sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info

    Clean energy sources

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Corner Bar
    43 Posts 13 Posters 1.7k Views 13 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • R Offline
      remus
      last edited by

      Thats the chap πŸ‘

      http://remusrendering.wordpress.com/

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • T Offline
        tomasz
        last edited by

        @remus said:

        The fact of the matter is their is a mountain of evidence which suggests energy cannot be created and very little evidence to the contrary, so until someone conclusively shows that energy can be created i find it hard to believe.

        There are more convincing scientific experiments that prove that the energy efficiency of some processes can higher then 100% (overunity).
        Here is a link to Professor Ph. M. Kanarev's works presented in English
        and an example of Low Current Electrolysis of Water where in conclusions one can read:

        @unknownuser said:

        Energy efficiency index of the low current electrolysis should be refined, but in any case it will be greater than 10, that’s why there is every reason to think that a way to production of inexpensive hydrogen from water and transition to hydrogen energetic is opened.

        Not only 'garage inventors', but also scientists prove that it is possible. If societies would only be more aware of possibilities in front of us, it would be easier to find the resources to push them out from labs.

        Author of [Thea Render for SketchUp](http://www.thearender.com/sketchup)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • R Offline
          remus
          last edited by

          πŸ˜‰ <- my unconvinced face

          http://remusrendering.wordpress.com/

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • P Offline
            PeterCharles
            last edited by

            Some of this sounds a bit like the old Cold Fusion of the late '80's, or even ZETA from the '50's which I remember was going to give power so cheap it wouldn't be worth charging for it!
            ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7190813.stm )

            Ho, ho, ho

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • AnssiA Offline
              Anssi
              last edited by

              @petercharles said:

              Some of this sounds a bit like the old Cold Fusion of the late '80's, or even ZETA from the '50's which I remember was going to give power so cheap it wouldn't be worth charging for it!
              ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7190813.stm )

              Ho, ho, ho

              It sounds like the same old thing, and it is. Five minutes of Googling (the name Kanarev, for instance)brings up links to the same old cold fusion and Steorn etc. nonsense.

              Anssi

              securi adversus homines, securi adversus deos rem difficillimam adsecuti sunt, ut illis ne voto quidem opus esset

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • T Offline
                tomasz
                last edited by

                @anssi said:

                It sounds like the same old thing, and it is. Five minutes of Googling (the name Kanarev, for instance)brings up links to the same old cold fusion and Steorn etc. nonsense.

                Steorn and cold fusion? You are mixing thing my friend.
                Kanarev brings in most cases Low current electrolysis.

                @remus said:

                πŸ˜‰ <- my unconvinced face

                What doesn't convince you? Graphics of the site? Calculations? Nationality of the author?
                Prejudices...

                Author of [Thea Render for SketchUp](http://www.thearender.com/sketchup)

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R Offline
                  remus
                  last edited by

                  I probably am prejudiced, but i just find it very hard to believe that someone who has found a method for creating free energy has trouble getting his ideas out to the world.

                  All it would take is a working sample and he'd be sorted.

                  The following extract doesnt inspire a lot of confidence, either.

                  @unknownuser said:

                  Present days physics students are fooled by main stream physics teachers not only with respect to SRT but they hear other ferry tales about nature. This is one reason why physics students have problems in getting jobs in in-dustry and research institutions.
                  Our troubled world needs, for example, physicists, who build new useful devices or in-vent new methods for converting matter to energy (fusion does not work well and many people hate uranium) instead of looking for new crazy particles based on unproven theories.

                  p.s. I will buy you a pint if the conservation of energy is shown to be wrong πŸ‘

                  http://remusrendering.wordpress.com/

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Mike LuceyM Offline
                    Mike Lucey
                    last edited by

                    Time will tell. Just a thought! In order to protect these inventions, patents will have to be granted. This means that FULL data will be available to the public. At this stage the facts will come the light ... excuse the pun.

                    Mike

                    Support us so we can support you! Upgrade to Premium Membership!

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • P Offline
                      PeterCharles
                      last edited by

                      @mike lucey said:

                      patents will have to be granted. This means that FULL data will be available to the public.

                      Excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • D Offline
                        Double Espresso
                        last edited by

                        @mike lucey said:

                        Time will tell. Just a thought! In order to protect these inventions, patents will have to be granted. This means that FULL data will be available to the public. At this stage the facts will come the light ... excuse the pun.

