Gulf Oil Spill

[So fist]

Pandora, the oldest junk science scheme is the perpetual motion device which is what your free energy magnet dude is claiming he's invented. His claims are laughably ridiculous (You cannot achieve more than potential energy and even then due to friction and other mitigating factors not even full potential) and he refuses to have his device peer reviewed and independently tested. True hallmarks of a snake oil salesmen trying to live the easy life off of the idiots he dupes into investing in him.

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/lutec1.pdf
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/lutec2.pdf

 

[united washcloth express]

In North Korea, the oil spill has been vanquished by Kim Jong-Il on horseback.

 

[united washcloth express]

In North Korea, the oil spill has been vanquished by Kim Jong-Il on horseback.

 

[Cryranos]

Delightful.

Seriously this could turn into a global disaster if enough oil gets into the Atlantic.

 

[united washcloth express]

Let it. Smaller countries offered earlier to drain the escaped oil via ships and buy it at a slightly discounted price. People with the power to approve this extraction method did not approve it.

What you will see for the remainder of the spill is more half-assed ideas from BP and the US government. The media will begin to blame Obama for not acting fast enough, just as they did with Bush and Katrina. BP will pay out large amounts of money until they are near bankruptcy. The US or British government will then buy BP. Somehow, Global Warming will be inserted into the issue. Environmentalists will use this issue as a reason why drilling is dangerous, and supporters of drilling will blame Environmentalists, citing that drilling could have been done on land in Alaska if they would not have complained.

All in all, nothing will be solved.

 

[Glitchfinder]

Thank you sophist, for providing a proper response to the perpetual motion bullshit. Perpetual motion would only be possible in a universe without friction, and where something like electrical current moving through a wire doesn't heat it up, etc. And even then, you only get as much energy as you put into the thing. And before anyone brings up fusion/fission, or even cold fusion: neither fusion and fission create energy. Instead, they literally convert matter into energy. And it takes a lot of energy to make matter, so even a tiny mass converted to energy is a lot of energy. The bomb dropped on Hiroshima converted approximately 600 milligrams of mass into energy. That much matter was enough to create between 54 and 75 teraJoules of energy. A joule can be approximated to the kinetic energy of a tennis ball moving at 23 km/hr. A teraJoule is that to the twelfth power, or in other words, that times 1,000,000,000,000.

And now I have forgotten my point. Enjoy the wikipedian science lesson, though.

 

[Ellie]

On top of that even if a perpetual motion (here being getting as much energy out as you put in, since any more is physically impossible) was possible, the whole endeavour would be pointless since no new energy is being made - taking energy out of the machine would require new energy being added in, much like a full glass of water.

One analogy that's spewn about a lot is that "if something can be observed to be indefinately moving, it is not", meaning that to observe something (here meaning to feel, see, or know it is moving) it is impossible for it to be perpetually moving. This is assuming you are on Earth and not in a vacuum but even so

Uh

Yeah.

 

[So fist]

On the subject of the amazing revolutionary salt water engine.

Fire is energy. We need energy. Can we use this as an energy source?
No.

A guy in a lab shoots a radio wave (using energy) at a beaker of salt water and fire starts atop it (creating energy). Unfortunately, the radio wave (or whatever method you use to break the bonds) consumes more energy than the fire releases. You spend two gallons of gas getting one for free. Therefore, it can’t be used as an energy source, because you haven’t actually found a source of energy. You’ve found a terrible exchange rate.

It costs energy to split the hydrogen and oxygen. Putting them back together does release energy but not as much as you spent breaking them apart. That is just a fact of nature.


If you can’t create energy or destroy it, how can a reaction end up with more or less energy than it started with?
The salt-water-on-fire reaction is a negative energy equation. Negative because you lose some energy to the system around you, or for processes that don’t pay off in the energy release, or just because you took three lefts to make a right. Breaking those bonds might cost more energy than they give back, depending on how you break them. Even if the reaction were perfect, though, you could only get as much energy out as you put in because you're simply reversing the action.

There are such things as positive energy equations. These exist when energy has been stored in something prior to the start of the reaction, and often involve a catalyst (something to lower the energy needed to make the reaction happen). The best example: gasoline.

Lighting gasoline on fire gives off more energy than the person who ignited it put in. The energy comes from the breaking of chemical bonds. They key is that nature put those bonds together, not us. We’re taking advantage of someone else’s work. It’s what we do when we eat food: the plant got energy from the sun, stored it in a little energy piñata, and we came along, broke it open and took all the candy. So to speak. The earth and millions of years under pressure put energy into oil and coal. The sun could heat things for us. The wind could move things for us. There are ways to get energy out without putting it in, but breaking apart salt water and putting it back together is not one of them.

