Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

New Free Energy Research Breakthrough - Physics Forum

New Free Energy Research Breakthrough - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-02-2005, 06:18 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough


"Paul Lowrance" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1109783323.679410.310160@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
You have mentioned *no* experimental apparatus you are using.
Two coils, ferrite rod, voltmeter and ammeter is about all you
should need. Presumeably you do not need power, as you are producing more
than you put in.
Sorry you had a girly hissy fit. All I wanted was some experimental evidence
to back up your ludicrous claims.

Dream on, and don't give up the day job.

SR



Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-02-2005, 06:30 PM
Paul Lowrance
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

Dear David,

I will not carry a conversation based on personal statements, sorry.

Please provide one factual statement where I'm wrong. I would expect
details, pointing to exactly where I am wrong, along with the exact
correct data. The type of people I will not converse with are those
that make statements such as "do you know what an experiment is?" or
"Do not worry. You are unlikely to be taken for an authority on the
subject" or "you don't know a whole lot ..." or "you may have been
born yesterday." You may call that being polite, but I have no time
for that of mentality. You asked if I'm going to be defensive.
I've clearly written long replies that were not defensive. This
here, this type of conversation will end here unless you wish to carry
a logical productive conversation. Be specific. Don't make a claim
and not back it up with specifics and facts. Example, I don't have
time for such statements as "It is evident that you don't know a whole
lot about the real physics of what you have been modelling." followed
by no data, math, or quotes. I encourage you and others to point out a
flaw followed by the exact correct, any data or experiments, equations,
quotes from text books, etc.

Is that fine with you? Thank you!
Paul

Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-02-2005, 06:40 PM
Paul Lowrance
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

Dear Steve,

Please quote me where I had a "girly hissy fit." I stated that I did
not want to converse with you.



Sorry, I will not continue with this conversation if you continue with
that type of mentality.

You keep asking me where's my experimental data. I asked you to be
more specific. Didn't you read me letter? It clearly states this is
computer simulations based on basic physics math and other well known
simulations such as Ising. Ising is backed up by tons of experimental
data which I do not need to repeat. I clearly explained the advantages
of simulation. If you disagree then move on. Sorry but you're not
going to get any emotions from me. Nor will I attack you and make
personal statements.

Thank you,
Paul

Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-02-2005, 06:47 PM
tadchem
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough


Paul Lowrance wrote:

Eddie Alvarado, the engineer who sits three desks down from me and to
whom English is a second language, says you probably mean 'eddy'
currents, and *NO*, I'm not talking about 'eddy currents.' I am
talking about aligning the orbitals of the unpaired electrons in the
d-orbitals of the iron (that's what puts the 'fer' in ferrite).

Each iron atom has unpaired electrons that exist in d-orbitals with
spins and angular momentum that do not participate in the chemical
bonding. That's why they are magnetic. These unpaired electrons
produce a small magnetic moment due to the circulationg current.

Normally these are all randomized by thermal motions, but by lining
them up you can magnetize the bulk material. It takes a little energy
to do this, however.

want,
not

The "chem" in my 'nym "tadchem" means "chemist." I understand electron
spin. The intrinsic spin (+/- 1/2) combines with the spin from orbital
angular momentum (+2, +2, 0, -1, or -2 for d-orbitals) to produce
*total angular momentum*, which is responsible for the overall magnetic
moment of the atom.

I also understand the statistical mechanics of aligning a few gazillion
magnetic moments to make a large magnetic moment.


Are you trying to imply that interrupting the current in the coils will
instantly randomize the internal magnetic moments of all those iron
atoms you spent so much energy to align? The aligned state is a
low-energy state, and requires energy input to undo.


Nope. Wrong again.


'resisual?' Do you possibly mean "residual?"

flux is dependant upon the

Your design doesn't even get anywhere near this level of
sophistication, so turn off the smoke machine and put the mirrors away.

Run the experiment. Find out how much force you need to exert to
separate the magnetized ferrite cores after you turn off the current.
Recall that force times distance equals work, which equals energy.

Let us know what you get.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-02-2005, 06:47 PM
N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

Dear Paul Lowrance:

"Paul Lowrance" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1109788204.557311.226750@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...

Ah! So you think we are out to make you wrong. This is not
correct. We are asking why we need to:
1) run your program,
2) do your research for you,
3) believe your advertised claims of "New" or "Free Energy" or
"Research" (since you want us to do your research for you) or
even "Breakthrough".
what you propose in not new, provides no free energy (since you
had to put more than that in), you have done NO research (which
is more than cracking one book), and you certainly will only
breakthough a gullible person's wallet.

....

I see you tailoring a product to attract idiot money.
What is fine with me is that I call you a bad name. So rather
than do that, I will say...

