Cheap Abundant Energy

Here is another example of free energy, that is "non-existent".

This free energy will last the lifetime of the Earth. It's called GEOTHERMAL ENERGY. Use the hot core of the Earth to heat water into steam, and use the steam to turn generators. Wow, easy, clean, and nearly free. Of course there will be maintenance, and running costs like other business, but at least it isn't OIL.

Flip through this slide show: geothermal.marin.org...

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Use the hot core of the Earth to heat water into steam, and use the steam to turn generators. Wow, easy, clean, and nearly free. Of course there will be maintenance, and running costs like other business, but at least it isn't OIL.

Flip through this slide show: geothermal.marin.org...

Thanks for the link, I am part way through it and there seems to be quite a bit of good information on it.
I read about the process of drilling to the magma quite a few years back. Like all the other forms of cheap abundant energy it never got put into use.

Originally posted by RedGolem
So the government is supresing some four thousand patents. Unforchant indeed. Hopefully people reading these pages on the net will bring some of the technology out. However the question I must ask is who is calling the shots to keep all this hidden from the public?

Valone's being somewhat less than honest here. Yes, 4,000 currently active gags is probably about right, but it's not "free energy patents". Chapter 17, sections 181-188 of patent law allow for suppression of the publishing (we call it a 'gag') of a patent. You still get a patent, of sorts, but it's not generally available to the public.

There's a "gag panel" that receives your patent if the first examiner thinks it may be something that should be looked at. They evaluate it, decide if it is a national security issue, and if it is, they 'gag' it.

Gags can fall into several categories, some are useful to the government and for those they sort of shop it around, if there's interest the gag panel chooses whom you may license to and gives you a list. Like, say, Lockheed.

If it's just a nasty nuisance, you can't use it until they let you. That typically doesn't last forever, most gags are lifted in a few years when it doesn't matter anymore.

About 500 gags a year are issued for small businesses and individuals. I think there are about twice that issued for large corporations. It's way up in the past few years, it used to be maybe a fifth of that.

If you get a gag and you have a clearance already, it's no big deal, Yet Another NDA. You get read onto your own invention, basically. They might issue you a bump for the scope of your invention if it's above your clearance.

If you're not cleared, it's a bit tackier. They come to your house and are sort of curt, I understand. You get a 20 year NDA, they have endless interviews to determine who you might have told it to, if you did, THEY get NDA'd in the same fashion.

edit: clarification:

The patent office gag panel doesn't do the shopping around by themselves, it's more like it gets turned over to DOE or whomever the patent falls under and they do it. But from the point of view of the gagged, it all looks like the PTO did it.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Tom Bedlam]

Originally posted by RedGolem
I read about the process of drilling to the magma quite a few years back. Like all the other forms of cheap abundant energy it never got put into use.

On the other hands, geothermal power plants aren't uncommon:

link


also, plenty of other info on the web.

The chief difference between this tech and the "permanent magnet motor" crap is that the former does not violate conservation of energy while the latter does.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam

Valone's being somewhat less than honest here. Yes, 4,000 currently active gags is probably about right, but it's not "free energy patents". Chapter 17, sections 181-188 of patent law allow for suppression of the publishing (we call it a 'gag') of a patent. You still get a patent, of sorts, but it's not generally available to the public.

Tom
Thanks a bunch for clarafying that part of the supresed patents.
So as the gag works on patents its for national security intrists, no suprise there. But the patents issued for the cheap abundant energy devices like we have been discusing hear would not have the gag order on the patent?

Just wanted to confirm that since I am not farmiler with all the workings on the patents.

Originally posted by RedGolem

Tom
Thanks a bunch for clarafying that part of the supresed patents.

So as the gag works on patents its for national security intrists, no suprise there. But the patents issued for the cheap abundant energy devices like we have been discusing hear would not have the gag order on the patent?

Just wanted to confirm that since I am not farmiler with all the workings on the patents.

Red,

If there WERE any suppressed energy devices, I guess you could use a gag on them.