Also I doubt very much the salt water engine dude is being sued by oil companies. If he's trying to sell it as a perpetual motion scheme he might be in fraud territory and in trouble with Federal Commerce Regulators. I would like to see where you read this. My bet is its from a little "inventors" (more like crackpots) forum where people talk about how they saved a hundred gallons of gas per mile by installing a ram implosion wing on their car or by putting magnets on their carborator.

And before you even jump to the Big Oil conspiracy nonsense consider this. Let's pretend for a moment Lutec (The magnet loons) had invented the perpetual motion device. Do you even understand how powerful such a thing would be? Forget just powering your house with it. Put that thing on a satellite with a rinky dink solar panel and city destroying laser and let her rip. It would be a ridiculous decision to suppress such a thing. Pretend you are the government. You can on the one hand take loontec's technology and enter a new era leaps and bounds ahead of this one with which you can take names and kick ass as you see fit, or you can have a million dollars to put next to your other huge stacks of millions courtesy of the oil companies for keeping them in business by taking said device and putting it in the junkyard. If it worked back in 1999 the US would be mass producing laser tanks with energy shields by now. What nation would trade that kind of technology edge for a few million dollars? Its almost laughable to even consider such a conspiracy.

 

[So fist]

On top of that even if a perpetual motion (here being getting as much energy out as you put in, since any more is physically impossible) was possible, the whole endeavour would be pointless since no new energy is being made - taking energy out of the machine would require new energy being added in, much like a full glass of water.

One analogy that's spewn about a lot is that "if something can be observed to be indefinately moving, it is not", meaning that to observe something (here meaning to feel, see, or know it is moving) it is impossible for it to be perpetually moving. This is assuming you are on Earth and not in a vacuum but even so

Uh

Yeah.

Como when these people think perpetual motion they think of something that recieves one charge of kinetic force and then moves indefinitely that is continuously providing kinetic energy. It is an infinity device essentially. It bollocks anyway but that where the thinking is.

Kinetic Energy + Perpetual motion device = Perpetual source of kinetic energy

 

[PandoraShock]

@ Captain Murphy
Most of Physics is theories so we are not entirely sure whats real and whats not, its all what been told to us. If you were born with someone telling you that the earth was square Then your going to believe it, We dont know whats possible and whats not its believing that its possible and trying to achieve it that makes a difference. IE:
Saying perpetual motion and or an infinite energy source are impossible, just shows your not willing to think out of the box. There are sources of energy here and beyond our planet we have yet to discover, my point I was trying to make was getting people to think about the future and possible ways we could make a difference.
Anything is possible if you set your mind to it.

If you recall many thought the Lunar landing was a crackpot scheme, the lightbuld, telephone, cellphone, flight. But look what the innovator did, they made those Crackpot schemes or ideas into a reality.

Being an innovator is what will bring this world to the future. Being the one to say "impossible" is what will hold us back.

 

[Perihelion]

Pandora, there are different degrees of scientific impossibility. Thermodynamics is not an experimental new theory; it's a well established part of how the universe works supported by a massive body of evidence.

 

[So fist]

If you recall many thought the Lunar landing was a crackpot scheme, the lightbuld, telephone, cellphone, flight. But look what the innovator did, they made those Crackpot schemes or ideas into a reality.

Again more unsubstantiated nonsense. Who are the many? Their are always naysayers on everything but what I consider crackpot is to believe something can be done based on an absolutely spurious and childish fantasy. I can hardly see how the cellphone would fit in that mold since its analog the telephone already existed and well they've had mobile portables since the fifties carried in suitcases and whatnot. The idea that technological advances would eventually shrink it was a rather natural idea. The telephone itself was built on previously utilized technologies and was not far out of the imagination and had the science preexisting that it would theoretically work. It was an invention birthed in the world that already knew the Telegraph and the phonograph so a telephone is rather an engineering culmination of this cable and sound technology put together.

All of these inventions were engineering marvels rather than scientific breakthroughs, that is new science wasn't created by them rather existing knowledge of physics and nature were harnessed in an innovative way. What Bell, Edison, Wright, ect. were good at was using the proven science they knew and making an engineering solution that met their goals. They also didn't run around with their inventions and make ridiculous impossible promises of their capabilities. Graham Bell didn't tell people his phone could contact dead relatives, nor did Edison say his electric lights can heal gout or would last for a hundred years without replacement. This is all in stark contrast to the loontec people and their ilk that claim their perpetual motion device can produce energy for twenty years off the charge of a tiny duracell, or the ram implosion wing guy who claims his retarded looking spoiler saves you an additional thirty miles per gallon, or the carburater magnet nuts who make similar claims. Their are legitimate inventors/engineers and then there are snake oil salesmen, crackpots, and crackpot snake oil salesmen.

