Gas price Idea

[RacerX]

First Law of Newcodynamics (involves a tinfoil hat I believe)

[Tekky]

From Wikipedia:

"The law of Conservation of Energy states that energy can never be created or destroyed."

This "law" is incredibly naive: energy had to have been created at least once in order to have anything to classify as energy. While energy cannot be destroyed directly (since it is intangible), it can be reduced to non-existance by sufficiently impeding the flow of that energy to its destination, or by eliminating the source. This is equal to destroying energy.

Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that full statement, energy can never be created or destroyed, it can only be transferred? (as I remember learning it many many moons ago)

Any so-called energy creating system needs some form of energy in to equal energy out. An automobile's energy, for example, uses chemical energy, gasoline and thermal energy(ignition), to create kinetic energy (and the byproduct thermal energy), which is then transferred to the different axels to make the automobile move. (the thermal energy is mostly lost, but there are also attempts to recover it by using it to heat the inside of the car) Now to keep it going, an alternator needs kinetic energy, being transferred to it via the engine and belts, to get it to create electrical energy. (and, as a byproduct, more theremal energy)



--thank you to Mrs. Petska

[Rsmacker]

Help, I appear to have inadvertently strayed into The Stephen Hawking Fan Club Board. I gotta get out of here before someone starts discussing how the Starship Enterprise couldn't actually exist...........

Computer, take me to a thread containing insults, childish abuse and profanity. Gooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Tekky]

Help, I appear to have inadvertently strayed into The Stephen Hawking Fan Club Board. I gotta get out of here before someone starts discussing how the Starship Enterprise couldn't actually exist...........

Computer, take me to a thread containing insults, childish abuse and profanity. Gooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I'm sorry, should we suit you by just posting 1+1=2 or cat goes "meow" dog goes "woof"?

[Rsmacker]

Yes please, that'd be super. Though try and mention tits in there somewhere too. Oh, and pictures, of the tits, would be great.

[Tekky]

Sorry, can't help you. Us nerd types don't have those kind of pictures.

Can I interest you in a nice picture of Uranus?

[fett]

Matter is matter. It's just a matter of where it was before we realized that we could use it for our purposes. It's that simple. We have just figured out how to take what has been "Earth" and just changed the natural composition to suit our needs. Oil or coal as it sits in the ground is just natural. Our ability to burn them just changes the solid matter into their components. Ergo, therefore, the barrel of oil or the ton of coal gets reduced to our needs. And the residue gets sprewed in the air.

[marcus]

From Wikipedia:

"The law of Conservation of Energy states that energy can never be created or destroyed."

This "law" is incredibly naive: energy had to have been created at least once in order to have anything to classify as energy. While energy cannot be destroyed directly (since it is intangible), it can be reduced to non-existance by sufficiently impeding the flow of that energy to its destination, or by eliminating the source. This is equal to destroying energy.

This is the first time I've ever heard a law of physics called naive The fact is that this law is very useful and you have its application to thank for numerous technological devices, including the internal combustion engine. And I am aware of no experiment that has ever shown that energy can be created or destroyed. Einstein has shown that it can be converted to and from matter, but energy is conserved in this process as well.

And the 2nd law of thermodynamics:

"a microscopic system may exhibit fluctuations of entropy opposite to that dictated by the Second Law (see Fluctuation Theorem). In fact, the mathematical proof of the Fluctuation Theorem from time-reversible dynamics and the Axiom of Causality constitutes a proof of the Second Law. In a logical sense the Second Law thus ceases to be a "Law" of physics and instead becomes a theorem (read: theory) which is valid for large systems or long times."

Here's where I call something naive: this entry from Wikipedia. Laws of physics are not universally applicable. In other words, most of the physical laws have circumstances in which they don't hold true. For example, quantum mechanics and relativity liberally violate Newton's laws. That does not mean that Newtons laws are not useful for understanding the way the world works. The 2nd law of thermodynamics is no different. Sure, there are some microscopic systems in which entropy seems to be reversed. But we have never seen this happen on the scale of things which are bigger than microscopic. Again, internal combustion engines would not work correctly if the law were not true on a macroscopic scale. As a final note here, scientifically speaking there is a world of difference between a theory and a law of physics, and the statement you have bolded here does not make this law a theory. You can turn your vehicle on a million times and the 2nd law of thermodynamics will be observed every time. If not, you better get out, because its going to get hot

Oh yeah, for those who are having trouble following along, I like tits

[marcus]

I'm sorry, should we suit you by just posting 1+1=2 or cat goes "meow" dog goes "woof"?

I play a mean game of patty-cake, anybody in? As for the Enterprise not being physically possible, don't get me started

[YetAnotherOne]

Ron's qouted survey was dated 2005.
48 cents a gallon, I believe, here in South Carolina.
Plus many other embedded taxes that are not quite as visible.
Cost of regulatory compliance is beyond calculation.

