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 john_bmth
reply to post by just an allusion
Oh, gotcha. Nope, no evidence of it to date (and unlikely for the foreseeable future).
If the temperature of something is really at zero degrees Kelvin, that's the lowest possible temperature it can have, there's no way to extract any heat energy from something that's at zero K.
Originally posted by just an allusion
"...evidence of..." WHAT? Apologies, I seem to have lost track of the train of the discussion, please clarify.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by just an allusion
Oh, gotcha. Nope, no evidence of it to date (and unlikely for the foreseeable future).
Originally posted by john_bmthWhat you said in your post, i.e. zero point energy/over unity
Originally posted by ArbitrageurIf the temperature of something is really at zero degrees Kelvin, that's the lowest possible temperature it can have, there's no way to extract any heat energy from something that's at zero K.
Likewise, a system at zero point energy means it's at its lowest possible energy state so that means you can't extract energy from it. If you do an experiment that shows you DID extract energy from it, then it was NOT at Zero Point Energy, because it would have to have energy above its lowest possible state to be able to extract any energy from it. That is why even beyond the foreseeable future, we won't be extracting energy from zero point energy, because if we extract energy from it, that means it wasn't really at zero point. See the problem?
Yes I think at the very least people need to stop calling it zero point energy if they expect to be able to get any energy out of it.
Originally posted by just an allusion
Then, on the other hand (Arbitrageur), it is your understanding that the phrase cancels itself out by producing an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory meaning, and that ALL discussions of "zero-point energy" or "zero-point modules" (Stargate reference), are a misnomer and there is a need to devise a more so appropriate term to address the proposition...Yes?
You can read the rest of the explanation at the link.
Zero-point energy is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical physical system may have and is the energy of the ground state...
The discovery of zero point energy did not alter the implausibility of perpetual motion machines. Much attention has been given to reputable science suggesting that zero point energy is infinite, but zero point energy is a minimum energy below which a thermodynamic system can never go, thus none of this energy can be withdrawn....
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
By the way we've already built the "Atmos clock" runs with no batteries or winding and extracts its energy from thin air without violating the laws of physics, so why are people so intent on trying to violate the laws of physics to extract energy, when we can extract energy from thin air without violating the laws of physics?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by just an allusion
My self-winding watch is less impressive, because if I decide to wear a different watch, and let it sit on my dresser, it stops running after a few days. So it's self winding from the motion of my arm moving.
The Atmos clock doesn't require any motion. It gets its energy literally out of thin air, just sitting there, so it's more impressive than my self-winding watch.
Interesting, how does your watch get its power then?
Originally posted by just an allusion
Yours, apparently, is operated by kinetic motion, mine is not.
The expression "thin air" was intended in its idiomatic use rather than literal. Therefore it was meant to say it appears to have no visible power source, rather than it works in Denver!
As for the Atmos clock...An intriguing piece of machinery and, to a certain extent, you are correct about the "thin air" attribute, but only if it has been pre-calibrated at the shop to operate at higher altitudes.
if something appears or is made out of thin air, it suddenly and mysteriously appears or is made
Originally posted by ArbitrageurInteresting, how does your watch get its power then?
Originally posted by ArbitrageurThe expression "thin air" was intended in its idiomatic use rather than literal. Therefore it was meant to say it appears to have no visible power source, rather than it works in Denver!
Out of thin air
if something appears or is made out of thin air, it suddenly and mysteriously appears or is made
Actually I don't know if it will work in Denver or not, it might.
But since we live in air, isn't it actually easier to extract energy from "thin air" (idiomatic usage) than from a vacuum?
Originally posted by ArbitrageurTo get a vacuum we either need to travel outside the Earth's atmosphere or make a vacuum somehow if we don't leave the Earth. ("Vacuum energy" and "Zero point energy" are sometimes used interchangeably). I never said the Atmos clock was magic, in fact that was part of the point I was trying to make, there's no need to change the "magic" of perpetual motion machines/ZPE when we can make pretty much the same thing like the Atmos clock, without magic.
Originally posted by just an allusion
Originally posted by playswithmachinesIf it worked, they would be selling the machines themselves.
You mean like Elon Musk has and is doing with the (aptly named) Tesla Roadster and Model S:
blogs.discovermagazine.com...
www.caranddriver.com... _info/2012_tesla_model_s_sedan/tes_model_s_12_burstein_13/2077202-1-eng-US/tes_model_s_12_burstein_13_cd_gallery.jpg
- "?" -