Zero Point Energy

[Allcanadian]

Jerry

I consider this to be a breakthrough.  The time may come when we can buy ZPE panels similar to solar panels, although thicker, depending on how many diode sheets need to be stacked for a desired output.  Replacing vacuum between the plates with the thin film dielectric is very innovative.  Successful operation would seem to be more important than understanding where the energy comes from.

Were going to be seeing a massive number of breakthroughs in the near future made possible by nano-technology and meta-materials. Almost every university has some kind of program working on ZPE or nano power generation.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/07/30/184712/engineers-unveil-first-casimir-chip-that-exploits-the-vacuum-energy/
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph240/blakemore1/

Richard Feynman and many other Nobel prize winning physicists predicted all of this decades ago and said the only real problem was building a small enough lever to extract energy at atomic scales. We already know there is a huge amount of kinetic energy in matter and EM/ZPE energy in the spaces between matter. So it's simply a matter of understand energy and where it comes from as well as how to interact with it in a practical manner.

We could think of it this way, we already know how much energy is available at the atomic level from Fission and Fusion. It's all been proven tens of thousands of times over however it's very costly and problematic. All this new tech doesn't blast matter apart like fission/fusion and is designed to interact with the kinetic energy already present in a non-destructive way. There's simply no getting around the fact everything we know is made up of matter in motion and EM energy.

I find all this stuff easy because my focus was always on understanding Energy, the Primary Fields and Matter first. To understand the foundation everything is built on first then proceed to build technology based on that. As they say, we cannot build what we cannot understand and many are going about this backwards in my opinion.

AC

[F6FLT]

The extraction of energy from the zero point follows the same rules as physics in general.
It is not because we can have forces, that we could have a perpetual energy.
In the Casimir effect, the force between plates will indeed do some work. But when the plates have moved closer to each other, how can we put them back to their initial position to reset a cycle, without doing the opposite work?
Whether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.
Energy is what is recovered by going from one state to another, and what must be supplied to return to the initial state. This principle seems to me to be sufficiently universal that we should either try to circumvent it rather than fight it or deny it, or to tap into known or unknown sources of energy for the return to the initial point of the cycle, sources that would be diminished but would be sufficiently large for our needs (for example, nuclear). Magic words like "ZPE" are not enough to counteract it.

[Jerry Volland]

I'm reconsidering my opinion of the ZPE 'breakthrough'.  ZPE does not flow through a Casimir boundary plate.  Instead, it is considered to push against the plate from the outside.  Also the metal/oxide/metal diode doesn't have the characteristic doping associated with a tunnel diode.  Furthermore, the top mirror reflecting energy which does flow into the cavity suggests this reflection may produce a biphasic energy which results in a shape resonant self organising charge effect across the diode.  It's likely that his picoWatt is coming from ambient heat reflected back out at the top, with the internal reflection coming up from the bottom, then back down.  But of course, I may be wrong, and some other mechanism is responsible for the effect.  But I don't see how it can be ZPE.

[Allcanadian]

F6FLT

Whether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.

This is true however it's not the only energy process we know of. 

A plant can absorb energy, water, minerals and gasses from it's environment doing work in the process. More important, unlike any primitive devices constructed by man a plant can grow increasing it's rate of absorption exponentially over time. Unlike your system we do not supply energy and in order to return the system to it's original state the energy it absorbed can be transformed doing work for us.

In engineering terms every plant is an semi-intelligent, semi-independent, self constructing, self replicating, self healing energy transformation machine.

Are plants intelligent?...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/radical-conservation/2015/aug/04/plants-intelligent-sentient-book-brilliant-green-internet

I always found it strange that mankind is not even remotely close to having the intelligence or knowledge to be able to create something like a plant from scratch. I mean were surrounded by them, we eat them, there everywhere yet we have no idea where to even begin to build one. Granted we can pretend to grow them and genetically modify them but building one from scratch is beyond our understanding.

This is why it's important to keep an open mind and understand our conception of energy and machines to extract energy is child like at best compared to nature.

