.
Abstract
Basic idea is – current cosmological changes may be reflected in any atom. At any given cosmic time, ‘Hubble length’ can be considered as the gravitational or electromagnetic interaction range. Some cosmologists use the term ‘Hubble volume’ to refer to the volume of the observable universe. With reference to the Mach’s principle and Hubble volume, at any cosmic time, if ‘Hubble mass’ is the product of cosmic ‘critical density’ and the ‘Hubble volume’, then it can be suggested that, each and every point in the free space is influenced by the Hubble mass. Clearly speaking, with Hubble volume and Hubble mass: quantum physics, nuclear physics and cosmic physics can be studied in a unified manner. In this new direction authors noticed some interesting coincidences. With reference to the present fine structure ratio, present value of Hubble’s constant is 69.53 km/sec/Mpc or 71.75 km/sec/Mpc.
Dr Rossi,
Can you please give me your business e-mail address?
All the best,
Joe
Dear Andrea, what should you do if it will be released a negative report?
regards
Fabio
Another one, fake?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCMuDBajFjU
Mark
Wlad,
someone else has already done this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHW6b1aFPfU
and has got the patent
Mark
Dear Wladimir G.,
we know that every point in a field,has its potential energy.
Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion there is the explanation of the thing we are talking about,made better than I could do.
However,the (uni?)verse is a strange place and I try to keep my mind open,making attention that my brain doesn’t falls on the ground (Piero Angela).
So,if you make an experimet in which you will get more energy than that you give to the system,you’ll get the Nobel,otherwise you’ll pay a pizza.
In this event I’ll bring beers !
Regards G G
Dear Giovanni Guerrini
are you agree that the magnet-device must stop its oscillation faster than the bar-device ? (because the energy supplied by the finger to the spring in the bar-device is larger than the energy supplied by the finger to the spring in the magnet-device)
regards
wlad
Daniel De Caluwé
May 14th, 2014 at 4:31 PM
@Wladimir and Mark,
What I learned from some video’s (Bearden – Bedini) in the past, is that _maybe_ (if the mechanism is real and works and if you’re very lucky 😉 ) you can succeed in subtracting energy from the ether/aether (or the vacuüm), by using what Bearden and Bedini call ‘Tesla-impulse-networks’. So you need to work with (electro-magnetic) circuits where switches are used, and then you have to look for the right frequency of switching.
—————————————————
Daniel,
the Figueiredo Motor does not use electro-magnetic circuits
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_How_magnet_motors_work
I had replicated the Figueiredo Motor, and it works
It uses basically a paper sheet (the rotor) and a magnet. The rotor gyrates.
It has not practical use, since the energy generated is very small.
However it is the proof that energy comes from somewhere not explained by Classical Physics.
The extraction of energy from the aether by using LENR or magnetism occurs via several different mechanisms.
regards
wlad
Giovanni Guerrini wrote in May 14th, 2014 at 8:34 AM
@Mark
the car moves with the work that you have given putting the system in a not balanced standing.
@Wladimir
you can measure the force of the finger and the Joule given by the led all more the heat by the friction.
Superman bet a pizza that will be the same.
Superegards G G
————————————————-
Mark,
you can also test a third device, as follows:
In the original magnet-device, you replace the magnet by an irong bar with the same size and the same weight of the magnet.
The difference between the magnet-device and the bar-device is the followig:
1) In the magnet-device the spring force Fs and the magnetic force Fm are in contrary direction when you compresses the magnet with the finger. Therefore the force applied by your finger is F = Fs – Fm.
The force on the spring is Fs – Fm = K.x
x = (Fs-Fm)/K
And so the energy supplied by your finger is E= 0,5.K.[(Fs-Fm)/K]² = 0,5(Fs-Fm)²/K
2) In the bar-device the force applied by your finger is Fs= K.x
x = Fs/K
And the energy supplied by your finger is E= 0,5.K.(Fs/K)² = 0,5.Fs²/K
Therefore,
the energy supplied by your finger in the bar-device is very biggest then the energy supplied by your finger in the magnet-device.
As the energy supplied by your finger is wasted in friction, we have the following conclusion ahead.
