I do not believe that this is entirely comparable to irrational beliefs such as astrology, magic or certain superstitious aspects of religion.
I think that this desire for "free" energy corresponds to an extension of scientism at the same time as it constitutes a critical vision of it, in a paradoxical way.
"Progress", after the messianic enthusiasm it aroused, revealed its dark side: both the misdeeds associated with it, but also the global precariousness of the positive effects which risk disappearing with the exhaustion of means. that make them possible.
The "free" energy appears in the eyes of its proselytes as a technique which would be carrying what the usual technique does not have, an intrinsically favorable and emancipatory virtue. This is where the greatest error of this mental construction lies: to think that it is necessary, for a negative technical determinism, to substitute a positive technical determinism, so that, suddenly, a liberation takes place!
I readily admit that the technique is not neutral, however, what would be a "passive emancipation" *, the automatic result of a determinism? How can we not see a renunciation of the spirit in this submission?
*Oxymoron!
Rosch Gaia yet a motor free energy
I see things more generally I realize that on lots of subjects the information and the truth is not necessarily that which is presented to us in the mainstream media. I am sure you know some too, and we could even make a subject on the great manipulations of the proven past today.
I do not see why on the subject of energy we will not hide anything in view of the interests at stake. Yes but physics ... bof all time new theories have contradicted the old ones.
I do not see why on the subject of energy we will not hide anything in view of the interests at stake. Yes but physics ... bof all time new theories have contradicted the old ones.
0 x
Information control is an integral part of power ...
On physics, no observation has ever contradicted the laws of thermodynamics and your reasoning is analog, that is to say a mode which does not allow to establish the truth directly, but only by an approximate comparison.
The idea that energy-related monopolies have every interest in nipping the emergence of a possible "free" energy in the bud is based on a vision which is not totally inaccurate, but which would be valid only afterwards. 'a static point of view (1).
In reality, if we suppose that, unlike the current situation, access to energy no longer required heavy investments and complex techniques, but would be easily accessible to each individual, a fortiori large industrial groups would be able to benefit much more widely (2).
Two scenarios can thus be envisaged in this highly fictitious scenario:
1 - this type of production is prohibited for citizens by legal means in order to maintain monopolies - which is very easy: it suffices to monitor the consumption of electric meters.
2 - this production is free, but the competitive advantage of large industrial consumers allows them to transfer their earnings downstream to processed products and therefore maintain their monopoly.
I think that the simplistic speculations on this subject are the result of an unfinished reflection and if they persist, it can only be because no "free" energy having appeared (!), No pressure of reality. was able to demonstrate their inanity.
On physics, no observation has ever contradicted the laws of thermodynamics and your reasoning is analog, that is to say a mode which does not allow to establish the truth directly, but only by an approximate comparison.
The idea that energy-related monopolies have every interest in nipping the emergence of a possible "free" energy in the bud is based on a vision which is not totally inaccurate, but which would be valid only afterwards. 'a static point of view (1).
In reality, if we suppose that, unlike the current situation, access to energy no longer required heavy investments and complex techniques, but would be easily accessible to each individual, a fortiori large industrial groups would be able to benefit much more widely (2).
Two scenarios can thus be envisaged in this highly fictitious scenario:
1 - this type of production is prohibited for citizens by legal means in order to maintain monopolies - which is very easy: it suffices to monitor the consumption of electric meters.
2 - this production is free, but the competitive advantage of large industrial consumers allows them to transfer their earnings downstream to processed products and therefore maintain their monopoly.
I think that the simplistic speculations on this subject are the result of an unfinished reflection and if they persist, it can only be because no "free" energy having appeared (!), No pressure of reality. was able to demonstrate their inanity.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
-
sen-no-sen
- Econologue expert
- posts: 6856
- Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
- Location: High Beaujolais.
- x 749
raymon wrote:
We live in an anthropogenic system, and this system is based on exponential development.
