Dec 26, 16 / Cap 25, 00 22:47 UTC

#### Re: Unlimited Energy   ¶

I had brought this up on the original facebook forums in both physics, and engineering. Didn't seems like anyone had a comment either way. You can't go outside, and lift your car by hand right? But if you had a bottle jack you could easily do this with but one hand! Seems to me that just using the force alone from a single input to transform it directly to energy is missing a valuable step. Multiplying the force with hydraulics, which are reset via gravity feed while the reservoir chamber, and pressure chamber are open. This is a series process, and could step up the energy input prior to transforming into usable electricity. This will only work in a gravity rich environment. If prompted, I will go into furthermore details, but the idea is still at a conceptual phase as I am always seemingly broke.

Dec 26, 16 / Cap 25, 00 23:18 UTC

PROKHOROV thank you for this formula: The density of free energy could you calculated by formula E/V = cccc/ (8 pi G rr) where c is velocity of the light, pi = 3.14, G is the gravitational constant, r is the minimal possible radius of a black hole. As r could we use the electron radius (then E/V is circa 10(72) J/cubic meter) or Planks length (E/V is circa 10(112) J/cubic meter)....

i did not know there was a formula built around this principle.. would you share with us the origin of the formula and who worked it out? i think this is important... for example "E=MC square" was not Einstein but Oliver Heavyside...

this is very important science and not considered "fringe" anymore because so many have accomplished working devices and there have been thousands of patents awarded utilizing this type of technology. it is, however, still highly suppressed due to the inevitable destruction it will cause to entire financial systems. that is precisely why Asgardia should usher in this technology BUT ONLY if we are not under the control of the present monopoly of power and the financial systems. this is the only way to move forward into the public with technology that uses a COP>1

Dec 26, 16 / Cap 25, 00 23:19 UTC

Ahóá! Nahtahnii, Nizhónígo ałhééhosiilzįįd

Dec 26, 16 / Cap 25, 00 23:33 UTC

so you estimate that the COP (coefficient of performance) can be no greater than +108, so therefore COP108 is maximum. this is very interesting, what would you think is the force limiter in this? what prevents COP109?

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 00:52 UTC

I think the major challenge is not lying on whether we can create the machine for free energy, but how it will work and its role into the society. I would like to contribute on how to utilized this type of free energy machine into society once it is available. It is my great affection to see energy and clean water are free for everyone, and this is achievable thru the right system. Capitalist will have its contribution too, but they will not be the main player anymore but arbiter. Looking forward to see a workable product :)

Last edited by:  Jordan Ballega (NCM, Asgardian, Candidate, Member of the Parliament)  on Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 04:24 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 11:56 UTC

Habermacher, I have myself derived the formula E/V = cccc / (8 pi G rr). Derivation of the formula is in two my artickles. 1. IGOR PROKHOROV, "The energy of gravitational field and vacuum", Vorträge des Kongress "Raumenergie-Technologien 2000", Bregenz, April.15-16, 2000, ss.102-166. 2. IGOR PROKHOROV, "On a new Interpretation of some facts of classical mechanics", Materials of the VII international Research and Practice Conference "European Science and Technology", Vol.2, April 23-24, 2014, Munchen, ss. 533-542.

The first article is wroted in Englisch, but the derivation of formula is not very rigorous there. Second artickles is wroted in Russian, therefore you need to produce translation. And derivation of the formula in this article is rigorous and correct. By the way, in second artickle I deduce also the most common formula of the free energy E = mcc. The formula has the following physical meaning: when we transmit the energy E to the vacuum, it reacts generating the substance in quantity m = E / cc. Potential energy is also an error. In reality, the energy of gravitational field exists, but not potential one. When we lift a Stone, we produce a work over gravitational field and transmit our muscular energy to the field. After that, when the stone falls under the action of gravitational field, the field releases ist energy to the stone.

When I had understood all these relations, I had began to seek the Facts and Technologies which could demonstrate the liberation of energy from the vacuum. I had found numerous Facts and Technologies. In 1952 was found very strange Effect in one of Soviet Institute: metallic ball falls upon massive metallic plate from Height 10 meter and recoils after collision to Height 13-15 meter. I repeat: it begins to drop from 10 meter and lifts to the height 13-15 meter. Such effect is in so greate contradiction with classical science that our Academicians have decided "to forget" the Effect. My Explanation is following: the physical vacuum deforms itself in moment of collision with the ball and gives back much Energy that hurls back the ball to 13-15 meter.

