HOME       >>       Science and Technology

Is It Possible To Create Free Energy?


squeaky

You have a very creative way on thinking of ideas that would help our society and future, but you need to know the facts that come with it. Inforunetely, Science tends to prove things otherwise, and in this case, this is true. When you said "Rotating motion + dynamo = electricity,' this would no be possible because the needed force to spin the dynamo would be taken from the car's efficency of the car. Vehicles already have alternators that is attached to the engine and constantly charges on idle and while the vehicle is being driven. If you think about it, if you want to make electricity by having a group of men push a generator around and around, and you had another generator (the rotating tires of the vehicle) it's going to take more energy and work from the men to keep it going. This would result in more CO2 and energy needed, similarily to the vehicle. The vehicle would use more fuel, and put out more CO2 and other elements of the vehicle it must use more of to work harder. So, I like your ideas on new ways to make things more efficient, but I'm sorry, the scientist tested it and it doesn't work. Keep up the good thoughts though!


matak

You have a very creative way on thinking of ideas that would help our society and future, but you need to know the facts that come with it. Inforunetely, Science tends to prove things otherwise, and in this case, this is true. When you said "Rotating motion + dynamo = electricity,' this would no be possible because the needed force to spin the dynamo would be taken from the car's efficency of the car. Vehicles already have alternators that is attached to the engine and constantly charges on idle and while the vehicle is being driven. If you think about it, if you want to make electricity by having a group of men push a generator around and around, and you had another generator (the rotating tires of the vehicle) it's going to take more energy and work from the men to keep it going. This would result in more CO2 and energy needed, similarily to the vehicle. The vehicle would use more fuel, and put out more CO2 and other elements of the vehicle it must use more of to work harder. So, I like your ideas on new ways to make things more efficient, but I'm sorry, the scientist tested it and it doesn't work. Keep up the good thoughts though!


well vehicles produce much much more energy than they need. you see if engine has 100 HP (horse power), it is equal to 75 kW of energy.. do you know how much is that? lets say that average AC unit needs about 5kW of energy, computer needs about 1kW of energy.. i don't know how much does refrigerator or stow needs but i don't think that it is more than 5 kw 10 or max 20Kw.. So you see practically one car is enough to produce energy for the whole house.

But car pollutes very much. Last info i saw was that Opel Tigra made in 1995 has about 173 g/km of CO2, that is way too much...

Forbez

To all those who say there is no such thing as free energy, are probably right. But i think coming close to free energy is a sure thing. But why not just use the earth for power, instead of burning. Use the wind around us, use the water we have. Thats totally free to use. But I was thinking of a way of getting free energy, if you had a round circle. And it had water in it. And the water would go down one side, and spin the wheel, and when it reach the bottm it would go though a tunnel. Which water can only go though and not backwards. Once then it would fill the other side up, overflow and pour down the tunnel again.I think they use this one little toys. I have no clue, but I have been thinking of that for ages.


FLaKes

I saw this product the other day that is a wind generator, which was really small, it costed about 8000 dollars but it would generate you electricity and your electricity bill would be a whole lot cheaper. Studies say that you get your investment returned in about 8 years, and after that its free.


communitykat

What about Tesla? He came up with free energy in 1901. He put a clear insulation layer on a shiney metal panel (sort of like solar panels). The panel harnessed radiant energy from the sun and the cosmos. The panel was wired to one side of a capacitor and the other side of the cap. to the ground. It even ran at night. I think there are a lot of ways to harness energy, depending on what you need the energy for. It is more difficult to come up with ONE energy source for all energy needs. We need local sustainable energy sources. It is very efficient to have households run off of solar, wind and compost.


salamangkero

What about Tesla? He came up with free energy in 1901. He put a clear insulation layer on a shiney metal panel (sort of like solar panels). The panel harnessed radiant energy from the sun and the cosmos. The panel was wired to one side of a capacitor and the other side of the cap. to the ground. It even ran at night. I think there are a lot of ways to harness energy, depending on what you need the energy for. It is more difficult to come up with ONE energy source for all energy needs. We need local sustainable energy sources. It is very efficient to have households run off of solar, wind and compost.

I'd be first to admit I was not acquainted with that technology. However, I must concede that it will work if its energy was dependent on cosmic rays. After all, we are constantly bombarded by near light-speed particles from somewhere in the cosmos, even more so at daytime. The tiniest bit of these particles could generate substantial energy, when properly harnessed and converted.

