Legitimate Energy Source?
Moderator: scott
Legitimate Energy Source?
Bill (ovyyus) continually talks about the need for a legitimate energy source.
Are there illegitimate energy sources? An illegitimate child is still a child. An illegitimate energy source would still be an energy source. What determines legitimacy?
It is well known that kinetic energy varies by the square of the speed of an object. When an object doubles in speed its kinetic energy quadruples. If this increase of kinetic energy could be tapped to do work without depleting the original momentum then would this be a legitimate energy source or an illegitimate energy source?
If the energy source breaks the Second Law of Thermodynamic then does it become an illegal or illegitimate energy source?
The second law of thermodynamics is a statement of repeated observation (or perhaps better yet, a statement of some things that have never been observed).
Here are two things that have never been observed:
1. Heat has never been observed to move spontaneously from a cold body to a hot body.
2. Heat has never been observed to be converted entirely into work with no other result.
So the second law, in other words, is just the statement that these two things are impossible. That is:
1. It is impossible for heat to move spontaneously from a cold body to a hot body with no other result.
2. It is impossible to convert heat quantitatively into work with no other result.
The latter statement is sometimes phrased: "It is impossible to make a perpetual motion machine of the second kind."
Ah, but this assumes that the perpetual motion machine uses heat to produce work. Heat is kinetic energy. Motion is also kinetic energy. A perpetual motion machine would use kinetic energy in the form of motion rather than kinetic energy in the form of heat. Thus the Second Law of Thermodynamics does not apply. Kinetic energy CAN and DOES move from slower objects to faster objects under certain circumstances involving centrifugal force. Thus the Second Law of Thermodynamic only covers heat engines. Even James Clerk Maxwell recognized the fact that the Second Law of Thermodynamic might not be valid in certain cases. That was the basis of Maxwell's Demon.
A device that converts (or sorts) motion into faster moving weights and slower moving weights is much like Maxwell's Demon. Both Maxwell's Demon and such a device break the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Maxwell's Demon sorts molecules one by one into faster and slower vessels, which is an almost but not impossible task. A motion engine would sort the motion of weights into faster and slower moving weights. This requires no energy other that the initial rotation of a wheel. Thus kinetic energy transfers from slower moving weights to faster moving weights, which would break the Second Law of Thermodynamics if the kinetic energy was in the form of heat. But the kinetic energy is not in the form of heat, it is in the form of motion.
Does this make the energy gain illegitimate?
Are there illegitimate energy sources? An illegitimate child is still a child. An illegitimate energy source would still be an energy source. What determines legitimacy?
It is well known that kinetic energy varies by the square of the speed of an object. When an object doubles in speed its kinetic energy quadruples. If this increase of kinetic energy could be tapped to do work without depleting the original momentum then would this be a legitimate energy source or an illegitimate energy source?
If the energy source breaks the Second Law of Thermodynamic then does it become an illegal or illegitimate energy source?
The second law of thermodynamics is a statement of repeated observation (or perhaps better yet, a statement of some things that have never been observed).
Here are two things that have never been observed:
1. Heat has never been observed to move spontaneously from a cold body to a hot body.
2. Heat has never been observed to be converted entirely into work with no other result.
So the second law, in other words, is just the statement that these two things are impossible. That is:
1. It is impossible for heat to move spontaneously from a cold body to a hot body with no other result.
2. It is impossible to convert heat quantitatively into work with no other result.
The latter statement is sometimes phrased: "It is impossible to make a perpetual motion machine of the second kind."
Ah, but this assumes that the perpetual motion machine uses heat to produce work. Heat is kinetic energy. Motion is also kinetic energy. A perpetual motion machine would use kinetic energy in the form of motion rather than kinetic energy in the form of heat. Thus the Second Law of Thermodynamics does not apply. Kinetic energy CAN and DOES move from slower objects to faster objects under certain circumstances involving centrifugal force. Thus the Second Law of Thermodynamic only covers heat engines. Even James Clerk Maxwell recognized the fact that the Second Law of Thermodynamic might not be valid in certain cases. That was the basis of Maxwell's Demon.
A device that converts (or sorts) motion into faster moving weights and slower moving weights is much like Maxwell's Demon. Both Maxwell's Demon and such a device break the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Maxwell's Demon sorts molecules one by one into faster and slower vessels, which is an almost but not impossible task. A motion engine would sort the motion of weights into faster and slower moving weights. This requires no energy other that the initial rotation of a wheel. Thus kinetic energy transfers from slower moving weights to faster moving weights, which would break the Second Law of Thermodynamics if the kinetic energy was in the form of heat. But the kinetic energy is not in the form of heat, it is in the form of motion.
