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.

 

I have created a free energy plant.

page: 15
10
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 08:32 AM
link   
forced precipitation?

If you created a biosphere with the corret settings then you could create a mass rain machine which would constantly replenish the water.

flaw is that you would have to have an initial power source to get the thing started.

however after the initial setup you may create new energy thus free energy because it would be self sustaining...i call it the weather sytem in a box



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Yes but smaller than a bathtub?

Also OP claimed it would solve the worlds energy problems. A turbine that small maybe would power a few lightbulbs. Not enough for a house.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ian990003100
 


the energy to produce your ` forced precipitation ` would come from the sun

but the ` carbon footprint ` of your biosphere construction would be many magnitudes greater than the power "provided " by your rain powered hydro



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ian990003100
 


I doubt that seriously. Our weather is generated by the sun. And even suns expire.

Where would the heat energy come from to produce the evaporation - the falling rain?



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2 cents
reply to post by ian990003100
 


I doubt that seriously. Our weather is generated by the sun. And even suns expire.

Where would the heat energy come from to produce the evaporation - the falling rain?


Ultimately the weather is driven by the Sun, in that it provides a lot of the energy. However there are also forces generated by the Moon, (tidal forces), the ocean, geothermal effects (volcanoes, and vents), and a host of other conditions.

In fact as far as direct effects, the ocean and the deep layer circulation has one of the most profound effects, as evidenced by things like El Niño

Not disputing you, just offering a broader perspective.





[edit on 7-3-2008 by Badge01]



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Obviously all your points are more than valid i was just throwing an idea around...

Quite true is the point that is made about the sun and the moon and what not. However i was just thearising. if we ever intend to terra form other worlds this would be an essential peice of kit. the carbon footprint would be huge quite true but please remember we wouldnt be creating any morematter so we wouldn't actually be making a huge carbon footprint...

The technical problems really only come down to one thing can we create artificial weather? can we force precipitation?

this would eventually create free energy but this would have to be huge....

this was a barmy afternoons thought dont take me too serious.... i was just throwing ideas around



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ian990003100
 


When you look at the Earth as a finely tuned system, I think it is unwise to mess around with the weather. Even things like local cloud seeding has negative effects.

I don't know of any mechanism by which you'd be able to 'force precipitation' in an area that did not have certain favorable conditions.

You can harness various systems, including wind power, geothermal power, even wave power (by using a leverage system).

The broad classification of this kind of power is 'renewable' energy. The basis for all energy on Earth except for geothermal, is derived from the Sun as you mentioned.

From Wiki (link above)
* Wind power
* Solar power
* Hydroelectricity
* Geothermal power
* Biofuels
* Biomass

Biomass is an interesting system and is largely untapped. There are vast areas where we could grow switch grass which is an excellent source. It is considered 'carbon neutral', ut still has a 'leakage' effect that could impact global warming, so you want to spread out the effects. In some systems we've already lost a lot of this by random burning of the Tropical rainforest. If we had tried to capture this energy that is available instead of just burning it into the atmosphere, it would have been much better.

One area of carbon footprint that bothers me is the use made by the military. I'm sure we'd have been able to go well into the 23rd century with fossil fuels if it were not for the US and Soviet armies burning vast quatities (not to mention all the jet fuel they release into the atmosphere when they dump fuel - which happens daily - they could give a crap.)

Anyway, back on topic, I don't think that this idea of using rainfall as an energy source is viable, since it is even less sporadic and unpredictable than wind energy. In addition to there not being any mechanism (at lest not one that isn't very harmful to our steady state), it's not advisable due to the bad effects it could have.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by 2 cents
Energy is conserved. And if you took all the heat energy and vibrational energy losses and somehow used them to raise the ball back to its original height what good would it do?


That would just be neat but what we are truly working towards is the following type of system.


The customers include the Atlanta Police Department, a fire station, a dry cleaning plant, and a gymnasium. Interestingly, the Hydrosonic pump was installed in the public buildings by the county engineer after evaluating the device. The buildings are using the device mainly for heating purposes, and they have been running for more than a year. The customers have bills from their local electric utility company showing a year on year decrease in bills equivalent to 30 per cent.

What precisely causes the claimed excess heat? Griggs himself rejects the popular idea that his pump has something to do with so-called 'cold fusion'.

'We have kind of been lumped into the cold fusion field', he says wryly, 'because we have experienced excess energy out of the pump. As far as cold fusion goes, we don't believe that we're accomplishing any type of nuclear reaction within our system. We feel that it can be explained through the theory of cavitation or sonoluminescence.'

www.rexresearch.com...


So don't tell me about how 'losses' needs to exceed input without useful energy being extracted. Why focus here is just to destroy some of the appeals to 'scientific law' that just does not apply!


