Japanese inventor creates motor with 330% efficiency

The forum for non-component-related silent pc discussions.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

wsc
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:25 am
Location: Oklahoma

Japanese inventor creates motor with 330% efficiency

Post by wsc » Fri Apr 02, 2004 9:27 pm

http://japan.com/technology/index.php

whoa. and his technology is nearly silent too. aboslutely amazing.

EDIT: they now have several videos of the motors operating, be sure to check them out.
Last edited by wsc on Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

loren_brothers
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:11 pm
Location: Friday Harbor, San Juan Island, WA, USA....Just West of B.F.Egypt

Post by loren_brothers » Fri Apr 02, 2004 9:52 pm

Saudi's and Enron? (hmmm, hard to prove, hard to disprove)

330% efficiency? (hmmm, if scotty can do it on the Enterprise...)

Seems to me that somebody is pulling the wool over someone elses eyes! Doesn't look like those photos were taken in a backroom shop to me!

I think the dead 'give-away' is:
"I am not in this for the money," Minato says. "I have done well in my musical career, but I want to make a contribution to society
...spare me!! If he hooked two of his miracle machines together, after initial start-up, they could run each other forever plus produce electricity to spare. Thus putting every power producer in the world out of business overnight!

??Wasn't it just April 1st??

Let me know when you get his first production model delivered to you!

Ever hear of "E=mc2" and a "perpetual motion machine"? One is reality, one is a scam (right in there with snake-oil). One can not create motion in a mechanic object without the input of energy accompanied by the resultant loss of energy due to friction. The creation of energy in excess of the input energy over a sustained period of time is not possible within the laws of physics. The use of magnetic fields have been used over the last 100 years by many to claim 'creation of energy" but none have ever been shown to be anything more than "hocus-pocus". Those little whirrly-gadgets, run by magnetic repulsion forces, you see in gift shop windows always stop spinning after the initial starting force is expended. What did P.T. Barnum say? " One born every minute...?"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Belgarion
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 5:46 pm
Location: Maryland

Post by Belgarion » Sun Apr 04, 2004 6:58 pm

loren_brothers wrote: If he hooked two of his miracle machines together, after initial start-up, they could run each other forever plus produce electricity to spare. Thus putting every power producer in the world out of business overnight!
Actually, if you read the article, he isn't claiming free energy or anything like that. While his claims do sound a bit outlandish, efficiencies of over 100% are not science fiction. Geothermal (i.e. ground-source) heat pumps, for example, are typically rated between 300% and 400% efficient. They take in electricity and use it to move heat from the ground to your house (or vice versa). There are no laws of physics broken, because the extra heat energy already exists in the ground. It just turns out that less electricity is required to move the heat than the actual amount of heat moved, resulting in greater than 100% efficiency.

It sounds like this Japanese inventor has found a way to extract more energy from the magnetic field of permanent magnets in an electric motor than conventional designs allow. I think only time will tell if this is real, but if so, kudos to him.

Trip
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Location: SC

Post by Trip » Sun Apr 04, 2004 7:41 pm

How can energy be extracted from a magnetic field? He might be able to reclaim energy and reduce inefficiency by 3.3X, however. Gas motors run on chemical energy, the geothermal heat pumps you refer to run on heat from the Earth, but unless the magnets are somehow deteriorating in this process, I can't see how this is possible. As loren_brothers pointed out: as we currently understand it, energy can only be created from other forms of energy or from matter.

On E=MC^2, hasn't that been proven wrong? The speed of light is supposedly not a constant now. Einstein's 4'th dimension time traveling thing is a farse too - if I can't understand it, it's a farse :P

sthayashi
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 3214
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Post by sthayashi » Sun Apr 04, 2004 8:25 pm

Trip wrote:On E=MC^2, hasn't that been proven wrong? The speed of light is supposedly not a constant now.
Not to my knowledge. Except that the C is usually referred to as "The Speed of Light in a vacuum"

The big question is, upright or canister? :lol:

Trip
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Location: SC

Post by Trip » Sun Apr 04, 2004 8:46 pm

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3077354/

I meant that people question the speed of light in a vacuum as being a constant now. At least they question the constant speed of light in space. Astronomers especially seem to doubt it.

Generally, light seems to be constant through a medium but what they are saying is that is slows down over time.

Whatever the reason, there are some huge flaws in physics/astronomy right now, ie. dark energy, what is it? - and a scary question of: do we live in an "open" universe that will continue to expand indefinately or do we live in a "closed" universe that will expand and contract indefinately (big bang, big collapse, big bang, big collapse, etc.)?