 

Then there is also the constant, soft glow in the sky called the microwave background radiation. Anyone have any idea whether microwaves can power anything?


krtbs

In thermodynamics, the term thermodynamic free energy is a measure of the amount of mechanical (or other) work that can be extracted from a system, and is helpful in engineering applications. It is a subtraction of the entropy of a system ("useless energy") from the total energy, yielding a thermodynamic state function which represents the "useful energy".In short, free energy is that portion of any First-Law energy that is available for doing thermodynamic work; i.e., work mediated by thermal energy. Since free energy is subject to irreversible loss in the course of such work and First-Law energy is always conserved, it is evident that free energy is an expendable, Second-Law kind of energy that can make things happen within finite amounts of time.In solution chemistry and biochemistry, the Gibbs free energy change (denoted by ΔG) is commonly used merely as a surrogate for (−T times) the entropy produced by spontaneous chemical reactions in situations where there is no work done; or at least no "useful" work; i.e., other than PdV. As such, it serves as a particularization of the second law of thermodynamics, giving it the physical dimensions of energy, even though the inherent meaning in terms of entropy would be more to the point.The free energy functions are Legendre transforms of the internal energy. For processes involving a system at constant pressure P and temperature T, the Gibbs free energy is the most useful because, in addition to subsuming any entropy change due merely to heat flux, it does the same for the PdV work needed to "make space for additional molecules" produced by various processes. (Hence its utility to solution-phase chemists, including biochemists.) The Helmholtz free energy has a special theoretical importance since it is proportional to the logarithm of the partition function for the canonical ensemble in statistical mechanics. (Hence its utility to physicists; and to gas-phase chemists and engineers, who do not want to ignore PdV work.)The (historically earlier) Helmholtz free energy is defined as A = U − TS, where U is the internal energy, T is the absolute temperature, and S is the entropy. Its change is equal to the amount of reversible work done on, or obtainable from, a system at constant T. Thus its appellation "work content", and the designation A from arbeit, the German word for work. Since it makes no reference to any quantities involved in work (such as P and V), the Helmholtz function is completely general: its decrease is the maximum amount of work which can be done by a system, and it can increase at most by the amount of work done on a system.The Gibbs free energy G = H − TS, where H is the enthalpy. (H = U + PV, where P is the pressure and V is the volume.)There has been historical controversy: * Among physicists, ?free energy? most often refers to the Helmholtz free energy, denoted by F. * Among chemists, ?free energy? most often refers to the Gibbs free energy, also denoted by F.Since both fields use both functions, a compromise has been suggested, using A to denote the Helmholtz function, with G for the Gibbs function. While A is preferred by IUPAC, F is sometimes still in use, and the correct free energy function is often implicit in manuscripts and presentations.


krtbs

The experimental usefulness of these functions is restricted to conditions where certain variables (T, and V or external P) are held constant, although they also have theoretical importance in deriving Maxwell relations. Work other than PdV may be added, e.g., for electrochemcial cells, or f ˑdx work in elastic materials and in muscle contraction. Other forms of work which must sometimes be considered are stress-strain, magnetic, as in adiabatic demagnetization used in the approach to absolute zero, and work due to electric polarization. These are described by tensors.In most cases of interest there are internal degrees of freedom and processes, such as chemical reactions and phase transitions, which create entropy. Even for homogeneous "bulk" materials, the free energy functions depend on the (often suppressed) composition, as do all proper thermodynamic potentials (extensive functions), including the internal energy.Name Definition Natural variablesHelmholtz free energy A=U-TS\, ~~~~~T,V,\{N_i\}\,Gibbs free energy G=U+PV-TS\, ~~~~~T,P,\{N_i\}\,Ni is the number of molecules (alternatively, moles) of type i in the system. If these quantities do not appear, it is impossible to describe compositional changes. The differentials for reversible processes are (assuming only PV work) dA = - PdV - SdT + \sum_i \mu_i dN_i\, dG = VdP - SdT + \sum_i \mu_i dN_i\,where μi is the chemical potential for the i-th component in the system. The second relation is especially useful at constant T and P, conditions which are easy to achieve experimentally, and which approximately characterize living creatures. (dG)_{T,P} = \sum_i \mu_i dN_i\,Any decrease in the Gibbs function of a system is the upper limit for any isothermal, isobaric work that can be captured in the surroundings, or it may simply be dissipated, appearing as T times a corresponding increase in the entropy of the system and/or its surrounding.


jamers

Free energy is not created, it simply exists. Don't need to be a genius to know that no matter how much math you do it's impossible to prove that every molecule, every ion, every prticle in the universe has or ever will stand still at the same time. So as long as there is motion you will have all the free energy you want. Just put up a solar panel or windmill or water wheel.

Google "John Hutchison" or go here for starters http://www.hutchisoneffect.com/
you will be amazed at what you learn is going on around us as we speak.

One thing he has invented is a simple way to create a battery with an extremely long life by crushing some quartz rocks and mixing in something else, maybe an acid or something, then shake it up and it lights a little bulb. He did this on TV real time and it worked! Rocks that he found at the edge of some downtown buildings flowerbeds for crying out loud. Here we have multiple sources of new technology for energy and instead of taking an interest in that to help save the planet we have some people going to war to steal oil from other countries instead.


Dooga

I find the concept given by Steorn very interesting, yet it doesn't seem to make sense to me. While I just have average knowledge on Introductory Physics, it doesn't seem to make sense that energy can be indefinitely produced without having it transfered from somewhere else. The system would have to have no wear or tear, and it will have to forever function without any chemical changes such as corrosion etc. and will not depend on gravity etc. Bizarre... if this energy exists, why are humans the ones to start it up? Perhaps it's just a really really long oscillating pendulum or something :PAlthough the only free energy we have right now is just the fact that lots of energy exist even if all the humans died on the earth, for example, energy from the sun, energy from wind and water, and gravity. I think that's enough energy for us to last a few million lifetimes.


