+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Vacuum or Hydrogen?

  1. Link to Post #1
    Germany Avalon Member
    Join Date
    18th November 2014
    Posts
    6
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 22 times in 4 posts

    Default Vacuum or Hydrogen?

    Today nobody doubts that the world economics will refuse the hydrocarbon fuel and go over to so-called “green” power sources. As such, the Sun/wind are considered as the first option and the wave/tidal as the second option. Nuclear energy still remains an undecided issue and it is not clear how relevant it will be in future.

    Unfortunately, both the Sun’s and wind’s greatest shortcoming is unstable energy generation: clouds can cover the sky and wind can die. In order to compensate such gaps in generation of energy, there is a suggestion to use hydrogen be made out of water with the help of electrolysis during the periods of maximum solar and wind activity. Hydrogen, however, is a very difficult energy carrier and can cause numerous problems. First of all, hydrogen can leak into any opening. Second, hydrogen can even leak into solid metal and make it brittle. Third, hydrogen forms an explosive mixture with air even when it is only 7% of hydrogen in the air. Thus, there is a growing danger of hydrogen cylinders explosion due to decreasing metal durability: cylinder is destroyed through internal pressure and released hydrogen explodes.

    Nevertheless, we could avoid this danger if we are able to find such energy source that exists in any point of space, exists always, is sufficiently effective and is characterized by stable generation. Such energy sources do exist, but they yet have not attracted scientists’ attention. Those sources are physical fields that are around us such as electromagnetic field of our planet, gravitational field and physical vacuum. For example, gravitational field contains one billion times more energy than cumulative energy of all known deposits of hydrocarbon fuel (coal, oil, gas, shale oil, etc.). Similar figures are characteristic for electromagnetic field. As for the physical vacuum, it contains quadrillion times more energy than gravitational and electromagnetic fields taken together.

    It is interesting to note that we constantly use these energies in everyday life and do not know about it. For example, a hydropower plant converts gravitational energy into electricity. When the Sun evaporates water from the surface of seas and oceans, it spends some energy to do it. Exactly same amount of energy is released during steam condensation in top cold layers of atmosphere. Consequently, the Sun leaves the hydrological cycle at the stage of steam condensation. Further on falling raindrops acquire kinetic energy from the Earth´s gravitational field and spend it on erosion of mountain slopes and generation of electricity in our hydropower plants. If we recreated a similar hydrological cycle inside a high tower, we could build gravitational power plants in any part of the planet, even in the desert. Calculations show that it is technically possible and economically profitable.

    Nonetheless, use of physical vacuum is a more attractive idea than use of gravitational or electromagnetic fields (it is necessary to make things clear: physical vacuum is not a void, it is a very complex energy-intensive structure that exists in any point of the Universe and just seems to be empty as we do not have abilities to see it). We use physical vacuum when we drive nails. If we try to force a nail into wood using constant pressure, we will spend a lot of energy with minimum results. When we use a hammer, it is enough to hit a nail two or three times and it will get into wood with little to zero energy expenditure. Such effect is explained by the following fact: when a hammer comes in contact with the tip of a nail, it stops short and physical vacuum creates an impact impulse along a nail axis towards wood.

    We also observe the physical vacuum effect when our car accelerates. When we hit the gas and start accelerating, our car’s accelerated movement deforms the structure of physical vacuum that surrounds us spending certain amount of energy in the process. In response physical vacuum creates inertia force that drags us back to decrease our speed down to zero and prevent any deformation. When we hit the brakes we deform the structure of the surrounding physical vacuum again, and it again creates inertia force to keep us in the state of steady motion and prevent new deformation. However, we do not spend any energy when we hit the brakes. On the contrary, physical vacuum gives us back the energy it received earlier at the stage of acceleration. Previous experiments have shown that it can give back much more since it contains huge amounts or energy. How much more? It depends on acceleration and deceleration conditions. It is currently known that physical vacuum can return 10,000 times more energy than it received during acceleration stage.

    In the late 20th century astronomy acquired two new terms: dark matter and dark energy. Currently the three mostly known theories on the nature of dark matter include the hypothesis of modified gravity, the hypothesis of quintessence, and the hypothesis of cosmological constant. Observations of astronomers favor the hypothesis of cosmological constant. This hypothesis, however, suggests that pressure, density and energy of physical vacuum are nonzero. Astronomers have not yet come to an agreement about pressure, density and energy order of values. Some operate very low values; others talk about ultrahigh values. Our calculations show that physical vacuum values range between 10(72) and 10(112) Joules per cubic meter. By this criterion alone physical vacuum exceeds all and any processes known to astronomers. Formula of the vacuum energy density is E/V = cccc / (8 pi G rr), where c is the light velocity, pi = 3.14, G is gravitational constant, r is electron radius (in this case E/V = 2.45x10(72) J/cub.meter) or Plank´s length (E/V = 1.2x10(112) J/cub.meter).