:lol: I dunno what all Einstein did that was great but I don't accept a lot of his theories. Not that I'm an expert in this field - all I have is common sense - but empty space creating and destroying itself, 4'th dimensional time travel, and perhaps the constant speed of light all seem to be false. That said, having been at an engineering school and being acquainted with a few physics/math majors, I can tell you that they absolutely idolise Einstein - so he must have done something right.

Though perhaps if people forgot Einstein and came up with their own theories, they would find some answers.

lenny
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 10:50 am
Location: Somewhere out there

Post by lenny » Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:00 am

Trip wrote:and a scary question of: do we live in an "open" universe that will continue to expand indefinately or do we live in a "closed" universe that will expand and contract indefinately (big bang, big collapse, big bang, big collapse, etc.)?
Well, the only question important on this forum is, when the universe ends, is it going to be noisy, and if so, what can we do to quiet it down?

;-)

silvervarg
Posts: 1283
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:35 am
Location: Sweden, Linkoping

Post by silvervarg » Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:24 am

Lenny, we don't fix the noise until we have proove that it is irritating over the other noises around us. So, we will wait until we hear the first bang of the big collapse before we try to silence it...
Fortunately that will not happen too soon.

It is always nice to see every day newspapers do reports on scientific things without looking at the details. Strangely enough all really good ideas tend to get noticed in scientific publications over time.
100% of the constructions that produce more energy than they use has turned out to be frauds so far. This one doesn't even pretend to get out 100.001% of energy, it it said to produce 325% energy.
If it really worked it would solve the entire worlds energy need, but they claim it is good to use it for driving big cooling fans, as if that would be a bigger contribution to the world...
Lets face it, this guy is just another fraud. But he seems to be able to build nice cooling fans, so he is not a total scam.

eniacs
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 5:17 am

Post by eniacs » Mon Apr 05, 2004 4:51 am

it is feasible to attach a generator to the motor and produce more electric power than was put into the device
Yeah right.

Total Rubbish.

Ralf Hutter
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 8636
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:33 am
Location: Sunny SoCal

Post by Ralf Hutter » Mon Apr 05, 2004 5:14 am

eniacs wrote:
it is feasible to attach a generator to the motor and produce more electric power than was put into the device
Yeah right.

Total Rubbish.
Hah!!!

I suppose all you nay-sayers don't believe in the 300 MPG Carburetor either! The greedy autmakers have been suppressing this technology for years now (but fortunately there's the internet nowadays so you can buy a book that explains all the technology behind this revolutionary carburetor for only $11.95, Paypal accepted), just like the energy companies are probably going to do with this guy's 300% efficient motor......

lenny
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 10:50 am
Location: Somewhere out there

Post by lenny » Mon Apr 05, 2004 11:17 am

My car easily gets better than 300 miles per gallon. So can yours.

As long as it is only going downhill, of course.

PiSan
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:06 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by PiSan » Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:14 pm

I may have been misinformed, but I believe magnets lose their energy after a period of time. He's just converting a magnet's energy which will eventually die out.

sthayashi
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 3214
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Post by sthayashi » Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:42 pm

Trip wrote:I dunno what all Einstein did that was great but I don't accept a lot of his theories. Not that I'm an expert in this field - all I have is common sense - but empty space creating and destroying itself, 4'th dimensional time travel, and perhaps the constant speed of light all seem to be false. That said, having been at an engineering school and being acquainted with a few physics/math majors, I can tell you that they absolutely idolise Einstein - so he must have done something right.
So let me get this straight. You think that Einstein is overrated, but you don't accept the overgeneralizations of his theories?

I'm on the opposite side of the fence as you. I trust his theory until it can be proven to be completely wrong. Just remember that F=MA isn't entirely correct either.
PiSan wrote:I may have been misinformed, but I believe magnets lose their energy after a period of time. He's just converting a magnet's energy which will eventually die out.
You've been somewhat misinformed. Magnets will eventually lose their magnetic field. However, to say that Magnets contain energy is misleading at best, and flawed at worst.

Magnets CAN contain potential energy with respect to other magnets, much in the same way that a brick on top of a building contains potential energy with the ground. Energy is required to give magnets that potential energy, and the Conservation of Energy implies that the energy required is always greater than the potential energy.

Edit: I'm not a Physicist, so take my words with a heavy grain of salt. And maybe a shot of Tequila.