Regards
AC

[Smudge]

Whether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.

That assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

In the early NMR work back in the late 1940's it seems that there might be a route for using nuclear precessions to get excess energy.   In any magnet the electrons responsible for the magnetism are precessing and there is energy in those precessions.  Fast applied field transients might unlock some of that energy as we discussed in 2019 on one of my benches.  That got nowhere but partzman was using conductive magnets that don't take kindly to fast transients.
Smudge   

[F6FLT]

F6FLT
This is true however it's not the only energy process we know of. 

A plant can absorb energy, water, minerals and gasses from it's environment doing work in the process...
[...]
This is why it's important to keep an open mind and understand our conception of energy and machines to extract energy is child like at best compared to nature.

Regards
AC

Plants do not differ from inert matter. The physical-chemical reactions at work in life also result in a overall increase of entropy. Plants burn energy to run their processes, just like our artificial machines. There is no natural free energy, which is moreover the evidence that if it is possible, it is surely not obvious.
Nature did not invent the wheel, man did.  If nature's models had all the answers, airplanes would flap their wings.

If we are not able to learn from our past mistakes, we go around in circles. This is what is happening today in the free energy movement. For the question of the open mind, one must be circumspect, see my signature.

[F6FLT]

That assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

In the early NMR work back in the late 1940's it seems that there might be a route for using nuclear precessions to get excess energy.   In any magnet the electrons responsible for the magnetism are precessing and there is energy in those precessions.  Fast applied field transients might unlock some of that energy as we discussed in 2019 on one of my benches.  That got nowhere but partzman was using conductive magnets that don't take kindly to fast transients.
Smudge

I want to believe you, but I don't see anything coming.
This question of energy as a passage from one state to another is also at the microscopic level.
For example, a seemingly brilliant idea was the capillary engine. The water rises by capillarity, so we think that once it's up, we just have to let the drops fall back down, and bingo, we can start the cycle again! But no! At the microscopic level, the Van der Valls forces are at work and block the process.
The principle is universal. We must find something else. A Maxwell demon is perhaps possible. The LENR too. The energy of neutrinos... In any case we have to consider a change of state of something whose imbalance would then be restored naturally by the ambient energy, or whose imbalance would be unimportant if the energy provided is enormous (nuclear energy).
There is no miracle solution in the past, it would be known. I think we should look to the future, not to the past, and think innovation rather than rehashing the old stuff that everyone is talking about for decades without ever having produced anything useful, or even the slightest proof of concept.

François

[Allcanadian]

Smudge

That assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

This reminds me of my work on the perpetual electromagnet.

A permanent magnet is simply a ferromagnetic material where the electron orbits have been coordinated and locked in place producing a permanent magnetic field. An electromagnet is simply an electron current moving in circles like an orbit through a conductor. Thus if the conditions were met whereby the electrons in the turns of wire in an electromagnet could continue in motion like a PM it would become a switchable permanent electromagnet. At which point the notion of having to remove an iron core or magnet becomes a mute point.

In fact there were many inventors who made similar claims which is where I got the concept. They used solenoid or switched reluctance motors which used only a fraction of the input we would expect. You see almost all the energy we input into an electromagnet is used to maintain the electron current holding the magnetic field not to create it. If the electrons could be maintained in motion like a PM then we would only need to create the magnetic field once, let it perform work then recapture the input.

So my goal was straightforward, do whatever is required in order to maintain the electron current moving in circles in a conductor longer than expected. Much of this isn't that difficult however we have to understand and focus on the problem at hand. As Faraday said, it doesn't matter how we do it only that we do.

I should also note that Ed Leedskalnin's literature also helped my progress. I built many of his devices including the perpetual motion holder(PMH). Don't get me wrong, Ed was as crazy as the day is long however that doesn't change the fact his concepts had merit. The PMH was valid and a periodic induced magnetic field could be maintained permanently. It's important to start with a viable concept as a foundation then continue building on it.

