Questions for the scientists in our midst

[manitou]

There's a few things that I wonder about from time to time. Please forgive me if these questions are already answered within the scientific community; I have no formal education at all.

 

First of all, it seems to me that perpetual motion is a kind of holy grail that mankind is looking to manifest. Do scientists, deep thinking scientists, ever consider that Love (or mutual attraction) is the missing component to the perpetual energy question? As to how we would ever harness that, that bears some deep thinking, I would deeply think.

 

 

Second question: Remember when you were a kid and you'd take a magnifying glass and hold it so the sun's rays would emolliate ants? (And then take the ants and bury them in cigarette filters in your front yard, like me and Harold did, marking the graves with popsicle sticks?) Does solar energy use this concept? Is there a way that this could be used better, i.e. more magnifying thickness and curvature of the lens as opposed to the flatness of the solar panels?

 

Thanks, anyone. I was just wondering.

[soaring crane]

I love your first question! Here's my initial, irreverent answer to the second one:

 

Walkie Talkie

[ralis]

There's a few things that I wonder about from time to time. Please forgive me if these questions are already answered within the scientific community; I have no formal education at all.

 

First of all, it seems to me that perpetual motion is a kind of holy grail that mankind is looking to manifest. Do scientists, deep thinking scientists, ever consider that Love (or mutual attraction) is the missing component to the perpetual energy question? As to how we would ever harness that, that bears some deep thinking, I would deeply think.

 

The universe doesn't work that way. Love is a human based emotional concept.

[alleswasderfallist]

The universe doesn't work that way. Love is a human based emotional concept.

 

Which scientific concepts aren't human based? And emotional?

 

To understand the sound of a drum you have to understand both drum and drummer. In understanding the universe, don't imagine that you're detecting the pure sound of the drum with concepts like time, space, energy, light, heat, etc.

[Marblehead]

I'm not going to get involved in the love one but,

 

to the second one, that is how hydro-solar power plants work. The sun's energy is reflected to a central collector where water is heated to turn turbines.

 

A physicist can tell you about perpetual motion and conservation of energy but I can't.

[ralis]

Which scientific concepts aren't human based? And emotional?

 

To understand the sound of a drum you have to understand both drum and drummer. In understanding the universe, don't imagine that you're detecting the pure sound of the drum with concepts like time, space, energy, light, heat, etc.

 

I was referring to perpetual motion free energy devices that the OP wanted comments on. There are reasons that these machines are bogus ideas. Friction and load cause these machines to fail.

[Mark Foote]

I was referring to perpetual motion free energy devices that the OP wanted comments on. There are reasons that these machines are bogus ideas. Friction and load cause these machines to fail.

 

Hey ralis- how does conservation of energy work in the big bang theory? if the universe expands infinitely into nothingness, where did the energy go? Don't know if you're up on that, but I was thinking that the universe itself is some kind of perpetual motion machine if it expands from one bang and contracts in to the next one, but I don't believe that's the current theory- is it?

Edited November 12, 2013 by Mark Foote

[Nungali]

I was referring to perpetual motion free energy devices that the OP wanted comments on. There are reasons that these machines are bogus ideas. Friction and load cause these machines to fail.

Especially when the word "PERPETUAL" is in the formula

 

One 'perpetual' energy that seems to be generated and just keeps on going is Gravity ... but only until Shiva's eye opens again

 

As far as harnessing love for energy ...I did consider connecting a tidal/wave generator to my bedsprings at one stage ... but that would fail on the' perpetual' side of things as I couldn't 'keep it up' for that long.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Nungali

[manitou]

The universe doesn't work that way. Love is a human based emotional concept.

You sure?

[manitou]

I'm not going to get involved in the love one but,

 

to the second one, that is how hydro-solar power plants work. The sun's energy is reflected to a central collector where water is heated to turn turbines.

 

 

I was thinking more about the magnification of the reflection, the really heat-producing energy that zaps ants in a hot second.