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Mon Apr 05, 2004 3:17 pm

Trip, you may want to do some real reading on the subject if you want to have a better grasp of the concepts involved in Cosmology.

MSN.com is probably not the place. A good place to start would be Hawking's A Brief History of Time.

What you have with Davies' paper on the speed of light is an unsupported hypothesis based upon a single observation. His results were pretty rounded criticized at the time as being as likely to have been caused by an error in his methodology as by an actual phenomenon. (There were some that accused him "enhancing" his data to make it more controversial, in order to gain publicity for his book) It would be the same as if you saw a 3-legged dog, and then proclaimed that all dogs have 3 legs, with no explanation for how other dogs have 4 legs.

Do some more reading, (from a book, not the internet) and see if your ideas about "flawed" dark matter, and "scary" closed universes change.

When it comes to topics like Relativity and Quantum mechanics, "common sense" is of little (or no) use. It's all about the math.

Belgarion
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 5:46 pm
Location: Maryland

Post by Belgarion » Mon Apr 05, 2004 6:33 pm

Trip wrote:How can energy be extracted from a magnetic field?
A permanent magnet creates a magnetic field around it, which has the ability to apply a force to a nearby moving particle with electric charge. The force, acting over some finite distance, exerts work on the charged particle. The work creates a change in energy in the charged particle. If you happen to believe in conservation of energy, then you might say that energy has been transferred from (or to?) the magnet.

I was being a little imprecise in my previous post, however the explanation and terms above come (in abridged form) straight from my physics text (Cutnell and Johnson, 1989). My intended meaning was that energy is implied in the magnetic field by its ability to perform work, and therefore change the energy in its surrounding objects.
Trip wrote:He might be able to reclaim energy and reduce inefficiency by 3.3X, however. Gas motors run on chemical energy, the geothermal heat pumps you refer to run on heat from the Earth, but unless the magnets are somehow deteriorating in this process, I can't see how this is possible.
I agree with the other posts that this new motor, if it works, very likely does deplete the magnets. Otherwise it would violate the principle of conservation of energy. The question is, how long does the motor last? When the magnets wear out, is it feasible (and economical) to simply replace them? If this invention took off and was widely used over the next few decades, would we eventually run out of ore from which to refine new magnets?

loren_brothers
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:11 pm
Location: Friday Harbor, San Juan Island, WA, USA....Just West of B.F.Egypt

Post by loren_brothers » Mon Apr 05, 2004 6:37 pm

POOH! :lol: the only things magnets do are to temporally counteract the force of gravity (spinning toy-in-the-window example) and is not sustainable. And he did claim to create energy....production of electrical force in excess of electrical force provided... and I re-iterate: that if he hooked two of his machines in tandem they could power themselves and create excess electrical power. SOOO long EXXON and CON-EDISON!

(I too am not a physics expert, but I know "snake oil" when I see it!)

Jan Kivar
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 4:37 am
Location: Finland

Post by Jan Kivar » Tue Apr 06, 2004 10:32 am

lenny wrote:My car easily gets better than 300 miles per gallon. So can yours.

As long as it is only going downhill, of course.
Freight trains are also a good way to achieve amazing MPGs... :lol:

Cheers,

Jan

IsaacKuo
Posts: 1705
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:50 am
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Post by IsaacKuo » Tue Apr 06, 2004 11:22 am

Freight trains get horrible MPGs--it's just that they can carry such incredible amounts of freight for those gallons per mile they burn!

Trip
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Location: SC

Post by Trip » Wed Apr 07, 2004 3:06 am

Rusty075 wrote:Trip, you may want to do some real reading on the subject if you want to have a better grasp of the concepts involved in Cosmology.

MSN.com is probably not the place. A good place to start would be Hawking's A Brief History of Time.
:lol: , I linked to MSN b/c it was the first article in a google search.
Do some more reading, (from a book, not the internet) and see if your ideas about "flawed" dark matter, and "scary" closed universes change.
There really is some controversy in astrophysics right now about dark energy and it's implications (that perhaps we live in an open universe)

http://www.astronomy.com/search/content ... ark+energy

This is just one website, I know, but I flipped through half a dozen astronomy magazines at my university for "research" on dark energy and they offered a similar selection. Magazines, like news papers, are not terribly reliable b/c most will publish anything to make a sale. So whether or not this all a big hoax, I couldn't tell you for certain, but there are a lot of people, including my astronomy teacher, who are questioning the generally accepted astrophysics theories.
What you have with Davies' paper on the speed of light is an unsupported hypothesis based upon a single observation.
All of this controversy from one observation? I don't have time to look at it now, but surely there have been more made since then.

