I have become quite interested in the BEC theory, which raises a vast amount of questions.
While studying it, I noticed something. While it costs $50,000 to do originally, surely that technology will be able to be reproduced on the market eventually (I mean a long time, perhaps after we've retired). If that is possible, surely there's another alternative power source.
Considering shining a laser at the right frequency at an atom will cool it (slowing it down), and the energy will be converted to light, surely eventually they will have a laser power station, where they near supercool atoms on a large scale, converting the energy wherever necessary.
Reason I ask this is, surely an energy source that has no inputs or outputs is where the future will head at some point. Remember all those sci-fi's that talk of absorbing ambient energy, surely this is it?
Trouble is, I'm not very good in this field, is there enough energy in a particle like that to collect any sizable amounts of light energy (considering you'd be cooling it by 200 C)? Is my following novice calculation wrong?
shc(air)=1KJ/kg
energy=shc(air)*200C*1kg
energy=200000 per kg of air used.
What is the best material to absorb energy from though? Nitrogen? I am aware that you couldn't do it with (most of) air, it was an example.