CONCLUSION:
As the energy supplied by your finger in the bar-device is very biggest, therefore:
a) the bar-device must keep the oscillatory motion during a long time, because the energy supplied by your finger is very large.
b) while the magnet-device must keep the oscillatory motion during a very short time, because the energy supplied by your finger is very small.
c) Therefore, in the case the magnet-device stops to oscillate in a time very shorter than the bar-device, we will conclude that Mr. Giovanni Guerrini is right, and the energy wasted in the spring and the bearing is indeed the energy supplied by your finger, as he claims.
regards
wlad
@GG
It would be positive if the total energy required to produce the magnet, is far less than the total energy generated by the magnet in an isolated system experiment from other forces.
If negative, the magnet could be viewed as a storage of energy, which turned the steel bar into a magnet originally.
Some rare earth magnets like those in your headphones are exceptionally strong and can last a very long time and certainly works are being done. The interesting question, is energy conservation held?
Mark
Giovanni Guerrini wrote in May 14th, 2014 at 8:34 AM
@Mark
the car moves with the work that you have given putting the system in a not balanced standing.
@Wladimir
you can measure the force of the finger and the Joule given by the led all more the heat by the friction.
Superman bet a pizza that will be the same.
Superegards G G
————————————————-
Mark,
let us test other second experiment, as follows:
1) Instead of to use a magnet, you will use an iron bar, with the same size and the same weight of the magnet.
2) Suppose in the device with magnet you used a spring with elastic constant K. So, the energy supplied by your finger is E= 0,5.K.x²
3) Fix the iron bar in the vertical position, between two vertical walls. The bar will be suported by the axis fit in the two bearing rotation.
4) Between the two walls you fix two springs horizontally, one at each side of the bar. So, while one spring is compressed, the other is streched. The springs are also fixed in the vertical walls.
5) Each spring must have an elastic constant K/2. So, the energy of each spring is E= 0,5.(K/2).x² , and therefore the total energy of the two springs is E= 0,5.K.x² (the same energy accumulated in the spring of the device made with the magnet).
6) Apply your finger in the bar, so that to compress one of the springs (the other will be streched).
7) As the energy accumulated in the two springs is the same energy accumulated in the spring of the device using the magnet, this is the energy which will be wasted in the two springs and in the two bearing rotation.
Suppose the device with the magnet oscillates during a time T. Then this new second device also has to oscillate along the same time T.
Pay attention that, according to Mr. Giovanni Guerrini, the amplitude of the oscillatory motion of the magnet and the bar must be decreasing slowly in the two devices (the amplitude cannot be conserved in any of the two devices).
Would you like to test it ?
regards
wlad
@Wladimir and Mark,
What I learned from some video’s (Bearden – Bedini) in the past, is that _maybe_ (if the mechanism is real and works and if you’re very lucky 😉 ) you can succeed in subtracting energy from the ether/aether (or the vacuüm), by using what Bearden and Bedini call ‘Tesla-impulse-networks’. So you need to work with (electro-magnetic) circuits where switches are used, and then you have to look for the right frequency of switching. There are Bearden-Bedini video’s where they realised to subtract energy from the ether/aether/vacuüm, by using electro-magnetic circuits with switches that are opened and closed at certain frequencies, and when you use the right circuits with the righ frequencies, then the energy from the ether/aether/vacuüm comes in. There even was a situation with an experiment of Bedini, where somebody noticed that the environment cooled, while loading a battery with what Bedini calls ‘radiant energy’ (energy from the ether/aether/vacuüm), and this behavior is quite opposite to the normal heating of circuits by the Joule-effect. So, although this is against all rules of classical physics, you maybe will find some effects, by using rapid switching. And then it all depends of the fine-tuning of the circuits… But again, untill it is proven and widely accepted, at the moment, this still is not established science…
Kind Regards,
@Mark
the car moves with the work that you have given putting the system in a not balanced standing.
@Wladimir
you can measure the force of the finger and the Joule given by the led all more the heat by the friction.
Superman bet a pizza that will be the same.
Superegards G G
Giovanni Guerrini wrote in May 14th, 2014 at 1:52 AM
Of course,the led is lighted by the finger.