    Vacuum power-engineering era has already started. Currently there are at least three companies in the world offering vacuum energy generators - German company ROSCH INNOVATION, Canadian company NOCA, and American company IEC. There may be another company in Thailand and one more in Malaysia, however, they only operate locally and there is no information on their activities. In the nearest future (one to five years from now) several companies in Russia and Ukraine shall be expected to emerge. Specific capacity of existing generators is not high yet: 0.025 kilowatt/kilogram for an American device, 0.05 kilowatt/kilogram for a German device, and 0.5 kilowatt/kilogram for a Canadian device. That is why these generators are applicable only for stationary power-engineering and cannot be used as transport engines. Nevertheless, use of such generators already allows to stop using hydrogen and turn to batteries with electric engines instead. When powerful compact generators with specific capacity of about 10 kilowatt/kilogram and more (why not?) will be invented, we will even stop using batteries.

    To sum it up, it makes no sense to hurry up and develop hydrogen infrastructure not to lose our investments later on. We shall invest money into new revolutionary technologies of new alternative power engineering. He, who will have the power over vacuum energy, will have the power over the world.

  2. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to IGOR PROKHOROV For This Post:

    Ewan (27th September 2021), ExomatrixTV (26th September 2021), Harmony (26th September 2021), meeradas (18th October 2021), Snoweagle (26th September 2021), Sue (Ayt) (26th September 2021), Sunny (27th September 2021), toppy (26th September 2021), Vangelo (26th September 2021), yelik (26th September 2021)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Philippines Avalon Member
    Join Date
    29th May 2013
    Age
    58
    Posts
    3,059
    Thanks
    4,661
    Thanked 13,266 times in 2,725 posts

    Default Re: Vacuum or Hydrogen?

    As of this moment the elite is still in control of the new techs. So whatever energy source they want, will come. Maybe take a look at what's promoted by world economic forum. Lots of suppress free energy devices. Nikola Tesla and victor Schoenberg, Stanley Meyer and so on and those are just the famous ones. I believe there are more that is not known.

  4. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bubu For This Post:

    Snoweagle (26th September 2021), Sunny (27th September 2021), toppy (26th September 2021), Vangelo (27th September 2021), yelik (26th September 2021)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Germany Avalon Member
    Join Date
    18th November 2014
    Posts
    6
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 22 times in 4 posts

    Default Re: Vacuum or Hydrogen?

    My colleague have made two experimental prototype of vacuum-generator of small power already: electronic variant (power is 20 Watt) and mechanical variant (power is 200 Watt). These prototypes are for demonstration, we do not plan to switch to commercial production with these prototypes. For commercial production, we shall make a hydraulic prototype with power 100 kW, 500 kW and 2000 kW. But, nobody believes uns. When I begin to relate about physical vacuum, academicians answer mir that physical vacuum is pseudoscience and refuse to hear mir out. As a result, we cannot obtain investments.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to IGOR PROKHOROV For This Post:

    Vangelo (27th September 2021)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Aaland Avalon Member Blastolabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd November 2020
    Language
    English
    Posts
    442
    Thanks
    1,649
    Thanked 3,352 times in 432 posts

    Default Re: Vacuum or Hydrogen?

    I've been following free energy technology for a long time and there have recently been a few breakthroughs in the "Low Energy Nuclear Reaction" LENR world (formally called cold fusion)

    It has been discovered that the mechanism for cold fusion can be attained simply by popping tiny bubbles, also known as cavitation.

    ANYONE can try this at home with a cheap $40 ultrasonic cleaning machine.

    You simply put water into the machine along with a piece of foil.

    The microscopic bubbles pop and for a toroid/ donut shape.

    When this happens somehow energy from the vacuum is transported into our local reality <---- my hypothesis.

    This sounds a bit unbelievable, which is why YOU should do the experiment at home.

    The fact that the universe allows nearly infinite energy via popping bubbles shows that this is a universe of ABUNDANCE, not scarcity.

    The author of these videos believes that this is not future tech, but going back to the future, using the same tech as the ancients.


    A man won the Nobel Prize in physics for showing the laws of energy conservation can be broken if you can get the Universe to move from disorder to order instead of the normal order moving to disorder (entropy)

    The popping bubble seems to accomplish this as it collapses into a donut shape.

    If you do the experiment you will notice MANY tiny "craters" through out the foil after a few seconds, and if you leave the foil in for 3 minutes it will be SHREDDED.

    Scientists have recently found that on the outside of the "craters" the metal seems to have undergone nuclear transmutation into other elements.

    Here is a great explanation of how to do the experiment at home


    This video goes IN DEPTH about what happens in these simple experiments ANYONE can run.


    There is a shrimp, the pistol shrimp, that uses a popping bubble made with its claw to create underwater shockwave, the shrimps bubble has been shown to be hotter than the sun!!

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Blastolabs For This Post:

    Dreamer148 (27th September 2021), Ewan (27th September 2021), meeradas (18th October 2021), Snoweagle (27th September 2021), Vangelo (28th September 2021)

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts