New Power Generator that relies on magnets

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by skipmac

The bottom line. If ANY of these devices worked at all then why isn't someone building them and selling them? The "inventors" apply for patents. The only reason to apply for a patent is to protect your rights to the device. The reason to protect your rights to the device is so you can commercialize it.

So why are none of these things for sale? Why can't I get one down at Home Depot?

The answer is obvious. Because they don't work and if anyone tried to sell them advertising they would do what they're claimed to to on the internet that person would be charged with fraud.

I have a different question -- why do we care?

If a device is:

1. Not on the market

and

2. There is no scientific explanation for how it works, based on published principles, proven by repeatable and reproducible experiments;


Then it's not relevant to either our intellectual curiosity, or to our practical needs as cruisers.

Such a device might be relevant to potential investors, but as I am not in that market, I am sure not going to spend the time to try to separate the hype from possible reality. At first glance, it looks like utter nonsense. When I can read about it in Scientific American, I'll consider going beyond first glances.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I have a different question -- why do we care?

If a device is:

1. Not on the market

and

2. There is no scientific explanation for how it works, based on published principles, proven by repeatable and reproducible experiments;


Then it's not relevant to either our intellectual curiosity, or to our practical needs as cruisers.

Such a device might be relevant to potential investors, but as I am not in that market, I am sure not going to spend the time to try to separate the hype from possible reality. At first glance, it looks like utter nonsense. When I can read about it in Scientific American, I'll consider going beyond first glances.

Sometimes it is just fun to bait nonsense.

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I have a different question -- why do we care?

If a device is:

1. Not on the market

and

2. There is no scientific explanation for how it works, based on published principles, proven by repeatable and reproducible experiments;


Then it's not relevant to either our intellectual curiosity, or to our practical needs as cruisers.

I would care if a completely unexplained, even unexplainable using accepted science power source was demonstrated to work. The explanation could come later. If it works, that's proof enough for now.

But so far we haven't seen a working device. If anyone actually had a device as is being described, they couldn't keep it a secret if they buried it in their backyard. Someone would find out, copy it, and release it into the world. Perhaps they would get rich. One way or another, it would turn our world upside down and we would all know about it.

Just think, if you had that Indian guy's magic transformer, you could hook the output back to the input and get 10,000 Watts for free, forever. You could hook a bunch of them together, or just build a larger one, and power a city, a nation, the world. For free, with zero pollution. The stakes are huge, and while there would be some economic disruption, the benefits would be so great that nobody could stop it.

The plans for a working device are supposedly available on the internet. Why aren't we using it now? Could it be that it doesn't actually work?

Note that I'm not claiming that we understand everything in this universe. Here's an example of an "impossible" technology that appears to be real: https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015...stic-em-drive/

But note that this isn't being suppressed, but instead being publically evaluated by NASA.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Sometimes it is just fun to bait nonsense.

And we sure have some real master baiters around here

[Ribbit]

Originally Posted by buzzstar

Is he the guy who produced oil from plastic waste found at sea?

That's actually easy (and cheap) to do with Plasma Gasification and Syngas Production.

Waste to Energy | Westinghouse Plasma Corp.

Then of course there was some guy or other that dangled two copper wires into a river flow, and got an induced current from them.

[four winds]

The NASA article that Paul Elliot linked is quite interesting. An EM engine that seems to defy a conventional view of physics.

Results verified independently in three countries.

Four hour travel time to the moon.

Propulsion without burning/exhuasting (or carrying) fuel by tapping into virtual particles in the quantum vacuum. Uses a fuel cell or nuke reactor and microwave generation. So technically there is fuel aboard.

But a star ship to reach Alpha Centauri would require a reactor half the size of the current nuke sub version.


Most interesting is the connection to the device of the original subject of this thread. Namely, functioning outside the conventional boundaries of physics. And the virtual particles from the quantum vacuum. Or quantum space/Sirac Sea.

[Paul Elliott]

Originally Posted by four winds

The NASA article that Paul Elliot linked is quite interesting. An EM engine that seems to defy a conventional view of physics.

Results verified independently in three countries.

Four hour travel time to the moon.

Propulsion without burning/exhuasting (or carrying) fuel by tapping into virtual particles in the quantum vacuum. Uses a fuel cell or nuke reactor and microwave generation. So technically there is fuel aboard.