I can fire this at you:rethinking Einstein :)

I think I've flipped through Hawkin's book about 5 years ago - dag, I feel old - and it discussed how time travel was possible in a worm hole between two black holes, stuff like that? The math was pretty intense but I didn't see any reason to believe it. I believe in black holes, but not that space-time can be ripped and traveled through.*

Note: I was in highschool at the time and when I say "flipped through [it]" I mean exactly that.

Right now I have a stack of books that I need to read - Atlas Shrugged is the one I'm on now, the first fiction novel I've read outside of school in a long time. I just finished watching MikeC's recommended FDR and'll put Hawkin's book into the queue. I should get to it in the post-spring semester 2004 phase of my life :lol: .

But for now it's time for aerobic exercise. I started back lifting again in the past few weeks and have gained like 15lbs... and it's not all muscle. I'm still thin but 15lbs. couldn't be healthy.


EDIT: *I believe that there is another dimension - that's where God must be. Outside of religion, I haven't been presented with enough evidence of Dimension 4, yet.
Last edited by Trip on Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:01 am, edited 2 times in total.

al bundy
Posts: 667
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 5:38 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Post by al bundy » Wed Apr 07, 2004 3:51 am

Trip wrote:... :lol: I dunno what all Einstein did that was great but I don't accept a lot of his theories...
The academic community has long known Einstein to be one of the world's worst plagiarists, especially regarding relativity theory. He simply restated the ideas of Poincare, Hilbert, Maxwell, Lorentz, etc as if they were his own - without giving references or due credit to the great thinkers who in fact came up with the ideas. This had the effect of making Einstein's work seem as if it was his own original thinking, when in fact it was never his own work at all. His international scientific contemporaries were always greatly disgusted with the ongoing dishonest behavior of Einstein and regularly pointed out his international reputation as a plagiarist and a fraud.

The Einstein myth is long dead in upper academia. Hopefully soon it will finally die off in the mind of the general mass public as well. Some fine authors (like this one for example) provide more information for the interested readers.

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
-- Albert Einstein

8)

Oli
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:50 am

Post by Oli » Wed Apr 07, 2004 4:07 am

to stop the arguing - some of you are right in stating, according to our current understanding of physics: TOTAL energy out CANNOT be greater than TOTAL energy out.

There have been many many more of this type of device, harnessing various forces etc... they have all turned out to be fakes or unproven.

A good book to read on all of this subject area is called "the hunt for zero point".. an excellent book from a very balanced viewpoint.

HammerSandwich
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1288
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:21 pm
Location: 15143, USA
Contact:

Post by HammerSandwich » Wed Apr 07, 2004 2:00 pm

Oli wrote:TOTAL energy out CANNOT be greater than TOTAL energy out.
Finally, a statement we can ALL agree with!

trodas
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 6:21 am
Location: Czech republic
Contact:

Post by trodas » Thu Apr 08, 2004 3:25 am

Trip - ...and it discussed how time travel was possible in a worm hole between two black holes, stuff like that? The math was pretty intense but I didn't see any reason to believe it. I believe in black holes, but not that space-time can be ripped and traveled through.
Well, im not a big fan of Einstein nor theories, that is not backed up with measuring, but one thing is for sure - tough it might be scary for all of us - there is no time.
Everything is relative, and so the time as well. I mean - stop imagining a time as universal CONSTANT for all the universe. It is not. The "time" simply "click faster" when you are near object with big gravity, such as blackholes, stars, etc.
This was proven. Into middle of 70 years, crazy expemenetatios put two atomic clocks - one in basement of watertower, another on top of it. The clocks showed nasty habbit of goig wrong :lol: The one closer to earth ticking faster.
So, let's start imagine time as there dimentional box of the universe, where the empty spaces are too infrequent and young, while in the space close to the objects are the "density of time" notably higher and therefore they are older (or seems to be older, depend from where you measure it!) that the rest :wink:
So, if you life into the empty space (cough, cough), then you life longer that - relatively - ppls on Earth. It could not extend your lifespan dramaticaly, because earth is relatively light.
Extraterresial forms of life, very small, because living in very high gravity (something like Saturn, not Jupiter, there are limits how big planet can be to still can be made from somethign solid and not just bunch of gas fluids and such...), can gain more noticable life extending, by living far from gravitytional fields :wink:
The only bad thing is, that it all seems to working only forward - so, you can get older faster, but you can't get into past.

