# ground breaking technology

## Recommended Posts

This is going to save people's lives you all please share it no advertising please

in another forum I got questioned why I post link to a web page. I can't post all of it here. if the google page is not ok you can download documents from here: no advertising please

Edited by Phi for All
commercial link removed by moderator

##### Share on other sites

!

Moderator Note

We don't know you, don't trust you, so please tell us about this topic without leading us away to sites we don't know, don't trust. This is a science discussion forum, and we're not here to boost your numbers or buy anything from you. What ground-breaking technology would you like to discuss?

##### Share on other sites

the first part is about inserting a superconductive tube inside a magnet to harvest energy

the second part on the page is about how to train children to become anti-machine agents and pro humans in the AI age

the last part is about leaving the planets and build new colonies for our race's advance.

details is very long how do i post a several page content in a forum post?

##### Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, awakening said:

the first part is about inserting a superconductive tube inside a magnet to harvest energy

the second part on the page is about how to train children to become anti-machine agents and pro humans in the AI age

the last part is about leaving the planets and build new colonies for our race's advance.

details is very long how do i post a several page content in a forum post?

Ah. Magnets.

And harvesting energy.

Does Tesla come into it at any point?

##### Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, awakening said:

the first part is about inserting a superconductive tube inside a magnet to harvest energy

the second part on the page is about how to train children to become anti-machine agents and pro humans in the AI age

the last part is about leaving the planets and build new colonies for our race's advance.

details is very long how do i post a several page content in a forum post?

!

Moderator Note

You should have only one topic per thread.

##### Share on other sites

here are links directly without any external link to files. You should go contact a popular scientists with lots of followers and ask them to publish these on their social media account. you should act very natural to do not provoke creepy guys go after you. say we are posting this for everyone for investigation and commercial potentiality and stuff like that.

##### Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, awakening said:

here are links directly without any external link to files. You should go contact a popular scientists with lots of followers and ask them to publish these on their social media account. you should act very natural to do not provoke creepy guys go after you. say we are posting this for everyone for investigation and commercial potentiality and stuff like that.

Why should we do that when it obviously won't work?

##### Share on other sites

13 hours ago, awakening said:

the first part is about inserting a superconductive tube inside a magnet to harvest energy

Can you reference any superconducting tubes that don't require energy input to maintain the superconducting state ?

##### Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, studiot said:

Can you reference any superconducting tubes that don't require energy input to maintain the superconducting state ?

theoretical reference point to validate feasibility is CMB that is 2kelvin and is becoming lower overtime. you don't need any cryogenic tool to keep superconductor below it's critical temperature there.

the output of the system on earth is much greater than cryogenic costs. the bigger building is, less radiation effects our work.

##### Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, awakening said:

the output of the system on earth is much greater than cryogenic costs. the bigger building is, less radiation effects our work.

How do you know this ?

##### Share on other sites

2 hours ago, awakening said:

theoretical reference point to validate feasibility is CMB that is 2kelvin and is becoming lower overtime. you don't need any cryogenic tool to keep superconductor below it's critical temperature there.

So you have an alleged power source (although you don’t*) in deep space, far away from any star. What good is that?

*”harvesting” energy like this violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics

##### Share on other sites

1 hour ago, swansont said:

So you have an alleged power source (although you don’t*) in deep space, far away from any star. What good is that?

*”harvesting” energy like this violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics

ambient temperature there, is not a power source, its just cold. and this is just a reference point to deliver the idea, we don't want go there to use it we can use it here right now. pickup a magnet and let a metallic ball suddenly stick to it. the attraction gives you x joules energy until ball hits the magnet's surface and stops moving. when you put the superconductive tube inside it, you use a high RPM motor (lets say ~10kRPM) that makes ball attract toward magnet about 200 times per second. a magnet will have 4 tube in front and back which gives us 800x joules per second.

yes it violates thermodynamics and i am in danger please ask someone on social media publish it as a joke or whatever you want so i don't need to worry anymore.

##### Share on other sites

1 hour ago, awakening said:

ambient temperature there, is not a power source, its just cold. and this is just a reference point to deliver the idea, we don't want go there to use it we can use it here right now. pickup a magnet and let a metallic ball suddenly stick to it. the attraction gives you x joules energy until ball hits the magnet's surface and stops moving. when you put the superconductive tube inside it, you use a high RPM motor (lets say ~10kRPM) that makes ball attract toward magnet about 200 times per second. a magnet will have 4 tube in front and back which gives us 800x joules per second.

yes it violates thermodynamics and i am in danger please ask someone on social media publish it as a joke or whatever you want so i don't need to worry anymore.

