PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2026-04-01, 10:31:49
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Author Topic: Free energy is easy, ask an intelligent question...  (Read 17175 times)
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3100
Smudge
Quote
You say gas is expensive but here in the UK it is a quarter of the price of electricity.  And the installation cost for a gas boiler is far less than that for a heat pump, so if I were faced with your problem I would do what you are doing.

What are your gas and electrical rates where you are?. AI say's the UK is around $0.4167/kWh for power and $27/GJ for gas. I find this hard to believe and in Alberta I'm paying $0.12/kWh for power and $3/GJ for gas. All prices are in CAD dollars and 1 GigaJoule = 277.78 kWh.

Where I am natural gas is about 91% cheaper than power when comparing costs per kWh. Which sounds about right and my guesstimate was 10:1 before checking the prices.
« Last Edit: 2026-03-15, 21:24:29 by Allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2363
Smudge
What are your gas and electrical rates where you are?. AI say's the UK is around $0.4167/kWh for power and $27/GJ for gas. I find this hard to believe and in Alberta I'm paying $0.12/kWh for power and $3/GJ for gas. All prices are in CAD dollars and 1 GigaJoule = 277.78 kWh.

Where I am natural gas is about 91% cheaper than power when comparing costs per kWh. Which sounds about right and my guesstimate was 10:1 before checking the prices.
My latest bill shows gas at 6.02p/kWh and electricity at 22.39p/kWh so a ratio of 3.72 there (100p=£1).  Those prices are capped by the UK government.  I am on a fixed rate contract that expires in June and the big concern here is the UK reliance on imported gas that is severely affected by the war in the Middle East.  Also the UK store of gas is measured in days so it seems a crisis is looming.  Our government is trying to move everybody away from gas, pushing households towards heat pumps.  My granddaughter does not have a gas supply and is reliant on oil deliveries where the war has caused her oil costs to more than double.

Smudge
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3100
Smudge
Quote
My latest bill shows gas at 6.02p/kWh and electricity at 22.39p/kWh so a ratio of 3.72 there (100p=£1).  Those prices are capped by the UK government.  I am on a fixed rate contract that expires in June and the big concern here is the UK reliance on imported gas that is severely affected by the war in the Middle East.  Also the UK store of gas is measured in days so it seems a crisis is looming.  Our government is trying to move everybody away from gas, pushing households towards heat pumps.  My granddaughter does not have a gas supply and is reliant on oil deliveries where the war has caused her oil costs to more than double.

Thanks, so the AI estimate at around $0.4167/kWh for power and $27/GJ for gas was pretty close.

I'm not a big fan of air-air heat pumps but did a lot of calculations and design on enhanced heat pumps. For example, we cover a southern exposure with flat black vented soffit and the heat pump pulls intake air from behind the soffit. The sun heats the air on the surface of the soffit, is pulled through the holes in the soffit and this solar heat is added to the heat pump input. Extra heat can also be added by pulling warmer air from an attic space. It only works during the day but can easily double the COP.

I have no problem with alternative energy and I was into it before it became fashionable. My father built our house on the farm with a Trombe wall 45 years ago so I grew up with alternative energy. He used eight 4'x8' solar thermal panels using flat black soffit under double pane glass. The hot air was blown through 4" ducts in the concrete floor/thermal mass which kept the house warm all night. Our heating bill was 95% less than everyone else running a gas forced air furnace. I thought it was normal to have a $100 annual heating bill, lol.

I suspect my experience growing up is why I never found alternative or free energy all that difficult. The notion of environmental energy was normal and natural to me from a young age.




---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2497
...
I see nothing wrong with the concept of a system that extracts environment heat energy, converts it to electrical energy, with a COP>1.

Smudge

I agree in principle. The problem is that you cited the heat pump as a source of free energy, yet this energy is not currently free; you have to use electricity to extract energy from the environment, and the COP is currently so poor that it works out more expensive than gas. The theory, even though it has not proven that all Maxwell’s demons are impossible (only certain types), has not proven their possibility either, so the whole thing remains highly hypothetical.
« Last Edit: 2026-03-16, 15:53:35 by F6FLT »


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2497
...
I suspect my experience growing up is why I never found alternative or free energy all that difficult. The notion of environmental energy was normal and natural to me from a young age.

That’s how things were done in the past, when there was no electricity. We burned wood, and the CO₂ was then absorbed by the trees again. A self-sustaining system – ‘how wonderful’, as environmentalists would say.
The problem is that none of this meets our needs today. What might work for a detached house becomes a huge challenge when it comes to city blocks and hundreds of thousands of people to power. And even if it did, we would still be a very, very long way from meeting our overall needs, particularly those linked to industrial production and transport.
Even renewable energy lacks the consistency required for our needs, and causes significant nuisance due to the low ratio of energy produced to the space and volume occupied. Realistically, the only options currently available are oil, gas and nuclear power. And barring a miracle in the realm of free energy, the best option for the near future is nuclear fusion. Hot.

