A practising Engineer explains over unity or free energy misconceptions

[MrAl]

All the hydrogen bombs we have now are insignificant with respect to amount of energy from storms and other natural phenomena that occur constantly. I am talking about really large amounts of weaponized energy, like perhaps a directed and controlled gigantic solar outburst aimed at a country or continent.

The people that put forth the idea that man is partly responsible for climate change ignore thousands of facts that show otherwise. In fact, they try to make it a social issue rather than a scientific one. They would like to have a vote of some kind by those who have a financial interest in climate change to decide on climate change legislation. They should instead be required to prove their assertions and explain all the discrepancies that are present. It is both a social and scientific issue, and a consensus of opinion is not good criteria for judging the truth. Explaining the facts are. Furthermore, the motivation behind each opinion should also be examined.

Ratch

Hello,

If you are going to disagree, at least be inventive enough to use your own words, otherwise my reply can be:
Everything you said, but just the opposite.

And also then i guess you're rubber and i'm glue?

 

[steveB]

Hi,

I am not that concerned about new weaponry based on free energy being a big deal, because we have weaponry that already threatens the entire civilization on planet Earth.

I think this is a good point, and it's not just energy that is lethal, but also radioactivity. I full blown nulear war would be devastating to the human race. Perhaps our species would survive, but a long dark age would be the best outcome, and extiction the worst.

It's interesting to look at two examples from science fiction. Even though it's just fiction and these things are not at all likely, it is fun to use our imaginations to see how technology might come up against human nature.

In "The Gods Themselves", by Asimov, people discover free energy can be obtained by tapping into two parallel universes that both have different laws of physics. By using one universe as a "hot side" the other as a "cold side", the conservation of energy can be bypassed. The uninteded consequence is that the laws of physics in our universe begin to be altered, and beyond a certain point, the sun will supernova, if humans continue to tap this energy source.

In "Forbidden Planet", a planet is discovered which had an extinct alien race, that left technological artifacts, still operating even 200,000 years after their demise. The final scenes reveals that that race developed technology to transform matter under thought control, and with a nearly infitite power source. Even though that race was ethically developed to deal with this technology in a constructive, rather than destuctive, way, they forgot about their subconscious brain that orginally evolved millions of years ago. Once the switch was thrown, their subconscous minds evoked demons that destroyed the race in one night.

 

[tcmtech]

If you really break down human nature to what drives us to destroy its not that we want everything destroyed. In fact its quite the opposite.

I don't want to kill you in order to take the things of yours I want but dammit you keep opposing me so I have no choice but to try and dispose of you in some way while hopefully not taking on to many loses to myself in the process.

I never wanted you or anyone else destroyed and certainly do not want myself destroyed in any way. I just want everyone to stop opposing me when I want to take all their stuff and make it my own!
Well that and no one had better try and take the stuff I took from someone else or I may have to destroy them in self defense.

We just want that which opposes our personal desires to stop opposing us.
How hard is that to understand?

 

[tcmtech]

The people that put forth the idea that man is not partly responsible for climate change ignore thousands of scientists that claim otherwise

Actually we are not ignoring those thousands of scientists. We are listening to the millions of others who don't agree with those thousands.

The problem is there is more than one side to this whole debate. The second side is supported by those who don't see the changes in the same defensive posture. We see them as likely having great benefit to us instead to which effect means we have absolutely no interest or want to waste our time effort and money to keep things the same for someone else at our expense.

Would you like to have to pay your money and adjust your lifestyle to keep my grass green in my yard at the expense of your own and you not even being able to have grass?
If not then why do you think I should have to sacrifice my potential gains at my expense to keep your lifestyle the way you want it when it does absolutely nothing positive for me?

 

[Ratchit]

Hello,

If you are going to disagree, at least be inventive enough to use your own words, otherwise my reply can be:
Everything you said, but just the opposite.

And also then i guess you're rubber and i'm glue?

I partially mimicked your post to show that the same generalities you put forth can be made by those with the opposite view.

Ratch

 

[Ratchit]

I think this is a good point, and it's not just energy that is lethal, but also radioactivity. I full blown nulear war would be devastating to the human race. Perhaps our species would survive, but a long dark age would be the best outcome, and extiction the worst.

It's interesting to look at two examples from science fiction. Even though it's just fiction and these things are not at all likely, it is fun to use our imaginations to see how technology might come up against human nature.

In "The Gods Themselves", by Asimov, people discover free energy can be obtained by tapping into two parallel universes that both have different laws of physics. By using one universe as a "hot side" the other as a "cold side", the conservation of energy can be bypassed. The uninteded consequence is that the laws of physics in our universe begin to be altered, and beyond a certain point, the sun will supernova, if humans continue to tap this energy source.