Surely this failure, by someone who clearly doesn't know what they are talking about, to provide proper Physics and Maths support in a mainstream forum has gone on long enough.

##### Share on other sites

2 hours ago, awakening said:

ambient temperature there, is not a power source, its just cold. and this is just a reference point to deliver the idea, we don't want go there to use it we can use it here right now.

No, we can’t, because it will take energy to keep the superconductor cold. Heat will flow in from the ambient surroundings.

2 hours ago, awakening said:

pickup a magnet and let a metallic ball suddenly stick to it. the attraction gives you x joules energy until ball hits the magnet's surface and stops moving. when you put the superconductive tube inside it, you use a high RPM motor (lets say ~10kRPM) that makes ball attract toward magnet about 200 times per second. a magnet will have 4 tube in front and back which gives us 800x joules per second.

It stops moving is the key. And it took energy to get the objects to the starting point. There is no net energy to harvest.

2 hours ago, awakening said:

yes it violates thermodynamics and i am in danger please ask someone on social media publish it as a joke or whatever you want so i don't need to worry anymore.

So you admit this won’t work. Why would you expect anyone to advocate for it?

##### Share on other sites

Quote

No, we can’t, because it will take energy to keep the superconductor cold. Heat will flow in from the ambient surroundings.

As i said 2 kelvin is enough to keep Mgb2 superconducting. if you make the tube cooler than 2 kelvin heat very slowly flow into it but you don't need to do it. there are ceramics that are still superconductors above 100 kelvin and more...

Quote

It stops moving is the key. And it took energy to get the objects to the starting point. There is no net energy to harvest.

You should not masseur the distance, saying that if object moves 5 cm toward magnet you have to spend same amount of energy to pull it back at starting point thus net energy to harvest is zero. You must masseur applied force. a one Tesla magnet gives you a very strong lift to harvest lots of energy while to displace the moved object and putting it at starting point you just have to overcome friction, as object inside the tube do not experience any applied force on it. Power plant's building is vacuum that means there is no air friction bothering us. we only have friction in axis which can be moderated to almost zero by using a friction less axis using magnetic levitation by balancing a disk magnet over a superconductor. you almost spend nothing for displacing object inside superconductive tube while when it exits the tube a super strong force effects the object that you can harvest lots of energy from it.

Quote

So you admit this won’t work. Why would you expect anyone to advocate for it?

Don't go emotional. there are theories out there supporting the idea that there are no laws of physics and we almost have no idea what is going on in universe yet. a scientist must always be open minded to all possibilities.

##### Share on other sites

4 hours ago, awakening said:

there are theories out there supporting the idea that there are no laws of physics and we almost have no idea what is going on in universe yet

You used the wrong pronoun.  You should have written 'I' instead of 'we'.

##### Share on other sites

On 10/21/2022 at 6:28 AM, awakening said:

ambient temperature there, is not a power source, its just cold. and this is just a reference point to deliver the idea, we don't want go there to use it we can use it here right now. pickup a magnet and let a metallic ball suddenly stick to it. the attraction gives you x joules energy until ball hits the magnet's surface and stops moving. when you put the superconductive tube inside it, you use a high RPM motor (lets say ~10kRPM) that makes ball attract toward magnet about 200 times per second. a magnet will have 4 tube in front and back which gives us 800x joules per second.

yes it violates thermodynamics and i am in danger please ask someone on social media publish it as a joke or whatever you want so i don't need to worry anymore.

Hi @awakening, how are you?

Is english your first language? There is little doubt you are in danger, but, to coin a phrase, "go stick your thumb in another pie". Find something to do: whether it's taking a long walk or starting some exercise, gathering and preparing some food, or going out to talk to strangers or meet with friends or family, or maybe some "ablution" or body care. What is it you think is the danger, specifically? Murder plot?

As for your designs, you refer to (6) as motor. I look at it, and (6) looks like it must be stator, a vertical anchor (as in $\perp$ to the length x width of magnet) around which your rotary (5->7) motor is turning. I think you also need to account for point (6) to have a wire to conduct the electricity. Do you see this as an electric generator?

You get into some complicated specifications. To start, I think you need to simplify and consider building a simple model as proof of concept. Or, can you explain:

1) How does the superconductive tube/metglas ball function as armature? Why are these specifications necessary?