But a star ship to reach Alpha Centauri would require a reactor half the size of the current nuke sub version.


Most interesting is the connection to the device of the original subject of this thread. Namely, functioning outside the conventional boundaries of physics. And the virtual particles from the quantum vacuum. Or quantum space/Sirac Sea.

Oh, there's definitely fuel aboard. What is different (other than the strange physics) is that there is no reaction mass necessary. Current ion drives use electricity to accelerate (I believe) Argon to provide thrust. The electrical acceleration consumes power, and the Argon provides the mass. Both of these are limited resources. This new drive does away with the reaction mass, using electromagnetism instead (?), but still needs a substantial power source. As for virtual particles from the quantum vacuum, that's just a conjecture.

Again, this is being tested and verified, in public. These other schemes we've been discussing, as far as I can tell, plainly just don't work. At all.

[iancoombe]

Will it recharge the 9 volt battery

[goat]

Magnets you say? Sounds legit.

Sent from my SGH-I257M using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[four winds]

Yes fuel aboard, as I said in the post. But the quantity for the distance borders on mind boggling. If I remember right, a small fuel cell to take a craft to the moon in four hours. All possible because that small amount of energy allows the harvesting of an additional energy source, seemingly out of "nowhere". And that nowhere actually exists. Truely amazing.

Interesting to note the NASA proof of concept device is low power, like hundred watts or something, and deceptively simple technogoly.


The device subject of this thread purports to access that same space. Using a small amount of energy to tap into a larger seemingly unreal source.

The sailor guy needs to do a you tube video.

Yea, I'm sceptical, but people aren't as smart as they think, if they are so certain there the laws of physics are immutable.

[sailorchic34]

The Nasa EM thruster, is a very low thrust (like a few newtons of force... tiny) device that does NOT do in any way violate newtons laws. It's a simple microwave magnatron in a tuned resonator. Thrust is developed not by the microwaves hitting the back plate (that would violate newtons laws) but as a vector shift when the particles/waves reflect off the angled walls. Very tiny thrust. Like a feather. But then no fuel is required, so pretty handy for satellite positioning.

That 4 hours to the moon thingy is the marketing guys talking. Sort of like the 200 mpg carb.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

That 4 hours to the moon thingy is the marketing guys talking. Sort of like the 200 mpg carb.

The 4 hours to the moon got my attention as well. Would take an average speed close to 60,000 mph, or almost four times the orbital speed of the space shuttle. If you factor in acceleration from zero mph at liftoff and deceleration to land on the moon the max speed would be much higher. Speaking of acceleration, even if you had a ship and engine that could do it, the G forces would turn any passengers into pancakes.

If it wasn't so late and I wasn't so tired I might do some math and come up with some approximations but I'll let you do that. You're obviously better at it than I am anyway.

[four winds]

Sorry, not my intention to suggest Newton's laws are being broken. Be hard to fly a spacecraft if so.

But rather it is the source of the energy for thrust that is extraordinary. And the use of very little energy to harvest that source.

A qoute,....


In Dr. White’s model, the propellant ions of the MagnetoHydroDynamics drive are replaced as the fuel source by the virtual particles of the Quantum Vacuum, eliminating the need to carry propellant.



One more qoute.....


The NASASpaceflight.com group has given consideration to whether the experimental measurements of thrust force were the result of an artifact. Despite considerable effort within the NASASpaceflight.com forum to dismiss the reported thrust as an artifact, the EM Drive results have yet to be falsified.

After consistent reports of thrust measurements from EM Drive experiments in the US, UK, and China – at thrust levels several thousand times in excess of a photon rocket, and now under hard vacuum conditions – the question of where the thrust is coming from deserves serious inquiry.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

The Nasa EM thruster, is a very low thrust (like a few newtons of force... tiny) device that does NOT do in any way violate newtons laws. It's a simple microwave magnatron in a tuned resonator. Thrust is developed not by the microwaves hitting the back plate (that would violate newtons laws) but as a vector shift when the particles/waves reflect off the angled walls. Very tiny thrust. Like a feather. But then no fuel is required, so pretty handy for satellite positioning.

That 4 hours to the moon thingy is the marketing guys talking. Sort of like the 200 mpg carb.

