Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 22 replies
  • Subscribers 289 subscribers
  • Views 3061 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Free energy?

enrico.migchels

Hi there,

 

There are several posts on the Internet from people who claim to have found the energy 'holy grail'. Meaning machines which convert energy from one form the another without loss or even with energy gain. What do we do which such claims as there is no one who has produced a machine that is in normal use somewhere by someone.

 

Personally i am strong non-believer of free energy devices, as they seem to contradict the law's of physicsas as we know them.

 

Please share your idea's and comments on this topic.

 

Best regards,

 

Enrico Migchels

  • when you transfer 1 form enegy into another there is always loss. solar pannels are a perfect exemple solar energy is order 1kw /m2 (at least)   and take a look on solar panels /m2 energy  converted to electricity.

    even if you conect the output of an electric generator to the input of an electric motor conected to same generator. the spin will stop due to loss of energy.  and motor and generator have a high eficiency.

  • in reply to FredM

    Hi Fred,

     

    You are right about the difficulty in getting charge carriers from the atmosphere to the ground.

     

    I had thought of using a balloon to carry a conductive mesh up into the upper atmosphere to pull down a steady stream of current, but excessive wind currants probably make it infeasible.

     

    I know that Nicolai Tesla had an idea on using the normal rotational forces to power a generator, but he either did not write it down or it has been "mislaid" somewhere.

     

    In my lightning research, I have come up with a reasonable model for how the charge gets into the atmosphere and how it sets up in bands accross the different air layers.  However, the discharge events do not seem to be predictible enough, though the rocket delivered wires appears to work fairly reliably.

     

    As for CFC effects, I have to point out that there is still no proof that they had a mechanism for transport into the upper atmosphere.

    My calculations showed that the Ozone holes at the north and south poles were natural phenomena and not the result of any man made elements.

    Like man generated CO2, the predicted proof data does not justify the efforts made to limit its generation.  The data overwhelmingly support a natural phenomena for both the increase and decrease in CO2 levels over time.

     

    I have also recently came up with a good fusion model that indicates that nuclear fusion does not generate excess energy.  Instead it converts kinetic energy into potential energy when the mass is fused together.  If true, it means that our dream of clean fusion energy is dead and we need to look elsewhere for a solution.

     

    DAB