Electricity from tap water

[Richard]

[xbusymom]

very interesting... this gives me an idea on how to ground my orgone devices.

also wondering if this method can be used to jump-start a magnetic engine/generator?

[Wood]

I am not an expert on batteries but I think this is the standard principle behind all "wet cell" batteries: two pieces of different metals and some kind of liquid medium inbetween, as electrolite. This one using water is very weak (just a few milliwatts-hour I guess). The acid-lead batteries found in cars are much more powerful for instance. The main problem behind them all is, I think, that the metal corrodes. I think the flow of electrons will make the water oxidise the metal pieces and it will stop working in a while. Please correct me if I am wrong since I only have a general understanding of all this.

For free energy my hopes are on some kind of magnetic generator that taps energy from a place not understood by our physics. If that is shown to not be true despite all the people making claims about it, I hope we can improve wind turbines, water turbines and sun collection techniques. I am thinking myself to do an experiment with an small scale 'solar updraft tower'.

[Rob Wood]

I'm not a scientist, although I spend a lot of time trying to understand the physical world, and building and engineering various robotic and radio controlled devices. The problem with "free" energy, at least in terms of energy that can be stored for electrical devices, is that there is really no such thing. Free energy and perpetual motion machines are in the same general category of "wouldn't it be cool if the laws of physics were different?" The reason there is no free energy is that natural resources have to be expended in order to make use of any renewable energy source, and in some cases, the costs are simply prohibitive to produce significant amounts of storable energy. That holds for solar, methane (from organic sources), hydro-power, wind, wave power generators, heat exchangers, geothermal, and nuclear. Of all of those sources of energy, nuclear power probably comes closest to "free," if you compare them all from a cost/benefits point of view, and most of us are wary of that particular solution. There was a moment some years ago, when we all thought that cold fusion had become a reality. That would have been the ultimate, free energy source, but it was not to be. No matter what we do, it has to be done on a major, commercial scale, and I don't see that happening until the planet runs out of easily obtainable oil, I'm afraid.

What I'm hoping to see are gigantic wind-powered generators that are comprised of vertical sails, as opposed to the extravagant 3-bladed vertical units we see standing on hilltops today. A horizontal, circular wind collector could be made in huge models, with the outer ring of sails rotating slowly, turning a small hub dynamo in the center. The differential in gearing would make the dynamo spin at incredible speeds, while the outer ring of sails would turn so slowly that birds and bats would not be pulverized, as they are by the free-standing, single-unit wind turbines currently in use.

The reason I'm hot on wind power is that wind is more prevalent than any other source of energy, and although it's unpredictable, the wind-powered generators I'm envisioning would be able to produce enough electricity to make them pay for themselves. True, we would need to rely on batteries to store the excess electricity, and batteries - as you say - degrade. But battery technology is really advancing at a rapid pace. Fuel cells are the next big thing, and the net energy available, as well as the virtually unlimited availability of hydrogen and water, make it look extremely promising.

No matter what happens in the next 25 - 50 years, though, it may very well be that we will have to eventually change our entire attitude toward energy, and what we think we absolutely need to be "civilized." I think it's ironic that we are moving in ever-increasing leaps and bounds to greater dependence upon non-renewable resources for technological toys and throwaway devices (almost all of which require petroleum products to manufacture), even while we are becoming more and more desperate to find a way to save the planet. Something has to give. Maybe we can find a solution by working together, here.

Rob

[Wood]

Posted by Rob Wood (here)
Free energy and perpetual motion machines are in the same general category of "wouldn't it be cool if the laws of physics were different?"

I see your point and that is the reason I tend to be quite skeptical with magnetic devices that claim over-unity. But I believe we do not actually know the laws of physics. We just have an approximation that is updated from time to time.

An example I've found interesting and plausible are antenas. They get charged by static and that is removed for radio and so. I've read about tall enough antennas that could give lots of power. I think it is related to the changes in the magnetic field due to earth rotation and movement around the sun, or maybe to the air hitting the antenna. I am not a scientist either and maybe that is not usable at all, but from what I know I think it would be interesting to test.

[Vidya Moksha]

Posted by Rob Wood (here)
. Free energy and perpetual motion machines are in the same general category of "wouldn't it be cool if the laws of physics were different?"

Rob

Rob, read Viktor Schaubergers work, free downloads at Scribd, maybe you will change your views. Man made laws of physics are just that, man made.