However, it's my understanding, not ever having tried it personally, that if you attempt to file a US patent on a perpetuum mobile, they will make you demonstrate it, if they accept the filing at all. That sort of makes Valone's statement a little shaky in my perception. I'm not really sure how many "magnetic motors" or "Joe cells" patents would be accepted for filing in the first place.

If I had such a thing, I'd probably try filing it with the EU, I'm not sure they're quite as dismissive. But the EU couldn't gag a US citizen, if they even have a gag panel equivalent. Why have none of these people filed EU instead, to start with? Odd.

Also, some of the ones I think are very interesting, although I don't think they work, would be things like Kawai and Bearden, and those were NOT gagged.

It's been my experience (our merry band of engineers have a few gags) that there are certain ways to guarantee a gag. The lore amongst us military contractors is that usually any workable nuclear weapon patent will be gagged, as will production methods for war gases, or unique new crypto. Novel stealth tech often gets a gag, and of course anything too derivative of an ongoing SCI project gets a gag by default. There are a few other topics I feel queasy discussing that are sure bets.

On the other hand, I've seen a lot of stuff that ended UP classified that still has its patents in the open with all the classified material lying right there. I guess they are afraid a post hoc gag would be too obvious.

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Here is another example of free energy, that is "non-existent".

This free energy will last the lifetime of the Earth. It's called GEOTHERMAL ENERGY. Use the hot core of the Earth to heat water into steam, and use the steam to turn generators. Wow, easy, clean, and nearly free. Of course there will be maintenance, and running costs like other business, but at least it isn't OIL.

Flip through this slide show: geothermal.marin.org...

If geothermal were to be tapped for it's chemical abilities in areas where there are variant forms of Gases, then you certainly could use it for power.
Kind of like a giant battery.

Tom,
Again thanks for the information on the gags. I am not an enginer so it is good to hear from one. I can understand all the military technology being put on the gag list, and I would exspect the fifteen year cycle on the patents would be exstended for those cases also. Perhaps hopefully some one, line the company in Ireland whos invenchen started this thred, will get what ever patent he wants both with the EU and and US and what ever other countries will issue one so these technologys weather they produce a surplus of energy or in my opinion are just way more efishent, will come into the benifit for all man kind.

Red:

You know, I actually would be happy if it DID work. Not only would it solve a lot of issues, but it would herald a big shake-up of the current physics status quo. That's traditionally heralded a lot of new exciting developments.

However, I'm pretty skeptical. The test conditions they have dictated are not workable. If they want it tested impartially and in under conditions that can't be rigged, the normal way is to publish replicatable plans and let various universities build their own. There's no way to rig it then.

But to just observe one you can't carry off, or at least totally disassemble and rebuild in a different lab with your own instruments to measure with, that's pure Keely. I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole under those conditions.

Tom,
Once again you have made some good observations with what is going on with all of this. I would like very much to see this work. Yes the physics books would need to be partialy re written, in my opinion, but I just want to see it work to better the lives of everyone on the plannet.

I agree the way they are doing to open testing does not seem forthright. I does not really matter if I would or would not touch it with a barge pole because I am not a scientist. I just do hope that when the comitte is chosen they will be given all the plans avaible so they can construct the device in there own lab and see how well it works. Not quite as open as makeing the plans avaible to the public but does meet the requirnments for fair scrutenty.

If nothing else the technecial information and plans for the rotating drum watter heater that is supose to be over one hundred percent efishent is avaible on line. It is to bad that it does not look like that is something a modest single family home would be able to make use of.

Originally posted by Aelita
Why? That's because you understand Maxwell's equations and you don't understand any or most of Einstein's work?

I actually understand enough of both to realise which had the largest implications for the 20th century and it's why i said what i did.

It is quite silly to complain that there are no easy ways in science. The mathematics describing things like superconductivity or interaction of light with matter on the atomic level is complex and likely well beyond your understanding.

And likely beyond yours as well; so what? Do i have to understand the math that qualifies a scientific theory to understand it's possible implications and utility? Bah.

This absolutely doesn't make it any less valuable for either fundamental science or applied research.

Einstein did far far less original work than Maxwell did and even the few bits he did contribute was notwhere near as important as the work of Maxwell. Your just rambling as far as i am concerned and i hope you do far better in explaining yourself next time.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX
I actually understand enough of both to realise which had the largest implications for the 20th century and it's why i said what i did.