Regards
AC

[F6FLT]

Perpetual electromagnet or perpetual anything are expressions to please oneself, when nobody is able to provide the slightest experimental indication that it would be possible, and certainly not the pseudo-inventors who talked about it. An inventor is one who produces an invention. Where is this invention of a perpetual electromagnet, outside the heads of believers? Nowhere. So no invention, no inventor, but useless palaver.

We all dream of little black boxes with a power outlet that takes out the perpetual KW. So we have fun with electronics and electricity, because the components are available and playing with them is easy. And we invent stories, that this or that would not be in conformity with the classical theories when nothing deviates from it and that this idea is the simple result of the ignorance of those who speak about it, the less competent being the most apt to delude.

It reminds me of the story of that drunk person, who at night, when leaving the bar, looks for his car keys that he lost, under the street light, because elsewhere it is dark!  If there is free energy somewhere, you'll have to be a lot smarter than rehashing fairy tales to flush it out!

[Allcanadian]

F6FLT

Perpetual electromagnet or perpetual anything are expressions to please oneself, when nobody is able to provide the slightest experimental indication that it would be possible, and certainly not the pseudo-inventors who talked about it. An inventor is one who produces an invention.

My proof that perpetual motion is the norm is that not you or anyone else can give me one example of something not in perpetual motion.
The conservation of energy demands perpetual motion is the norm because energy is motion.

Your supposedly a smart guy, one example of something not in perpetual motion is all I'm asking, any idea's?. It's strange because not one single person has ever responded to my question. One would think they would be all gung ho to prove me wrong but I suspect they already know the answer.

Regards
AC

[Jerry Volland]

If my theory that ZPE stems from a momentary relaxing of the local space/time curvature is correct, this would lead to the notion that there might be less of it in interstellar space than on, or near, the Earth.  With the Cassimere effect conceeded to be an example, we might see a reduction of this force so far out in deep space.  The space/time graph is not linear.  With a uniform difference between the internal and external Cavity pressures, there might still be a relativistic overall variance from one depth of space to another.  (This may already be known about by those who work with the ZPE equations.). Perhaps we should send a Cassimere test device on an interstellar probe?

Another way we could test for variance would be to use directly extracted ZPE to power the probe, then watch for changes in the probe's acceleration.  Or, just monitor the output from the ZPE unit.

If my theory is correct, then something else we should consider is the concept that extracting the energy could quite possibly produce a permanent reduction in the local curvature, with a corresponding permanent reduction in gravity.  There is a legend that a planet named Malduk exploded in the Pleiades thousands of years ago, with at least some of the survivors coming here - landing in the Carpathian Mountains region.  There is reason to accept the legend.  So what destroyed the planet?  Widespread, universal extraction of power from the ZPE?

I think before we get too determined to power our cars with ZPE, we'd better send out one or more probes to find out if there IS a change in the underlying curvature.  If there is, then ZPE should be outlawed, except in deep space.

Another thing to consider is that Putin said he invaded Ukraine because they were going to install a Sky Net which would destroy the world.  Were they planning to power their High Altitude Platforms with some easy way they discovered to extract ZPE?

[F6FLT]

...
My proof that perpetual motion is the norm is that not you or anyone else can give me one example of something not in perpetual motion.
...

Semantic drift and sophism. The question is not perpetuity, we know well that there is perpetual motion in the atom or the universe, it is a truism. The question is to extract a useful work by alleging a perpetual motion.

[forest]

Allcanadian

If you cross magnetic field with closed conductor current is generated inside conductor, so I suspect we should cross magnetic field frequently with frequency related to the circumference of conductor to bring current in DC mode like you imagined

[Allcanadian]

F6FLT

The question is not perpetuity, we know well that there is perpetual motion in the atom or the universe, it is a truism. The question is to extract a useful work by alleging a perpetual motion.

Very good, we have now established that perpetual motion is the natural state of everything in the universe. This is self-evident and anyone who claims perpetual motion is impossible is misinformed.