« Last Edit: 2026-03-16, 16:20:00 by F6FLT »


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 527
"Researchers at ETH Zurich have achieved a breakthrough by creating a miniature superconducting magnet capable of generating a 42-tesla field, small enough to fit in a palm. This 42-tesla (42 T) magnet, composed of four REBCO pancake coils, significantly advances superconducting technology for NMR and MRI applications."

now connect it with Clemente Figuera patent and for me it looks like MW power plant is almost possible today without big input power.
   
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1319
Hej Forest,

The super magnet needs liquid helium and over 1000 Amper to get 42 Tesla, did you consider that?    :D      It is surely an advancement in creating very strong magnetic fields though.

For others here, this is a description https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz5826 


"Researchers at ETH Zurich have achieved a breakthrough by creating a miniature superconducting magnet capable of generating a 42-tesla field, small enough to fit in a palm. This 42-tesla (42 T) magnet, composed of four REBCO pancake coils, significantly advances superconducting technology for NMR and MRI applications."

now connect it with Clemente Figuera patent and for me it looks like MW power plant is almost possible today without big input power.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
The super magnet needs liquid helium and over 1000 Amper to get 42 Tesla, did you consider that?   ://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz5826[/url]
However, as with any superconducting electromagnet, the 1000A of current does not have to be continuously supplied from outside after it's ramped up. ...and this current does not run down so the electromagnet becomes self-powered and can by moved around as long as the LH stays cold.
In practice, the recondensing pump dissipates some energy to keep the LH liquid but that in not the electromagnet's fault.  The heat used to boil the LH does not come from the magnet but from the air and ambient temperature.  Thermal insulation is a big factor.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 527
"Furthermore, the magnet coils are small enough to fit in the palm of a hand and consume less than 1 watt of power."
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1132
superconducting.   hmm.  ok.  how much energy does it take to gather and compress the gas that cools the super conductor in order to hold currents indefinately??  seems like a lot to keep that going. 

superconductors have their uses. but the cost is not a bargan in real world applications. i keep hearing of 'ideal' this and that.  many say FE is fantasy land, but keep refering to super this and that, of which seems super costly for general use... Tesla im sure, if he had FE, did not require super anything. just simplistic materials configured in a correct way. that is what we need to work on.   

lets say we could get a super conductor to have never ending currents. it is only stored energy that 'costs' to hold it.  break that loop and apply it to a work load. not so ever lasting now is it. did it have more energy than what was applied in the first place, even if we neglected the energy to cool the thing?  super conductors are useful for certain things. but there is no free energy there.

mags

   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
Let's say we could get a superconductor to have never ending currents. It is only stored energy that 'costs' to hold it.
Yes, especially on the warm Earth.  In space it would not cost anything to hold it.

Break that loop and apply it to a work load. Not so ever lasting now is it.
Correct, once the loop is broken - so is the current.

Did it have more energy than what was applied in the first place, even if we neglected the energy to cool the thing? 
No, what you get out is what you put in.   Just like with a capacitor but by a different mechanism.

superconductors are useful for certain things. but there is no free energy there.
Certainly not by themselves.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 559


Buy me some coffee
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9b3bPyizbc

The Bedini guy, seems to be going round in circles.


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
The Bedini guy, seems to be going round in circles.
Describe the circles
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 559


Buy me some coffee
Describe the circles
He keeps re-building the same circuitry with "It'll work this time" hopium. Different coils, better diodes, higher spec transistors, better gate drivers, etc etc,... and now his bearings are done, so they need replacing. As I said, "circles". lol
« Last Edit: 2026-03-24, 15:28:36 by Aking.21 »


---------------------------
Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KV charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd  plate?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 527
I saw a few days video which I think present one of the simplest free energy device and IMHO it's real. The only thing which is missing is tank circuit on primary powered by any electronic resonant circuit. Primary must be high Q to get high COP at output:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmy-QuaXQjY&t=140s

Schematic :
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
I saw a few days video which I think present one of the simplest free energy device and IMHO it's real. The only thing which is missing is tank circuit on primary powered by any electronic resonant circuit. Primary must be high Q to get high COP at output:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmy-QuaXQjY&t=140s

It uses this Chinese miracle.



Even if you somehow learn the output voltage, frequency and current of this module, replicating that 12x8cm transformer-capacitor only with information about its wire gauges, is a shot in the dark.

  Transformer-capacitor with 3 windings.

A similarly wound transformer-capacitor also appears in this article.

Also, that light bulb is not a resistive incandescent type like the symbol on the schematic implies.  The accompanying text on the schematic clarifies this.
In the video, it appears as a cracked standard LED bulb tailored for a 240VAC mains supply, but the physics of LEDs requires them to be supplied with a much lower voltage ...and DC or PDC.
To satisfy this requirement, that LED light bulb must have some kind of 240VAC to low-voltage DC converter built-in.  This converter will have a profound impact on the current flowing in the primary winding of the transformer-capacitor since that LED bulb is connected in series with it.

