Visit our Popular Forums

Strygaldwir · 25-06-2009, 10:46

Neither matter nor energy can be created (by humans, given our current understandings of physical and the properties of our universe) only transformed. E = MC*C theorizes that there is a direct correlation between energy and matter and that C*C (Speed of light squared) suggest that there is an AWFUL lot of energy in matter. Thats at the nuclear level of interaction. At the chemical level, energy can be store and released by creating and releasing certain bonds. Since we know we can't create any energy, or matter, we can only transform it, we know that the energy released during a chemical reaction had to been put there previously. Now, we may not have put it there. So, that gives us some opportunities.

Hydrogen, can be burned in the presence of Oxygen and you'll get two things one, a chemical energy release and 2) a combining of 2 atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, that H20 stuff colloquially known as water. We could even take the water, transform it into hydrogen, dissassociate the oxygen and burn it. Only challenge is we'd have us the same energy we released to break them apart. Now, there are an untold number of ways to create these chemical reactions, but they all have to honor the "we can't create energy or matter theory. There are these really cool devices that take water, solar energy carbon dioxide, strip the hydrogen out of the water, combining it with the carbon dioxide and release the 2 oxygen atoms and makes a substance we can burn, releasing that stored solar energy! Really cool stuff, very ecologically friendly too!

I am sure that we understand, we live in a semi closed system, earth. This semi closed system gets almost all our energy from nuclear energy transformations. Some of it is stored via a very large number of mechanisms. A very large amount of it gets radiated back out into space in a variety of forms. We can lever MANY of those forms, heck we can even create a lot of our own, but it is just moving one thing from one place to another, no magic, yet! (How does Jean Gray get all the energy to lift all that stuff? Is she tapping gravitational energy, does she store it in some kind of cellular structure, severing covalent bonds? Tapping mitichlorians? Now that's worthy of analysis!)

**GordMay** · 25-06-2009, 10:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strygaldwir

... How does Jean Gray get all the energy to lift all that stuff? Is she tapping gravitational energy, does she store it in some kind of cellular structure, severing covalent bonds? Tapping mitichlorians? Now that's worthy of analysis!

Apparently, Jean Grey has psionic powers of telekinesis and telepathy, granting her complete control over matter, energy, thought, and unlimited psionic energies.
In other words, it's all in her mind.

Strygaldwir · 25-06-2009, 11:00

Gord!

See, that's the question! Is it in her mind (cellular structure), or is she manipulating external forces and if so, which ones!

Captain Bill · 25-06-2009, 11:23

Glad to see you two have joined the fantasy world that started this thread. Maybe you guys will make it on a local news program.

Hampus · 25-06-2009, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strygaldwir

Now that's worthy of analysis!)

I wouldn't mind analysing Jean Grey

anotherT34C · 25-06-2009, 12:56

Captain Bill, you must re-read what I wrote. It is the act of striking a match and setting it to oil which releases more energy than you put in. This is of course because oil comes to us as a ready-made fuel, whose energy was paid for by the nuclear furnace of the sun. If one were to argue that the energy cost of creating the match were more than what was released from the oil by way of the First Law, they would be incorrect.

Seawater comes to us as a ready made fuel. As it turns out, it holds less (chemical) energy than would be required to liberate it. My point was that this wasn't necessarily so.

wacko · 25-06-2009, 13:21

ok, this is hard for me to explain because I'm not a scientist. but, all this talk of getting more than you put in may not be where we should be looking.

Maybe, the energy required to break the bonds is less using these radio waves.

I'm going to use easy numbers and make things up for this example, bear with me.

right now we get a certain amount of energy from oil. it takes a certain amount of energy to get what we get from oil.

lets say it takes 10 units of energy to get 5 units back from oil - you have a 50% difference between what it takes to create and what you get back. it's like 50% efficient.

maybe these radio waves could create 10 units of energy and we get 8 units out of it. that would be like 80% efficiency.

we don't necessarily have to get MORE out of what we put in, but if the system is more efficient, and we can get more % back then maybe that could be possible.

i'm really sorry bout this message. i've been, ummmmm, enjoying a green plant all day and am wasted.

anotherT34C · 25-06-2009, 16:19

We'll let you go on that one, until the plant wears off.

anotherT34C · 25-06-2009, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strygaldwir

Neither matter nor energy can be created (by humans, given our current understandings of physical and the properties of our universe) only transformed. E = MC*C theorizes that there is a direct correlation between energy and matter and that C*C (Speed of light squared) suggest that there is an AWFUL lot of energy in matter. Thats at the nuclear level of interaction. At the chemical level, energy can be store and released by creating and releasing certain bonds. Since we know we can't create any energy, or matter, we can only transform it, we know that the energy released during a chemical reaction had to been put there previously. Now, we may not have put it there. So, that gives us some opportunities.

Hydrogen, can be burned in the presence of Oxygen and you'll get two things one, a chemical energy release and 2) a combining of 2 atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen, that H20 stuff colloquially known as water. We could even take the water, transform it into hydrogen, dissassociate the oxygen and burn it. Only challenge is we'd have us the same energy we released to break them apart. Now, there are an untold number of ways to create these chemical reactions, but they all have to honor the "we can't create energy or matter theory. There are these really cool devices that take water, solar energy carbon dioxide, strip the hydrogen out of the water, combining it with the carbon dioxide and release the 2 oxygen atoms and makes a substance we can burn, releasing that stored solar energy! Really cool stuff, very ecologically friendly too!

I am sure that we understand, we live in a semi closed system, earth. ..

E=mc^2 refers to the rest mass of a particle. That is, the energy required to create that complete particle from vacuum. It may suprise folks to learn that this happens all the time. When you clap your hands, for instance, the kinetic energy of the particles that make up your claping hand gets transfered to the vacuum and 'creates' a few light particles. Most of the time, the particles vanish quickly in a blip of light. This is a smaller scale version of what happens in a particle collider. So I'd have to correct you that matter CAN in fact, be created. Energy cannot (well... not exactly).

I'd also correct you that the Earth is not properly a semi-closed system. The Earth + the Sun is.

captain58sailin · 25-06-2009, 17:39

So what could really ease the energy crisis is, using less of what is created (more efficiency + reduced actual consumption). And tapping into maximizing the most efficient methods of producing usable energy. It seems that the continual human condition is our reach exceeding our grasp. No matter how much we have, we always want more, so the real answer to the whole dilemma is we all become Buddhists and exercise birth control.

BeBalu · 29-06-2009, 07:21

What we need is a big one!...and burn of the ocean. Quite a show eh?

i tend to think that his process is inefficient. But my doubting hat is only half way on, i try to believe that anything is possible...so i say, Why not?

**GordMay** · 29-06-2009, 07:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by captain58sailin

... the real answer to the whole dilemma is we all become Buddhists ...

You think we can harness the energy of the spirit (Ki)?

hellosailor · 29-06-2009, 07:43

Burn the ocean! Wasn't that an Irwin Allen movie?

Oh, no wait, that was the sky they set on fire, the whole atmosphere could be cooked off. (Some of the top scientists who built the original a-bomb thought that might happen anyway, for a fact.)

As Robert Heinlein said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The only question is, can you do it AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN? And if the system works so well, can you also power your video corder and car and house from it, and then start selling the excess to your neighbors?

If you can't, then it ain't working.

**GordMay** · 29-06-2009, 09:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by hellosailor

...
As Robert Heinlein said, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic...

Clark's Third Law:

Robert A. Heinlein said, “One man's magic is another man's engineering.”; but it was Arthur C. Clarke who formulated the three laws of prediction:

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."