                        Mike

                        And that is where it always falls apart...
                        sorcerers apprentice.jpg

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • pilouP Offline
                          pilou
                          last edited by

                          Mine πŸ˜‰

                          http://forums.polyloop.net/imagehosting/1964632033398621.jpg

                          Frenchy Pilou
                          Is beautiful that please without concept!
                          My Little site :)

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • pbacotP Offline
                            pbacot
                            last edited by

                            Very good DE, on both posts! Also I thought of the palendrome, "Dogma: I am God." speaking of opposites.

                            Seriously now (there's no "serious" emoticon) I'd say Tomasz at least has done some homework. For myself I never thought cold-fusion was some kind of scam. I thought it was a bona fide line of scientific research that is found so far to not be feasible under relevant conditions.

                            MacOSX MojaveSketchUp Pro v19 Twilight v2 Thea v3 PowerCADD

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • T Offline
                              tomasz
                              last edited by

                              @mike lucey said:

                              Time will tell. Just a thought! In order to protect these inventions, patents will have to be granted. This means that FULL data will be available to the public. At this stage the facts will come the light ... excuse the pun.

                              One has to remember that patents applications are usually written in the way to protect the idea of the design and to disclose important details to make it really work.

                              @remus said:

                              I probably am prejudiced, but i just find it very hard to believe that someone who has found a method for creating free energy has trouble getting his ideas out to the world.

                              All it would take is a working sample and he'd be sorted.

                              Just stand in a position of a scientist who invents something that produces energy apparently from 'nothing'. If you would mention it to your superior, wouldn't you immediately be treated as a geek. Would you put all your career just to fight all those unconvinced?
                              This guy is fighting more than 30!! years to make his invention, confirmed by scientists, to the public.
                              http://www.josephnewman.com/
                              Almost everyone treats him as a insane man chasing his dreams, but he has made several WORKING prototypes. Scientists has confirmed that his engines display extraordinary properties.

                              As SU Forum can hardly keep any discussion serious, there is something way lighter and presented in an easy to digest fashion πŸ˜’

                              [flash=425,344:3fdtow7z]http://www.youtube.com/v/gTAqGKt64WM[/flash:3fdtow7z]

                              Extremely simple device that amplifies the current, so you can lit a LED using 1.5V DEAD! battery. It is easy to replicate. It is a amplifier similar to Magnacoasters unit.

                              Tomasz

                              Author of [Thea Render for SketchUp](http://www.thearender.com/sketchup)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • R Offline
                                remus
                                last edited by

                                Cant watch the video, as i'm at college, but with relation to the rest of your post:

                                If i was him i would approach the whole issue from a more traditional point of view i.e. presenting the idea as an anomaly in the current theory. Thus he is openeing up the idea for investigation in a more traditional manner without being labelled a crackpot.

                                Of course it shouldnt have to be like that, scientists should treat all ideas equally and investigate them all without prejudice. But then they have to discriminate to an extent, there simply isnt enough time to investigate everything. Thus they tend to throw away the ideas that seem particularly lacking.

                                Essentailly what i am trying to say is Mr. Kanarev is not doing himself any favours by saying "What everyone else has found is wrong, what i have found is right." (paraphrased)

                                http://remusrendering.wordpress.com/

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • Mike LuceyM Offline
                                  Mike Lucey
                                  last edited by

                                  The Joule Thiefs were good πŸ‘ Is there such a thing as 'hidden' energy around the place that we are discovering? Could this be the answer?

                                  Support us so we can support you! Upgrade to Premium Membership!

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • T Offline
                                    tomasz
                                    last edited by

                                    @remus said:

                                    Mr. Kanarev is not doing himself any favours by saying "What everyone else has found is wrong, what i have found is right." (paraphrased)

                                    You are right, but if there would be something obvious in front of your eyes, that you have really put your all knowledge to research it and it would give you aways same results, you would come to a conclusion... it does really work! There would be no much space for a compromise. I am right or they are.

                                    @mike lucey said:

                                    Is there such a thing as 'hidden' energy around the place that we are discovering? Could this be the answer?

                                    Joseph Newman teaches, based on his experience and working prototypes, that there is a magnetic field being created in a conductor when a current is going through it (nothing new). The longer the conductor (wire) the longer it takes for an electricity to go through the whole length (obvious thing). The electricity in just a 'catalyst' and it is not a source of magnetic field (something new). The magnetic field comes from particles in a (copper) wire that has aligned their own magnetic filed (something new). When one would open the circuit to stop the electricity doing a whole loop back to a source (battery) then no energy would be lost since the loop has not been yet closed. In such a case a magnetic field has been already created. The collapsing field, due to absence of the current, produces a reversed current (something well known). There would be no big influence on the battery capacity since the current didn't manage to close the loop.