——————————————–
yes,
of course the energy of the finger is able to supply energy to the led along years
Mark has a very strong finger, indeed …
Mark, are you a Superman ?
hahahaha
regards
wlad
orsobubu:
Thank you, for the link.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Pekka Janhunen:
It depends on the cost too.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Wladimir Guglinski:
Good luck!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
In the case the test of my thought experiment will be positive, I will baptize my invention as e-Dog (Energy Device of Guglinski).
My e-Dog will generate electricity, and it will be the most harder competitor of your e-Cat… hahaha
And I’m going to patent my invention.
But unfortunatelly my invention cannot be put in the market, because anybody can made his own e-Dog.
Then at least I will accomplish that old dream of Tesla, so that to give free energy to everybody… hahaha
regards
wlad
Dear Andrea,
I happened to come across the following science news (http://news.rice.edu/2013/10/07/white-graphene-halts-rust-in-high-temps-2/):
“Atomically thin sheets of hexagonal boron nitride (h-BN) have the handy benefit of protecting what’s underneath from oxidizing even at very high temperatures, Rice University researchers have discovered. One or several layers of the material sometimes called ‘white graphene’ keep materials from oxidizing – or rusting – up to 1100 degrees Celsius, and can be made large enough for industrial applications.”
My speculation: If this works, then perhaps one doesn’t need stainless steel in a hot environment, but can use cheaper iron coated with this material. I’m thinking of the outer wall of the Hotcat.
regards, /pekka
More clues on Scientific American on neutron’s behavior that baffles the Standard Model
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/13/neutron-decay-mystery-physicists_n_5316963.html?utm_hp_ref=science
Of course,the led is lighted by the finger.
Regards G G
@GG
Stick a strong magnet infront of a small toy car and load the car with a mass. Now bring an iron bar close to the car, which will accelerate towards the iron bar.
Isn’t that work done W =F *d?
It would be positive if the energy or work required to produce the magnet is proven to be far less than the energy or work done by the magnet.
Mark
Dear Mark,
as the alternate motion of the magnet has an oscillatory magnetic field, if you put a coil in font of the magnet then an electric AC current will be induced in the coil.
If you put a led in the circuit of the coil, the led can be lighted.
Please try it
regards
wlad
Koen Vandewalle:
I think that in the future, as well as in the present, all the energy sources will be systematically integrated. More than competition, I see specification.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
There is a lot of interesting discussion about magnets in this blog. Personally, I have been confronted with some very weird experiments, that were in fact accidents, of high power coming from collapsing magnetic fields.
I will not explain what I think that is happening in a collapsing magnetic field, but magnetism has to be considered as a competitor for the E-Cat as a source of usefull energy. Not in power density, but as a simple, not so powerfull source of mechanical energy or even electric energy.
Therefore my question about the importance of the Gas-Cat in the competition of the new energy sources. It has other capabilities that magnetic systems don’t have.
Gravity and magnetism may be linked in the sense that they are both fluxes of the same medium, so that a change in magnetic flux, causes a local change in gravity. Of the vice-versa I’m not sure. (I doubt it, but it could be at random, and not usefull for energy production, because it is to be considered as waste-heat)
Quastion for Andrea Rossi:
Do you consider, in the long term, magnetic or electro-magnetic devices as competitors for energy production ?
Kind Regards,
Koen
Mr Daniel,
your answer is correct and the magnet will stops when the energy given to the system with the finger will be converted in heat.
A magnetic “engine” runs with the initial energy of the system,but doesn’t give work.
Regards G G
Daniel De Caluwé wrote in May 13th, 2014 at 5:39 AM
@Wladimir,
And the final equilibrium position of the magnet will be found by solving this equation:
Fm(x) = Fs(x) ~= k*x (in the case of a linear spring)
So, because of the friction (in the bearings) and the energy losses (in the spring), the magnet will oscillate around and finally end up in this position ‘x’ (at a distance of ‘x’ from the vertical metallic wall).
——————————————–
COMMENT:
Daniel,
this is what the Classical Physics tell us.
However the aether does not exist in the Classical Physics, and therefore the complete equation considering the contribution of the aether does not exist in your equation.
