| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 71834 | 2006-08-18 23:31:00 | Free Energy? | Renmoo (66) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 479275 | 2006-08-19 06:14:00 | Thats not the same thing at all. The business with the water can be tested in your home, faster than light can't. Its a law when its obvious and a theory when a few scientists are still messing with it. lol I think your missing the point as always pctek Einstein (you may of heard of him) said "nothing" can travel faster than the speed of light. This was a sacred law for many years that most scientist cherished, now they are having to examine the word "nothing". I am NOT saying a Perpetual Motion machine is possible, I have nothing to back that up with. I am saying Science has a long history of proving itself wrong, so it would be ignorant to close the door completely. |
Battleneter (60) | ||
| 479276 | 2006-08-19 07:00:00 | Your problem Battle is a case of a little knowledge is dangerous :) It has never been a "rock solid law" that nothing can travel faster than light, and neither did Einstein say nothing can travel faster than light. I have already read the New Scientist article, and there have been other similar experiments in recent times that seem to show photons or pulses traveling through media, not vacuum, faster than the "speed of light". PF1 is certainly not the forum to discuss esoteric physics and relativity theories, and obviously no outcome is possible. But here are a few comments. "Classical" relativism itself proposes a constancy for the "speed of light", as indeed Poincare suggested before Einsteins Special theory. Classical relativism says the speed of light can only be 'measured' over a to and fro path. That is the total flight time between sending a ray and it being returned is measured. But a little reflection of the 3 quantities, velocity, distance and time will show that to measure any one, the other two have to be defined as invariant standards. Relativistically, any measurement of the speed of light turns out to be a distance measurement. Whilst wavelength of light is used as a convenient terrestial length standard, cosmologically it is observed to vary, measured from our frame of reference. So it is the 'to and fro' speed which is constant. I could go on and on and deeper and deeper................... The speed of light issue is a red herring, the thread was about "free energy" something for nothing. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 479277 | 2006-08-19 09:28:00 | C'mon James, you are smarter than that. You can't get more energy out than you put in, and as the experimenter found, he couldn't get the water from the nozzle to spray higher than the head source. Add some pressure-sapping generation facility and that's the end of the story. If it was that simple, it would have been done already. Google "perpetual motion" and you will find any number of very ingenious failures. What surprises me is that Mr Perpetual had an ego (or lack of basic knowledge) great enough to show the world that he's a failure. Good for a laugh though. Cheers Billy 8-{) :D Oops, Billy :D I didn't quite finish reading the whole article before starting this thread, actually. :P Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers :) |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 479278 | 2006-08-19 09:29:00 | Actually Terry Porritt I have read about 20+ articals on this, and thanks for your long and drawn out (re-worded) copy and paste post . You look so much smarter now! This example was given to show the law of physics are only laws until they are proven wrong . No matter how much bull**** you post Einstein said "Nothing", and something does, there is not a dam thing you can say to change that . |
Battleneter (60) | ||
| 479279 | 2006-08-19 09:49:00 | Can't believe I had to waste time to prove Einstien said "Nothing travels faster than the speed of light" . It's like being in the twighlighht zone . Of course now scientists are attempting to change the meaning of the word "nothing" . I guess like a few here they hate being proven wrong lol . Here's a few books for you to read, OMG "nothing" is mentioned everywhere, big surprise! . google . com/books?q=nothing+travels+faster+than+the+speed+of+l" target="_blank">books . google . com ight+einstein&ots=jbPeb-pVXK&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title |
Battleneter (60) | ||
| 479280 | 2006-08-19 20:58:00 | There is no "copy and paste" whatsoever. Show me. I repeat, you are trying to throw a red herring into a post about free energy, by reporting that some experiments that seem to show that electromagnetic pulses can in some instances appear to travel faster in a medium than light in a vacuum somehow means that a 'rock solid' law of physics has been broken, and therefore we have to keep an open mind about whether energy can be obtained for nothing..... as I said what a load of bull. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 479281 | 2006-08-19 21:40:00 | Nice thread. Anyhow, I suggest we visit the topic again in about......hmmmm.....1000 years. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 479282 | 2006-08-19 22:49:00 | Nice thread. Anyhow, I suggest we visit the topic again in about......hmmmm.....1000 years. Good thinking Met,lets see what Terry has to say then! |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 479283 | 2006-08-19 23:19:00 | No, I wont wait a 1000 years, I have more to say now :) I repeat for the benefit of those with a 'bit of knowledge is dangerous'. Einstein did not say in Special Relativity that you cannot travel faster than light. Repeat, he did not say you cannot travel faster than light. What he did postulate was that the velocity of light is independent of the velocity of the source. There has always been controversy over relativity theory, and because it is a theory, is one reason why there is not a "rock solid law of physics" about the velocity of light as such. Before Einstein's paper on relativity, Poincaré postulated a law about laws which was his principle of relativity. In that he discussed 'absolute' time, the 'simultaneity' of two events occurring at different places and the method of synchronising clocks using light signals, and it was Poincaré who postulated that the velocity of light cannot be surpassed. But enough. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 479284 | 2006-08-20 00:36:00 | Actually Terry Porritt you are the one clearly clearly lacking knowledge. He clearly did say "Nothing can travel faster than light" and was quoted on many occasions. I have provided you with links to back up my claims. Where are yours? All we have is you repeating the mis-information, and verbal diarrhea. Time to show me the money :) |
Battleneter (60) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | |||||