One thing is for sure - questioning everything is the basic for evolution. It seems like into past centuries religion told us, that the whole earth is flat and we on the sides fall to hell. When we finally question this, we found a america. Old greeks know, that earth is going to be sphere, because they first see pylons of ship and then the ship body. However religion taught us, that earth is flat and being center of the universe.
If we applied this situation to todays reality, until we question Einstein, we can't move forward.

It's like astronomicians taught us twenty years ago, that star with planets are uncommon in the space. The village-logic applied to how the solar system was created telling us, that there must be a planets into every star system - just like how many moons have every planet on solar system. One can even speculate, that due to the gravity thing, the bigger the star is, the more planets will it have...
Anyway, "the wise oldes" telling us othervise.
Not far ago, they finally got better equipment and it turns out, that every star they can measure precisely-enough, show gravitational effect of having a planets - whoa! Some planets are even visible.

So, questioning everything is more that necessary and it can lead us only forward :wink:

Like the speed of light. What is light, after all? Ha, it's all just wave that running - pulsing - as some clock. Fam from the Ghzs in computers, but similar. So, it's a energic wave spreading trough universe from every star. Right. Since the waves are transmited by electrons forced by pulsing so fast, that they have no weight (and become fotons, according to relativistic theory), how the hell black hole can tie them by their gravity, when they have no weight at the light speed?
See my point?
Something is not right there. Since CygnusX is typical black-hole - a VERY dark object with VERY strong gravity field - and it do not emiting light (thats of course again not entierly true, there are some quantum vaporation of energy, because of the imprecision of the quarks position on the border of light-barier of black hole...), then is obvious that light can be affected by gravity. Therefore it must have some weight, even very very small.
Just this prove the myth, that nothing can run as fast, as light, wrong. I do not even speaking of taychyons...

Anyway, into universe are about 80 atoms per square meter (meter is about 3 feets roughly). So the emited fotons have only a little barrier, but still - on the distance from star to earth the atom count can easily produce Big China wall :lol:

It might also explain, why the universe is so dark, with all the stars shining and "unrestricted" light spreading - hell, it could be all white sky, even at night, right?
But since it is not, the light have to be somewhat reduced.
Or it's just the ange - from more distant object we getting only smaller and smaller view ange of it's emited fotons ...?

Back to the magnetic motor :wink: It's not explained, how he get around the magnatic lockup, when using permament magnets. To put it as simple as possible - the electromagnets are used because we can shut them when need, to prevent the lockup and even invert them, to push the rotor of the motor away - and then invert and pull the next magnetic pole of the rotor, then shunt and then invert and push ui away... And so on, so forth.
I could not imagine, how he can using such low electricity can convice the permament magnet to change its poles, however if he can - god bless him and where i can buy this motor? :) :twisted:

eniacs
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 5:17 am

Post by eniacs » Thu Apr 08, 2004 4:34 am

magnetism is amazing stuff. it does take energy to create a magnet, but i dont believe energy can be removed from a magnet.

For example:

get two fridge magnets,

Lift one and feel the weight, ok?

Now stick one of the magnets to the other and hold one above the other.

The other one on the bottom is using an attracting force to hold them together (like glue would), but this is no energy force, they are simply attracted to hold together (like gravity). and you yourself are bearing the weight of both the magnets,
It is not a magical energy force that is holding the bottom magnet of the ground, it is you that is holding the magnet of the ground.


i cant belive so many people are fooled by this thread!

Trip
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Location: SC

Post by Trip » Thu Apr 08, 2004 6:28 am

trodas wrote: Everything is relative, and so the time as well. I mean - stop imagining a time as universal CONSTANT for all the universe. It is not. The "time" simply "click faster" when you are near object with big gravity, such as blackholes, stars, etc. This was proven. Into middle of 70 years, crazy expemenetatios put two atomic clocks - one in basement of watertower, another on top of it. The clocks showed nasty habbit of goig wrong :lol: The one closer to earth ticking faster.
Here's where I digress. I think the clocks may have clicked faster or slower but time continued at a constant. If time could really be slowed down or sped up... Rusty, Einstein, and that dude in the wheel chair may be on to something.