You have to agree that there is a large degree of subjectivity here, at best. I would argue that the atomic theory of matter pioneered in ancient Greece also had great implications and so did the periodic table.

It is quite silly to complain that there are no easy ways in science. The mathematics describing things like superconductivity or interaction of light with matter on the atomic level is complex and likely well beyond your understanding.

And likely beyond yours as well; so what? Do i have to understand the math that qualifies a scientific theory to understand it's possible implications and utility? Bah.

I've had extensive training in physics, not sure about your background. Then again, yes, in many cases you need to understand the math to see the implications. For example, when you solve a problem of neutrons undergoing diffusion in a structure containing various materials, you need to spot cases when the solution becomes unstable, i.e. there is chain reaction. Or, if you aren't good at math, you will need someone else's interpretation of it.

Einstein did far far less original work than Maxwell did and even the few bits he did contribute was notwhere near as important as the work of Maxwell.

I frankly don't care whether Einstein was superior to Maxwell in any way or manner. What is important that these were great scientists, and to put pop-science charlatanes from Ireland on the same scale seems quite silly. Some people probably like these pseudo inventions because they invariably involve water, magnets, D-cell batteries etc etc, i.e. stuff that everybody has tinkered with at some point -- hence easy to visualize and sort of appreciate. On the other hand, the fundamental nature of conservation of energy is indeed somewhat esoteric and requires a fairly deep knowledge of physics to full understand its implications. Such as Noether's theorem

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Aelita]

Originally posted by RedGolem
I do think you are right about the technologys being stolen and or supresed. But in this case I dont think it would be the government as must as it would be the energy companies, and the countries the control the energy.

The energy companies sure do their best to keep their share but without government backing they would not really have any power over us. I think if you look at who has most to lose you will find that energy companies may readily be able to adapt ( there will always be a market for at least some of their products) but the government will stand to lose much of their self assumed function and thus right to exist in their current form. Government trough it's science establishment does far more to suppress alternative energy sources than big energy could ever hope to imo.

So if something unforseen happens I think that might make this technology very importand and authentic.

I think it will simple take enough people to realise that these technologies exists before the public outcry will become big enough to force government into giving up their suppression tactics.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

The energy companies sure do their best to keep their share but without government backing they would not really have any power over us. I think if you look at who has most to lose you will find that energy companies may readily be able to adapt ( there will always be a market for at least some of their products) but the government will stand to lose much of their self assumed function and thus right to exist in their current form. Government trough it's science establishment does far more to suppress alternative energy sources than big energy could ever hope to imo.

Stellar,
I do feel the the energy companies will be able to adapt should this technology beacome readley avaible for public use. But history has shown that the big companies will not adapt if they do not half to, which means they will fight it every step of the way.
Even if fosile fuels is not the main sorce for energy it will still be big proffit bunsiss, because it is used in some many other products and things that I dont see changeing there fuels any time soon. Like avaition.

In previous posts in this thred Maxwell has been menchened several times. Maxwell did do quite a bit for the advancement of electricity and magnetism. If any one would like to find out more about Maxwell click hear for more information.

Enjoy

just suprises me that the larger energy companies, at least the domestic ones arent smart enough to find an idea in alt energy and invest in it so that they can get their share of it rather than trying to supress it. even the domestic oil companies are to some degree dependant on opec, why not cut the cord? (or the pipeline in this case)

but for me proof of a conspiracy in energy is evident two ways

hybrid cars that get 50mph? plz, the technology is out there to get much more

ethanol isnt a primary fuel source...what do some south american countries have we dont?

just my .02 worth

Some snippets from a recent interview with Steorn's Sean McCarthy:

Steorn Live Chat Transcript 24-Aug-06
Q: Are you afraid that corporate big business or government entities might have you whacked?

Sean_McCarthy: No, I have worked most of my life in the energy business and do not buy into conspiracy theories!

Q: Did the Irish or any other government approach you?
Sean_McCarthy: No

Q: What level of qualifications do the 50 scientists out of those who have applied have? Are we talking professors or what?
Sean_McCarthy: We have not had a chance to review the applicants in detail. We are seeking people from the world of experimental physics.