Step two is to acknowledge that everything we know and see all around us is in perpetual motion as matter or energy. We have no need for imaginary schemes or theories and it has been well established that matter and the space it occupies holds all the energy we could ever want. On this level we must also acknowledge that energy/motion cannot be created or destroyed and is always conserved.

On the question of how to extract useful work by alleging a perpetual motion... were already doing it.

All energy is the perpetual motion of something thus all our present energy systems and any useful work ever done must utilize it. Many billions of years ago matter/energy was dispersed into this area of the universe forming our Sun/star and planets which then provided all of the energy and life we presently enjoy.

We cannot just cherry pick a small part of the present energy here or elsewhere and presume it had no past. The law is that energy/motion cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. Thus all energy including all we know must have come from somewhere and represent perpetual motion because ...energy cannot be destroyed.

So the only relevant question is how to efficiently transform some of the energy from the sea of energy we are presently immersed in?.

The first clue should have been that all energy relates directly to the motion of something. All our present systems and those in the future must rely on the conversion or transformation of one form of energy/motion to another. For example fission/fusion knocks around some electrons in a material, they recombine as a different atom(transmutation) and release some energy. We oxidize a hydrocarbon, the atoms recombine as different molecules and release some energy. As we can see all these energy transformations rely on changing the kinds of motion taking place. Most often electron orbital motion in an atom changing and recombining to form a new atom/molecule and releasing energy as oscillations/heat.

In every case the energy transformation process is nearly identical because were not creating/destroying energy or motion were transforming or converting it. The most obvious problem is that many have come to believe creation/destruction in the norm not transformations. At which point the saying "You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into" comes into play.

Which begs the question where the energy in these free energy devices could come from. We know as a fact that all the matter and space the device occupies is full of energy and in perpetual motion, that may be a good place to start. It's literally all in motion thus it's simply a matter of finding a way to transform some of that motion to a more useful form. 

Regards
AC

[forest]

Nobody questions the operation of heat pumps. Why somebody would question operations of energy pumps ? There is enough energy in Earth magnetic field coming from solar rays and other cosmic sources.

[Allcanadian]

Forest

Nobody questions the operation of heat pumps. Why somebody would question operations of energy pumps ? There is enough energy in Earth magnetic field coming from solar rays and other cosmic sources.

That is a good observation, our batteries, generators and other sources simply pump free electrons from the (+) terminal to the (-) terminal. Then the free electrons flow from the (-) terminal through the circuit or load back to the (+) terminal at the pump. By any other name it is simply a pump using a force to produce a flow of material we call electrons.

The heat pump is a neat device, on the cool end it absorbs the oscillation energy (heat) in our house and moves those oscillations in a material to the hot end where the oscillation energy is expelled. It's an energy pump or mover rather than an energy transformer like an electric heater which is why the efficiency is higher. 

It would seem to me we could use a similar process to move other forms of energy. The concept is sound it's just a matter of working though the problems associated with the technology.

Regards
AC

[Cadman]

Forest
That is a good observation, our batteries, generators and other sources simply pump free electrons from the (+) terminal to the (-) terminal. Then the free electrons flow from the (-) terminal through the circuit or load back to the (+) terminal at the pump. By any other name it is simply a pump using a force to produce a flow of material we call electrons.

....

Regards
AC

In a nut-shell that's what I think Tariel Kapanadze did. Create a large electron deficit (sink) and hook a device between that and the earth (source). Electrons move from earth to fill the sink but get converted to other types of energy before they get there, and the sink never fills. He said from the beginning it was simple.

Regards
Cadman

[Bob Smith]

My own limited observations have shown that a charge gradient must be established to draw zero point energy into a system, where it essentially changes state into work-capable charge.  I believe there are ways to establish conditions which produce this charge gradient using basic transistors, diodes and coils (and an outside power source).

[F6FLT]

F6FLT
Very good, we have now established that perpetual motion is the natural state of everything in the universe.
...
On the question of how to extract useful work by alleging a perpetual motion... were already doing it.
...

Those who tell us this are still paying a subscription for electrical energy.
Find the error...