In "Forbidden Planet", a planet is discovered which had an extinct alien race, that left technological artifacts, still operating even 200,000 years after their demise. The final scenes reveals that that race developed technology to transform matter under thought control, and with a nearly infitite power source. Even though that race was ethically developed to deal with this technology in a constructive, rather than destuctive, way, they forgot about their subconscious brain that orginally evolved millions of years ago. Once the switch was thrown, their subconscous minds evoked demons that destroyed the race in one night.

It is interesting entertainment, but cannot be used for guidance or leadership for our present times and problems. Don't get me started on biological evolution. I have spent many hours debunking and arguing against that piece of pseudoscience quackery.

Ratch

 

[nsaspook]

In "Forbidden Planet", a planet is discovered which had an extinct alien race, that left technological artifacts, still operating even 200,000 years after their demise. The final scenes reveals that that race developed technology to transform matter under thought control, and with a nearly infitite power source. Even though that race was ethically developed to deal with this technology in a constructive, rather than destuctive, way, they forgot about their subconscious brain that orginally evolved millions of years ago. Once the switch was thrown, their subconscous minds evoked demons that destroyed the race in one night.

I loved the movie but the fact that the 'thought to matter' machine had little or no safeguards for 'great bodily injury' was something that proved that personal injury lawyers must have been eliminated from the Krell society along with common sense.

 

[Ratchit]

tcmtech,

It goes to show that the reasons people proclaim to support their beliefs or justify what they do are not always the real reasons they do what they do. This hidden agenda can usually be discerned by comparatively analyzing their actions to what they should have done to further their public statements.

Ratch

 

[steveB]

I loved the movie but the fact that the 'thought to matter' machine had little or no safeguards for 'great bodily injury' was something that proved that personal injury lawyers must have been eliminated from the Krell society along with common sense.

Well it depends on how you read it. The story indicates that the Krell were eons more advanced than humans in both technology and ethics. The idea of deliberate cause of bodily injury was inconceivable to thier conscious minds. And, their techology probably prevented bodily injury and in the rare cases it occured, cured it almost instantaneously. Although not mentioned in the story, one can assume that the Krell did build in many safeguards. Consider that the machines automatically self-serviced themselves for 200,000 years and kept working after the Krell were extinct.

But, one imagines that an unforsceen virus or postive feedback loop was engaged as the ancient desctructive thoughts buried in the subconscious of the entire race , all came on-line at the same time. Each subconscious mind tried to gain the upper hand and most control, as dictated by a deep and dormant instinct. Eventually, the battle would become one of mere survival, an even deeper instinct. All the safeguards and positive conscious ethical beliefs of the Krell were just fractionally short of what they needed to be to make a stable system. A small piece was missing in their design equations, and that small piece was something they forgot about over 1 million years ago.

But, it's just a story ...

 

[JoeJester]

Sometimes you need a calibrated instrument to guide you .... a BS detector.

On EDIT:

I couldn't remember where I put the pic ...

 

[steveB]

So they need to insert the right 8 letter word in for the ******** to access that meter. Something related to bovine scatology, I think.

Aw, you deleted the link. lol

 

[nsaspook]

But, it's just a story ...

Yes, a very good story with origins from
"The Tempest"

I would say the Krell machine was defective not the people. It's one thing to have a entire planet of super-beings bent on homicidal unconscious murder but if one lowly human could control it to destroy the original party when they attempted to leave and then use it's power on the rescue crew when his little perfect world was threatened then the destruction of the Krell was a sure thing when they flipped on the switch.
Thank goodness that the production of energy is not free or easy.

 

[steveB]

if one lowly human could control it to destroy the original party when they attempted to leave and then use it's power on the rescue crew when his little perfect world was threatened then the destruction of the Krell was a sure thing when they flipped on the switch.
.

You are assuming the machine that Morbius found, was the same as the one the Krell designed. I always imagined that the Krell war resulted in modifications to the system as part of the battle strategies. Somehow a small flaw allowed bypassing certain safeguards. Removal of some safeguards allowed more access to bypass other safegaurds. The system was then open in the the final stages of the fighting. It seems a natural thing that would happen with the high intelligence of the Krell and the capability the machine provided to alter matter, machines and programming with thought commands.

So rather than the lesson being "lack of common sense", I think the lesson is "arrogance". The Krell were arrogant to think they could design a flawless system. They forgot their humble beginnings and dared to think of themselves as god-like.