Simply the move to drill for oil domestically would get some of OPEC's
antics in check. I think in this world of speculators, it would make a big difference.

Exactly. Every good and service sold in the US contains within its price a roughly 25-30% embedded tax that compensates upstream businesses for the taxes they paid. The cost of regulatory compliance is widely thought to exceed the cost of direct taxation ob businesses so add another 25-30%. Add in a typical 5-7% sales tax and roughly 2/3 of every dollar spent on goods and services here in the US is really the cost of government rather than the cost of the good or service purchased.

[Rsmacker]

I found this, about free energy.

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/

No tits though, so far.

[Newc]

And the alternator is powered by the engine, which uses gas/diesel. What you are saying Newc is that our problem is easily solved by putting an alternator on an electric motor. Now it will charge the batteries as they are in use, and it will run forever, right?

If this is the case, forget it. Motors generate heat, which is wasted power. Alternators do the same thing. Both consume energy in their operation (power losses). Even if you were to capture every energy loss, it still would not work. You can't produce more power than you consume.

That is a perpetual motion machine, and believe me that if it could be done they already would have done it by now.

If you have some other way for this to be done, I sure would love to hear it! So would a boatload of scientists and oil executives...lol!

An alternator doesn't care if it's being spun by a Hemi or a gerbil in a wheel. It has nothing to do with the heat coming off the motor - it's all about moving parts. Keep those parts moving of their own momentum after an initial start and they will run freely. Yes, friction will retard the motion, but an electrical (battery) system where power is split between moving the moving parts and repleneshing spent battery power negates that.

[Newc]

This is the first time I've ever heard a law of physics called naive The fact is that this law is very useful and you have its application to thank for numerous technological devices, including the internal combustion engine. And I am aware of no experiment that has ever shown that energy can be created or destroyed. Einstein has shown that it can be converted to and from matter, but energy is conserved in this process as well.

So car engines simply focus the power of the universe into a central point? They don't create energy? Fascinating.





I think the main sticking point here is "where does all that heat go? it's not going back into the machine as power so it's wasted and therefore the entire process is impossible". This is what I'm getting out of all this.

Yes, heat is a by-product of friction. No, that heat cannot be converted back into kinetic force (though you can use it to cook food with). That doesn't render the concept impossible.

And I'm not sure we're talking about the same electric motor - the one I'm thinking of does have moving parts which can be used to turn alternators and such. I'm not aware of any electric motor that sits there and produces motive force just by humming.

[Newc]

Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that full statement, energy can never be created or destroyed, it can only be transferred? (as I remember learning it many many moons ago)

Any so-called energy creating system needs some form of energy in to equal energy out. An automobile's energy, for example, uses chemical energy, gasoline and thermal energy(ignition), to create kinetic energy (and the byproduct thermal energy), which is then transferred to the different axels to make the automobile move. (the thermal energy is mostly lost, but there are also attempts to recover it by using it to heat the inside of the car) Now to keep it going, an alternator needs kinetic energy, being transferred to it via the engine and belts, to get it to create electrical energy. (and, as a byproduct, more theremal energy)



--thank you to Mrs. Petska

That's the line as I found it on at least 3 different searches, not including the Wiki page.

While an initial rotation cannot create enough force to sustain a 2nd rotation, it can provide power to the next system in the line to rotate, and then that provides the power to the next system, and so on. Loop those systems and the last provides the first with enough power for a second rotation. It doesn't matter if you have 3 systems or 30,000 systems in a loop.

This is the simple premise to the Newton's Cradle - initial energy is transferred to the next piece, then the next, then the next, then the last, which is then transferred back to the first, though with the cradle's linear design, it passes back through the middle pieces.

If you make that as a ring and are able to provide enough force to the initial piece that would make the last piece loop around to the first, it would run continuously. Obviously on such a small system gravity and friction would reduce the efficiency as the last piece swung over the top of the loop frame, but if a spring-loaded arm at the top of the loop was there to flip the piece through the rest of the loop, gravity and friction effects would be reduced.

[DrDoug]

Newc, heat can be converted back into energy. A turbocharger is a good example. It uses the heat (and the expanding gasses from it) to generate more power. There are other ways that are used to recapture what was once lost energy.

The problem with your idea is that it takes energy to spin an alternator. Because of thermodynamics, it takes more energy than it is able to create to power it via an electric motor. I am a former marine electrician, and I played around with some heavy duty DC inverters to set up an experiment using 30 amp marine chargers. No matter what you do, it will run out of energy. This system has no moving parts, so no energy lost there. It loses its energy via heat (and a lot of heat at that!).

I did this to settle an argument at the plant (and we had time to waste between production runs!), and it turned out as expected. The argument was to set up a self sustaining loop, and tap off the excess power from it. There was never any extra power, and it ran itself into the ground.

Sure would be nice to overcome that problem, because it would solve all of our energy problems.