Free energy

Actually I beleive the sun works like this.

The sun's core gravity is so strong that the electrons of the atom collide into the center of the atom(nucleus), But because matter can never touch a huge force is created and the atomm explodes apart. Repelling each other in opposite directions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I suppose you either don't know about nuclear fusion or don't believe it works. Right?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Don't know... never read about nuclear fusion.
I just thought to myself how would the sun work.

That was what I came up with.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OK. Then you might want to spend just a little while reading about it because that's actually what's happening in the Sun. For starters, try the following link - and it's not really necessary to go through all the math to get the general idea, so don't let that bother you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion

 

Windmills are free energy machines for example.

Energy can't change form, it can only be created and destroyed. It can change form too, but change is just the appearance of constant creation and destruction.

 

Wait, I thought it meant free energy as in it is actualy creating energy...?
Isnt all energy 'free' then? It costs moeny for a solar panel, for a windmill etc... and it costs money for electricity. And surely this 'device' would cost money if it were real and produced. Whats the difference, one doesnt have to continue paying for the panel and mill after the initial investment?

Also, no you got it backwards: energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only change form. In changing form it may 'appear' to be created or destroyed but it isnt.

-Andrew

 

Exactly, and windmills create energy. You may think that they receive their energy from the wind, but the wind comes from nothing, so it's creation of energy.

It's backwards in all the books you've been reading, but just because it's backwards does it mean it right?

It's impossible that anything could change because the present moment is all that exists, and it has no duration, so nothing has time to change.

If things could change we wouldn't need to make movies that consist of unchanging pictures, we could make real motion, not just illusions.

 

You may think that the wind is caused by the Sun heating up the air, but the heat of the sun comes from nothing, so it's creation of energy.

And then you say: "No. The heat is caused by nuclear fusions."

And I say, you might think that nuclear fusions cause the heat, but the nuclear fusions are caused by nothing, so it's creation of energy.

Continue and soon you reach the limit of your understanding, and realize that all energy comes from nothing (ignorance), because there is nothing else...

 

I see, so your argument rests soundly on the logical falacy ad ignorantiam
Every example clearly shows that energy cannot be created or destroyed. There is empirical evidence to support this.
The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate the creation of energy, not for us to show you every form the energy changed from.
However, the beginning of this chain of causality, if your wondering, is that the energy was created with the universe, and thus from the perspective of any observer inside the universe, it has always been there.
But dont think that just because it was created with the universe means it can be/is still created in our universe.
So you still have to show proof of it being created, in our universe right now, and thus adding more energy than existed in it a moment ago.

-Andrew

 

No argument can rest on anything but ignorance, words, nothing, because nothing the source of everything. Nothing can be known because everything is "something" which means that we don't know what it is (ignorance), and we can never know (because everything is something)... we can only think we know.

If it could be created "then", why couldn't it be created "now" anymore?

Nothing can be created in the past because the past is only a memory, a thought.

 

No of course we cannot actualy know anything, however that does not make us ignorant. Moreover, this actualy makes you ignorant compared ot the rest of us if you choose to discard what you have to gain knowlege. Most use what they can to try and find knowlege (senses, language, emotions etc..) If your argument simply rests on the fact that we do not ultimatly know anything, theres no point in any debate, so you can stop wasting our time. People know this, it's old, and no premisis to support any argument, as that would mean any argument is just as correct.

Read the link if you dont understnad what "argument from ignorance" means.
I can make an argument that my shirt is red. My eye's say its red, my friend confirms this. That is an argument, not from ignorance. One from ignorance would be that: I say it's red because you can't see it to prove otherwise. Or the prime example: "You can't prove unicorns don't exist, so they do."

Simply because it was created with our universe, not within it.
As I said, show me an example to counter it, or your argument is still ad ignorantiam

-Andrew

 

I already showed you. Windmills.

 

...It was already explained to you why this was false.
As I said, you can trace the changes of energy back to the beginning of time and never see it created within our universe. From the perspective of any observer inside the universe, it has always existed, and always will.

-Andrew

 

Why couldnt the sun be a continuing cycle of nuclear fission? Much like the water on the earth has a continuing cycle of vapor and liquid.
Nuclear Fission happens in the middle of the sun and the components of the atom are blown apart, but because the suns gravity is so strong it recombines the broken atoms before they can leave the surface of the sun.
A continuing cycle of broken atoms being blown apart away from the center and whole atoms being drawn back down to the sun's core to be blown apart again.

 

The lighter elements release energy through nuclear fussion, however it requires energy to split them apart (nuclear fission) the heavier elements release energy through fission, but require energy to be fused. Thus, you can't actualy gain energy by fusion and fission of the same material. So, since the sun outputts it's energy as EM radiation, once it has fused all it can, it has no energy to split it back again.

-Andrew

 

Steorn

Someone asked me what I thought of the Steorn demo (appears to have been stopped). Well I did read that it went for 4 hours. Remarkable if the system is the same as a SC ring.

 

The sun releases energy so how does that interplay with the sun not being a continuing cycle of nuclear fission? Once it releases enough energy/mass by light and radiation. It will lose the strength of it's gravity to a degree that it would not be able to continue it's current cycle of fission and will grow to a red giant and start another but weaker cycle of Nuclear fission.

I don't know though I never really read about fusion. It's just hard for me to see two nucleons fusing together and releasing energy. Especially since I thought it was a law that particles could never physically touch each other. But even if it was possible than it would take more energy to fuse nucleons together then the release of power. If it was possible the release of energy would equal a tiny bit of energy left over of what could not be fused together.

 

But stars die, thus it is not truly a continuing cycle: it ends somewhere. The more massive the star, the more massive the elements it can fuse, but eventualy it wont be big eanough to fuse anything, and hence dies.

Think of a log, your outside camping. It takes allot of work to get that log burning initialy, but once you do, it outputs more energy than it took to light it, plus you can add more logs and sustain the reaction, thats essentialy what stars have done. Eventualy, you run out of logs/trees and your fire dies, just like the star runs out of fusion material.
Whats happening in the nucleus of an atom is, under high preassure and tempuratures, the nucleons are so close together the Strong Nuclear Force is abble to take effect and bind them together, releasing stored potential energy in the process (eg as EM radiation, and heat.) You will have to do your own reading if you want a better understanding of the physics.

-Andrew

 

I never said it was an infinite ongoing cycle. The sun is constantly releasing energy which comes from mass.

Does Nuclear fission not create EM radiation and heat?

Plus when you burn a log the compounds that made up the log are separated and released. Doesn't seem anything like nuclear fusion to me.