In such a system you cannot siphon off any energy for useful work - that is direct the energy elsewhere for something else, otherwise there would not be enough energy to raise it to its starting point again.


Admittedly it's probably going to be hard to devise a system where you employ the friction and or vibrational energy towards again raising the ball while siphoning off some energy. As is however evident from previous examples such examples are not unknown in science thus violating the principle uninformed people derive from the supposed conservation of energy.


Getting all the energy from the ball, friction and so forth would be a 100% conversion of energy, which the 2nd law says cannot happen.


The second law states NOTHING of the sort and neither does the first or the third. Even if they did they are dealing with ISOLATED systems which means it would rarely if ever apply in this universe.


More than that, getting all that energy converted and then the ball raised to its starting point without adding energy is what is considered 'over unity' that is over 100% efficiency.

Just Not Possible.


Not in a isolated system, no, but since we are not aware of any of those it just does not apply. If you want to raise theoretical objections they should at least apply!

Stellar



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Are you positve you have an understanding of the 2nd law? Please if you do please explain it to me?

It should be easy assuming you do understand this as well as you claim to.

From what I get you don't believe the laws of thermo?

[edit on 7-3-2008 by dascro62]



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I can't stomach this anymore.
A person wants help with an invention that he/she won't explain completely.
This person talks of "free" energy yet has dreams of money and fame.
This person talks about the invention of the century yet he/she can't use proper grammar or spell.
I'm not picking on the OP,just pointing out the obvious.

This reminds me very much of the Nigerian scams going on.That's what my instincts tell me and it's rarely wrong.

By the way Tesla was Serbian (my heritage) so I don't know how he relates to your German heritage.Anyone who compares himself to Tesla would have to be amazingly brilliant in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
this is ridiculous, sounds like something I dreamed up when I was 10. everyone needs to check out advance energy research organization. they are the real deal. Free energy wont come from gravity people and you are deluding yourself if you think so. The quantum vacuum that all matter and energy in the universe fluxes to is far more likely.



posted on Mar, 7 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
To Someguy,

Think about what you are saying and what you are trying to do here! Think about who is on this site reading this information. Take myself for instance, you have no idea who I am or what I do but here I am reading your idea and looking at the people who are fishing for information from you about your idea. If in fact you have discovered a method of free energy, why are you discussing it on a website that is what it is. My advice to you is to protect your idea with everything you have. Change your name and stop blogging about it. If indeed you have what you say you have, someone if not everyone will want to steal it from you or help you and then claim it as their own. The gov't has methods of producing free energy but will never let it be known. If you have it they will want it. If I were you and I needed help I would keep a low profile and head to MIT, Cal Tech, Va. Tech etc, and find a professor in physics that is bored and start creating free energy. I will pray for you to suceed just so I can see the look on Rex Tillerson's face when he loses his job, along with all of the other big oil guys. Don't play around with this, you may just have a true gift from GOD floating around in you head.

GODSPEED,

EYE OF EAGLE



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Yes stellarx, I attempt to progress peace and prosperity and it has everything to do with free energy.

And yes, all energy is already free and this is the zero point. The unvierse is a 3 dimensional immeasurable singularity.

Any energy that is used is from the "zero point". You are of the "zero point". Everything is the zero point energy field. All the zero point is explaining is the essence of energy. That means an annex of matter, mass, volume, light, electric, etc. etc. etc. The entire/unentire (if you consider it measurable, but w/e, not gunna get into pedantical semantics as of the current explicitive) universe.

If one was to create a machine that gave "free" energy it would have to implement every known element of the universe, and in accord actually mimmick the universe but as a so called closed system, but every machine that creates energy already fits this definition because it is of the universe and already interacting with every known element! It's not as simple as water and a few valves, though it is! You have to take what you have and harness it, not try to make obsolete the physics that will always be in place.

For example: Gravity. Why are people trying to create anti-gravity devices before such a force is even understood? If we harness gravity first and truly understand its concept and what it is doing to everything then we can simply reproduce its effect any way that we want to. But I never hear about anyone doing this, only speculation on anti-gravity. It's like trying to make anti water! Anti-light! Come on now......

[edit on 8-3-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 06:49 AM
link   
reply to post by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
 


I think this might give you a better idea of what space-time and dimensions and ZPE entail.

The local space around our area of the Galaxy, or maybe the Universe in normal space is either a 4-dimensional structure (with time or space-time as the fourth non-spatial dimension), or an 11 dimensional structure.

Think of the analogy of a heavy ball on a rubber sheet. The heavier the ball the deeper the indentation in the rubber sheet.



"Free energy" may be a misnomer. It is known that something is going on when two large plates are very close, called the 'Casimir effect' or Casimir Force.