 

[nsaspook]

You are assuming the machine that Morbius found, was the same as the one the Krell designed. I always imagined that the Krell war resulted in modifications to the system as part of the battle strategies. Somehow a small flaw allowed bypassing certain safeguards. Removal of some safeguards allowed more access to bypass other safegaurds. The system was then open in the the final stages of the fighting. It seems a natural thing that would happen with the high intelligence of the Krell and the capability the machine provided to alter matter, machines and programming with thought commands.

I would love a good prequel to Forbidden planet about the destruction of the Krell that discusses this subject because it looks like the 'machine' in some form might be with us sooner than some think.
**broken link removed**

The Krell Machine, by contrast, is an infinitely dangerous servant precisely because it has not been preprogrammed with Asimov's Three Laws in mind, and the Krell have evidently made a monumental error on this point.

 

[steveB]

Obviously I don't agree with the interpretation of the article. Why should we believe that aliens millions of years more advanced than humans are not as smart as Asimov was in the 1950s?

I think a more sophisticated interpretation is required to have the right understanding of the moral of the story. The Krell would have been one millions steps ahead any of our thoughts, and still they failed

 

[JoeJester]

Steve,

I found where I had the picture and put it in the above posting. My phone and responding to threads is an adventure ....


TVTech,

Here a some light reading for you ...

 

[nsaspook]

Obviously I don't agree with the interpretation of the article. Why should we believe that aliens millions of years more advanced than humans are not as smart as Asimov was in the 1950s?

I think a more sophisticated interpretation is required to have the right understanding of the moral of the story. The Krell would have been one millions steps ahead any of our thoughts, and still they failed

Never underestimate the ability of very smart people to do stupid things when they think themselves superior to the base nature of the universe. That would be my understanding of the moral of the story, how to prevent 'empty planet' syndrome by our own hands.

 

[MrAl]

I partially mimicked your post to show that the same generalities you put forth can be made by those with the opposite view.

Ratch

Hello,

Well your new reply is neutral so there is nothing to reply to. So like i said, "Everything you said but just the opposite".
It is up to you who you want to believe, but time will tell. I believe the majority of the scientists, i have no choice because there is no other intelligent choice.

 

[MrAl]

I think this is a good point, and it's not just energy that is lethal, but also radioactivity. I full blown nulear war would be devastating to the human race. Perhaps our species would survive, but a long dark age would be the best outcome, and extiction the worst.

It's interesting to look at two examples from science fiction. Even though it's just fiction and these things are not at all likely, it is fun to use our imaginations to see how technology might come up against human nature.

In "The Gods Themselves", by Asimov, people discover free energy can be obtained by tapping into two parallel universes that both have different laws of physics. By using one universe as a "hot side" the other as a "cold side", the conservation of energy can be bypassed. The uninteded consequence is that the laws of physics in our universe begin to be altered, and beyond a certain point, the sun will supernova, if humans continue to tap this energy source.

In "Forbidden Planet", a planet is discovered which had an extinct alien race, that left technological artifacts, still operating even 200,000 years after their demise. The final scenes reveals that that race developed technology to transform matter under thought control, and with a nearly infitite power source. Even though that race was ethically developed to deal with this technology in a constructive, rather than destuctive, way, they forgot about their subconscious brain that orginally evolved millions of years ago. Once the switch was thrown, their subconscous minds evoked demons that destroyed the race in one night.

Hi,

Wow, i havent read that book but that would certainly be a good example of an energy source that does not have to be replenished

I have been hoping for cold fusion, but that turns out to be more difficult than expected. From what i understand there were particle responses that were not predicted by modern physics which made any design unworkable for the time being, but there may have been advances in theory by now. Maybe mankind is just getting deeper into the cooking pot anyway and everything is just at best a temporary solution. Perhaps the death of life is inevitable on a grand scale.

 

[nsaspook]

Hi,

Wow, i havent read that book but that would certainly be a good example of an energy source that does not have to be replenished

I have been hoping for cold fusion, but that turns out to be more difficult than expected. From what i understand there were particle responses that were not predicted by modern physics which made any design unworkable for the time being, but there may have been advances in theory by now. Maybe mankind is just getting deeper into the cooking pot anyway and everything is just at best a temporary solution. Perhaps the death of life is inevitable on a grand scale.

There are low energy nuclear reactions, or LENR but it's not 'Cold Fusion' the energy source that would require new physics to explain it. Cold fusion today is just another 'free energy' scam.
We are moving forward with real fusion designs: https://aviationweek.com/technology...ype--campaign..campaignid--0..fieldname--id~~