Energy sources?

[Num7]

It's too bad, but perpetual motion devices don't exist for a reason. There's always a little (a lot in some cases) energy that's wasted. Water evaporates, circuits become hot, friction, etc.

A ton of these devices you're sharing have something fishy in them that creates the illusion of perpetual motion.

@Harte Do you consider a hypothetical perpetual motion device could exist in the vacuum and zero gravity of space?

 

[TheMedic2001]

It's too bad, but perpetual motion devices don't exist for a reason. There's always a little (a lot in some cases) energy that's wasted. Water evaporates, circuits become hot, friction, etc.

A ton of these devices you're sharing have something fishy in them that creates the illusion of perpetual motion.

@Harte Do you consider a hypothetical perpetual motion device could exist in the vacuum and zero gravity of space?

I may not be Harte and I may not be the best person to ask either cause I'm not that educated, but I think since there isn't as much friction in space I think it'd be possible but because it's hard to get anything into space and it would still require lots of energy to get anything up and running it wouldn't be worth the effort. I always played around with an idea of using a planet like venus or jupiter( where venus has a very hot atmosphere and jupiter has a very high pressure) for generating energy again though that would cost to make and take over there and using stuff like electromagnetic waves to transfer the electricity over would just put the energy to waste.

 

[Harte]

It's too bad, but perpetual motion devices don't exist for a reason. There's always a little (a lot in some cases) energy that's wasted. Water evaporates, circuits become hot, friction, etc.

A ton of these devices you're sharing have something fishy in them that creates the illusion of perpetual motion.

@Harte Do you consider a hypothetical perpetual motion device could exist in the vacuum and zero gravity of space?

Perpetual is forever, so no. You can't escape friction, no matter how much you minimalize it.
Essentially perpetual? Possibly, if there wasn't anything trying to remove energy from the device.
A drop of liquid (maybe a Bose-Einstein condensate) in zero g could be set to oscillate. Possibly that might continue to oscillate for longer than, say, the life of the Sun.
But not forever.

Harte

 

[SergiusPaulus]

Maybe a system that used motion to create energy and we were able to store the energy. Once the stored energy got full the motion device would quit moving. And once the stored energy got depleted to a certain level the motion device would start again. So maybe not perpetual but long enough to provide free energy which is the goal.
Cars are transitioning to electric such as Tesla. Maybe homes will transition to a battery source. Battery technology is advancing or changing. They are creating solid state batteries. If there was a way to use a motion device to keep batteries charged. The motion device would operate only when needed, not perpetually but perhaps long enough for a recharge.

 

[TheMedic2001]

Maybe a system that used motion to create energy and we were able to store the energy. Once the stored energy got full the motion device would quit moving. And once the stored energy got depleted to a certain level the motion device would start again. So maybe not perpetual but long enough to provide free energy which is the goal.
Cars are transitioning to electric such as Tesla. Maybe homes will transition to a battery source. Battery technology is advancing or changing. They are creating solid state batteries. If there was a way to use a motion device to keep batteries charged. The motion device would operate only when needed, not perpetually but perhaps long enough for a recharge.

You're better off trying to make a nuclear fusion reactor honestly

 

[Harte]

Maybe a system that used motion to create energy and we were able to store the energy. Once the stored energy got full the motion device would quit moving. And once the stored energy got depleted to a certain level the motion device would start again. So maybe not perpetual but long enough to provide free energy which is the goal.
Cars are transitioning to electric such as Tesla. Maybe homes will transition to a battery source. Battery technology is advancing or changing. They are creating solid state batteries. If there was a way to use a motion device to keep batteries charged. The motion device would operate only when needed, not perpetually but perhaps long enough for a recharge.

Motion is constantly in use to generate energy.
You are describing a hydroelectric power station, or an internal combustion engine attached to a generator.
Or a windmill.

Harte

 

[Einstein]

The past couple of weeks I've been contemplating about the lift force generated by airplane wings. It's always vertical. The opposite direction of gravity. One could say that this lift force could actually be an anti-gravity force. But why do we choose to move the wings through the air? Why not move the air through the wings? All the resistance created using either method would create the orthogonal vertical lift force. The reason I suggested the second method is because a rotating air mass could be enclosed within a vehicle with no external visible clues as to how the vehicle would appear to rise vertically. Why did I choose a rotating air mass? We already know funnel clouds exhibit the exact claimed properties. One could call it an internally enclosed vortex engine. Sound familiar? Haven't we all read about the claimed propulsion method used by the TR-3B? A vortex engine using mercury plasma rotating at 50,000 rpm. I never gave that explanation much thought though just knowing there is no container that could hold a plasma.

So I went to YouTube to see what I could find about mercury vortex engines.

 

[MODAT7]

Elemental liquid mercury is poisonous, somewhat contrary to what the video stated. It's just not as chemically reactive as some of the other forms. There's evidence that the people in ancient times did have mental problems later in life if they handled it a lot. The "mad hatter" comes to mind and is generally well known.

Vortex engines seem to be centered around aether physics, with some likely connections to zero point energy. Perhaps charged mercury that is spinning is more effective at "grabbing the aether" than other methods. I also have a theory that they need "cold" electricity to be effective. It seems conventional "hot" electricity will work, but the voltages needed are insanely high.

 

[Einstein]

Elemental liquid mercury is poisonous, somewhat contrary to what the video stated. It's just not as chemically reactive as some of the other forms. There's evidence that the people in ancient times did have mental problems later in life if they handled it a lot. The "mad hatter" comes to mind and is generally well known.

Vortex engines seem to be centered around aether physics, with some likely connections to zero point energy. Perhaps charged mercury that is spinning is more effective at "grabbing the aether" than other methods. I also have a theory that they need "cold" electricity to be effective. It seems conventional "hot" electricity will work, but the voltages needed are insanely high.

I had about 5 mercury based fillings in my teeth for about 30 years of my life. I had them taken out about 10 years ago. Apparently the word poisonous is being misused with mercury. I think the EPA is probably behind this. They think they can change scientific facts with declarations of their own making. Just recently they tried to regulate CO2. The supreme court stripped them of their power to regulate. It's the role of congress to make laws.

I'm not familiar with aether physics. I prefer to use real world observable facts to come to some realizations that I come up with. Airplane wings generate life by moving through air. That is a solid fact. No aether or zero point explanation is needed. Mercury would allow electromagnetic control of mercury in its vapor state. But why use mercury when I know the job can be done with just ordinary air?

 

[SergiusPaulus]

Will DC technology overtake AC technology? If certain products in the home use DC then why not change the other household items to DC. Are we headed towards a DC world?

Benefits of DC Electricity in Buildings | Cence Power

DC power eliminates the need for converters at the load level, making it ideal for use in smart buildings. DC power is also more efficient to distribute than AC power. In this article we break down 5 reasons why DC electricity should be distributed in buildings.

www.argentum.ai