So, let us wait what the experiment will tell us till the end of June:
———————————————
Mark wrote in May 13th, 2014 at 12:55 AM
Wlad,
I did the thought experiment, and the results of the test made, could be positive but also could be negative.
I guess I have to wait till late June for something more solid.
———————————————-
regards
wlad
Sorry, I have to do a small correction in my answer:
In my previous answer I wrote:
But this must be changed as follows:
Fm(x) = Fs(x) ~= k*(dmax-x) (in the case of a linear spring)
Mark wrote in May 13th, 2014 at 12:55 AM
Wlad,
I did the thought experiment, and the results of the test made, could be positive but also could be negative.
I guess I have to wait till late June for something more solid.
————————————————–
Mark,
I suppose you used non-magnetic axis and non-magnetic bearing rotation, because if they be magnetic they will increase the friction
regards
wlad
@Wladimir,
You wrote: 1) Will the magnet continue its oscilatory motion without ever stop?
My answer: No, it will not continue its motion, because it finally will stop in a equilibrium position where its magnetic force (towards the metallic wall) Fm, which is also variable (!) and function of the distance between the magnet and the metallic wall (the magnetic field reduces with the distance!) will be equal to the repulsive force of the spring.
And the final equilibrium position of the magnet will be found by solving this equation:
Fm(x) = Fs(x) ~= k*x (in the case of a linear spring)
So, because of the friction (in the bearings) and the energy losses (in the spring), the magnet will oscillate around and finally end up in this position ‘x’ (at a distance of ‘x’ from the vertical metallic wall).
Kind Regards,
Daniel
Wlad,
I did the thought experiment, and the results of the test made, could be positive but also could be negative.
I guess I have to wait till late June for something more solid.
Mark
Thought Experiment Gedankenexperiment
Instead of to use the magnet fixed in the vertical plate of the refrigerator, I propose here a Thought Experiment, as follows:
1- in the plate we will fix two small bearing rotation
2- in the inferior end of the magnet we bond an axis, whose ends are introduced in the two holes of the bearing rotation
3- so, the magnet will be able to gyrate about the axis
4- in the geometrical center of the magnet we fix a plastic spring (without magnetism), whose other end is fixed to the plate of the refrigerator, so that the spring takes the horizontal position.
5- when the spring is totally compressed, the spring applies a force Fs a little stronger than the force Fm between the magnet and the plate.
Then let us put the apparatus working, as follows:
a) with a finger we apply a force on the magnet, compressing totally the spring
b) when we take off the finger, the spring stretches, and with the help of the weight of the magnet the spring pushes the magnet, which starts to move far away the plate (the weight of the magnet applies a variable moment M= p.d in the magnet, where d is variable because gravity center of the magnet will be oscillating between two maximum positions).
c) continuing moving, the magnet starts to stretch the spring, and now the force Fs of the spring is in the same direction of the force Fm, in order that the magnet finally stops, and changes the direction of its motion, going now toward the plate.
d) when the spring starts to be compressed again, due to the inertia the magnet continues compressing the spring, until the time when the spring is totally compressed, and starts again to push again the magnet far away the plate.
.
CONCLUSONS:
1) The magnet acquires an oscillatory motion about the axis.
2) Heat is generated during the compression and expansion of the spring, and also due to friction between the axis and the bearing rotation
.
QUESTIONS:
1) Will the magnet continue its oscilatory motion without ever stop?
2) In the case the oscillatory motion never stop, where the heat energy wasted by friction is comming from ?
regards
wlad
JR wrote in May 12th, 2014 at 7:47 AM
Daniel,
Wladimir appears to have a pattern: misunderstand the definition of some concept (magnetic moment or energy or basic workings of quantum mechanics), make some entirely unsupported claim based on this lack of understanding, then claim that it proves QRT or Aether or whatever else he’s interested in must be correct. When it’s pointed out that his ‘problem’ just doesn’t exist and/or is fully and easily explained in modern physics, he generally moves to personal insults, random links to largely unrelated things, or most commonly, yet another made up problem. He quite obviously has not interest in even trying to learn any basic information about the theories he is criticizing, despite constantly asking about what they predict. So personally, I’ve given up trying to explain conventional physics him, although his claims do occasionally lead to interesting discussions like this one.