2) Do you think a simplified version could prove feasibility study, specifically: what about the ball getting stuck? Do you think your complex specifications somehow evade the basic faults, or don't you suppose a simplified version needs to be done to show the basic mechanism can work?

I think of it this way: what you propose is a form of perpetual motion machine, one that will generate energy from motion for an apparent net gain. I gather that you think the complex specifications are necessary for this, but a simplified version should be able to prove the mechanical feasibility of operation, and although perhaps providing a lower power output than your proposed "overunity" device, may need to be the first step.
It will not be easy as you apparently need some precise machining and gearing, but I do not think anyone is going to pick up your project for engineering wholesale without smaller first steps to prove its worth. Good job trying to work on something that you think has potential. Perhaps think of it in terms of consciousness's wholistic designs: if your project is meant to come to fruition you'll likely get to live to make it happen and that very likely, in my opinion, means you'll have to fashion parts by hand and develop it yourself.

Good luck! And please do address the two pointed questions.

##### Share on other sites

On 10/22/2022 at 4:25 AM, awakening said:

As i said 2 kelvin is enough to keep Mgb2 superconducting. if you make the tube cooler than 2 kelvin heat very slowly flow into it but you don't need to do it. there are ceramics that are still superconductors above 100 kelvin and more...

But you just said it can be used “here” which I assume is on earth. Where on earth is the ambient temperature 2K?

Quote

Don't go emotional.

I wasn’t

Quote

there are theories out there supporting the idea that there are no laws of physics

Not within the physics community

Quote

and we almost have no idea what is going on in universe yet. a scientist must always be open minded to all possibilities.

Bull. We don’t need to be open-minded to obvious nonsense offered with no supporting evidence.

Evidence and viable models are what opens physicists’ minds.

“I have a proposal that violates the second law of thermodynamics” is a quick way to signal that your idea isn’t to be taken seriously

##### Share on other sites

On 10/22/2022 at 2:25 AM, awakening said:

a scientist must always be open minded to all possibilities.

This is a reasonable stance, but you're assuming early scientists weren't methodical, and you're ignoring the next step. Since every possibility can't be right, a scientist must start removing the ones they know won't work from the list of all possibilities. And that's what mainstream science is, the list of remaining explanations that match experiment and observation of the natural world after millions of scientists have worked their entire lives making sure these explanations are trustworthy.

##### Share on other sites

Quote

Is english your first language?

Hi bro. No english is not my native language sorry that I can't deliver concepts fluidly.

Quote

As for your designs, you refer to (6) as motor. I look at it, and (6) looks like it must be stator, a vertical anchor (as in  to the length x width of magnet) around which your rotary (5->7) motor is turning. I think you also need to account for point (6) to have a wire to conduct the electricity. Do you see this as an electric generator?

I didn't spent much time on drawing a detailed model of the idea, sorry for that. No (6) just refers to a motor effecting axis and this motor rotates axis without contact by Lenz's law. you can do it in many different ways that is why I did not defined it's characteristics. I just mentioned we need a source to rotate the axis (5), that in practical power plants is a very tall vertical bar holding Metglas balls (7) at every different attitude over superconductive tubes above each others. axis (5) is near the edge of tall magnet you see in picture from above, it is not inside magnet at all, sorry that I didn't documented it properly.

yes (6) can have a wire to supply rotationary input. we do not harvest anything from (6) to attach a wire to it. we harvest from axis (5) and wires there are not needed. at the top of axis (5) there is an insulating layer (to prevent current flow into metglas balls) that above itself is connected to a superconducting cylinder, which is surrendered with very strong electromagnets to induce electrical current on cylinder and convert axis's motion into energy for harvesting.

Quote

1) How does the superconductive tube/metglas ball function as armature? Why are these specifications necessary?

when ball is inside tube we can very easily move it with almost zero cost. when ball exits the tube, magnet attracts the ball toward itself and this gives you rotation.

In normal scenarios if you make an axis, connect a rod to it holding a magnetic object, when you release the object it suddenly moves toward magnet but then stops and you have to spend energy to pull it back. no rotation ... but in this invention when you put the superconductive tube inside magnet, you can have a 45 degree armature.