[manitou]

I love your first question! Here's my initial, irreverent answer to the second one:

 

Walkie Talkie

Okay! So it's apparently the concavity of the building that is doing that, the same as the concavity on a magnifying glass? Can we not find a way to harness the ultra-hotness of the concave-reflected rays and store them for use as energy for cars, heating, etc?

[thelerner]

If you use a magnifying glass to burn ants (yuck) as a kid than as an adult you'd use a fresnel lense to burn giant space ants. These huge lenses that are used in large screen TV's focus the suns power in a spectacular way.

Here's one site:

http://www.greenpowerscience.com/

also

 

back to original question: If you think big enough, everything is a perpetual motion device. The earth, sun, moon, meteors. Here in a heavy gravity field, with thick atmosphere, not so much. The tide, powered by the moon is.

[Bearded Dragon]

There is no such thing as perpetual motion. It defies the laws of physics. You can approach perpetual motion which is what any so called perpetual motion machine actually is. A better name would be a "highly efficient motor". There is the idea of using magnets, but the magnetic field of a magnet decays. It ends up just being another depletable fuel. Interestingly Venus had a magnetic field but it decayed and destroyed the planet. Impermanence.

 

The issue is that when you DO something, you lose energy. This is the same whether we're talking about motors or whether we're talking about meditation.

[Nungali]

I was thinking more about the magnification of the reflection, the really heat-producing energy that zaps ants in a hot second.

Check out the temperatures recorded in the system Marblehead referred to when the central collection pillar contains liquid salt

[Nungali]

Hey ralis- how does conservation of energy work in the big bang theory? if the universe expands infinitely into nothingness, where did the energy go? Don't know if you're up on that, but I was thinking that the universe itself is some kind of perpetual motion machine if it expands from one bang and contracts in to the next one, but I don't believe that's the current theory- is it?

Its still a Theory. Where did the energy come from in the first place ... now they are calculating (much more complexly ) 0 = 2.

[Nungali]

There is no such thing as perpetual motion. It defies the laws of physics. You can approach perpetual motion which is what any so called perpetual motion machine actually is. A better name would be a "highly efficient motor". There is the idea of using magnets, but the magnetic field of a magnet decays. It ends up just being another depletable fuel. Interestingly Venus had a magnetic field but it decayed and destroyed the planet. Impermanence.

 

The issue is that when you DO something, you lose energy. This is the same whether we're talking about motors or whether we're talking about meditation.

 

No 'loss' of energy, that is against the laws of physics ... energy changes from one form to another ... you can't loose energy out of an 'unsealed system' (if there is such a thing) ... like the heat and gas that comes out of the exhaust system of your car (why petrol is efficient comparatively and inefficient potentially). When you DO something you convert one form of energy to another.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Nungali

[Nungali]

Of course that means 2=0 gives the 0 a type of value that 'holds' the energy in suspended 'stasis' .

[Neophyte]

Hey ralis- how does conservation of energy work in the big bang theory? if the universe expands infinitely into nothingness, where did the energy go? Don't know if you're up on that, but I was thinking that the universe itself is some kind of perpetual motion machine if it expands from one bang and contracts in to the next one, but I don't believe that's the current theory- is it?

 

Its still a Theory. Where did the energy come from in the first place ... now they are calculating (much more complexly ) 0 = 2.

 

The total amount of energy in the Universe is ZERO! There is no energy according to modern physics: When you add up all of the positive energy with the negative energy (the gravitational field) in the universe, they exactly equal each other. Thus, there is no need to hypothesize where the energy came from initially and where it will go ultimately.

 

Please watch the lecture A Universe from Nothing, by Dr. Lawrence Krauss.

 

 

Here he is being interviewed about how the Universe came from Nothing.

 

[Nungali]

Yeah it is zero ... when you add it all up ... but it isn't added all up, its still in the 2 phase ... separated. It was 'added all up before the 'big bang'

 

But it still doesn't explain the 'secret infinite and unknown' , I.e. what created the =

 

WHY did the O separate ? What caused the separation .... now don't fob me off with that 'everything was perfect 0 {with a few little imbalances} <under breath>.

