How can novice scientific enthusiast get ideas disscussed?

[Salah Saad]

Hi everybody

I am a scientific enthusiast with great interest in the renewable energy field. and I had this idea in my head for so many years which i got from a scientific experiment I saw a few years ago.

After few years of grappling with this idea in my head I was able to put it into a theoretically working concept that needs to be discussed by experts in at least three fields of physics (Microwave and RF-Mulecular Hydro Physics-Renewable Energy-Gravity Physics).

I keep sending emails and messages to scientific institutes but most of them do not reply or gracefully apologize due to funding or policy issues.or that they do not get my idea because of it is outside the scope of their work.

My main question now is how could a novice scientific enthusiast like myself who lacks academic resources and background get my idea into a discussion only to prove its Pros and Cons. Without getting into funding and other issues ?

With thanks

Salah Saad

 

[phyzguy]

You could try reading this FAQ entry:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/wont-look-new-theory/

 

[berkeman]

Hi everybody

I am a scientific enthusiast with great interest in the renewable energy field. and I had this idea in my head for so many years which i got from a scientific experiment I saw a few years ago.

After few years of grappling with this idea in my head I was able to put it into a theoretically working concept that needs to be discussed by experts in at least three fields of physics (Microwave and RF-Mulecular Hydro Physics-Renewable Energy-Gravity Physics).

I keep sending emails and messages to scientific institutes but most of them do not reply or gracefully apologize due to funding or policy issues.or that they do not get my idea because of it is outside the scope of their work.

My main question now is how could a novice scientific enthusiast like myself who lacks academic resources and background get my idea into a discussion only to prove its Pros and Cons. Without getting into funding and other issues !

With thanks

Salah Saad

Welcome to the PF.

The best thing you can do is contact a consulting engineer/scientist and pay for a few hours of consulting work. Be sure that the consulting contract includes a clause that preserves your patent rights and intellectual property rights, and makes the consultant keep the information secret. You will pay a few hundred dollars for the consulting, and it should be well worth it (whether your idea can work or not). Best of luck

 

[Salah Saad]

Welcome to the PF.

The best thing you can do is contact a consulting engineer/scientist and pay for a few hours of consulting work. Be sure that the consulting contract includes a clause that preserves your patent rights and intellectual property rights, and makes the consultant keep the information secret. You will pay a few hundred dollars for the consulting, and it should be well worth it (whether your idea can work or not). Best of luck

I would like to thank everybody for the quick and insightful response.and I am hopping that you could have any idea of any consulting facility that can encompass the fields of (Microwave and RF-Molecular Hydro Physics-Renewable Energy-Gravity Physics) in one place where I have failed to find such facility because my technique needs all of them combined.

With thanks

Salah Saad

 

[berkeman]

have any idea of any consulting facility

What country are you in? What State or Province? It is best if it is a consultant local to you.

BTW, for the initial consultation, a general physicist or EE would probably do just fine. Especially if you are missing something fundamental (like you are trying to create a over-unity energy generator).

 

[Salah Saad]

I live in Kuwait and I have tried to reach local institutes to start debating my idea but with no luck. all the replies were regarding funding and mostly bureaucratic processes.

My idea is a technique that could use Earth's magnetic field on a molecular level by using microwaves inducted by a conventional magnetron into isolated water core.

I believe i have all the fundamentals covered in theory but I am missing a lot of math and real lab work which i do not want to get into before discussing the controversy in my idea which goes something like this.

Microwaves used in conventional microwave ovens give very good thermal gain because of the effect it has on water molecules in food.but if we eliminate that food fro the process and use ultra purified water then we could gain a thermal gain surplus through what I choose to call the Slicer Effect.

The Slicer Effect: is a term I would like to use to describe the effect the earth’s gravitational field has on a water molecule when HIT by a microwave.

The slicer effect mainly describes the ability to use the Earth gravitational filed in this process to gain more energy through molecular friction of water molecules.