======================================================
COMMENT
Dear Daniel
Mr. JR has not only a poor understanding of fundamental questions in Physics. but he even has no knowledge on simple geometry.
For instance, look at the structure of the nucleus 10Ne20 in the Figure 1 of the paper published by the journal Nature:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html
Is that structure spherical ??? Has that structure a spherical distribution of protons and neutrons?????
In December 14th, 2013 at 6:50 PM Mr. JR wrote about the Figure 1 of the Nature paper:
———————————————————
The type of non-spherical structure you’re talking about has a specific and different meaning, but the nucleus is still spherically symmetric in the traditional sense. So ‘non-spherical’ means to different things when you say that conventional theory requires spherical symmetry and when you say that the clustering structure shown in the paper you cite yields non-spherical components.
———————————————————
So, Mr. JR has not even notion about the diference between spherical and non-spherical.
According to Mr. JR a spherical shape can be non-spherical… ha ha ha
The journal Nature published the paper in 2012 because the experiments are showing that even-even nuclei Z=N have non-spherical distribution of protons and neutrons, as is seen in the Figure 1 for the nucleus 10Ne20, while along 80 years the Standard Nuclear Physics predicted wrongly that those nuclei have a spherical distribution of protons and neutrons.
However, in spite of the experiments have shown that even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape, Mr. JR continues claiming that they have spherical shape.
And so,
according to Mr. JR, the authors of the paper published by the journal Nature are idiots, as also is idiot the editor of the journal.
It’s a waste of time to discuss with Mr. JR, because he uses to suppose that his opposers are idiots.
regards
wlad
Dr Joseph Fine:
Thank you!
Warm regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
Previously, I mentioned development of the Helium Ion Microscope by Zeiss (‘ORION’ TM).
A new type of Focused Ion Beam Microscope (or ‘FIB’) is under development at the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) and related contractors. It is the Lithium Ion Microscope.
The use of heavier ions (vs. Helium) suggests it will produce shorter wavelengths and, therefore, will have better resolution for imaging and fabrication.
Perhaps, you may be able to use a Lithium Ion Microscope.
(Even so, it will be many years before anyone invents a Nickel Ion Microscope.)
http://www.nist.gov/cnst/fib-050614.cfm
http://www.techfragments.com/2611/low-energy-focused-ion-beam-microscope-first/
Macroscopic regards,
Joseph Fine
Daniel G. Zavela:
Things are not that simple, but we are working on that. I cannot give specific information until we are ready with the electric power generation on the market. Let me also remind you that the results of the test made could be positive, but also negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
Since independent test results show the E-Cat running continuously for many hours, and the HotCat achieving temperatures over 1000 degrees C, plus the Siemens Ultra-Efficient steam turbine being able to run at less than 400 degrees C, where is the stumbling block that prevents the generation of electric power at this time using your invention? What type of R&D breakthrough do you need at time?
Best of luck with your R&D.
Best Regards,
Daniel G. Zavela
Daniel,
In general, the situation is the same whether it’s gravity, electrostatic attraction, or magnetic attraction. No energy is expended in any of these cases if the force is simply cancelling another force (e.g. table pushing back against weight of object or surface of two magnets pushing back against each other to balance out the magnetic attraction.
For the case of a large permanent magnet (as opposed to magnetic moments between individual particles), there are other things going on. Permanent magnets lose strength over time, especially under conditions of high heat, sudden impact, etc…, as the spin alignment that causes the magnetic field is somewhat fragile. Also, this example is a little more confusing as it’s the magnet and iron pushing against each other that is balancing the magnetic field, and a third force due to friction that keeps the magnet from falling.
So as I say, it’s still one of Wladimir’s inventions (Aether) being used to explain the problem caused by another of his inventions (his claim that there is need for constant input of energy to keep forces from weakening with time), but there is no evidence of either of these being true. He pointed to some press releases, but while they all claim one or another method of producing energy in violation of known physics, they (1) don’t support Wladimir’s assertion that energy is constantly being lost through interactions and (2) are all things like press releases which are not considered meaninful primary sources of information.