 

And what about all that supposed dark matter that cant be found (in some theories) that is needed to balance the equation?

[Marblehead]

I was thinking more about the magnification of the reflection, the really heat-producing energy that zaps ants in a hot second.

Yes, I was speaking to that as well. It is already a reality.

[Marblehead]

Please watch the lecture A Universe from Nothing, by Dr. Lawrence Krauss.

I like Dr Krauss and he appears in many of the documentaries I watch. But remember, he is also a Quantum Theory Physicist. Those guys are wierd sometimes. Hehehe. Like maybe they are wired backward.

[Marblehead]

My solar system is perpetual energy as long as the sun gets to the panels.

 

I still have 12.4 volts on my system after over-night operation of one water pump.

 

Who mentioned gravity above? Yes, a potential source of energy. I like gravity - it keeps my feet on the ground. And talk about gravity - consider a black hole! Gravity so strong that nothing can escape - not even light.

[Stosh]

There's a few things that I wonder about from time to time. Please forgive me if these questions are already answered within the scientific community; I have no formal education at all.

 

First of all, it seems to me that perpetual motion is a kind of holy grail that mankind is looking to manifest. Do scientists, deep thinking scientists, ever consider that Love (or mutual attraction) is the missing component to the perpetual energy question? As to how we would ever harness that, that bears some deep thinking, I would deeply think.

 

 

Second question: Remember when you were a kid and you'd take a magnifying glass and hold it so the sun's rays would emolliate ants? (And then take the ants and bury them in cigarette filters in your front yard, like me and Harold did, marking the graves with popsicle sticks?) Does solar energy use this concept? Is there a way that this could be used better, i.e. more magnifying thickness and curvature of the lens as opposed to the flatness of the solar panels?

 

Thanks, anyone. I was just wondering.

If it hasnt already been answered well enough , I supply that the total area of the collector is put on one point leaving shadow on the area that would have had light on it , the intensification is entirely local. As well as magnifying glasses and mirrors , heat pumps and air conditioners use a similar principle of redistribution of energy.

A planet in space , or any moving object , must be acted upon to change is energy levels, or direction of travel.. and one can say they are 'perpetually' in motion, but machines do what is called work ( and waste) , the 'work' is an energy level change in the system ,, so the system would no longer be 'perpetual' if it does the 'work' of a machine.

 

Essentially if you wanted- love to do do 'work' , you would deplete it.

( marriage records 'reflect' that trend )

Edited November 12, 2013 by Stosh

[manitou]

If you use a magnifying glass to burn ants (yuck) as a kid than as an adult you'd use a fresnel lense to burn giant space ants. These huge lenses that are used in large screen TV's focus the suns power in a spectacular way.

Here's one site:

http://www.greenpowerscience.com/

also

 

back to original question: If you think big enough, everything is a perpetual motion device. The earth, sun, moon, meteors. Here in a heavy gravity field, with thick atmosphere, not so much. The tide, powered by the moon is.

Lerner - what a fabulous video! Thank you!

 

Bearded Dragon- the laws of physics, as man understands them, may not be the All in All. Aren't the most incredible discoveries (electricity, etc) often obtained from intuition, from dreams? Is it possible that there is a perpetual motion principle of which we are not yet aware, that involves no diminution of energy? I'm thinking it is maybe the difference between physical thought and metaphysical thought. The complete merger of the 'right and left brain' would seem to be the perfect balance to discover that which remains undiscovered.