In physics, the Casimir effect or Casimir-Polder force is a physical force arising from a quantized field.

The typical example is of two uncharged metallic plates in a vacuum, placed a few micrometers apart, without any external electromagnetic field.

In a classical description, the lack of an external field also means that there is no field between the plates, and no force would be measured between them.

When this field is instead studied using quantum mechanics, it is seen that the plates do affect the virtual photons which constitute the field, and generate a net force[1]—either an attraction or a repulsion depending on the specific arrangement of the two plates.


It seems to be a boundary effect and there's no evidence so far that we can harness this.

It's true that there is a foamy 'energy' or something at the quantum level.

Called Quantum Foam





Quantum foam, also referred to as spacetime foam, is a concept in quantum mechanics, devised by John Wheeler in 1955. The foam is a qualitative description of the turbulence that the phenomenon creates at extremely small distances of the order of the Planck length.


So far this quantum foam, believed to be a result of virtual particles of very high energy which spring into existence and then are annihilated, seems to have no way for us to harness or tap into this 'energy'.

Though NASA and other agencies are looking into using this low energy state, it would probably be through nano-devices that achieve a type of 'levitation', perhaps reducing friction.

It's a misnomer that there is a vast quantity of high energy tied up in a vacuum. The Zero Point energy is only predicted using quantum theory, because in ordinary physics, the energy in a vacuum is basically zero.

Now, again, I'm not say that -you- are wrong. I'm just suggesting that what people are telling you, or what the 'popular' fringe definition of ZPE is wrong, because they are hijacking a concept in physics and then misrepresenting it using pseudo-science. Since this is all theoretical, I'm not saying that physics is 'right' either, but we want to just keep everything in line with the scientific definitions of what we know so far, not something that involves pseudo-science. Okay?


I think if you read through some of the stuff I linked it will help you get a better idea.

Of course if you want to post some links or maybe explain what you mean a little better, I'd be happy to read that too.





[edit on 8-3-2008 by Badge01]



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by an3rkist
Hm, a quick google search provided me with sites about decreasing the amount of gas used by using a water engine, but these say you still run your car off gasoline mostly. I wonder if this is what that guy was talking about. I wonder if I've been duped!


I am currently in the process of building a couple of these devices, of differing design, to do some real world testing. Once I have some serious results I will post them here. I am skeptical, but not enough so to at least try this method. It is a little more complex that what a lot of these people advertise. One of the problems of running 100% on hydrogen or HHO is that apparently there is no device available that can supply enough gas "on demand" to run your engine. You could certainly use hydrogen fuel cells to supply fuel, but that isn't an "on demand" system.

On a less serious note...
I have invented a free energy machine and am looking for investors. Please email me, I promise to give 99.99% of my profits back to mankind. Here is a simple schematic:




posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 08:59 AM
link   



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
reply to post by Badge01
 


Emotions are obsolete, truth is all that persuades mind.



Says the guy with the word 'Love' in the avatar surrounded by the word truth...


That said, personal attacks are against the T&C and will not be tolerated. Either you go through and encounter what was presented, or you refrain from posting.

Consider this a happy reminder...or a warning. Your choice.



[edit on 8-3-2008 by MemoryShock]



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I have invented a device that creates a "time-bubble" around me, which allows me to be free from gravity. I have traveled to Mars several times, and well as visited the outer planets.

But I'm not going to show you the photographs. You'll just have to take my word for it.



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by spaznational
I have invented a device that creates a "time-bubble" around me, which allows me to be free from gravity. I have traveled to Mars several times, and well as visited the outer planets.

But I'm not going to show you the photographs. You'll just have to take my word for it.

HOP IN THE DELOREAN!



posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SomeGuy34
 


I will review your "theory" on the syphon. I will require details of the device, in terms of a detailed schematic; I will also require you to write a synopsis of how you think this device operates.
Obviously all data sent to me for review will remain confidential, and you will retain all copyright to the material and information.
As I am making this "contract" in public it is here for all to see and will be legally binding. In other words, if I were to use the information for my own gain, or disseminate the information to a third party you would be able to sue me in court for breach of contract and a LOT of money.
I am only going to make the offer of reviewing your findings once. I do not appreciate time wasters.
The decision now rests with you SomeGuy34. As I have already stated, I will require detailed schematics, and your "theory" written down as detailed as you can make it.
Then I will review your information, re-write your findings in a more scientific fashion in order that you might take it to the scientific community. My fee for this will be 2% of your profits for the first five years of sale of this device. Assuming of course that you do have a real "free energy" device and are not "yanking our collective chains".
Message me directly or converse in the open. Either way, you will get a review, if you do not waste my time.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join