Wladimir appears to have a pattern: misunderstand the definition of some concept (magnetic moment or energy or basic workings of quantum mechanics), make some entirely unsupported claim based on this lack of understanding, then claim that it proves QRT or Aether or whatever else he’s interested in must be correct. When it’s pointed out that his ‘problem’ just doesn’t exist and/or is fully and easily explained in modern physics, he generally moves to personal insults, random links to largely unrelated things, or most commonly, yet another made up problem. He quite obviously has not interest in even trying to learn any basic information about the theories he is criticizing, despite constantly asking about what they predict. So personally, I’ve given up trying to explain conventional physics him, although his claims do occasionally lead to interesting discussions like this one.
Wlad and Daniel,
I agree the magnet on a vertical iron plate, is an interesting example xample. I m an experimentalist however, and I want to show that the Energy needed to produce a permanent magnet is far less than the required energy to sustain the magnet ‘s mass on the iron plate vertically over a week . Wlad – would you have some preliminary calculations?
Mark
JR wrote in May 11th, 2014 at 12:28 PM
Daniel,
Maybe I missed some detail, but this seems to cover what he’s been saying.
——————————————-
COMMENT
Perhaps some of the details you missed, dear Mr. JR, are those ones:
BlackLight Power, Inc. Announces Sustained Production of Electricity
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3535&mode=&order=0&thold=0
Magna Coaster – solid state magnetic generator
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3514
Steorn ORBO Overunity Technology – FREE ENERGY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO1bOfIEqoI
Article: How magnet motors work
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_How_magnet_motors_work
I myself have replicated the Figueiredo Motor.
His motor does not use any sort of energy input. And the rotor of the motor gyrates, without any supply of energy.
regards
wlad
@JR,
Yes, I agree, in the case of my example, where a laptop is in rest on the table, the weight of the laptop deformes a little bit the molecular structure of the plate of the table, like a spring, untill the reaction force becomes equal to the action force (the weight of the laptop on the table). So yes, putting a laptop on the table causes a little deformation of the molecular structure of the plate, so that it bounces back like a spring, untill reaction force equals action force. So yes, I agree, in this case no energy (of the Aether) is involved. But what about a magnet? Does it loose its strength when it glues itself (by its magnetism) to a vertical metal wall? (The weight of the magnet tries to pull it down, but the magnetism of the magnet holds it in place, glued (by its magnetism) to the vertical metal wall). But in this case, could the magnet finally (after many years) loose its (magnetic) strength?
Daniel,
Actually, nothing about quantum mechanics or any aspect of conventional physics suggests that a table pushing back against gravity to keep something from falling requires any external energy. Nor does the earth orbiting the sun require energy to keep gravity from weakening, nor does an electron orbiting a proton require new energy to keep from having the attraction weaken with time, etc….
Wladimir simply made up the assertion that these things require energy (even though he started out by pointing out that no energy is expended). He then proposed that Aether exists and constantly supplies energy to everything to make up for the energy loss that he claims happens. He needs to do this, since no one has ever observed the loss of energy he claims exists, so the Aether has to put in exactly the amount of energy being lost to the mystery source of energy loss. At that point, his two inventions cancel each other out completely (at least in this regard), leaving absolutely no detectable sign that either one of them actually exists and restoring the exact same picture we have in traditional physics/quantum mechanics.
Seems like a pointless exercise to me. But having imagined that energy is constantly disappearing (into nothing, apparently) and being replaced with new energy from the Aether, one wonders where the Aether gets it’s supply of limitless energy. But I guess if you’re not conserving energy in the first place, one can give just about any answer and it’s as good as anything else.
Maybe I missed some detail, but this seems to cover what he’s been saying. Maybe his new paper will answer some of these questions (although again, I don’t really see the point of trying to do so, since I don’t see the slightest indication that any of this has any sort of basis in fact or reality).
