 |
There are currently, 201 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.
You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here
| |
| |
A Question
Posted on Monday, August 04, 2008 @ 22:55:31 UTC by vlad
|
|
jovthor writes: I don't know how to ask this in the proper way and I'm pressed for time, so I'm asking it here:
How does ZPE, or any of these other orgs for that matter, go about 'proving' a device is zero-point? What are the conditions that must exist?
Thank you so much!
~Marc McCormick
|
| |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.
| |
|
|
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 10:28:12 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | How to prove FE/OU? Raise the temperature of a quantity of mass above the ambient temperature without the need for outside energy input or the consumption of fuel.
Sometimes called a calorimeter, the people at the Austin Institute for Advanced Studies have the best setup for determining if FE/OU is actually happening. They have righteously investigated many, and turned down all of them. A confirmation by the Institute would constitute proof.
A lot of developers are upset with them, a sure indication of their honesty and unbias. Most phony FE/OU claims won't go near the Institute.
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by RBM on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 18:03:16 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | ElectroDynaCat
As a reader of this board for a while I am familiar with your qualifications - and I can assure you they exceed mine.
That said, the comment regarding the usefullnes of the calorimeter in FE/OU system measurements didn't sit right with me. So I did a simple word search for 'calorimeter' and 'Tom Bearden'.
A result: From http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/083101a.htm As a simple example, a calorimeter cannot be
used
dependably for measurement of such a mix, because it will measure the
effect
of the difference, between the positive energy that heats the liquid
and the
negative energy that simultaneously cools it.
It would seem the calorimeter has limitations ? |
]
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by ElectroDynaCat on Wednesday, August 06, 2008 @ 10:58:28 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | A positive calorimeter result is the only valid proof of FE/OU that would be accepted by the peer review physics community.
All energy degrades into heat, thats why a calorimeter is used to measure performance.
Thermodynamics requires that the calorimeter take into account an entire closed system, sorry no wires or air lines can go into the calorimeter box.
If an FE/OU device is getting its' energy from outside the measured boundary, it's not valid.
|
]
]
|
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by vlad on Monday, August 04, 2008 @ 23:22:02 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com | Good question Marc ...but I'm afraid the answer is not that simple and takes a lot of reading to understand. Since you're "pressed for time", a more recent example of an attempt of 'proving' a device is/uses zero-point (vacuum) energy and the conditions that must exist for "extraction" to happen can be found in the following post:
http://zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2938
Again, this whole domain of research, zpe/vacuum energy engineering, is progressing so slowly because everybody is "pressed for time" these days ... but I have no doubt there are few people out there who do take the time to study this, and they will change the world as we know it ...
Vlad
|
|
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by malc on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 01:24:26 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://web.ukonline.co.uk/mripley | The inventor will have no fuel bills and a car that never stops at a petrol station!
So will their family and friends. In fact any inventory with half a brain cell will make sure that as many of their family and friends are fuel bill free before they disclose it. That way it can't be supressed and nobody can deny that it works.
regards,
Malcolm
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by irjsi on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 18:07:04 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | Amen to this post !
by malc on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 01:24:26 PDT
( User Info [zpenergy.commodules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=malc] | Send a Message [zpenergy.commodules.php?name=Private_Messages&mode=post&u=416]) http://web.ukonline.co.uk/mripley [web.ukonline.co.uk] The inventor will have no fuel bills and a car that never stops at a petrol station! . . . .
Malcolm
or:
When a claim for OU etc. is published . . .and the one in possession of the OU device is asked:
"What is the longest time this 'OU device' has operated?
And the 'one in possession of the device replies:
"It has been functioning since my Great grandfather placed it into operation,
on October 14, 1917!
"As you observe, the device is quite small, and as your are, also aware, the device emits no sound!
"The Electric Company scratched their heads for 30 years.
"The Great grandparents and their neighbors had a very well lighted farms!"