In the simplest case, the converter is constructed as a simple capacitive divider with a rectifier. 
In more complex solutions, the 240VAC is first rectified and then applied to a high-frequency buck-converter. 
In the highest quality LED bulbs, an additional high-frequency PFC stage precedes the buck converter.

The first case severely distorts the current waveform coming out of the Chinese HV module and the two latter solutions modulate the primary current of the transformer-capacitor with undetermined high frequency harmonics.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2497
...
A similarly wound transformer-capacitor also appears in this article.
...

How can a bloke who seems to have access to decent equipment be so incompetent that he makes so many crass, beginner’s mistakes?
For example, he denies that a circuit with a capacitor in series is a closed circuit for varying currents, not an open one! And he even uses this as a pretext to criticise the laws of physics.  C.C

Clearly, he only wants to see what suits him, and will therefore never manage to create a self-sustaining device, despite how easy it would be to do so if one were to believe the far-fetched and dubious principles he puts forward.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
For example, he denies that a circuit with a capacitor in series is a closed circuit for varying currents, not an open one! And he even uses this as a pretext to criticise the laws of physics.  C.C
Maybe he does not believe in displacement current ...or has never heard of it  ...or maybe you did not realize that this article has been machine translated from the russian language and in that language an open switch has 0Ω resistance and a closed switch has ∞ resistance (ideally).

Also he might have never heard of the variability of capacitance with voltage in non-ideal capacitors. ...and about inductive CSRs.

On the other hand: this video claims increasing battery voltage.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2363
.......an open switch has 0Ω resistance and a closed switch has ∞ resistance (ideally).
Does the translator really make that profound mistake?

Smudge
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4577
Does the translator really make that profound mistake?
Russian transistors, too.  Their collector and drain currents are the largest when the transistors are "open".

Oh!, you asked about "translator" - not "transistor".  Yes, machine translators make that mistake all the time.  Human translators, too.
It is not a matter of translating the individual words "open"  and "closed" incorrectly.  For example: the word "open" in a phrase like "open windows" has the same meaning in both Russian and English ...but in the phrase "open transistor" the same word has the opposite meaning.
These words acquire different meanings in electric contexts.  Only a technical human translator or an AI translator would be able to account for this context.
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 419
I know how to make OU. Unfortunately, it isn't possible today with the current development of civilization, because a hole through the ground is needed.
A rocket, when leaving the ground, has more kinetic energy than was its fuel burned .  The Oberth effect works.  O0
The rocket receives part of its kinetic energy from the gravitational field.
« Last Edit: 2026-03-29, 09:14:06 by chief kolbacict »
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3100
I know how to make OU. Unfortunately, it isn't possible today with the current development of civilization, because a hole through the ground is needed.
A rocket, when leaving the ground, has more kinetic energy than was its fuel burned .  The Oberth effect works.  O0
The rocket receives part of its kinetic energy from the gravitational field.

The Oberth effect is really interesting and there are many other effects related to it.

I think of a Pelton water turbine where the kinetic energy of the water doing work on the turbine can be reduced to near zero. The water enters the bucket at high velocity doing work but turns 180 degrees doing more work as it leaves. If water leaves the bucket at X velocity and the bucket is moving in the opposite direction at X velocity the water appears to be standing still and falls straight down away from the bucket. Similar to this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zllEVOn9NjM

A similar effect seems to happen in electrical systems. An electron current can appear to be moving quickly in a solenoid coil however if the iron core is far away from the coil the current's magnetic field does little work on it and most of the electrons kinetic energy dissipates as heat. It appears as a kind of slippage in the system where the electrons or water or hot gasses from a rocket have kinetic energy but it is not transferred to the thing we want to perform work on. This is why it's important to find the sweet spot in any system where as much of the input is transferred to the output as possible.

This also relates to the reason almost all FE devices use impulses instead of continuous flows. Viktor Schauberger explained this phenomena well. In a continuous flow every part of the water is tied to the motion of the other parts behind it and in front of it like so (0000000000). This is not true with a mixture of air and water where a droplet of water which can move independently of any other droplets like so (0  0  0  0  0  0  0). Schauberger used whorl pipes and fins to guide the water droplets into the center of the pipe filled with air so it seldom if ever touched the walls of the pipe thus had no friction. It's so simple a child could understand it, push the water droplets to the center of the pipe so they can move without friction through air instead of water. The water droplets can move much faster because they are not held back by any of the other droplets of water like a continuous water flow. Imagine a pipe where the flow inside of it only touches the pipe walls 1% of the time and it becomes obvious why there was very little friction.

« Last Edit: 2026-03-29, 18:26:48 by Allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 419
Can a Tesla valve regularize Brownian motion ?
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2026-04-01, 10:31:49