Goodbye.
<plonk>

David A. Smith


Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-02-2005, 08:04 PM
Paul Lowrance
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

> Are you trying to imply that interrupting the current in the coils
will


I'll quote myself ->

to

No, I did not imply that the domains change instantly.



BTW, are we in agreement that it takes less energy to magnetize
material to the same magnetic field with higher permeable material than
lower permeable material?





You said that it lags. Therefore it is magnetic lag. Please be
specific.




away.

Please be civilized.




I already know. It's called hysteresis. Magnetic lag is only relevant
when you try to change the current too fast in the coil. You have
stated it's neither hysteresis nor magnetic lag. No offense but I'm
question if you really know what you're talking about. Please be
specific. Do you have a name for this? I've made countless toroid and
transformers. I know how much energy it takes. Additionally, Ising
completely disagrees with what you're trying propose. I am well aware
of hysteresis and magnetic lag. There are no other lagging effects.
BTW, hysteresis is not a time lag. Magnetic lag is the only time lag
that I am aware of.

Sincerely,
Paul

Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-02-2005, 08:08 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough


"Paul Lowrance" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1109788806.423891.282800@f14g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
Which is what I regard as a girly hissy-fit.


So you have *no* reason to assert that your simulations are correct.


Which is almost wrong. You do not get more energy out of a system than
you put in.


If you state that you don't want to talk to someone that is a pretty
personal
statement. I thaught that maybe you simply lacked the balls to do an actual
experiment - I now realise you are probably incapable.

SR



Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-02-2005, 08:45 PM
Paul Lowrance
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

Dear Steve,


You're not reading. Again, please back your statement up. Show me the
quote where I said my simulations are correct. *If* I did then I'll
apologize. I clearly said that it could be flawed.


than you put in.

You're not reading. I said the energy comes from the magnetic
material. It will get colder. It's a simulation, a theory. Please be
constructive here.


personal statement

A personal statement is self explanatory. It's a statement that refers
to something in particular about a person. What I said is not saying
you are this or that. It is conveying my will.Also, note my often
usage of the words, "No offense." :-)

thank you,
Paul

Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-02-2005, 09:52 PM
Steve Ralph
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough


"Paul Lowrance" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1109796317.638065.277330@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...
O.K. Could be it is.

So, maybe it will get colder. You are converting heat into electricity.
How much heat can you take before the ferrite either has material failure
or you run out of heat?
When you run out of heat, you will have to pump it in.
How efficient is it? And how do you calculate your efficiency?
What is the temperature/power characteristic?

I am highly sceptical that cooling will even occur, let alone the rest.
When you have a physical demonstration - well I never expect to see
you produce one, and until then all you have is a computer program
than nobody but you has any use for.

I have done a lot of work in the past validating (or otherwise)
computational
fluid dynamics simulations with experimental data, and know how useless
any simulation is without this validation.

sR






Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-03-2005, 04:46 AM
Paul Lowrance
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New Free Energy Research Breakthrough

Thanks Steve,

Hey, perhaps I'm shooting for the moon. If it fails miserably and I
exhaust all my ideas then I will be more than happy to document
everything. What more could I ask than truth? Once analyzed, I think
everyone can agree that it's possible to convert heat to electricity.
How much power? I'm a little rusty in this area so if memory serves
correct, what do you think of these calculations, roughly speaking:

I don't have the thermal conductivity of a specific magnetic
material, but steel is 50.2 W/m-K
Let's say the temperature differential is 30 K.
Let's use a 2.50 inch (0.0635 m) radius toroid that's 1.00 inch
(0.0254 m) thick by 1.00 inch (0.0254 m) height.
Let's use the average distance the heat travels which would be ~0.5
inch (0.0127 m). So that gives us a W/m^2 of:
30.0K * 50.2 W/m-K / 0.0127 m = 119000 W/m^2.
Let's calculate the surface area. The circumference of the radius at
0.0635 m would be ~0.4 meters. Times the thickness of 0.0254 m is 0.01
m^2 for one side. For all four sides would be ~0.04 m^2.
This gives us a rough answer of 4760 watts for a 2.5 inch radius
toroid. That's not bad for no turbo fan! Ten of these would provide
47,600 watts of thermal conductivity without the aid of a turbo fan.
Does anyone have a rough idea how much a high speed turbo fan could
improve this? The 48K watts alone is enough to get a small car around
town.

Understandably my letter is nothing more than a letter. When the time
arises I'll try to write a more professional research paper.

Kind regards,
Paul

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
breakthrough , energy , free , research


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FFiMP: Where is the gravitational energy? Jan Gooral Physics Forum 0 05-22-2008 02:52 PM
Seeing Holographically cinquirer Physics Forum 24 11-19-2003 12:09 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.19258 seconds with 16 queries