I want to know every one's take on New Energy devices such as Zero point energy, hydrogen, and heat energy. Does the government and oil companies surpress these technologies? I sure think so what does every one else think
It was my understanding that the principle that predicts the existence of ZPE (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle) also says it is not harnessable. Harnessing it would change the quantity of energy in the universe and eliminate uncertainty.Originally posted by FZ+
BTW, ZPE is still in theoretical stages, whether useful work can be done is debatable. Hardly a "technology".
Einstein did not believe in modern Quantum Mechanics. Newton believe in alchemy. Aristotle believed that the rate of falling is porportional to mass. Each did great work. An argument of personalities is never valid. And I don't see why people would reject any such science, if they were valid. Science changes. The nature of science is that it changes.I would never tell them they are false because Nikola developed a lot of things that we use now and also showed edison that he was wrong about AC electricity.
Have you ever heard of Alaska?Originally posted by Rebel
... there is no place on earth that can exhibit pure zero degrees celsius
Many people call these zero degree celsius atoms ice.Originally posted by Rebel
... we have to find a way to convert heat into energy and give off pure zero degrees celsuis atoms
Thermodynamics is pretty well explored, and you're the first part is false we cannot have 100% effeciency.Originally posted by Rebel
...if the device is to work as 100% efficient. But heat it seems to me is unexplored.
Forget those Hawking books; if you're just starting out, here are the names you really need:Originally posted by Rebel
Ive only been studying physics for about year started by reading Stephen Hawking books so no i dont know what that law is i will look into it thanks.
Kelvin is the absolute temperature scale. Zero Kelvin is the lowest temperature possible, all though we can never really get there, though we can approach it very closesly (I believe the current record is somewhere around 10-6 K). The Kelvin temperature scale and the celsius temperature scale change in the same increments (i.e. if the temp changes 1 Kelvin it also changes 1 degree celsius). However the celsius scale is "set higher." 0 Kelvin is about -273.15 C. Kelvin is the temperature used in the SI system.Originally posted by Rebel
Why you guys dont like Stephen Hawking?
What is the measurement of kelvin?
Is that metric or standard?
Hawking's goal is what you fault him for - simplifying the science to make it digestable by the masses - and its an admirable one. I think its pretentious to dismiss him based on his simplicity (and maybe a little arrogant).Originally posted by climbhi
As to why we don't like Hawking, its cause he oversimplifies science to get people to buy his books and make him famous. Way way too many people go out and read the Hawking best seller and think that afterwards they are the worlds physics-uber-genious despite the fact that, millions of others read it too, they have no formal exposure to physics or math and, don't even have a high school understanding of classical physics. Then they come here and float all sorts of pretentious crap based on what they read out of Hawking and are convinced they are right even though what they're arguing about is completely absurd. That's why most people don't like him.
I didn't mean to fault him personally, yes its great that he gets people interested in science, what I was trying to get at is that somehow after people read the books they're left with this notion that they are incredibly brilliant at physics now becuase they read his book. I think this might be partially his fault (perhaps not making it obvious enough that "okay i'm giving it to you at baby food level") and mostly the readers fault. But anyway...Originally posted by russ_watters
Hawking's goal is what you fault him for - simplifying the science to make it digestable by the masses - and its an admirable one. I think its pretentious to dismiss him based on his simplicity (and maybe a little arrogant).