[Allcanadian]

Bob Smith

My own limited observations have shown that a charge gradient must be established to draw zero point energy into a system, where it essentially changes state into work-capable charge.  I believe there are ways to establish conditions which produce this charge gradient using basic transistors, diodes and coils (and an outside power source).

That's the kicker isn't it?.

We look at these FE devices in there most basic form and it's nothing more than some coils of wire, maybe iron cores and switches. Then again, a computer AI is simply a bunch of transistors forming logic gates and some software. Giving rise to the notion that not unlike ourselves some things can be much more than the sum of there parts. I mean, if most people were not "alive" themselves they would probably conclude intelligent life was impossible, yet here we are.

So we have a lot to learn...

AC

[Bob Smith]

Bob Smith
That's the kicker isn't it?.

We look at these FE devices in there most basic form and it's nothing more than some coils of wire, maybe iron cores and switches. Then again, a computer AI is simply a bunch of transistors forming logic gates and some software. Giving rise to the notion that not unlike ourselves some things can be much more than the sum of there parts. I mean, if most people were not "alive" themselves they would probably conclude intelligent life was impossible, yet here we are.

So we have a lot to learn...

AC

Yes. I suspect the keys to unlocking this mystery (tapping ZPE) are very simple and we are getting bogged down in far too much detail and technobabble - both purposeful and by conditioning within conventional closed system paradigms.

[Allcanadian]

Bob Smith

Yes. I suspect the keys to unlocking this mystery (tapping ZPE) are very simple and we are getting bogged down in far too much detail and technobabble - both purposeful and by conditioning within conventional closed system paradigms.

I have a trick I use at the bench during the theory and building phase. I picture matter as a fog of oscillating particles floating in a sea of EM energy. This keeps my mind thinking objectively versus just seeing components, wires and switches which is subjective. We have a hundred years of science which proves what we think were seeing in reality is subjective. What we think we see is not real and matter is 1% kinetic material and 99% EM energy. At which point this notion of closed systems becomes completely absurd.

It's definitely a balancing act because we have to live and work in the supposedly real world but most of it is a fabrication. Most of the stuff were contemplating is the last thing on anyone's mind, lol.

Regards
AC

[Chet K]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=atGD9dIgYgg&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD

Casimir effect ( zero point ....
Shared by a fellow open source researcher ( and avid experimenter)

Respectfully submitted
Chet

[Chet K]

The Garret model ( again,shared by a fellow who follows the news on the "other side" of open source )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6_KKXTbTyg
And the patent

Quantum vacuum energy extraction

Publication of US20070241470A1

2008-05-27

Application granted

2008-05-27

Publication of US7379286B2

Respectfully submitted
Chet K

[Allcanadian]

Chet K

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=atGD9dIgYgg&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD
Casimir effect ( zero point ....

They make some good points and I'm not sure most understand the significance. The Casimir effect shows almost everyone was completely wrong about the amount of energy in a given space. Ergo, space is not empty that lie is off the table. We have reproducible, demonstrable proof we are floating in a sea of energy... period... end of debate... full stop... time to move on. 

So there is no need to suppose a FE device must get something from nothing or violate the COE. That lie is off the table and no longer relevant.

In fact some of my testing agrees with this notion. I found the supposed "extra energy" in a FE device may not come from an external source. It comes from the circuit itself and the space said circuit occupies. Nothing is flowing in from anywhere the energy is already present within the system.

It's similar to a primitive or simple minded person saying nuclear energy is impossible when all they know is steam engine technology. Nuclear energy must be impossible because nothing is being burned and we cannot see the energy source... the energy must be created from nothing, LOL.

It's also absurd that the people supposedly claiming to believe in the COE are most often the first to claim it must be violated by a FE device.
Supposed expert... nothing can violate the COE.
Man shows working FE device.
Supposed expert has a melt down and claims COE has been violated.

So which is it?, do they believe in the COE or not because their actions tend to prove they do not. I would never suggest the COE can be violated, I know better.

AC