                                    I think that in Joule Thief there is this reversed current being trapped and probably small self-induction occurs in the toroid. I have seen a replication of the circuit using bigger toroid and it was able to light a CFL light bulb using two AA batteries (3V in total). It is a 'hardcore' πŸ˜„ material for real enthusiasts and I don't want to do all homework for you! πŸ˜„

                                    Tomasz

                                    Author of [Thea Render for SketchUp](http://www.thearender.com/sketchup)

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • P Offline
                                      PeterCharles
                                      last edited by

                                      @unknownuser said:

                                      @mike lucey said:

                                      Time will tell. Just a thought! In order to protect these inventions, patents will have to be granted. This means that FULL data will be available to the public. At this stage the facts will come the light ... excuse the pun.

                                      One has to remember that patents applications are usually written in the way to protect the idea of the design and to disclose important details to make it really work.
                                      Tomasz

                                      The patent must describe the invention in such details as can be understood by a man "skilled in the art". This will mean anyone can make it from the patent, except that they will be prevented from doing so in the countries that have granted the patent.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • T Offline
                                        tim
                                        last edited by

                                        @petercharles said:

                                        The patent must describe the invention in such details as can be understood by a man "skilled in the art". This will mean anyone can make it from the patent, except that they will be prevented from doing so in the countries that have granted the patent.

                                        Not quite; they would be prevented from making them for profit without permission of the patent holder. Patents do not stop anyone making something patented. They require the maker to have permission from the owner, usually of course granted in exchange for money. Nothing stops someone from getting a patent and allowing cost-free licenses. Or even - so far as I know at the moment - refusing all licenses and thus preventing the thing being made by anyone. Now, if only I could have had a patent on the core of Word, so I could stop it from driving a billion people insane...

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • TIGT Offline
                                          TIG Moderator
                                          last edited by

                                          The universe is teeming with energy: it's just the 'catching it' in a way that you can use it that's difficult.

                                          Talk of 'efficiency' and >100% is something of a red-herring. Think of the well tried and proven 'heat-pump'... for every kW of electricity you use to run it you get 3+ kW of heat out of it. That's 300% 'efficiency' if you use that terminology. It's normally called COP = Coefficient Of Performance. Clearly the device has 'produced' considerably more energy than you've put into it. It hasn't made it by magic, it's just moved it from somewhere else and concentrated it - after running it you'll now some ground-water (or other 'source') that's a tiny bit cooler AND a few litres of water in you building that's now a lot hotter. Same energy - but moved and concentrated where you want it.

                                          I don't think anyone disagrees that a heat-pump works - after all fridges and air-con use them all the time !

                                          Although I can't envisage the exact details, it might be possible to contrive a device that does something similar with forms of energy other that basic 'heat'.

                                          Imagine a device that uses electricity from a battery and seems to produce more electricity than the battery uses - 'impossible' the sceptics say, however they are looking at a closed and limited system... What if the device could somehow take a tiny bit of the energy in the earth's magnetic-field (or some other field - solar-wind or whatever you can imagine), that's so little out of so much that it had an imperceptible effect on the whole thing; and that device then somehow moved the potential energy and concentrated it into useful power... After all there are zillions of Watts of energy landing all over the earth from the sun AND the earth's magnetic-field and radioactive core-heat output: we just need to catch it and concentrate it where we want it to be...

                                          .

                                          TIG

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • P Offline
                                            PeterCharles
                                            last edited by

                                            @tim said:

                                            Not quite; they would be prevented from making them for profit without permission of the patent holder.

                                            My understanding from the UK is that profit does not come into it

                                            @unknownuser said:

                                            Patents do not stop anyone making something patented. They require the maker to have permission from the owner, usually of course granted in exchange for money.

                                            True

                                            @unknownuser said:

                                            Nothing stops someone from getting a patent and allowing cost-free licenses.

                                            True, but then why spend all that money on a patent! Just publish it in the public domain
                                            @unknownuser said:

                                            Or even - so far as I know at the moment - refusing all licenses and thus preventing the thing being made by anyone.

                                            Except by the patentee himself

                                            @unknownuser said:

                                            Now, if only I could have had a patent on the core of Word, so I could stop it from driving a billion people insane...

                                            Of course you can only enforce a patent if you've got deep pockets. Be prepared for others to, claim prior art, launch an application for revocation, produce it in countries you couldn't afford to patent in, just ignore you and let you sue if they've got money and you haven't, etc, etc

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 2 / 3
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Buy SketchPlus
                                            Buy SUbD
                                            Buy WrapR
                                            Buy eBook
                                            Buy Modelur
                                            Buy Vertex Tools
                                            Buy SketchCuisine
                                            Buy FormFonts

                                            Advertisement