Does this make the energy gain illegitimate?
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Jim, a 'legitimate' energy source is one that is proven and can do work. Your concept of inertial energy gain between moving weights is unproven and does not do any work. It would appear that when energy machines are designed to run on unproven energy sources they invariably don't work. That's PM history to date.Jim wrote:Are there illegitimate energy sources? An illegitimate child is still a child. An illegitimate energy source would still be an energy source. What determines legitimacy?
If Bessler had truly created a never before seen form of inertial energy, as you propose, then why did Karl allow such an important discovery to slowly wither into obscurity? Karl had the opportunity of a lifetime to etch his name in history, all at a relative pittance. Instead, Karl chose to simply support the inventor and make vague statements about the secret being simple and somewhat obvious. Something isn't quite right.
I think Bessler's energy source will be found to be simple and obvious and already known, when pointed out in the right way, as Karl implied. IMO, a new and revolutionary inertial energy source simply doesn't fit Karl's descriptions of Bessler's invention.
I could harp on.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:31 pm
- Location: U.S.A.
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Hey Bill.....
Are you thinking that whatever the energy source was....was not something new and that Karl was familiar with it already. Although maybe not used in the way that Bessler was using. Basically, Karl wasn't thrown for a loop with this "new" source because it wasn't something unbeknownst to him?
Steve
The implications of ones "honor" and the understanding of integrity 300 years ago were nowhere near the pathetic level we hold dear today. Now, that is just a personal opinion here, but there are documents that would show how much more a persons honor and integrity were held in esteem lo those many years ago as compared to our times. People would stake their lives on it....literally! Not so today....at all! He simply kept his promise.....Jim, a 'legitimate' energy source is one that is proven and can do work. Your concept of inertial energy gain between moving weights is unproven and does not do any work. It would appear that when energy machines are designed to run on unproven energy sources they invariably don't work. That's PM history to date.
If Bessler had truly created a never before seen form of inertial energy, as you propose, then why did Karl allow such an important discovery to slowly wither into obscurity? Karl had the opportunity of a lifetime to etch his name in history, all at a relative pittance. Instead, Karl chose to simply support the inventor and make vague statements about the secret being simple and somewhat obvious. Something isn't quite right.
I think Bessler's energy source will be found to be simple and obvious and already known, when pointed out in the right way, as Karl implied. IMO, a new and revolutionary inertial energy source simply doesn't fit Karl's descriptions of Bessler's invention.
Are you thinking that whatever the energy source was....was not something new and that Karl was familiar with it already. Although maybe not used in the way that Bessler was using. Basically, Karl wasn't thrown for a loop with this "new" source because it wasn't something unbeknownst to him?
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Steve, I'm not sure what you're saying in regards to honour and integrity 300 years ago. Sure, both qualities were perhaps held more seriously then. I think Bessler and Karl acted honorably and with integrity, so how does that relate to your commentary?
In answer to your second paragraph - yes.
In answer to your second paragraph - yes.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:32 pm
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
legitimate or illegitimate?
Does it matter if its their? Jim have you created it and closed the loop yet ? I do not want details of the design just an answer on whether you have something patentable yet. If you could let us all know i would appreciate it. Hope all went well with the house but we are dying to hear some progress reports.
I believe it may not be a legitimate source but it is their. I have been struggling to get my mind around "energy source" lately. When we have free energy from the manipulation of other forces what ends up getting the credit for it. The gravity, the ficticious force, the accumulated momentum or the new energy source that we think is there?
Crazy Dave
Does it matter if its their? Jim have you created it and closed the loop yet ? I do not want details of the design just an answer on whether you have something patentable yet. If you could let us all know i would appreciate it. Hope all went well with the house but we are dying to hear some progress reports.
I believe it may not be a legitimate source but it is their. I have been struggling to get my mind around "energy source" lately. When we have free energy from the manipulation of other forces what ends up getting the credit for it. The gravity, the ficticious force, the accumulated momentum or the new energy source that we think is there?
Crazy Dave
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
I've been asked to post this quote.
Walter
The beginning of wisdom is a definition of terms.
The question might be, "Legitimate or illegitimate?" Whether it's more nobler to sire a thousand bastards with any whore who will lay with you or one legitimate heir with your childhood sweetheart.
But to the point. What is a legitimate energy source. I think what is meant is one that actually exists. I don't mind being corrected.