 

 

I have been reading this book for months, it is so complicated and wonderful. It is Morals and Dogma (of the Scottish Rites of Freemasonry) by Albert Pike. This is the most metaphysical and wonderful book I've ever read, I believe. I happened to come upon a paragraph last night which seems to fit in with what we're talking about here. It's in the 28th degree, starting on page 744. (Please keep in mind this was written in 1871, so it's not an easy read.) If Science has negated or expanded on some of these words, please chime in! Much of the basis of Freemasonry, as well as all world religions, is based on the Kabalah, as Pike maintains in the third paragraph:

 

 

"No characteristic of matter belongs to Light, or Heat, or flame, or to Galvanism, Electricity, and Magnetism. The electric spark is light, and so is that produced by the flint, when it cuts off particles of steel. Iron, melted or heated, radiates light; and insects, infusoria, and decayed wood emit it. Heat is produced by friction and by pressure; to explain which, Science tells us of LATENT Caloric, thus representing it to us as existing without its only known distinctive quality. What quality of matter enables lightning, blazing from the Heavens, to rend the oak? What quality of matter enables it to make the circuit of the earth in a score of seconds?"

 

"Profoundly ignorant of the nature of these mighty agents of Divine Power, we conceal our ignorance by words that have no meaning; and we might well be asked WHY Light may not be an effluence from the Deity, as has been agreed by all the religions of all the Ages of the World."

 

"As truly dogmatic religions have issued from the Kabalah and return to it: everything scientific and grand in the religious dreams of all the illuminati, Jacob Boehme, Swedenborg, Saint-Martin, and others, is borrowed from the Kabalah; all the Masonic associations owe to it their Secrets and their Symbols."

 

"The Kabalah alone consecrates the alliance of the Universal Reason and the Divine Word; it establishes, by the counterpoises of two forces apparently opposite, the eternal balance of being; it along reconciles Reason with Faith, Power and Liberty, Science with Mystery; it has the keys of the Present, the Past, and the Future."

 

 

Enticing stuff, as I see it. So Pike continues a page later with a dissertation of the emanation of light, which seems to stem from the REMOVAL of the core, the Void created. I think the question is, what is the 'canal' or 'line' that he refers to in the last paragraph? Is this not the holy grail? Could that canal be the infusion of love, compassion, mutual attraction, gravity - the attraction of two objects to each other? After his paragraphs, I have included a synchronistic dream that came to me last night; actually, more of an image. (Capitalization is mine, indicative of the emphasis placed in the text - however my italics button isn't working, apparently) Also, when he speaks of ADAM KADMON, this refers not to the first man as enunciated in religious tomes, but rather of the IDEA of the first man.

 

 

"When the Infinite God willed to emit what were to flow forth, He contracted Himself in the centre of His light, in such manner that most intense light should RECEDE to a certain circumference, and on all sides upon itself. And this is the first contraction, and termed TSEMSUM.

 

"ADAM KADMON, the Primal or First Man, is the first Aziluthic emanant from the Infinite Light, immitted (sic) into the EVACUATED SPACE, and from which, afterward, all the other degrees and systems had their beginnings. It is called the ADAM PRIOR TO ALL THE FIRST. (Note from me: this would allow for the phenomena of evolution, IMO) In it are imparted ten spherical numerations; and thereafter issued forth the rectilinear figure of a man in his sephirothic decade, as it were the diameter of the said circles; as it were the axis of these spheres, reaching from heir highest point to their lowest; and from it depend all the systems."

 

"But now, as the Infinite Light would be too excellent and great to be borne and endured, except through the medium of this Adam Kadmon, its most Secret Nature preventing this, its illuminating light had again to emanate in streams out of itself, by certain apertures, as it were, like windows, and which are termed the ears, eyes, nostrils, and mouth."

 

"The light proceeding from the ADAM KADMON is indeed but one; but in proportion to its remoteness from the place of out-flowing, and to the grades of its descent, it is more dense."

 

"From the word ATSIL, to emanate or flow forth, comes the word ATSILOTH or Aziluth, Emanation, or the System of Emanants. When the primal space was EVACUATED, the surrounding Light of the Infinite, and the Light immitted (sic) into the void, did not touch each other; but the Light of the Infinite flowed into that void THROUGH A LINE OR CERTAIN SLENDER CANAL; and that Light is the Emanative and emitting Principle, or the out-flow and origin of Emanation; but the Light within the void is the emanant subordinate; and the two cohere only by means of THE AFORESAID LINE."

