Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Reviews - Diaries - Our Products
Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation"?


By Matrix1000, Section Reviews
Posted on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 09:42:59 AM MST
Just an interesting quote from a book about energy..

I found this book about energy and the laws of physics while doing a search for energy stuff and I read something interesting. So before you guys move this post, it is just an innocent observance as something interesting to think about.

It seems that Earth Gravity breaks the most basic law we use regarding energy usage the Law of Energy Conservation.

I'll just paste the quote here and you can read it if you are interested.

The fist chapter of the book can be found here...for those that are interested.
http://www.thefinaltheory.com/images/Final_Theory--_Chapter_1.PDF

Quote-------------
There is nothing in Newton's gravitational theory stating that the force
of gravity weakens as it expends energy. The mass of the moon exceeds
one percent of the Earth's mass and would fly past the Earth and off into
space if not forcefully constrained by gravity to circle the Earth,
according to Newton's theory. Yet this tremendous continual effort
expended by Earth's gravitational field is not considered to diminish the
strength of this field at all - millennium after millennium.
Returning to the vehicle analogy, when a car increases its speed
it is said to accelerate, which is only possible by drawing on a power
source, converting its energy into the car's increased speed or kinetic
energy. Turning the vehicle in a circle is another form of speed change
or acceleration, involving a constant, forced change from its natural
straight-line direction of travel. This continuously forced circular
direction change is known as centripetal acceleration, and also requires
energy to maintain this constant diversion from the natural straight-line
path of objects. Likewise, the natural forward momentum of the moon
would carry it away from our planet and off into space in a straight line
if gravity were not forcefully pulling it into a circular orbit moment by
moment. Yet this tremendous energy expenditure is not balanced by a
conversion of energy from any known power source. This is a creation
of energy from nothing - energy for free - rather than a conversion of
energy from one form (a power source) to another (circular centripetal
acceleration). This situation is a clear violation the Law of Conservation
Of Energy.
Gravity also forcefully holds down all objects on the surface of
our planet, which would drift off into space otherwise. In fact, the pull of
gravity holds our very planet together, creating tremendous crushing
forces within the center of the Earth. This has been going on for well
over 4 billion years, yet no known power source is being drawn upon to
support this tremendous ongoing energy expenditure.
This mystery is further deepened when we consider that not only
is there no drainage of energy from a power source to support the effort
expended by the gravitational force, but in fact there is no power source
at all. A gravitational force is considered to emanate from within each
atom of matter, adding up to the tremendous overall gravity of the Earth,
yet we still have no explanation for its endless power source despite
having created detailed atomic theories - and even having split the atom.
This is a textbook case of an impossible free energy device.

Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation"? | 12 comments (12 topical)

Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conserva (3.00 / 0) (#1)
by stop4stuff on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 12:10:31 PM MST

This energy source is already being tapped...
...with tidal power stations...

The moon's gravity affects large bodies of water causing 'tidal movement', a difference of water height at calculable times of the day. The energy in stored in the height diference of the water can be captured with a hydro gen set.

paul



Re: Break "Law of Energy Conservation"? (3.00 / 0) (#2)
by finnsawyer on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 12:32:28 PM MST

As I pointed out in some earlier comments, if a force acts at right angles to the direction of motion (velocity) of a moving object, it does no work and expends no energy.  If a object moves in a circular orbit around the earth no work is done by the gravitational field so it need not change.  In the case of an elliptical orbit the situation is more complicated, but by the time a complete orbit is over all energy accounts are back where they started from.  In the case of a near fly by, there is a energy exchange, but this shows up in changes in angular momentum and in inertial energy, which can change the orbit, however slightly, of the earth.

I would also take issue with the statement about centripetal force.  There is no physical requirement for an expenditure of energy to turn the object if it's speed stays constant.  The need for an energy input comes about because of frictional losses.
GeoM



Re: Break "Law of Energy Conservation"? (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by p0lizei on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 01:22:14 PM MST

I agree, it sounds as though the book is trying to find some fault with the traditional laws of physics so that later on it or someone else can say, "OMG DEWDZ!!  WITH A Z!1!!1!  I CAN MAKE OVERUNITY CUZ LIEK TEH MOON IS SUPER DUPER BREAKIN THE LAW!@"

[ Parent ]


Interesting Energy source (3.00 / 0) (#4)
by John II on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 04:57:24 PM MST

Of course the Moon is breaking our laws. But the question is... what are we going to do about it ? haha

All joking aside, The moon is pulling whole tides of water every pass which probably equate in to billions of horse power per pass. I would most certainly call that force a form of "friction". It is indeed exerting powerful forces on the earth, yet does not diminish or decay in it's orbit over untold millions of years.

True be told, there's a lot that we still don't know. Science has come along ways from the "dark ages" but we still have a long ways to go, which I suspect is good, because it would be totally boring if we had the final "formula" for everything in the universe and beyond. Life is a little more interesting when you know you still have things new to discover.

Because tidal wave generators are already extracting energy from this free source of power, It makes you wonder if there are other forms of gravity shift engines that might work on a much smaller scale even if but to wind your old grand father's clock : )

John II



Re: Interesting Energy source (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by Ungrounded Lightning Rod on Mon Nov 22, 2004 at 06:49:54 PM MST

All joking aside, The moon is pulling whole tides of water every pass which probably equate in to billions of horse power per pass. I would most certainly call that force a form of "friction". It is indeed exerting powerful forces on the earth, yet does not diminish or decay in it's orbit over untold millions of years.