If a technology allowed access to a superunit energy source, it is clear that it would not remain secret for very long.
In addition, historically it appears that technological discoveries are often made in several places of the world at the same time * (see a few years).
This is due to the fact that knowledge leads irreparably to conclusions which is realized within the bottlenecks of knowledge ... and incidentally industrial espionage can give a boost ...
The question of overunit has been addressed many times in physics, think that we would be hiding the "truth", therefore implies that all physicists in the world would act within a global conspiracy! ... Beyond the impossibility of such a deception, it appears that making such a speech take place requires recourse to not easily digestible intellectual contortions.
Now in terms of science, know that a theoretical prerequisite is necessary before any application, here it is not a question of cutting the butter, but of violation of the principles of thermodynamics, which doesn’t is not nothing!
Another point, in a frame strictly theoretical, it would be possible to use (use indefinitely) the same energy through a bias: we call this Maxwell's demon:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9mon_de_Maxwell
It is also this type of reflection that makes me think that the defenders of over-unity are only sweet dreamers ... and sacred amateurs ...
Because in reality, rather to want to extract energy "ex nihilo", it would already be necessary to exploit the energy of the Universe which is conserved (1st principle of the thermo).
The universe itself seems to have used this principle, the "big Bang" may be only one big bounce (big rebound) of itself, and our past would therefore be our future, the key to the reuse of energy would therefore be linked to a temporal paradox.
Thus there will be no violation of thermodynamics.
*Ahmed just come to answer a few minutes the same thing, that well support the ubiquity of knowledge !!!
I do not see why on the subject of energy we will not hide anything in view of the interests at stake. Yes but physics ... bof all time new theories have contradicted the old ones.
We live in an anthropogenic system, and this system is based on exponential development.
If a technology allowed access to a superunit energy source, it is clear that it would not remain secret for very long.
In addition, historically it appears that technological discoveries are often made in several places of the world at the same time * (see a few years).
This is due to the fact that knowledge leads irreparably to conclusions which is realized within the bottlenecks of knowledge ... and incidentally industrial espionage can give a boost ...
The question of overunit has been addressed many times in physics, think that we would be hiding the "truth", therefore implies that all physicists in the world would act within a global conspiracy! ... Beyond the impossibility of such a deception, it appears that making such a speech take place requires recourse to not easily digestible intellectual contortions.
Now in terms of science, know that a theoretical prerequisite is necessary before any application, here it is not a question of cutting the butter, but of violation of the principles of thermodynamics, which doesn’t is not nothing!
Another point, in a frame strictly theoretical, it would be possible to use (use indefinitely) the same energy through a bias: we call this Maxwell's demon:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9mon_de_Maxwell
It is also this type of reflection that makes me think that the defenders of over-unity are only sweet dreamers ... and sacred amateurs ...
Because in reality, rather to want to extract energy "ex nihilo", it would already be necessary to exploit the energy of the Universe which is conserved (1st principle of the thermo).
The universe itself seems to have used this principle, the "big Bang" may be only one big bounce (big rebound) of itself, and our past would therefore be our future, the key to the reuse of energy would therefore be linked to a temporal paradox.
Thus there will be no violation of thermodynamics.
*Ahmed just come to answer a few minutes the same thing, that well support the ubiquity of knowledge !!!
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
-
Exnihiloest
- Econologue expert
- posts: 5365
- Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
- x 660
raymon wrote:@] Ahmed because lying and manipulation is widespread and to believe that the truth is on tf1 is an idea of a mental defect.
...
As debility, there is worse than to believe that the truth is on tf1, it is to believe that the truth is on an obscure site or in an obscure video which would promise a miracle out of all reason and out of all science.
As Henri Poincaré said:
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions, which both dispense us from thinking."