 

 

So it would seem to me that to find the same self-regenerative power (or energy that remains constant and doesn't diminish) would be to understand WHAT THE LINE OR CANAL IS that he's speaking of. I do maintain that it has something to do with love as being the ultimate generating force. Once found, maybe we could truly find the perpetual motion, the holy grail, without having to exploit and deplete our planet.

 

 

Okay, so here's the short vision or dream I had last night. I was observing what appeared to be a fluorescent light - shaped the same rectangular way, with long tubes for bulbs, as they are. Only I knew in this dream that it was made by an ancient tribe, Mayan or Toltec. There were two holes in the terminal ends of the shade, however (where the inner workings of the lamp would be, as they are placed now). The void hole ran the length of the shade, one end to the other. Tightly wound around this long void was a crush of chicken coop wire, metal in composition. However, it was astounding to me that there was such a perfect long hole within he chicken coop - how did they get it so perfect? I asked. Someone explained to me that it was originally formed around a metal core, a rod, WHICH HAD BEEN REMOVED. (As the void was created in Pike's rendition - removal of the core, contraction in that particular case). I also noted that there were other insular factors, like perhaps another layer of something or other, maybe two layers, can't remember. But there were insulating envelopes of air, or spaces, between the insulating sections. But all was concentric with the void in the middle. I recall seeing no electrical cord, but the darn thing worked. Also, on the outside there were finger-shaped thin sheets of metal, curved in the same configuration to keep the form of where the rectangular shade would be on an actual fluorescent reflector/shade. I got the impression these were reflectors.

 

So - getting back to the canal. Like Lerner said, if you think big enough everything is a huge perpetual motion device at the cosmic scale. Weren't there canals in the pyramids? Do we know what their purpose actually was, other than burial chambers? Energy generators of some type? Weren't they also leafed with gold, which could have served as reflectors? Doesn't it seem that we've unlearned more than we've learned over the ages?

 

Or not.

Edited November 12, 2013 by manitou

[9th]

And talk about gravity - consider a black hole! Gravity so strong that nothing can escape - not even light.

 

How is time changed in a black hole?

 

Well, in a certain sense it is not changed at all. If you were to enter a black hole, you would find you watch ticking along at the same rate as it always had (assuming both you and the watch survived the passage into the black hole). Although your watch as seen by you would not change its ticking rate, just as in special relativity (if you know anything about that), someone else would see a different ticking rate on your watch than the usual, and you would see their watch to be ticking at a different than normal rate. For example, if you were to station yourself just outside a black hole, while you would find your own watch ticking at the normal rate, you would see the watch of a friend at great distance from the hole to be ticking at a much faster rate than yours. That friend would see his own watch ticking at a normal rate, but see your watch to be ticking at a much slower rate. Thus if you stayed just outside the black hole for a while, then went back to join your friend, you would find that the friend had aged more than you had during your separation.

 

What is the best evidence for the existence of black holes? Is it all really just a theory?

 

Astronomers have found a half-dozen or so binary star systems (two stars orbiting each other) where one of the stars is invisible, yet must be there since it pulls with enough gravitational force on the other visible star to make that star orbit around their common center of gravity AND the mass of the invisible star is considerably greater than 3 to 5 solar masses. Therefore these invisible stars are thought to be good candidate black holes. There is also evidence that supermassive black holes (about 1 billion solar masses) exist at the centers of many galaxies and quasars. In this latter case other explanations of the output of energy by quasars are not as good as the explanation using a supermassive black hole. (You see, when matter falls in a gravitational field, its speed and therefore energy, increases. If lots of matter is falling in at the same time, and swirling around the black hole in a disk resembling a traffic jam in a cul-de-sac, then friction between the various pieces of matter will turn much of that speed-energy picked up during the fall into heat, which than gets radiated away. In this way, the matter surrounding a supermassive black hole can radiate more energy per gram of fuel than can be released by any other mechanism we know, including nuclear fusion.)