Nuclear Fusion The Eternal Energy

[Xeon 0]

I think the idea using the Tokamac is very intersting.  We obviously need to further develop our methods of creating energy. New good ideas and research should be embraced.

 

I think there should be other means of producing clean energy though; what about things like waves or ocean currents? surely turbines could be placed underwater that would constantly harness energy. It would work night and day and all year round being pretty much constant.

 

I think magentism deserves some thaught too; magnets put out constant force but dont seem to use up any fuel. There must be some kind of way to harness this energy!!! Infact, I came up with an idea myself that might harness magnetism as an energy source. I wrote an article about it on my site but my former host crashed, so when i have somewhere to put the diagram i'll post it all here. It probably wouldnt work (it goes against the laws of physics) but I cant see any reason why.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting idea, but unfortunately you can't create energy from magnets. Magnets do exert a force but if you want the magnet to do work something has to be pushing on the magnet. Its kind of like trying to get energy from gravity. Gravity exerts a force, but you can't get energy from it unless you already have done work before. You can however use magnets to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy like in generators.

 

Also, ocean generators are a good idea and I've seen lots of descriptions of futuristic generators. The only thing is that right now its kind of expensive to build the generators, so we might have to wait until the technology gets better.

[excellen 0]

With gravity we can't really manipulate the direction of the force, but we can with magnets. The idea that I thaught of is essentially; you have a ring of electromagnets with the (for example) positive poles facing in to the center of the circle. Inside, there is a wheel or disc with one (or more) permanent bar magnets attatched with the negative pole facing the electromagnets. If you made the electromagnets turn on/off in sequence you could make the disc turn. If only one electromagnet is on at a time it will only use a set amount of energy at any time regardless of how fast the magnets turn on/off (as is my understanding anyway). If the disc is attatched to a generator then the sequence could be slowly sped up until the machine is creating more energy than it consumes. The machine could be started by a battery which could later be recharged.I have a feeling that this would'nt work but I cant see why, since I am not a scientist and I haven't really studied science. I'd really like to know if this machine would work or not.

[whafizi 0]

the first thing that you must know is that "energy cannot be created, only can be converted".that's why, magnetism and gravity cannot produce power on their own. we must exert some sort of energy to them in order to have somekind of energy (e.g magnetism + physical force = electricity).if you can prove that you can generate energy from NOTHING, than I can assure that you'll win the biggest nobel price.

[leslie0629 0]

I'm not so sure about this energy source, I don't think it has been fully tested yet.

[Admiral Lyoko Samus 0]

the first thing that you must know is that "energy cannot be created, only can be converted".

 

that's why, magnetism and gravity cannot produce power on their own. we must exert some sort of energy to them in order to have somekind of energy (e.g magnetism + physical force = electricity).

 

if you can prove that you can generate energy from NOTHING, than I can assure that you'll win the biggest nobel price.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah, the ever elusive theory that is Free Energy. Yes, you will get the biggest Nobel Prize ever, if not the only one for the next few millenia, though there was an interesting experiment on Mythbusters (on the Discovery Channel) where they took a very long (don't remember the exact length) radio antennae (just the antennae connected to a voltage device) and were able to get a small charge; enough to power an analog watch perhaps.

[szupie 0]

So, are they doing this fusion energy making right now?And, does it take a lot of energy to make this fusing reaction?Also, what's the advantage of using Deuterium and Tritium instead of hydrogen? Is it more stable? Or more efficient?

[Xeon 0]

There are some fusion reactors operating, but they're operating for scientific purposes right now rather than energy purposes. It takes a lot of energy to heat up the reactants and maintain the reactants at that temperature and confine them. It currently takes more energy to start the reaction than the energy thats output, so right now the energy yield isn't that much.Deuterium and tritium are both isotopes of hydrogen. Deuterium has one proton and one neutron and tritium has one proton and two neutrons. Both are the main reactants for fusion to helium. If you want to use hydrogen, you have to first fuse hydrogen to form deuterium and tritium first, so its little more steps for the fusion process, which is why deuterium and tritium are both used directly.

[Kyle Perkins 0]

Has anyone ever heard of the book Angels and Demons, by Dan Brown? It's about antimatter, another clean energy source, like fusion. It's not just science fiction though, it's science fact. A research facility (the name escapes me) in Switzerland succeeded in creating antimatter by hitting two particles together at extremely high velocity in a giant particle accelerator. The resulting collision creates a mini big bang (yes, as in the big bang theory), and produces both matter and antimatter out of nothing (yes, it goes against the theory of conservation of matter). It's pretty cool stuff.-Kyle

[Admiral Lyoko Samus 0]

Interesting. I'll look into it, but if you do happen to find some resource (preferrably an online one), please post it. I may just need to rename this topic to "Most Efficient Energy Sources." Even though that has no relation to energy production. Just material synthesis, thus I stamp this small portion OFF TOPIC!

[Kyle Perkins 0]

I found a good resource, especially since it is the website of the group that created antimatter: CERN. CERN stands for Conseil Europeén pour la Récherche Nucleaire (in English, the European Organization for Nuclear Research), and they have the world's largest particle physics laboratory. CERN also claims to have invented the internet, thus joining the ranks of the US Department of Defense, and of course Al Gore. Who really invented the internet? We may never know...but who cares, anyway. Anyway, you wanted a good resource on antimatter, and there it is!

 

-Kyle

[Admiral Lyoko Samus 0]

I seriously doubt their "creating the internet" since no one man/organization owns the internet (that and I don't see any copyrights or understand why an organization specializing in Nuclear Physics would want/have the skills to do so), but thanks for the info anyway.