Roy Stewart,
Phoenix AZ
|
]
|
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by Koen on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 04:48:38 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | Since nobody knows exactly what the ZPE is ("virtual" particles, "virtual" photons, real photons according to Hal, or even "real" aether particles), I guess the hallmark of ZPE conversion is the following:
- overunity without the input of energy in the form of heat, wind, solar radiation or some other "well defined" form of energy.
I examined the patent, but I do not understand the principle. Is this ZPE extraction as explained to SED, where QM does not offer an explanation?
Hal does not describe very clearly how the Casimir cavities can be exploited for ZPE conversion into electricity, even if one take into consideration the validity of SED (stochastic electro dynamics).
Another ZPE patent:
Shoulders, K.R. (1991) "Energy conversion using high charge density",
U.S. Patent No. 5,018,180, issued May 21, 1991.
|
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by modernsteam on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 @ 09:26:16 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) | I gather you meant "Hal Puthoff". I'm one of those F-E enthusiasts ("groupies") who, though not sure about what ZPE is, accept for the time being Tom Bearden's explanation that it is only the relatively tiny, more mechanical manifestation of Energy from the Vacuum of Space as shown by Casimir's prediction in 1948, and Lamoreaux's experimental confirmation in the late 90s. Tentatively - and I mean tentatively - I accept that the relatively huge, very dense Wheeler "Quantum Foam" Vacuum or Space Energy consists of mass-free virtual particles/waves, virtual photons/waves, and sometimes virtual Dirac electrons/waves which, under certain wilfully engineered or naturally or accidentally occuring conditions (lightening perhaps?) strike or interact with "real" material particles, usually electrons, potentializing or energizing them beyond their base charge to do work on a load in an electrical circuit, or manifest as heat, light, or mechanical dynamics as in Cold Fusion, the Blacklight system, or the Steorn "Orbo" device (when it works, that is).
Hal Ade (the other Hal)
|
]
Re: A Question (Score: 1)
by Koen on Friday, August 08, 2008 @ 06:24:44 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://no.nl/tesla | Yes, dr. Puthoff indeed, and his ZPE extraction patent.
The Casimir effect can be explained or understood in various ways.
Sarfatti suggested the Casimir force is an inbalance of electro-static forces.
Tom Bearden's ZPE information is also very interesting, although I think Tom has a source (a military/navy scientist) who is much higher educated.
I assume Tom mixes the information he got with his own illogical ideas, such as gravity as a standing wave grid (Tom got mixed up with conjugated mirrored signals "going backward in time", etc...).
I deduced the following:
- Tom's standing scalar wave structure makes sense, taking into consideration my definition of scalar field (Tom did not define any scalar field within the context of a physics theory).
-The standing scalar waves have the effect of an electrical polarization of the vacuum, causing light beams to be bend (a known gravitic effect).
- Hal Puthoff described a model with anisotropic speed of light and variable vacuum permittivity and permeability.
So again I am the only one to connect the dots.
Tesla assumed the existance of aether particles (much lighter than electrons). He must have been correct, because it is not possible technically to polarize the vacuum into 'virtual' electrons and 'virtual' positrons not too far away from real charged particles. This takes too much energy.
But the existence of a lighter aether particles allows for vacuum polarization, and therefore for longitudinal electric waves, etc, etc...
Next, Whittaker's decomposition of an 1/r electric potential into a wave spectrum only makes sense as longitudinal electro-scalar waves.
This Coulomb potential wave spectrum has strong phase coherence, while the Zero Point Field TEM waves (according to Puthoff's theory) have random phase. This randomness gives rise to the 'statistical quantum behaviour' of particles. It is conceivable that energy waves with random phases are received, while the particle re-sends the energy waves with coherent wave phases (the Whittaker model).
Wheeler's massfree "quantum foam" is not necessarily mass-free and charge-free, it could have very light mass (think of dark mass, dark energy) and small electric charge (think of vacuum polarization, gravity light bending).
My theory explains that we can exploit static charge power in the form of Q dV/dt ( Q is static charge, and dV/dt means a change in voltage per second ). For some type of devices overunity can be explained as receiving electro-scalar wave energy. It involves the 'aether' according to Tesla.
|
]
|
|
|
|
