Page 1 of 1

The future of energy?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:59 am
by thelordharry
Maybe this device will power the impulse reactors of the future:

http://youtu.be/lSiShiu9Sgs

Just can't make up my mind if it belongs on a comedy show (i.e a hoax) or not!

Re: The future of energy?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 1:51 pm
by Graham Kennedy
There's a thousand inventors around with machines like this, all of them needing just a small contribution from your credit card so they can "perfect" their device and market it. Somehow that part never happens.

Re: The future of energy?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:15 pm
by SolkaTruesilver
Right. Off course, the designer was offered large amount of money for his invention by the oil industry, blablabla, and when he refused they managed have him commited to a psychiatric ward.

Right, this doesn't ring my crazy theorist alarm bell...


By the way, the way I see it, the shimanagan presented there is an energy converter, from potential chemical energy of fuel toward mechanical energy. It's an energy CONVERTER, not an energy SOURCE.

Energy sources are fuel to burn, solar to capt, wind to harness, uranium to split. The future of energy generation is no doubt space-based solar collection.


Finally, do anyone seriously think that any company wouldn't jump at the opportunity to corner the engine industry if given the possibility to genuinely acquire such "capacitor" to adapt them to... Well, any oil- or fuel-based machinery in the FREAKING WORLD. Oil-related profits would turn out to be pocket change if they acquires such technological advantage.

Re: The future of energy?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:03 pm
by Griffin
SolkaTruesilver wrote:
By the way, the way I see it, the shimanagan presented there is an energy converter, from potential chemical energy of fuel toward mechanical energy. It's an energy CONVERTER, not an energy SOURCE.
Isn't any energy source just a conversion of energy since energy can not be created, only converted.

Re: The future of energy?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:35 pm
by SolkaTruesilver
Yea and no. If yo wan to be entirely pedantic abou the issue, then yes. But the point I was making is that the energy intake of the engine displayed there was the same as before. The only thing this gizmo is meant to achieve is a more efficient energy conversion rate.

It would have been an alternative energy source if he had changed the energy source to electricity, compressed air, manure, fusion reactor.. But he hasn't. He still uses fuel, so the core energy source is te same, he only claims to harness it more efficiently. Kinda like what Watt did to steampower.