The fact that it is or not on TF1 is a trivial digression without any relevance as to the merits of the device in question, of which only the analysis, by a balanced and detailed reflection, can enlighten us. This analysis has been provided. If we don't understand it, we have to go back to high school or to college, and if we dispute it, we have to bring in logical and refutable arguments otherwise we are no longer in the register of reason, but of faith.
Personally, I am not claiming that the device does not work. It works, since we see it spinning! I affirm that it does not work according to the explanation given, for reasons already provided and obvious for those who have notions of physics. If it worked according to the explanations given, then all the current engineering would be false, and for example that the submarines, whose ballast proceeds from the same principle, would be "superunitary" machines.
As on the one hand the explanation given is false, and on the other hand the experimental evidence is not provided (no duplication by third parties), the device is until proved to the contrary to be classified as "scam" as the dozens more that I can cite that have been produced over the past 12 years.
The proof must be up to the "extraordinary" of the thing, and today we are really far from it!
0 x
-
Exnihiloest
- Econologue expert
- posts: 5365
- Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
- x 660
"Surunity" as the creation of energy ex nihilo, therefore perpetual machine of type 1, would be an extremely improbable discovery since it is contrary to all our observations so far, and incompatible with the mathematical formalism of physics, which has been proven. . Not completely impossible however in certain cosmological theories of "multi-universes" where the universes could have gateways allowing to "pump" from one, the energy of the neighbor. Needless to say, it's highly speculative ...
So if we really want to play the "sweet dreamer" with a minimum of feet on the ground, what do we have left?
An unknown and inextinguishable source of energy that a device would exploit, giving the appearance of a surunity since we do not know where it comes from.
Maxwell's demon of which sen-no-sen spoke is one of them, the surplus would in fact be drawn from ambient thermal energy. If the idea is completely incompatible with the second law of thermo, it is not opposed to the others, and in particular not to quantum mechanics where on small spaces (of the order of the atom), and very short times, one can have violations of the second law. From there to be able to draw useful, macroscopic energy over long periods of time, nothing is less certain (but still more credible than the Archimedes push presented here and claimed to be surunitary).
Another way would be that of low energy nuclear reactions (controversial subject of LENR or cold fusion). A number of experiments provide surprising results, but as nothing convincing has emerged after years, one can remain doubtful.
Finally the "ZPE", often claimed by "sweet dreamers" to be the origin of the "overunity" that they see in their crafts where it is not, could indeed be a source, except that this vacuum energy is at a minimum level and that very smart will be the one who will be able to lower a "minimum" level to get something out of it!
Other than that, I don't see ...
To return to the initial subject, the mathematical logic used in the laws of physics prohibits that one can turn it against it: in other words, no surunity can be explained by the notions that physics defines itself, as pressure, Archimedes' push, mechanical force, magnetic, electric fields ... not for the reason that physics would be complete and infallible knowledge, but for a reason of pure internal logic of formalism.
This very hypothetical surunity must therefore first be demonstrated experimentally, and if a theoretical explanation is provided, this cannot be based on the laws of academic physics while remaining logical (except to include the new source of energy ). This is not the case here, so the explanation of the Rosch Gaia is wrong.
So if we really want to play the "sweet dreamer" with a minimum of feet on the ground, what do we have left?
An unknown and inextinguishable source of energy that a device would exploit, giving the appearance of a surunity since we do not know where it comes from.
Maxwell's demon of which sen-no-sen spoke is one of them, the surplus would in fact be drawn from ambient thermal energy. If the idea is completely incompatible with the second law of thermo, it is not opposed to the others, and in particular not to quantum mechanics where on small spaces (of the order of the atom), and very short times, one can have violations of the second law. From there to be able to draw useful, macroscopic energy over long periods of time, nothing is less certain (but still more credible than the Archimedes push presented here and claimed to be surunitary).
Another way would be that of low energy nuclear reactions (controversial subject of LENR or cold fusion). A number of experiments provide surprising results, but as nothing convincing has emerged after years, one can remain doubtful.