Aging perhaps can be slowed down, but not time. Note though that even if weaker gravity led to less aging, our bodies are designed to live on this planet and exist within its gravity. Too much of a change may have unforeseen negative consequences.
It seems like into past centuries religion told us, that the whole earth is flat and we on the sides fall to hell. When we finally question this, we found a america. Old greeks know, that earth is going to be sphere, because they first see pylons of ship and then the ship body. However religion taught us, that earth is flat and being center of the universe.
If we applied this situation to todays reality, until we question Einstein, we can't move forward.
Ancient civilisations of Egypt, Mesopatamia, Harrapin, Aegean, other parts of Europe, AND Central and Southern Americas had a far more advanced knowledge of astronomy that we did. They also knew the Earth was round. Note: you may even include the Chinese in that group, they are currently thought to have been founded by the Tocharians who are thought to have come from the ancient civilisations.
So, questioning everything is more that necessary and it can lead us only forward :wink:
A major problem the scientific communities (from archaeology to astrophysics) seem to be having now is a fear of being labeled extreme. Scientists want to appear knowledgeable and to agree with the rest of the scientific community and otherwise may not receive research grants. As a result, they often slant their theories and opinions more towards the generally accepted theories. New theories are not accepted easily when they contradict the current paradigm.
how the hell black hole can tie them by their gravity, when they have no weight at the light speed?
I also think light has weight.
Anyway, into universe are about 80 atoms per square meter (meter is about 3 feets roughly). So the emited fotons have only a little barrier, but still - on the distance from star to earth the atom count can easily produce Big China wall :lol:

It might also explain, why the universe is so dark, with all the stars shining and "unrestricted" light spreading - hell, it could be all white sky, even at night, right?
But since it is not, the light have to be somewhat reduced.
Or it's just the ange - from more distant object we getting only smaller and smaller view ange of it's emited fotons ...?
I think space has such a low concentration of matter/light that it appears black. Our eyes are not sensitive enough to detect such a low concentration.

wsc
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:25 am
Location: Oklahoma

Post by wsc » Sat Apr 10, 2004 8:58 am

al bundy wrote:
Trip wrote:... :lol: I dunno what all Einstein did that was great but I don't accept a lot of his theories...
The academic community has long known Einstein to be one of the world's worst plagiarists, especially regarding relativity theory. He simply restated the ideas of Poincare, Hilbert, Maxwell, Lorentz, etc as if they were his own - without giving references or due credit to the great thinkers who in fact came up with the ideas. This had the effect of making Einstein's work seem as if it was his own original thinking, when in fact it was never his own work at all. His international scientific contemporaries were always greatly disgusted with the ongoing dishonest behavior of Einstein and regularly pointed out his international reputation as a plagiarist and a fraud.

The Einstein myth is long dead in upper academia. Hopefully soon it will finally die off in the mind of the general mass public as well. Some fine authors (like this one for example) provide more information for the interested readers.

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
-- Albert Einstein

8)
I'm actually studying a few of Einstein's contributions in a 4th year philosophy course (note that i'm engineering major) and Einstein did come up with a formula (at least one that I know of) that a scientist had used earlier to explain another phenomena.. Einstein applied it to how time changes as you approach C. My professor still seemed very convinced that Einstein was legit.

wsc
Posts: 161
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 9:25 am
Location: Oklahoma

Post by wsc » Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:12 am

eniacs wrote:i cant belive so many people are fooled by this thread!
They now have several videos of the motors operating ... look on the top of the original page I posted...

PiSan
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:06 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by PiSan » Sat Apr 10, 2004 10:23 am

I know enough about physics to realize that when I jump, I will come back down. But how are some of you so sure that you know more than me? There can be laws of the universe that aren't known.

I guess all I'm really saying is that anything is possible. Rather than build a wall with your knowledge, make it into a road.

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Sat Apr 10, 2004 10:53 am

PiSan wrote:But how are some of you so sure that you know more than me? There can be laws of the universe that aren't known.
This is a perfect example of Occam's Razor in action.

Which is simpler solution (and thus more likely):

A. An entertainer, show-biz promoter and part-time garage tinkerer has done in his spare time what thousands of engineers working for the past 75 years have not been able to.

or

B. It's a sham put on to generate investment capital.

PiSan
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:06 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by PiSan » Sat Apr 10, 2004 3:30 pm

Aw, bringing the discusion back to real life. I guess I'm just an optimistic kind of guy. I give people the benefit of the doubt when I have nothing to lose. Plus, the Japanese are crazy like that :lol: .

Post Reply