You're looking at it backwards.

The friction slows down the earth's spin and causes the moon to RISE
into a HIGHER orbit.  Part of the energy goes into raising the moon,
part into heating the water (and the underground strata that are
flexing as a result, one of the forces powering volcanoes and
continental drift).  All comes from slowing the earth's rotation
(except some of the underground heat, which also comes from
radioactive decay).

Longer days, lousier eclipses.  In geologic time, of course.

This process stops when either:
 - The moon gets away, or,
 - The earth ends up with one side facing the moon (as the moon
   already does with the earth).
I don't recall which it is, but I think the earth's spin doesn't
have enough energy and angular momentum to finish launching the moon.

After that (assuming the earth keeps the moon) the earth wobbles
back-and-forth for a while, until still more tidal friction causes
THAT to diminish.  But this doesn't raise the moon - just heats
the water and dirt while braking the wobble.

No conservation laws broken.

[ Parent ]



Sometimes things go up! (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by juiced on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 06:50:04 PM MST

Here is another example of gravity being used for electricity.

http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2004/10/22/195355/12

Canada's -Debatable- A.E./R.E Debate Site
News, discussions and debates!
www.juiced.ca



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by ghurd on Sun Nov 21, 2004 at 10:44:59 PM MST

E=MC^2
Almost written in stone.
Einstein was the first to say it was not correct! About a century ago.
It does not take into account PE or KE for starters.
So it should be "relatively" easy to break one of the more advanced theories.
How old is Newtonian Physics? 400 years? I can't remember. But it works for folks doing calculations.

Also, the tide powered devices in France have measurably decreased the speed of the moon.
If the moon falls, it would be more catastrophic than an ice age.
I'm not so sure that's a good idea.

G-
Ghurd.info



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#7)
by nothing to lose on Mon Nov 22, 2004 at 05:22:20 AM MST

"Because tidal wave generators are already extracting energy from this free source of power, It makes you wonder if there are other forms of gravity shift engines that might work on a much smaller scale even if but to wind your old grand father's clock : )
"

Well, let's see. How is it supposedly that the wind is created? I had thought the tides and wind were for the most part both created the same way. Of course wind can actually be forced to occure with just a tempature change also.

"Also, the tide powered devices in France have measurably decreased the speed of the moon.
If the moon falls, it would be more catastrophic than an ice age.
I'm not so sure that's a good idea."

Ya, me neither. It's not good to mess with nature! The earth, moon, sun, and other planets all stay in their own part of space, keeping their distance from each other based on the relationship established as a group. Toss one planet out of balance an change it's space realationship with the others and the group as a whole is out of balance. What could that actually lead to? A colision of planets? Maybe all planets being drawn into the sun eventaully in a few thousand years, maybe less?

Hmm, global warming??
Would we even notice if we were 2 miles closer to the sun? Would that increase the earths temp a couple degrees? Could it cause a slow melting of the Ice Caps?

.
nothing to lose

Spelin and tpying are my strong points, not electronics.
[ Parent ]



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by laskey on Mon Nov 22, 2004 at 08:19:53 AM MST

The motion of the winds is caused by the sun.  Solar radition heating the earth, and cooling at night.

The moon can orbit us, and we can orbit the sun, for almost ever because there is very little friction in space.  It doesn't matter what speed we, or the moon moves as long as it keeps missing us.  Orbit is achived by falling a rate that never allows you to contact the body of the thing attracting you.

You've gotta extract ALOT of power from the tides for that to slow the moon down.  It's slowing down on it's own anyway, just like everything is.  You can bet the earth will be destroyed at some point, it'll can't possibly be any otherway.  My expectation is that we will have destroyed ourselves way, way, way, in advance of that.  Now that you know, Try to be suprized when it happens.

Cya,
Chris

[ Parent ]



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by finnsawyer on Mon Nov 22, 2004 at 09:26:59 AM MST

I seem to remember reading that the tidal braking is actually causing the moon to move away from the earth.  Supposedly it started out a lot closer.  The whole deal involves angular momentum, inertial forces, and gravity.  The gravitational fields of the earth and moon don't change, but the other two quantities do.  Personally, I'd like to see the moon a lot closer.  Think how large the earth would appear from the moon!

One other thing.  The gravitational field of a body (atom, proton, whatever) is an inherent trait of the body that doesn't change over time as long as the body remains a body.  When matter (mass) is changed to energy (light) the gravitational field would disappear as light energy does not carry a gravitational field.  I pointed this out earlier in my diary.  No one seems to have addressed this issue, but I feel it's of a fundamental nature.  It appears that E = MC^2 carries a little more significance than is obvious.
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#11)
by ghurd on Wed Nov 24, 2004 at 01:10:44 AM MST

The 'point' was that it is a centuries old idea. Newton stuff.

The Earth is flat.
Man will never fly.
Girls have cooties.

The Earth still looks flat.
I can't fly.
Girls have cooties. You can ask my wife.

G-

P.S.- Tell her I said that and I'll kick your butt!  ;)

Ghurd.info
[ Parent ]



Re: Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by juiced on Wed Nov 24, 2004 at 01:19:16 AM MST

Talk about an open energy discharge! :p

Canada's -Debatable- A.E./R.E Debate Site
News, discussions and debates!
www.juiced.ca

[ Parent ]


Breaking the "Law of Energy Conservation"? | 12 comments (12 topical)
Display: Sort:
Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Total Views
  81 Scoop users have viewed this posting.

Related Links
· · Also by Matrix1000

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2009 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!