Can this really change the world???
- Thread starter Anth505
- Start date
The one thing I don't quite understand is that they said that it can produce 6 times the power it consumes.
Wouldn't that mean it has to be powered by an external power supply and therefore rendering the technology a bit useless? (sure it would help cut down on bills, but it wouldn't be half as revolutionary as it originally sounded).
Wouldn't that mean it has to be powered by an external power supply and therefore rendering the technology a bit useless? (sure it would help cut down on bills, but it wouldn't be half as revolutionary as it originally sounded).
DonS1mpson;999416 said:
It can't.
The law of conservation of energy states that energy may neither be created nor destroyed. Therefore the sum of all the energies in the system is a constant.
The most commonly used example is the pendulum:
The formula to calculate the potential energy is:
PE = mgh
The mass of the ball = 10kg
The height, h = 0.2m
The acceleration due to gravity, g = 9.8 m/s^2
Substitute the values into the formula and you get:
PE = 19.6J (J = Joules, unit of energy)
The position of the blue ball is where the Potential Energy (PE) = 19.6J while the Kinetic Energy (KE) = 0.
The position of the pink ball is where the Potential Energy (PE) is once again at its maximum and the Kinetic Energy (KE) = 0.
We can now say and understand that:
PE + KE = 0
PE = -KE
The sum of PE and KE is the total mechanical energy:
Total Mechanical Energy = PE + KE
NOTE: This is with the abscence of outside forces such as friction.
Using our common sense we know that it's impossible for the pendulum to swing higher than the height h without giving it a push yourself. If there was no friction, the pendulum would swing back and forth forever because of the law of conservation of energy.
Once again, TANSTAAFL.
LordHomerCat;999322 said:
Thats turning heat into mechanical energy, then from mechanical energy into electricity.
If this crap really worked, then it would already be in use. just like all the other scams out there, like acetone in fuel and those little 'tornado' things people put in the intake of their cars. If this crap really worked, manufacturers would be using it.
Heat energy directly to electrical energy would be ideal (as long as we didnt plunge ourselves into an ice age
). If we could harness that energy, then engines could come close to 100 percent efficiency (as opposed to the current, what, 12 percent or so we get now? not sure).We need to find out a better way to convert matter to energy than our current nuclear power methods.
Fusion is likely the answer. But in the interim, good old fission works a hell of a lot better than coal...
Flight doc, that's *mostly* true, however, you are leaving out economics, (and safety testing) which influences design quite a bit.
For instance, we have the TECHNOLOGY to make light bulbs that don't burn out. Ever. However, it would be economic suicide to manufacture and market them, because you would put yourself out of business in short order. After the initial glut where everyone replaces their bulbs with your super bulbs, demand would fall off dramatically, as the only replacements required would be for new construction or breakage.
We've had the technology to build hyrbrid cars for decades - where braking forces are scavenged and reused. But it's only in the last few years that manufacturers have decided to start using it.
Guaranteed there are a bunch of newer technologies that have to proven to work awesome, yet won't show up in mass production for another few decades. This is especially true for medications - or anything that they use on the human body. It's rather likely that a cure for many current diseases exists - but the testing process to have something licensed for sale for human consumption takes years, so we won't see it for a long time yet.
For instance, we have the TECHNOLOGY to make light bulbs that don't burn out. Ever. However, it would be economic suicide to manufacture and market them, because you would put yourself out of business in short order. After the initial glut where everyone replaces their bulbs with your super bulbs, demand would fall off dramatically, as the only replacements required would be for new construction or breakage.
We've had the technology to build hyrbrid cars for decades - where braking forces are scavenged and reused. But it's only in the last few years that manufacturers have decided to start using it.
Guaranteed there are a bunch of newer technologies that have to proven to work awesome, yet won't show up in mass production for another few decades. This is especially true for medications - or anything that they use on the human body. It's rather likely that a cure for many current diseases exists - but the testing process to have something licensed for sale for human consumption takes years, so we won't see it for a long time yet.
Perpetual motor? No, it's not. It does not create energy from nothing, or some hokus pokus crap like that. It uses the potential energy of natural magnets. I don't know where all this other talk of unicorns, magic, and perpetual motors came from. It's not a trick or a mystery;
As far as I know, it's a very carefully engineered arrangement of natural magnets on a rotating shaft. The alternating attraction/repulsion of the magnets causes the shaft to rotate. However, since natural magnets in the presence of a magnetic field will eventually lose their magnetic properties, the motor will not last forever.
Obviously, the difficulty involved is keeping it rotating in the right direction, which is why it probably requires 1/6th the power it produces... in order to power a complex system of electromagnets that keep the shaft rotating via a controlled alternation of current. Also, this shows why it required a physical "jump-start" to get spinning.
The concept here isn't wildly complicated... it's just that making it work is wildly complicated. To make natural magnets do that kind of work would require alot of them, and it has serious design obsticles. It's never been done before because of this complexity, but the theory has been around a very long time. I suppose until now, no one's ever made it work in a reasonably priced package that would fit in a room, and have a reasonable operating life.
It is brilliant.
As far as I know, it's a very carefully engineered arrangement of natural magnets on a rotating shaft. The alternating attraction/repulsion of the magnets causes the shaft to rotate. However, since natural magnets in the presence of a magnetic field will eventually lose their magnetic properties, the motor will not last forever.
Obviously, the difficulty involved is keeping it rotating in the right direction, which is why it probably requires 1/6th the power it produces... in order to power a complex system of electromagnets that keep the shaft rotating via a controlled alternation of current. Also, this shows why it required a physical "jump-start" to get spinning.
The concept here isn't wildly complicated... it's just that making it work is wildly complicated. To make natural magnets do that kind of work would require alot of them, and it has serious design obsticles. It's never been done before because of this complexity, but the theory has been around a very long time. I suppose until now, no one's ever made it work in a reasonably priced package that would fit in a room, and have a reasonable operating life.
It is brilliant.
Last edited:
I have seen the magnet idea in the past. The problem lies in the fact that magnets are not perpetual - these machines are draining the magnets in order to produce power. Then you need to replace the magnets. And as usual, it costs more energy to make the magnets than you get out of the 'generator' while you are draining them.
But while it's running, it sure looks like a free lunch!
But while it's running, it sure looks like a free lunch!
GrimJack;999623 said:
Agreed.
Things like friction, and the insurmountable complexity of getting enough magnets to generate enough power to make it feasable, are reasons it's never been a marketable technology.
Advancements in magentic bearings, computer modelling, C&C capability, umung other things, may be why we're seeing it now.
Making the magnets isn't cheap, would the unit make $5000 worth of power before it went kaput? I don't know... probably not.
I'll put my confidence in fusion technology long before natural magnet turbines.
Fusion: Take the most ubundant element in the universe, slam it together to make the second most abundant element, and alot of energy... little radiation, no risk of meltdown... it's beautiful. Once you get past the rediculous technical requirements of making it happen, haha.