Notices
Results 1 to 18 of 18
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By AlexG
  • 1 Post By SpeedFreek

Thread: Is Current Electricity Theory Wrong?

  1. #1 Is Current Electricity Theory Wrong? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    Is Current Electricity Theory Wrong?

    And/Or

    Could Free Energy be Real?

    With Possible Explanation/(s)

    A steel fork does not make spark when touch either side of abattery.

    Connecting either side of a battery to a steel fork via wiredoes not make sparks.

    Sparksoccur when circuit stops being fully complete with enough voltage (about 2.7volts) (2 AA NIMH).

    (untested) Capacitor charges (only when circuit is nearcomplete separated only by the gap between the plates)

    Battery-provided electricity lights up an LED through acapacitor (all components in the same series circuit).

    Battery doesn’t repel orattract steel silverware.

    Battery voltage decreasesover time with use (not new).

    Battery-created electrical energy can go through a capacitorto light up an LED to the same brightness as when the capacitor isn’t in thecircuit at all.

    Nickel-Metal Hydride battery self-recharges for a minute ofuse whenever it run out.

    Multimeter results/measurements appear to defy entropy bygoing up. Putting the multimeter test lead wires next to each other seems tocause increase as well.

    A battery terminal connected to a spoon-sized piece of metalcreates an AC voltage of around 80-200 millivolts.

    Still ceramic magnet touched by leadsto a multimeter heavily affects the voltage up to 200 or more millivolts eitherdirection.

    Electric fan voltage defies Newton’s Third Law by only going down to 2.3Vfrom 2.7V.

    Parallel circuit LED brightness defies explanation, staysthe same even with at least 9 resistors all in their own circuits parallel toLED.

    A hand-crank-generator-flashlight I unscrewed ran an LED inparallel with 8 resistors or so and a capacitor as easily as just the LED. TheLED didn't seem dimmer as far as I remember.

    (The last observation was not included in any manuscripts.)

    Opinions and Possible Explanations

    It would seem that rather than just electrons moving, some unknown“force” or “fluid” drags electrons, and the “fluid” can go right through theinsulation on capacitors.

    Then perhaps capacitors, batteries, and maybe even magnets,can create energy by charging and discharging.

    In today's science, there is this "Law of Conservationof Energy". And all motion is supposedly kinetic energy and comes frompotential energy.
    But I noticed one day that in Newton's three laws of motion, motion iscreated not by energy or potential energy, but by an "unbalancedforce".

    And I remember that fridge magnets can give off"endless" force apparently without any electrical energy input.

    So, wouldn't it be theoretically be possible to break the"Law of Conservation of Energy" using this "force-energygap"?

    Maybe it's possible, withcapacitors/solenoids/electromagnets/batteries to get more energy out of outputforce plus waste energy than total energy put in.

    Then:

    Work (energy) is FD∙cos(ө)

    But, if a machine can move magnets and/or coils by changingthe force without moving a magnet or a coil, by, say, changing polarity like amotor, or turning on and then off repeatedly, then maybe it can do work withoutusing work, or by using very little work (only enough to move electrons a smalldistance).

    And perhaps all motors create energy, just by beingpulse/polarity-dependent devices.

    Notes

    I tried to send this to 7 peer-reviewed journals, but theyall rejected it eventually.

    I’m starting to wonder, then, whether peer-reviewed journalsare really as good and important of a news source as scientists and otherpeople seem to think they are.

    More

    I have a digital multimeter that I am usingwith a battery. First, I tried to run the battery out of as much voltage/energyas I could. My multimeter said about 12mv or 6 mv. The battery's voltagewouldn't seem to hit and stay at zero.
    I then took it out of all circuits it was connected to. Then I let it sit therefor several days. for the first day or 2, It only went up to about .1V andseemed to be staying more or less around there, consistent with what I wouldexpect of a capacitor effect.

    But then on day 5 and 6, I checked the battery, and it said .895V and was at1775 or so microvolts.
    I then tried to run that out of amps and on the next day it was right backthere at .893-.892V."