Finally the "ZPE", often claimed by "sweet dreamers" to be the origin of the "overunity" that they see in their crafts where it is not, could indeed be a source, except that this vacuum energy is at a minimum level and that very smart will be the one who will be able to lower a "minimum" level to get something out of it!
Other than that, I don't see ...
To return to the initial subject, the mathematical logic used in the laws of physics prohibits that one can turn it against it: in other words, no surunity can be explained by the notions that physics defines itself, as pressure, Archimedes' push, mechanical force, magnetic, electric fields ... not for the reason that physics would be complete and infallible knowledge, but for a reason of pure internal logic of formalism.
This very hypothetical surunity must therefore first be demonstrated experimentally, and if a theoretical explanation is provided, this cannot be based on the laws of academic physics while remaining logical (except to include the new source of energy ). This is not the case here, so the explanation of the Rosch Gaia is wrong.
0 x
-
Exnihiloest
- Econologue expert
- posts: 5365
- Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
- x 660
faith is not a question of religion, but of trust in one's project and consequently of those who do not believe in it. Who would have thought that heavier scrap heavier than air could fly and yet the sky is saturated with hundreds of tons of planes. moreover this apparatus is not with any free energy or miraculous surunity. According to them, it would provide 12 kw / h for a consumption of 4 kw / h for the air compressor and operating losses.
"To ensure accurate statements regarding the capacity of the plant under operating conditions, a protocol for measuring a current at ROSCH in the prototype Serbia 12kW has been created. Confirm the values they identify that were needed during the measurement period in the operating phase on the product were during the output part of 11,37 kW on the input side 1,8 kW. A control measurement resulted in roughly the same input power at 10.7 kW output side. As defined Rotary current 3-phase generator generated special measuring instruments have been used, which have the advantages of each phase detected separately. The system was then examined endoscopically and drained the water column to ensure there was no fraud here. The measurement protocol for this prototype was created in mid-June 2014. It does not reflect the characteristics of the mobile functional model, which was among other things demonstrated for presentation purposes in easily transportable height of 2 m at the Congress of Munich." Google translation
"To ensure accurate statements regarding the capacity of the plant under operating conditions, a protocol for measuring a current at ROSCH in the prototype Serbia 12kW has been created. Confirm the values they identify that were needed during the measurement period in the operating phase on the product were during the output part of 11,37 kW on the input side 1,8 kW. A control measurement resulted in roughly the same input power at 10.7 kW output side. As defined Rotary current 3-phase generator generated special measuring instruments have been used, which have the advantages of each phase detected separately. The system was then examined endoscopically and drained the water column to ensure there was no fraud here. The measurement protocol for this prototype was created in mid-June 2014. It does not reflect the characteristics of the mobile functional model, which was among other things demonstrated for presentation purposes in easily transportable height of 2 m at the Congress of Munich." Google translation
0 x
-
moinsdewatt
- Econologue expert
- posts: 5111
- Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
- Location: Isére
- x 554
Janic wrote: .......
"To ensure accurate statements regarding the capacity of the plant under operating conditions, a protocol for measuring a current at ROSCH in the prototype Serbia 12kW has been created. Confirm the values they identify that were needed during the measurement period in the operating phase on the product were during the output part of 11,37 kW on the input side 1,8 kW. A control measurement resulted in roughly the same input power at 10.7 kW output side. As defined Rotary current 3-phase generator generated special measuring instruments have been used, which have the advantages of each phase detected separately. The system was then examined endoscopically and drained the water column to ensure there was no fraud here. The measurement protocol for this prototype was created in mid-June 2014. It does not reflect the characteristics of the mobile functional model, which was among other things demonstrated for presentation purposes in easily transportable height of 2 m at the Congress of Munich." Google translation
It's bullshit as these people know how to produce it by the kilometer.
0 x
Back to "hydraulic, wind, geothermal, marine energy, biogas ..."
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 375 guests