Really anybody who is out there trying to tell you you can get your money for nothing and your chicks for free is more than likely giving you the snow job. I know its an intoxicating fantasy that there is this magic machine out there that will create energy and dreams with no cost whatsoever but that just isn't so. Even the starship enterprise needed antimatter and dilythium crystals.

Energy comes from released potential energy and energy is released at a cost. You cannot recieve more energy than what exists in the potential.

 

[Glitchfinder]

...nor did Edison say his electric lights can heal gout or would last for a hundred years without replacement.

This isn't intended to derail your argument or anything, but there's a light bulb in a firehouse in San Francisco that has been continuously lit for over 100 years. It isn't really anything about miracles. It's a handmade light bulb that was just really, really, really well made. It isn't creating energy, or anything like that, either. It just sits there, glowing, just like it's been doing for over 100 years. They have it powered by battery, with a backup and such, to keep it from going out and damaging itself beyond repair.

 

[PandoraShock]

Lol I didnt want to get into an argument, but apparently you like it, And look up on your history Im sure you will find that everyone except for a few choice people thought the telephone was a hoax, Im just saying, just because we dont have the technology now doesnt make it impossible. You never know what could happen in the next 1 thousand years.

 

[Glitchfinder]

People also thought Gmail was a hoax, because one whole gigabyte of email storage, free, just wasn't done. At the same time, I recommend you grow up and take a physics class. I think you'd find thermodynamics to be rather enlightening, even if it crushes your whimsical and extremely annoying belief in impossible miracles that make the world a better place simply by giving us free energy that anyone can use to do anything, so long as you give the guy behind it $500,000 up front. It's a scam, and you were drawn in hook, line, and sinker. Just be glad you didn't have any money to invest in it.

 

[bacon]

hey guys, blows are getting kind of heavy here. Stop it. Get back on track with the discussion, this thread is about the Gulf Oil Spill. Nil responses after this post about energy.

 

[Velocir_X]

actually perpetual motion is possible in space, the problem is that if you at any point attempt to draw energy from it the device slows down, and the motion stops being perpetual. Its the law of conservation of energy at work.

~Did you not read what i said. Do it again and you'll receive a warning. This goes for anyone.


I would like to add that that isn't perpetual motion then is it. Perpetual motion by its crackpot definition will continue without pause once started whether you draw a current from it or not.

 

[Glitchfinder]

To get back on topic, the spill just keeps getting worse. There isn't really anything anyone can do about it, but everyone needs a scapegoat, and BP and Obama are prime targets. Not really Obama's fault, but BP does have a lot to account for, even if it was merely in the way of cutting corners to meet time and monetary constraints.

Also, a major US-based seafood company was just forced out of business by the spill. It was an oyster company, one of the very few that have ever actually managed to trademark their oysters. Unfortunately, their oyster fields were fouled by the oil, and every last oyster that hadn't already been taken out was killed by it. Thus, the company no longer had any way to make money, and they shut down after shipping out the last of their good oysters earlier today.

 

[Admiral David]

wow really? i havent heard about the oyster company yet. ya its a really awful situation, and I've heard the relief well is very probable to fail also. many scientists are urging us to nuke the site, in hopes that it will create a glass like barrier to stop the flow, but that pressure has to be very powerful at those depths. i'm just worried that if it comes to nuking it, that it could create a bigger flow. who knows?! someone told me it could be one of the hugest wells we've ever drilled into

 

[Glitchfinder]

wow really? i havent heard about the oyster company yet. ya its a really awful situation, and I've heard the relief well is very probable to fail also. many scientists are urging us to nuke the site, in hopes that it will create a glass like barrier to stop the flow, but that pressure has to be very powerful at those depths. i'm just worried that if it comes to nuking it, that it could create a bigger flow. who knows?! someone told me it could be one of the hugest wells we've ever drilled into

From my first post in the thread:

And before anyone suggests nuking the site, don't. It wouldn't work. It wouldn't seal off the well, and would effectively crack it and make the leak even worse. Add on to that the fact that it would violate international treaties signed by the heads of most nations in the world, and whoever nukes it will end up in some pretty hot water, internationally. Plus, there's no guarantee they'd even be able to get the nuke to detonate at 5000 feet underwater. Problems caused by the pressure, potential leaks, etc. might render the bomb a dud long before it was able to serve its new purpose.