Q: Is there a cut-off date for selection of the panel of 12?
Sean_McCarthy: Yes, the end of this month. We will be issuing a press release on this soon.

Q: What is your definition of “free” when used in the term “free energy”?
Sean_McCarthy: A direct violation of the 1st law of thermodynamics - that is free energy.

These men think they're about to change the world -Guardian UK

The saga continues, so place your bets. Will Sean McCarthy and Richard Walshe change the world forever or become another Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann?

Is it not amusing that they are soliciting applications and haven't looked at any yet?
Heck, I should apply. I have a PhD in pysics.

LOL this has a lot of comical value.

Originally posted by Aelita
Is it not amusing that they are soliciting applications and haven't looked at any yet?
Heck, I should apply.

I don't know what to make of it, other than it sounds loony and a strange way to go about things. I have yet to plan around or bet hard currency on announcements about a global paradigm shift that would eradicate 2000+ years of physics.

This outlines how their scam could play out:
Hypothesis on how it works

Perhaps next week we shall see Paris Hilton is a Rhodes Scholar CIA Operative.

[edit on 25-8-2006 by Regenmacher]

Originally posted by Aelita
You have to agree that there is a large degree of subjectivity here, at best. I would argue that the atomic theory of matter pioneered in ancient Greece also had great implications and so did the periodic table.

Well subjective as it may be i thought we were talking about late nineteenth century scientific break troughs.... If you want to suddenly widen the scope you should probably tell me about it before hating me over the misunderstanding.

I've had extensive training in physics, not sure about your background.

Could have fooled me... The obsession with Einstein should have given away the 'higher' education level...

Then again, yes, in many cases you need to understand the math to see the implications.

If the observations/findings can not be expressed in words one probably has no business trying to call it science.

For example, when you solve a problem of neutrons undergoing diffusion in a structure containing various materials, you need to spot cases when the solution becomes unstable, i.e. there is chain reaction. Or, if you aren't good at math, you will need someone else's interpretation of it.

There is no scientist in the world that does not depend in large on second hand information he never tested for himself. If every scientist had to re qualify everything in his text book we might very well have science ( civil application end) worth talking about but at this stage that is not really happening. Their just researching what they get grants for and believing what they were told; no different from the rest of us.

I frankly don't care whether Einstein was superior to Maxwell in any way or manner. What is important that these were great scientists, and to put pop-science charlatanes from Ireland on the same scale seems quite silly.

Frankly Einstein should not be mentioned in the same breath but i am no fan boy so i have no vested interest in attacking Einstein any more than he deserves for all that plagiarism. It is funny how many 'crazy' ( according to their peers) people end up being the the real discoverers of reality and i think the general level of weirdness might actually be a good standard towards finding likely genius. That's just me and if you like boring old science that arrives at it's conclusions five decades after the mavericks said so that is your deal entirely. Just don't expect much sympathy when i attack the vapid defense of the conventional science and their protectors.

Some people probably like these pseudo inventions because they invariably involve water, magnets, D-cell batteries etc etc, i.e. stuff that everybody has tinkered with at some point -- hence easy to visualize and sort of appreciate.

Why do you think people like George Bush? It's obvious that people like things within their mental grasp as their arrogance demands that their ignorance not be the horrible handicap that is obviously is. That being said i have sympathy with the belief in these 'simple' things as long as our science establishment has such obvious hardship in explaining simple things like magnets ( magnet's don't do work according to their theories) and the true nature of energy.

On the other hand, the fundamental nature of conservation of energy is indeed somewhat esoteric and requires a fairly deep knowledge of physics to full understand its implications.

I have no problem with the conservation of energy as long as people do not assume closed systems where there are clearly non in evidence. To simple state that a 'machine' like the Irish one is not a over unity device based on the principle of conservation of energy is showing a profound ignorance of the very science you profess to be defending.

Such as Noether's theorem

Talk about plagiarism. I should hazard a guess and assume your female then?

Interesting.

Stellar

[edit on 25-8-2006 by StellarX]