    Suggestions


    I created a solenoid coil of about 85 turns ( a normal coilthat would move toward or away from a magnet when on and under enough amps). Itested it, and it ran the same amperage when running far away from a magnet(about a foot away) as when running right next to it.
    The solenoid used only 1 ohm while the LED I had used about200 kohm.
    Also. I learned in DC electrics class, if I am rememberingcorrectly, that magnetic force of a wire/solenoid is dependant on amps andturns of wire, not volts or power.
    So I could presumably run AC current through a transformerand maybe or maybe not a diode to get equal force out of less power.
    Although the LED I was using seemed to limit amps andprevented the solenoid from working, maybe more amps or power than the 4batteries I had could force the solenoid to work. Maybe not.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Windevoid View Post
    Could Free Energy be Real?
    Build it, sell it; get rich. Stop bothering everyone until you do so.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    Well you can't get rich on this because no one believes you when you say you can do it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    If you actually DID it, they wouldn't have any choice, would they?

    No one believes claims that have no supportive evidence.

    Saying you can do it without doing it is worthless.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    I tried to send this to 7 peer-reviewed journals, but theyall rejected it eventually.

    I’m starting to wonder, then, whether peer-reviewed journalsare really as good and important of a news source as scientists and otherpeople seem to think they are.
    Or perhaps this is just a mish-mash of nonsense.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    "7 establishments that understand theory told me I am incorrect. This proves that they are wrong (somehow.)"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Brilliant. That is the funniest thing I have read in a long time. Love it.

    My favourite line:
    I tried to send this to 7 peer-reviewed journals, but theyall rejected it eventually.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    I wouldn't call it out just yet. My LED has been running 9 complete days on 2 AA rechargeable batteries.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by Windevoid View Post
    I wouldn't call it out just yet. My LED has been running 9 complete days on 2 AA rechargeable batteries.
    Sounds reasonable. Depending on the capacity of the batteries (and the LED current) you could get twice that quite easily. Maybe more.

    You probably need to go and learn a little basic physics and electrical theory before going much further. Even the sort of thing they teach at school would get you quite a long way.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Relaxation phenomenon or recovery effect is caused by the concentration gradient of active materials in the electrode and electrolyte formed in the discharge process. Driven by the concentration gradient, the active material at the electrolyte-electrode interface, which is consumed by the electrochemical reactions during discharge, is replenished with new active material through diffusion. Thus the battery capacity is somewhat recovered during a no-use state.
    Power Aware Design Methodologies - Google Books
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    Thank you Harold14370, although the snippet itself was pretty complicated and I never learned that in school. But then again, I guess they don't teach about batteries much or at all in school, it's just a side note there, at least in my High School.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Windevoid View Post
    Notes

    I tried to send this to 7 peer-reviewed journals, but theyall rejected it eventually.

    I’m starting to wonder, then, whether peer-reviewed journalsare really as good and important of a news source as scientists and otherpeople seem to think they are.

    Which 7 peer-reviewed journals?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    Oh it was Sage publications magazines, and the American Physical Society Physical review magazines. That's all I remember for now, after getting 7 different rejections.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    In this universe, we obey the laws of thermodynamics.

    PhDemon likes this.
    "Ok, brain let's get things straight. You don't like me, and I don't like you, so let's do this so I can go back to killing you with beer." - Homer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    11
    Or the universe doesn't obey the law of thermodynamics and the magnitude of the Lenz Law is a seventh or less of what it should be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Thank you Harold14370, although the snippet itself was pretty complicated and I never learned that in school.
    Perhaps you should at least finish High School, maybe take a physics class somewhere, learn a little before you try new hypothesis.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Windevoid View Post
    Or the universe doesn't obey the law of thermodynamics and the magnitude of the Lenz Law is a seventh or less of what it should be.
    I suggest you go back to high school and learn the science first. You are making yourself look foolish by challenging the laws of thermodynamics before you really understand them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Windevoid View Post
    Or the universe doesn't obey the law of thermodynamics and the magnitude of the Lenz Law is a seventh or less of what it should be.
    yes! Perhaps all scientists are just idiots and you're the sole beacon of intellect in a dark sea of idiocy.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Basic electrical current theory trouble
    By bobby_wales in forum Physics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 27th, 2012, 12:48 PM
  2. Can Electricity and Water substitute current fuel for airplanes?
    By icewendigo in forum Mechanical, Structural and Chemical Engineering
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: March 20th, 2012, 10:25 AM
  3. What is the current general consensus on brain theory?
    By 2ndRebelution in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: December 23rd, 2011, 03:53 AM
  4. Can modern biochemistry falsify current Evo theory?
    By cypress in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: September 24th, 2009, 02:13 AM
  5. Current theories about magnetism are wrong
    By Rob in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: April 1st, 2009, 03:40 PM
Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

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