In fact, the discussion between Wlad and Mark is an interesting one, because, according to classical mechanics, when, for instance, your laptop is resting on the table, no work is done, and no energy is exchanged (as long as you don’t move the laptop, there is no displacement, and thus no work according to classical mechanics). But according to QM or QRT, even when you don’t move the laptop, energy is exchanged (by the aether), to maintain the reaction force that holds the laptop so that is doesn’t dissapear through the table, isn’t it? 😉 (As engineers, we’re not used thinking like that, but I do agree that, at quantum level, something must happen, otherwise the table could not maintain it’s reaction force while compensating for the (weight) of the laptop that pressures on the structure of the table…)
Mark wrote in May 9th, 2014 at 9:44 AM
Wlad,
So you are suggesting, if you have two hydrogen atoms in a form of a hydrogen molecule by covalent bonding, they will need the heat from the surround environment to sustain the bond.
———————————–
No,
I am suggesting that if you have two hydrogen atoms in a form of hydrogen molecule, and you stop to supply energy to it, it will arrive to the zero grau Kelvin, and the molecule will collapse.
However, as there is no zero grau Kelvin in the universe, it means that the aether will supply energy to the molecule, and that’s why it does not collapse.
regards
wlad
Wlad,
So you are suggesting, if you have two hydrogen atoms in a form of a hydrogen molecule by covalent bonding, they will need the heat from the surround environment to sustain the bond. And if you isolate the hydrogen molecule from the surround heat (or the magnet and the iron plate in your point 2 above), eventually they will lose the bonding by running out of internal energy? Does it mean if you super cool a hydrogen molecule, you should get 2 mono atomic hydrogen atoms? Has this been observed in the lab? its experimentally feasible to verify your theory.
Mark
Mark wrote in May 8th, 2014 at 3:43 PM
Wlad
The bonding between molecules or atoms, do they also require energy?
————————————–
Mark,
molecules of atoms get heat from the enviroment, so that to continue working.
The question regarding to the magnet is the following:
1- in the case we put the magnet and the refrigerator within a vessel which do not receive heat from the enviroment, the magnet will not have heat energy supply.
2- as there is need energy so that to avoid the magnet to fall down, such energy must be supplied by the internal energy of the magnet (the energy of its magnetic field).
3- Suppose you put an horizontal wood bar touching the center of the magnet and the other end the wood bar is fixed to a vertical wall in front to the refrigerator. So, the wood bar avoids the magnet to gyrate under the action of the moment M (explained for Mr. JR), and so there is no need to use the horizontal magnetic force of the magnet so that to avoid it to gyrate. However, the wood bar is compressed, and it needs the bond of molecules of the wood so that to avoid the magnet to gyrate. But as the wood does not receive heat from the enviroment, it will use the internal energy of the molecules so that to avoid the magnet to gyrate. So, the wood bar will be wasting energy, and after a long time it will not have energy for the bond of its molecules.
regards
wlad
Steven N. Karels wrote in May 8th, 2014 at 2:18 PM
Since gravity and magnetism have existed for a long time, should not the mass of the universe be therefore decreasing or have gone to zero?
———————————
The mass of stars is decreasing by changing to energy according to E= mc²
regards
JR wrote in May 8th, 2014 at 7:35 AM
Rather than having a frame which is intrinsically unstable, couldn’t that frame be in the form of a table? Are you claiming that a table requires a gasoline motor to avoid collapsing after holding things up for an extended period??
——————————————————
Dear JR
your argument is unacceptable.
In the case of the table, the vector force of gravity passing by the center of gravity of the magnet and the vector reaction of the table are in the same line, and therefore they cancell one each other.
In the case of the magnet fixed in the iron plate of the refrigerator, the vector friction force is situated in the vertical iron plate, while the vector force of gravity passes by the center of gravity of the magnet.
Thefore, there is a moment M = mg.d , where “m” is the mass of the magnet, g = 9,8m/s² , and
“d” is the distance between the center of gravity of the magnet and the surface of the iron plate.
As you may realize, there is a moment M trying to gyrate the magnet.
The force which avoids the magnet to gyrate is the horizontal magnetic force applied by the magnet.
regards
wlad
DTravchenko:
Mats Lewan is a scientific journalist: he made his job.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Wlad
The bonding between molecules or atoms, do they also require energy?
Mark
Wladimir,
I asked “Cannot the same argument you poser to JR also be applied to gravity. Does gravity, in its existence, consume energy or mass?”
And you responded “yes”
Since gravity and magnetism have existed for a long time, should not the mass of the universe be therefore decreasing or have gone to zero?