HoRuS

This planet is full of free energy,

as mentioned earlier, the sun, water, wind and earth provide us with plenty energy,

it's the way people are that we have to pay for it.

 

True, constructions like windmills, dams and solarpanels cost enough to construct ans maintain, but these comapnies can make it way cheaper for us, instead of letting us pay more for ecological energy. As long as there we live in a capitalistic-minded world, there be no such thing as free energy.

 

But back to the original topic, dynamo's capable of providing energy for vehicles would be very (probably too) large,

I do like the idea though...

 

I hope someone comes up with an idea to create energy with our minds, also a large source of energy.


Custergrant

Well, if you know where to look, you can get any of those for either free or a very low cost. I've pondered free energy all of my life and have always been really into it. I really don't have a favorite for an alternative, like most people you talk to do ("yah, fuel cells will never happen"..."solar is way too inefficient"..etc..,etc..). I'm more into the inventive spirit of it.It's really just a matter of doing it. I know I'm currently working on a research prototype that I'm building using laminated solar cells put onto a parabolic dish (like the old satellite dishes). These PV (photovoltaic) cells turn light and UV light into electricity. The reflected light and infrared (heat) get focused onto a focal point where a hybrid Stirling engine and thermal fuel cell sit, which in short, is like your car engine, but just one piston in a closed cycle where the hot air is by itself. This little contraption alone gets like 74% efficiency, which is the highest of the solars. There's energy all around us, but the problem that we have is that we must direct it in some form in order to gain from it, such as in the case of heat (easier to understand). I live just a few minutes from a huge dam and it works well too. Just a matter of how you use it.EDIT: Someone mentioned using energy from our minds....actually, in terms of joules and other units, our minds really don't generate that much energy...it's more small and many type of arrangement. Not taking the resistance of the skin into matter, humans generate a very small charge, and another way to think of it is in calories. If you were to eat someone's brain (I know, I know), you might get a max of 1000 kilocalories out of it, while a lot, that's all it has grown since its creation (like a tree). A tree might generate a lot of sugar from photosynthesis per day, but when you look in retrospect, it takes a long time for that sugar to be put into the cell growth and grow a tree (takes trees a long time to grow). If that made any sense, then I'll be surprised.


azamat

Free Energy depends on principals of income outcome and saving, same as our life, maybe thats why human race is increasing ?


75rLs3U4

It's not possible to create free energy, because you need to create first something to extract the energy, convert to something that can be used (like electricity) and then, sent to every house and industry in the world.If you found a way to don't pay the workers to realize all that jobs, you can't have free energy. :XD:


adriantc

There is no such thing as free energy... and it's pretty simple to demonstrate. There is no pure energy in nature... everything mankind has are only exchanges of energy... solar power ---> electricity; wind power ---> electricity; coal ---> heat ---> electricity. So there isn't any energy just waiting for us to get. We must take some sort of energy and transform it into a different kind of energy.
But everyone knows that there is no such thing as a machine with 100% efficiency. It is extremely hard to even get near 100%. What does that mean? That some part of energy is lost during the transformation.
Taking your example: Rotating motion + dynamo = electricity

First of all you consume energy by the rotation motion (energy in other form... so your example is also a transformation). Second the dynamo surly has a low efficiency rate. That means you have a quantity of energy in the rotation motion, but you get less energy (electricity). How is that energy lost? By internal friction.

So why no free energy? Because even a near 100% efficiency machine you put in more and get less. Not to mention the use of the machine, the fact that someday it will have to be replaced.

One last thing ... in physics there is the principle of entropy... a little quote from the Entropy article on Wikipedia:

We have previously mentioned that a finite universe may be considered an isolated system. As such, it may be subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, so that its total entropy is constantly increasing. It has been speculated that the universe is fated to a heat death in which all the energy ends up as a homogeneous distribution of thermal energy, so that no more work can be extracted from any source.

So you see... Even energy (in its different forms) is not infinite (if of course the universe is finite). So energy MUST be lost in some form or another. Free energy cannot be created, but extremely cheap energy can... But well there is no will to adopt on a large scale alternative fules when you have around 40 years of fossil fuel.

Carson

I think there needs to be a proper definition of energy for this topic. Solar energy is obviously free. Thats one thing they cant charge us for. When you think about it, everything has energy. Everything on earth has gravitational potential energy, and moving objects have kenitic energy etc. It is possible to get things like electricity, or heating for free, its just so much easier and faster to pay for it.


DeM0nFiRe

Well, for some people energy would be cheaper if they could put windmills on Nantucket sound...



Pages :-

Page 1Page 2


VIEW DESKTOP VERSION REGISTERGET FREE HOSTING

Xisto.com offers Free Web Hosting to its Members for their participation in this Community. We moderate all content posted here but we cannot warrant full correctness of all content. While using this site, you agree to have read and accepted our terms of use, cookie and privacy policy. Copyright 2001-2019 by Xisto Corporation. All Rights Reserved.