;
...Many may know of hemp's use as a building material or medicine, but seldom know it can be used as a supercapacitor. A capacitor is a device used to store electric charge on one or more pairs of conductors separated by an insulator.
...Naturally, graphene is undergoing extensive research regarding capacitors. It can hold an impressive amount of electrons and can discharge practically instantly, giving power as quickly as it is needed. But graphene batteries are absurdly expensive, and hemp-based capacitors are proving to be a viable alternative.
...“Our device’s electrochemical performance is on par with or better than graphene-based devices,” says David Mitlin, one of the key researchers of hemp-based capacitors. “The key advantage is our electrodes, they are made from bio-waste using a simple process, and therefore, are much cheaper than graphene.”
The hemp-based carbon nanosheets also allegedly outperform standard supercapacitors by nearly 200%.
InterestingEngineering
Again, I don't fully understand this stuff, but it sure is fascinating, S&F
Free energy systems do not require a battery (source of energy) to work. Notice, this system does have a battery.
But I bet every one goes NO way Possible .
Look Up capillary action Its how Trees get water from the ground all the way Up to near 500 FEET for red woods and NO MOTION or power or pumps needed .
All It takes to prove this is 2 5 gallon Buckets - 10 Pices of 1/2 PVC pipes and SPUNGES to FILL the PIPS with .
Set up Right the water is DRAWEN from the LOWER BUCKET to the HIGHER bucket through capillary action FROM the SPUNGES stuck Inside the PIPES once In the UPPER Bucket the water can go BACK down through another pipe with a generator
Right, there are some similarities, but as you say they are not the same, which is why I think the reasons cited for why the Brillouin paradox won't work don't apply to this.
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Your describing Brillouin paradox which you know as wel as i do relies on our system trying to obtain thermal equilibrium.
This is not what they are implying at all though i will say the circuit diagram is very similar.
Yes, and squeezing the sponges could take more energy than you'd get running the squeezed out water through the generator.
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
I see a huge problem there is nothing that can extract the water from the sponge. And there is a certain point where gravity is going to overcome the capillary action of the sponge.A sponge is not the same as a tree To get any amount of useful water into the top bucket would require you to squeze the sponges.
There probably are some wrong sources on the internet saying trees use capillary action, but you're right, it's negative pressure that sucks it up. But wait, a perfect vacuum is zero pressure, how can there be negative pressure below zero? In that way it's not quite like sucking a straw, because the best you could ordinarily do with a straw "that won't collapse" is zero pressure, (you can't do that with your mouth, you'd have to hook up a vacuum pump). If you hook up a vacuum pump, you should be able to suck water up a straw about 10 meters or so (10.3?), but this video demonstrates someone trying to do their best with their mouth and they are able to suck a water up about 7 meters:
Hes wrong on how trees work what happens is the tree forms xylem which is an elongated cell creating a chain . Once the cells are formed, they die. But the cell walls still remain intact, and serve as an excellent pipeline to transport water from the roots to the leaves. So in effect the tree makes a straw that runs from the roots to the leaves. Now the leaves create negative pressure through evaporation drawing the water upwards. Very simiar to you sucking on a straw it doesnt use capilary action
So in effect the tree makes a straw that runs from the roots to the leaves. Now the leaves create negative pressure through evaporation drawing the water upwards. Very simiar to you sucking on a straw it doesnt use capilary action
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
originally posted by: charlyv
"Limitless" is a word that does not belong in the description of any closed system, otherwise it invokes the Perpetual Motion dogma, where the Laws of Thermodynamics forbid it.
Friction = Heat = Resistance = Loss.
The theory is cool, but it needs to be explained outside of the "something for nothing" context and shows where the entropy, which is in everything, comes into play.
There is a lot of left over energy from the big bang that can be calculated and measured, Zero-point energy.
-MM
originally posted by: charlyv
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
originally posted by: charlyv
"Limitless" is a word that does not belong in the description of any closed system, otherwise it invokes the Perpetual Motion dogma, where the Laws of Thermodynamics forbid it.
Friction = Heat = Resistance = Loss.
The theory is cool, but it needs to be explained outside of the "something for nothing" context and shows where the entropy, which is in everything, comes into play.
There is a lot of left over energy from the big bang that can be calculated and measured, Zero-point energy.
-MM
What does that have to do with what is being discussed here?
The discussion is about a closed system that supposedly can sustain itself without external influence.
No, there is no valid theory for extracting "Zero-Point Energy", which is already at the lowest possible energy state. You can't go to an energy level below the lowest possible energy state. If you could, it wouldn't be the lowest possible energy state, but by definition that's what "Zero-point" is.
originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
I´m no researcher, but I believe that it´s pretty much proven by now that graphene nanotubes is a bridge between Quantum Electromagnetism and Condensed Matter Physics, where the tubes seem to convert relativistic particles from the vacuum (ie. Zero-Point Energy) to electrons, thus providing a charge seemingly from "nowhere."
No valid theory predicts any way to extract such energy, which would require leaving things in a state with less energy than the state with least energy, by definition of 'zero-point.'