[Kyle Perkins 0]

No problem. I don't think they're claiming that they own the internet, they are just claiming that they gave birth to the idea of computers netoworked, then those networks internetworked. That may be true, but you are correct in that nobody owns the internet, and no one group is responsible for it's creation. Personally, I think the internet is arguably one of the most influential inventions of the 20th century.-Kyle

[excellen 0]

Here is the entire article I wrote about the magnetism idea I mentioned previously. The picture is a bit crude but It does the job.PART A: Here you can see how this machine essentially works. The Inner part is a wheel, attached to an axil. On this wheel, is at least one permanent bar-magnet. On the outer part, is a ring of opposing electro-magnets. These are activated in sequence, controlled by a computer system. This is similar technology to Christmas ''chaser'' lights: Only one magnet is on at any time, the moment the next in sequence is activated, the one before has been de-activated. By activating the electro-magnets in sequence, the permanent bar-magnet on the inner wheel is pushed in a clockwise direction. The magnets could be switched on/off faster and faster, but only consume a set amount of electricity. In this example, each electro-magnet consumes electricity at a constant rate of ''10''. There could be any set number of electro-magnets active at any time in the sequence depending on how many permanent bar-magnets are on the inner wheel, but for this example only one is used. More torque could be generated by having more permanent bar-magnets. Both the wheel and outer part would be made of a substance that is un-affected by magnets such as ceramic or plastic, and the inner wheel would be quite heavy, to increase momentum ounce moving.PART B: This is the computer system that controls the electro-magnet activation sequence. It would have some kind of controls that allow the rate to be increased, therefore generating more power.PART C: Attached to the inner wheel by an axil, this is the generator. On a small scale, It could be similar to a car alternator.PART D: This is some kind of device that manages the electricity from the generator. In this example, "10" electricity is fed to PART B, and any additional electricity could be fed into batteries, a power grid etc.PART E: This is a battery of some kind. It is necessary to start the machine working, after that it would be self-sustaining, and the battery could be recharged, like in a car.It is quite obvious that this machine would be HUGELY important if it worked. Large scale versions could be set up in power stations, which could replace coal, nuclear, oil and other pollution generating means of power generation. Small scale versions could be set up to power private homes or small country towns. It may have further applications such as vehicles. One of the laws of physics states that you cant get more energy out than what you put in. This machine works on magnetism which is not well understood, and I cant see any reason why it would not work.

[whafizi 0]

Here is the entire article I wrote about the magnetism idea I mentioned previously. The picture is a bit crude but It does the job.

 

 

 

PART A: Here you can see how this machine essentially works. The Inner part is a wheel, attached to an axil. On this wheel, is at least one permanent bar-magnet. On the outer part, is a ring of opposing electro-magnets. These are activated in sequence, controlled by a computer system. This is similar technology to Christmas ''chaser'' lights: Only one magnet is on at any time, the moment the next in sequence is activated, the one before has been de-activated. By activating the electro-magnets in sequence, the permanent bar-magnet on the inner wheel is pushed in a clockwise direction. The magnets could be switched on/off faster and faster, but only consume a set amount of electricity. In this example, each electro-magnet consumes electricity at a constant rate of ''10''. There could be any set number of electro-magnets active at any time in the sequence depending on how many permanent bar-magnets are on the inner wheel, but for this example only one is used. More torque could be generated by having more permanent bar-magnets. Both the wheel and outer part would be made of a substance that is un-affected by magnets such as ceramic or plastic, and the inner wheel would be quite heavy, to increase momentum ounce moving.

 

PART B: This is the computer system that controls the electro-magnet activation sequence. It would have some kind of controls that allow the rate to be increased, therefore generating more power.

 

PART C: Attached to the inner wheel by an axil, this is the generator. On a small scale, It could be similar to a car alternator.

 

PART D: This is some kind of device that manages the electricity from the generator. In this example, "10" electricity is fed to PART B, and any additional electricity could be fed into batteries, a power grid etc.

 

PART E: This is a battery of some kind. It is necessary to start the machine working, after that it would be self-sustaining, and the battery could be recharged, like in a car.

 

It is quite obvious that this machine would be HUGELY important if it worked. Large scale versions could be set up in power stations, which could replace coal, nuclear, oil and other pollution generating means of power generation. Small scale versions could be set up to power private homes or small country towns. It may have further applications such as vehicles. One of the laws of physics states that you cant get more energy out than what you put in. This machine works on magnetism which is not well understood, and I cant see any reason why it would not work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

really interesting idea. really.

before this, i've have stumble upon the same kind of thinking. i've been studying about it and actually tried it. but then, i know i was wrong. it would never work.

remember the idea about "energy cannot be created, only can be converted into another form"?. it true.

 

the system you have design might have the ability to retain energy (electricity) for some period of time, but then, the energy will slowly dissipiate. why? consider this;

1. the copper wire you are using will impose some resistance, where the electricity will be converted to heat and slowly dissipiate into the sorrounding invironment.

2. the mechanical movement will impose some physical resistance to the wheel and wind. so, again, the energy inside the system will be converted to other energy and dissipiate into the invironment.

 

this system, at the best will only be able to retain energy

[excellen 0]

really interesting idea. really.

before this, i've have stumble upon the same kind of thinking. i've been studying about it and actually tried it. but then, i know i was wrong. it would never work.

remember the idea about "energy cannot be created, only can be converted into another form"?. it true.

 

the system you have design might have the ability to retain energy (electricity) for some period of time, but then, the energy will slowly dissipiate. why? consider this;

1. the copper wire you are using will impose some resistance, where the electricity will be converted to heat and slowly dissipiate into the sorrounding invironment.

2. the mechanical movement will impose some physical resistance to the wheel and wind. so, again, the energy inside the system will be converted to other energy and dissipiate into the invironment.

 

this system, at the best will only be able to retain energy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>