Sc I posted before I have a carb that will get 150 mpg

[HankOnthewater]

There is a lot of technical detail in this thread. All of us, hmmm, some of us are familiar with anchors, sail shape, spade rudders, long keels etc, but some of the specialist jargon used in this thread might be foreign to readers. May I connect these unfamiliar terms to the boating/sailing world? I added a few more for clarity.

Big Bang
Many scientists think that's how it all started, but not so in the boating world: the Big Bang is an event when the very sudden realisation hits the boat owner that boating is not what the brochures told it to be.

Black Hole
The location where all the money goes, money invested in the boat, money that disappears without a trace and can never be recovered. There must be a lot of money there by now.

Event horizon
Actually there are a few horizons, one with the unaided eye, and one with binoculars (see also the entry ‘gravitational lens’) . Items on the horizon are always vague and always in the distance. BTW, this horizon is often thought of as origin of the rainbow. And no, the pot of gold is not there, that is a fable invented by trolls.

Hawking’s radiation
Not unlike UV rays, you can’t see them, but climbing high in the mast with a bino, you might see these rays on the horizon. You might get glimpses of where your money went. See also above entry.

Schrodinger Cat
Yes, he was a famous architect that specialised in cats, however not many know that Bob Perry was ahead of him with the “boat in the box” Far Harbour. Schrodinger Cats has been made famous by the quality of the vessels or lack thereof, either they sail well or they don’t, they are stable or flip easily. The paradoxical truth is they can be either or both of these, all depending on the person looking at it, or not. Which bring us to the next term

Relativity
“It all depends”. All things depend on the depth of your pocket and your life experiences. In boating terms that means, both a 28 ft and a 58 ft boat are big boats.

Super Nova (plural is “Novae”)
Nova is another word for “Novice”, a histrionic sailor with little sailing knowledge but with enormous energy, mostly noticed in club bars and forums. These sailors attract a lot of attention, they certainly look bright, and indeed they often are….. for a while.

Troll
Not a scientific term, this term is derived for the fantasy world with all the trimmings that go with that.

Neutron star/stuff
Very heavy stuff. There has been some attempts made to use this material as ballast in monohulls. Sofar all boats have sunk. Therefore caution is warranted in using this stuff.

Thermo dynamic laws
These laws must be obeyed. If not, the climate-change threads become invalid overnight, and might even disappear altogether.
Sorry, this area is not my speciality, maybe ask Mr Google.

Geomagnetic overlay
Invented by Raymarine for their latest digital charts, not available for Open CPN as yet.

Cold Fusion
A relatively simple process. For instance tonic with a dash of gin will make a gin and tonic. Each of the ingredients on their own may not be good or palatable, but the combination is just perfect. Ice recommended. Best time for cold fusion is around 1700 hrs or sunset.

Conservation of energy
This relates to doing as little as possible: don’t row the tender, use the outboard; don’t sail the boat in a zigzag fashion, motor in a straight line; don’t varnish that teak, let it go silver.

Triode
We all know the diodes ie to prevent stray currents; the triode is just 1 ½ diode.

Gravity waves
Actually this is a new concept, but easy to understand if we split the term in the two words: waves and gravity. Waves are not good while planning a cold fusion activity and particularly leaded monohulls are prone to gravity. So, both elements are negative, and the combination of both….. better stay in the marina when gravity waves are forecast.

Space time continuum
There is plenty of space on the oceans, one can keep on sailing forever, that is, when one has the time. The record sofar is set by Jon Sanders I believe.
So, if you have the time, the oceans have the space.
I must add that once the sailor sets off on the voyage his/her perception of time will certainly alter, and even the perception of space may be subject to change, that in context and contrast with the space of the ocean and the tightness of the small yacht.

Gravitational lens
Binoculors on steroids, sorry could not help myself, just kidding.
It is really new digital technology to let us see around corners. I believe some renowned manufacturers will soon bring out a portable model.

Quantum theory
There are rumours that Quantum has the lead here, but I believe that many other contenders who have this theory and technology as well; it is just that the folks at Quantum got the name nailed. See here:Quantum Sails

EM drive
I think the link that “Paul E” posted said it all in a few words. My prediction is that this technology will become available in boats soon after electric propulsion has become viable on long distance cruisers.