Quote

2) Do you think a simplified version could prove feasibility study, specifically: what about the ball getting stuck? Do you think your complex specifications somehow evade the basic faults, or don't you suppose a simplified version needs to be done to show the basic mechanism can work?

i tried do it the most simple way in just one page very easy to read. which part is complex?

the ball won't stuck. when ball reaches magnet's surface and starts entering the tube, configuration of flux lines change and they are not pulling the ball directly toward magnet anymore, as strong as a direct angled flux line. the bigger length of magnet is, the more uniform magnetic field it gives in front of itself. if you use a very big magnet it can give you for example 1 meter long one tesla flux density which makes you harvest more in each cycle if you think ball sticking at the moment of entering the tube is a problem. the bigger magnet is you can have 10 meter one tesla flux density while still you have same value for the stuck point so don't think about that as a reason for stopping the device work. in practice you don't need such big magnets because even a fully right angle flux line just gives you zero lift in the horizontal plot, it can't enter the tube pull back the ball to give you negative applied force and slow you down. I am just saying these to clarify your mind until I escape the isolation.

Quote

But you just said it can be used “here” which I assume is on earth. Where on earth is the ambient temperature 2K?

You was referring to the idea that this device don't work because you need source of energy to cool down superconductors so I replied to you saying that you can't use that statement for proving it's impossibility because in space temperature is 2 kelvin.

yes it can be used here because the output of a big building is very larger than cryogenic costs you need for cooling down the walls.

don't be fanatic.

Quote

This is a reasonable stance, but you're assuming early scientists weren't methodical, and you're ignoring the next step. Since every possibility can't be right, a scientist must start removing the ones they know won't work from the list of all possibilities. And that's what mainstream science is, the list of remaining explanations that match experiment and observation of the natural world after millions of scientists have worked their entire lives making sure these explanations are trustworthy.

this is why it took more than two century after Maxwell's equations free energy gets into stage...

what you are saying is right, to manage the budget and extract the highest yield from research operations. but it is not going to tell the truth always because knowledge is always incomplete.

talking about free energy to scientists is like going to Vatican city saying that there is no God!

##### Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, awakening said:

this is why it took more than two century after Maxwell's equations free energy gets into stage...

No, there still is no free energy.

##### Share on other sites

2 hours ago, awakening said:

You was referring to the idea that this device don't work because you need source of energy to cool down superconductors so I replied to you saying that you can't use that statement for proving it's impossibility because in space temperature is 2 kelvin.

yes it can be used here because the output of a big building is very larger than cryogenic costs you need for cooling down the walls.

That’s not the argument, though. Does it require energy, or not? The answer is yes.

Now you can move on to quantifying how much energy it takes to do this. Then you can show how you get energy out of your device.

2 hours ago, awakening said:

don't be fanatic.

Don’t be sloppy in your claims. The burden of proof is on you to show that this works.

2 hours ago, awakening said:

talking about free energy to scientists is like going to Vatican city saying that there is no God!

No, it’s not, since this isn’t a religious belief. If you want to challenge science, you need evidence. And, as the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

##### Share on other sites

The point is we want numbers not hand waving.

If you go to your bank manager and say

There are lots of cheap bananas and coconuts in the Windward Islands.
I want to make money by buying them there, taking them to New York and selling them for much higher prices.

He will say What is you business plan ? I want numbers.
How much do they cost?  how much can you sell (some) of them for?
How much wastage and unsold stuff will you have?
What are your storage and transports costs?
What are you import regulatory costs?
What are you staff costs?

It's the same with Science and Technology.

It's up to you to show the true maths, not offer wishy washy statements like

On 10/21/2022 at 10:53 AM, awakening said:

the output of the system on earth is much greater than cryogenic costs

Edited by studiot
##### Share on other sites

As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - and getting energy from nothing counts as an extraordinary claim and you aren't providing any evidence. It may appear to you like people are closed minded and refuse to listen but people who have convinced themselves they have a perpetual motion/free energy solution - and remain closed minded and refuse to listen to people who point out why it won't work - are surprisingly common. Working examples are not.

Conservation of energy isn't an arbitrary rule for excluding amateur scientists, it comes from a good understanding of physics, supported by observation and experiment. It doesn't take examining and understanding your proposed method to have very high, approaching absolute confidence that it won't work - sorry but Conservation of energy (more correctly conservation of mass/energy) has that level of confidence.

Thus the requirement for extraordinary evidence, such as a working example in it's most basic form (no unnecessary or confusing embellishments) that can be independently examined and verified. For a verified working prototype one consequence would be a Nobel prize for whoever can explain where the energy is coming from. If it came from world leading Physics labs it would be astounding - and probably still be widely disputed. From an amateur it is just unlikely to be correct.

## Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

## Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account