It isn't impossible to tap into the energy of the sun or wind or your next door neighbor's electrical power to get a "legitimate source". It might be immoral to rip your neighbor off yet the meaning of "legitimate" is one that actually exists. That bastard owes me and he does manage to pay his bills.
In my opinion both Jim Mitch and ovyyus make equally good points that aren't all that dissimilar.
If there is any possibility of intellectual discourse the terms need to be defined.
Walter
........................¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Correct. A 'legitimate' energy source is one that is proven to exist and capable of doing real work. Furthermore, in terms of Bessler's invention, I think it must also be one that appears free and inexhaustible.WaltzCee wrote:But to the point. What is a legitimate energy source. I think what is meant is one that actually exists. I don't mind being corrected.
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:32 pm
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Does it matter if its their? Jim have you created it and closed the loop yet ? I do not want details of the design just an answer on whether you have something patentable yet. If you could let us all know i would appreciate it. Hope all went well with the house but we are dying to hear some progress reports.
Progress report? Have you not read my plan that I posted a while back?
All I can say is that I'm following my plan!A] First get something that works!!!
B] Take steps to insure the idea survives in case of calamity.
C] Define the principle or the reason why it works!
D] Design a simple cheap working POP (proof of principle) sample model.
E] (omitted by mistake)
F] Build as many of these models as money/time/reasoning suggest.
G] Plan Ad campaign, including literature, web space, documentation, etc.
H] Write patent applications for most major countries.
I] Prepare a list of names, addresses of who is to receive what.
J] Always continue research into increasing power output and alternate designs.
K] Load up on liability and life insurance.
L] When all is prepared, file patents, upload web site, mail plans, ship models, etc. Hit the media hard! Make a sensation! Be on the evening news worldwide.
Do what needs to be done to keep those in power from suppressing your invention. It is much harder to put the genie back into the bottle after everyone has seen it. They move slow. You must move fast. The window of opportunity is between when the PTO receives your application and when someone reviewing it realizes what your invention really does.
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Still at step A?
-
- Addict
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:21 pm
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Jim, Are you on B yet? ;)
-
- Devotee
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:32 pm
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Sorry For asking about your progress, I thought i was being polite in not asking for any details. I did not see in any of your "plan" where deny success/failure was a stated goal. I only try and ask what you or others are doing at certain times and want VERY vague answers. I was elated when your four year old post was rehatched and i accidentally thought we had completely different wheels.
I have no assumptions that we have the same idea, and i have no delusions of jumping on any one else's bandwagon. But i have progressed quite far in my journey and have only a small handful of people who i would even consider to include for one reason or another in any announcement. Obviously no-one will share the glory with another but some might deserve a front row seat and enjoy being part of a working wheel if not the discoverer/inventor of such.
In the past few months i have asked you several direct questions regarding your thoughts on certain items and have made general inquiries into your progress. I am sorry if you don't feel i have the intellect or ability and do not wish to have a conversation with me.
I have absolutely no doubt of where i am or what my chances are and i am not searching for anyone to tell me how to do it. I also have no delusions that I am the only one that could have it and and not trying to derail anyone in their journey by stating otherwise.
Jim as i have said many times before, best of luck with your experiments, i will not bother you with my droll existence. Of course i read your "plan".
Dave
I have no assumptions that we have the same idea, and i have no delusions of jumping on any one else's bandwagon. But i have progressed quite far in my journey and have only a small handful of people who i would even consider to include for one reason or another in any announcement. Obviously no-one will share the glory with another but some might deserve a front row seat and enjoy being part of a working wheel if not the discoverer/inventor of such.
In the past few months i have asked you several direct questions regarding your thoughts on certain items and have made general inquiries into your progress. I am sorry if you don't feel i have the intellect or ability and do not wish to have a conversation with me.
I have absolutely no doubt of where i am or what my chances are and i am not searching for anyone to tell me how to do it. I also have no delusions that I am the only one that could have it and and not trying to derail anyone in their journey by stating otherwise.
Jim as i have said many times before, best of luck with your experiments, i will not bother you with my droll existence. Of course i read your "plan".
Dave
Dave, I did not mean to offend you. When you (or anyone) asks for a progress report I have two choices. Keep silent with no reply. Or remind everyone of my plan. Dave, you are one of the sharper ones here. I respect you. Please don't feel slighted when I keep my success status a secret until Step L.
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
Then I guess we're still at step A.
re: Legitimate Energy Source?
just one more A and you will have the trifecta
the uneducated
if your gona be dumb you gota be tough
Who need drugs when you can have fatigue toxins and caffeine
if your gona be dumb you gota be tough
Who need drugs when you can have fatigue toxins and caffeine