So for example let me say that I use 1 watt of electricity to generate microwaves that will reverse the polarity of 100 water molecules then Earth gravitational field will have an equal and opposite effect that will cause more friction which will give me 1 watt back in thermal energy, adding that to the thermal gain I had from the original 1 watt I would have doubled my induced power, That is in theory only

I am sorry for the long post but I really wanted to describe my technique to you so that you can help me in finding the right approach to discussing it.

With thanks

Salah Saad

 

[micromass]

What's your background in science and engineering?

What scientific papers on renewable energy have you read? What papers motivated you to do your work?

 

[Salah Saad]

What's your background in science and engineering?

What scientific papers on renewable energy have you read? What papers motivated you to do your work?

I am an Information Technology Engineer for that past 20 years which gave me an advantage in the scientific field because I have been online since the early days of the internet which gave me access to so many resources and articles.

I mostly read anything in the theoretical science and I really get attracted to any renewable energy research but math is my biggest problem where I am very bad in all aspects of it.

 

[micromass]

I am an Information Technology Engineer for that past 20 years which gave me an advantage in the scientific field because I have been online since the early days of the internet which gave me access to so many resources and articles.

I mostly read anything in the theoretical science and I really get attracted to any renewable energy research but math is my biggest problem where I am very bad in all aspects of it.

Can you name me some of the journals you regularly read on renewable resources?

 

[Salah Saad]

Can you name me some of the journals you regularly read on renewable resources?

I really do not follow any specific journals but I get my information from mixed sources such as documentaries since i was a kid and internet sources such as search engines,Scientific websites and news feeds.

 

[micromass]

I really do not follow any specific journals but I get my information from mixed sources such as documentaries since i was a kid and internet sources such as search engines,Scientific websites and news feeds.

OK, so you clearly don't read the scientific literature. It's in scientific literature like journals and papers that science is discussed. Science is a conversation between scientists, and published papers are one of the most important forms of communication. Since you don't read the scientific literature, you basically ignore whatever scientists have to say. Why then should scientists have to listen to your ideas?

Science is a two-way street. If you are unwilling to learn to read and investigate the different journals and papers, then you won't find anybody willing to listen to your idea.

 

[Salah Saad]

OK, so you clearly don't read the scientific literature. It's in scientific literature like journals and papers that science is discussed. Science is a conversation between scientists, and published papers are one of the most important forms of communication. Since you don't read the scientific literature, you basically ignore whatever scientists have to say. Why then should scientists have to listen to your ideas?

Science is a two-way street. If you are unwilling to learn to read and investigate the different journals and papers, then you won't find anybody willing to listen to your idea.

I really understand your point and it is taken that in order to achieve success in the scientific comunity then certain steps have to be taken,but as I have stated in my original post

My main question now is how could a novice scientific enthusiast like myself who lacks academic resources and background get my idea into a discussion only to prove its Pros and Cons. Without getting into funding and other issues ?

I understand that the process of publishing and peer-review guarantees results to be academically thorough but simple people like me do not have the academic background nor the resources to implement them.

So We go back to square one with my question. Is there a way to get y idea discussed with its primitive layout in order to at least discredit it or find its merits.

 

[berkeman]

Thread closed for a bit for Moderation...

 

[berkeman]

So We go back to square one with my question. Is there a way to get y idea discussed with its primitive layout in order to at least discredit it or find its merits.

Please hire a local engineering consultant for a couple of hours to explain in detail to you why your idea will not work. Then please try to keep on learning physics and engineering to work toward more productive ideas. It is great that you are so motivated to learn and contribute in science -- we encourage that. But we do not allow debunking discussions about why impossible mechanisms cannot work.

The thread will stay closed at this point.

From the PF rules Forbidden Topics post (kind of ironically)...

Pseudoscience, such as (but not limited to):
Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions
http://wiki.4hv.org/index.php/Free_Energy_Debunking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion
http://www.skepdic.com/freeenergy.html
http://www.skepdic.com/perpetual.html