In 1970 Belorussian physicist Uscherenko had found other strange Effect: small grain of sand collides with massive metallic plate at velocity circa 2 km/sec and burns a through hole in the plate. Calculations have shown that we need the Energy for such Effect 10 000 times more than kinetic Energy of the sand grain. Uscherenko was silent 20 years relativ such Effect. Why? Er was afraid that director will expel him from Institute for such results. My Explanation is the same as previous one: vacuum deforms itself in moment of collision and liberates very greate Energy that burns the hole in plate.

7 years ago I and my Partner have made a small unit which formed the Stream of physical vacuum. Wnen the Stream penetrates into a light turbine, the turbine begins to revolve. Unfortunately, we had no needful Equipment and therefore the power of our Unit was very small (may be, one microwatt). But, the important thing was the fact of Rotation of the turbine under action of physical vacuum Stream rather than power.

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 14:31 UTC

Jason, It's native American. He just recognized my name is all. Thanks for the help though! I prefer to use English for ease of the community, and because I haven't spoken anything other since I was like five!

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 15:29 UTC

Habermacher, COP = 108 is the efficiency that was observed in Technology which is very simple one for realization. In Prinzip, the COP could achieve the values in millions and millions. But, such Technologies with COP >10000000 are very inconvenient ones, since they lead to the destruction of material: vacuum liberates very much of energy and the unit breaks down.

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 16:18 UTC

errr not a scientist here ,but (open to explanations haha ) theres no unlimited energy?

since every energy have its "fuel", even the sun who is burning its not unlimited it will deplete sometime ,since its making reactions to produce the energy , the only "energy" that i think (can be wrong only a assumption) that can be closer to unlimited its darkmater? theres no actual way to us use this but IF we could it would not be closer to unlimited? (sorry someone explain if i am wrong)

Dec 27, 16 / Cap 26, 00 19:34 UTC

Habermaker, that was genius! Your post on the 25th involving diodes. I have always wondered what would happen if I just kept the current moving in one direction with a capacitor creating draw. Never knew how to think of it properly involving ground states, and never imagined it could handle the excess of a load!

My imagined project involved a transformer to step up the amps, but I never did anything because I figured it to be fruitless?

Dec 28, 16 / Cap 27, 00 00:07 UTC

If you don't mind that schematic being public access - screenshot it to avoid filtetype issues and software compatibilities and place it on somewhere like imgur. You can then share a link to the diagram.

I also see mention of things like "patents" -=- They won't stop anyone copying things you realise? it just gives you the perception of being able to take legal action when they do. That only works if they recognise the authority of the court. I copy anything willingly - but as I generally don't do this to make products that end up on sale, no-one ever finds out.

Open source is clever because they're going to copy it anyway. By helping they might improve it, and make those improvements available. Not to mention it conforms with the Asgardian core principle of being a "free scientific base of knowledge".

Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 16:43 UTC

PROKHOROV I'm sorry, but your formulation of the energy density is simply wrong. And it's easy to show. Just do a dimensional calculation, you'll see thatt instead of an energy/volume [J/m^3]= [kg/(m * s^2)] your formula give a [m * kg /s^2] that's not an energy density. You should check better next time.

I'm kinda losing hope for this section, there are very few that knows physics, and many that talks about something that can't even be called pseudoscience.

Last edited by:  Giacomo Giovannini (Asgardian)  on Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 16:50 UTC, Total number of edits: 3 times

Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 20:10 UTC

QestionMark, formula is right. Make the verification again.

Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 20:26 UTC

You wrote "E/V = cccc/ (8 pi G rr) " where c is measure as [m/s], r is a distance so just [m] and G being the gravitational constant is measured in units [N * m^2 / kg^2]. this means that in units, your formula gives

(m^4 * kg^2 )/( s^4 * N * m^4) = kg / (s^2 * m) being [N]=[m * kg / s^2]

Now, since you supposedly wrote an energy density E/V we expect as units [J/ m^3]= [ N/m^2]=[ kg / (m * s^2)] again substituting N and [J]=[N * m]

As you can see, the dimensional calculation doesn't give any chance, your formula is wrong, since it's not an energy density, and you can do the same calculation, if you understand the basics of physics and the international units used. If you still keep going on, not accepting this simple demonstration, it means you are don't understand even simple physics. I don't want just criticise you, but if you don't understand this basics, how could you derive such a theory?

Last edited by:  Giacomo Giovannini (Asgardian)  on Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 20:27 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Dec 29, 16 / Cap 28, 00 21:37 UTC

[E/V] = kg / ( m s^2);

[c^4] = m^4 / s^4;

[G] = N m^2 / kg^2 = m^3 / (kg s^2);

[r^2] = m^2;

[c^4] / ( [G] [r^2] ) = kg / ( m s^2)

Last edited by:  IGOR PROKHOROV (Asgardian)  on Jan 1, 17 / Aqu 01, 01 11:20 UTC, Total number of edits: 3 times