kernelpenguin said:
Anyway, it's a fun read and although a large part of it seems to be bull, it made me think about a few things. So if anyone feels like pointing out his flaws, that'd be nice :)
Oh and he said he has calculated the universal constants using his theory :)
from the website
two ideas both have the same fundamental flaw
Q: How can a fridge magnet cling against gravity
endlessly without draining a power source?
A: It can't ... fridge magnets are impossible according to
today's science. As we all know, it takes tremendous energy
to cling to the side of a cliff, supporting our own weight against
gravity, and before long we would tire and fall. Yet a fridge
magnet is not glued to the fridge -- it is held by magnetic
energy. And, as both our science and our common sense tell
us, such an expenditure of energy requires that a power source
be drawn upon to support this effort. Yet, a permanent magnet
not only maintains its strength indefinitely (no theory or text-
book shows the power drain characteristics of a permanent
magnet as it holds itself or other objects against gravity), but
there isn't even a power source in sight! Endless magnetic
energy apparently emanates from permanent magnets without
any explanation in our science. The only explanation that any
physicist will give for this mystery is that there is no mystery at
all since the magnet isn't moving, which gives a zero result if
you plug this into the Work Function.
edit: same goes for this
Q: How do heavy objects rest on a table without
its molecules giving way, collapsing the table?
A: Science has no viable explanation for this today. This
mystery is similar to the mystery of the fridge magnet. Atomic
bonds are said to result from electromagnetic energy attracting
and holding atoms together. Yet, there is no denying that
tremendous ongoing energy expenditure is required to hold the
structure of a table together under the weight of a heavy
object. Where does this energy come from? How quickly does
this subatomic power source drain as it expends all this
energy? Today's science has no explanation for this everyday
occurrence, so such questions are never discussed.
.
the creation of potential energy results in a single stored energy value that is relative to the 'resting state' of the system involved
this store degrades and energy is lost over time..
permanent magnets do lose there zip... thermodynamics and all that
the notion that energy is being continually created in some flow is a infinity... as the interval of creation is infinitesimal.. ie the energy is recreated every moment.. which means that an infinite amount of energy is created at any potential level..
if you claim that the potential remains constant because it is lost as it gains ie the object only retains PE by virtue of a flow then where does the energy go?
it would have to radiate it out somehow.. since this is a infinite flow all our energy requirements could be solved by placing something on a shelf and using the radiation coming of it to drive a turbine or something..
this is clearly bonkers..
so to resolve it we have this notion stuff is expanding... well that doesn't help as the energy of the collisions caused by this needs to be created as well by some unknown force never mind resolving how the rest of reality compensates for such a state of affairs... or even more perplexing if the nature of space and light etc etc expanded reciprocally it would negate the effect anyway...
the mistake is thinking that potential energy is being re-newed...
well its not its being lost..
work done in a energy field will create a potential energy that is degraded..
NOTE
the deceleration of the Earth's rotation is a transfer of energy to the moon so the energy loss is outward into the moon from the earth. the moon is spiraling out. gaining potential energy
the potential energy stored in a spring system or elastic will degrade... elastic after a while becomes inelastic... springs lose there springiness etc etc etc
the fridge magnetic will fall off the fridge if you wait long enough
ENERGY IS BEING LOST
this is why our arms tire because the bio mechanical "rest state" is piss poor compared to a shelf so the energy is lost quicker AND stress energies in our arm that make it a tool of flexibility come into play
a bow and arrow held by a arm is not efficient compared with storing the energy in a crossbow..
in classic mechanics we do not think of the crossbow re-newing the energy store moment to moment... the crossbow does not radiate energy if we store energy in it only to be re-newed the next moment by magic energy coming out of the bow/bowstring...
these people want to plunge us into the dark ages
the idea of circular motion requiring 'power" is a complete lack of basic understanding...
energy in a revolving system will continually to be there until it is degraded...friction etc... if we accept circular systems of rotation require a through put of energy the way our universe would work is truly bizarre
insisting that circular/wheel motion requires continuous power... such as orbits... is a failure to understand physics that is learned between the ages of 11 and 15 in most western societies.
the implication of such fundamental ignorance is startling and does not only demonstrate alack of knowledge but a lazy intellectualism that can not be bothered to think things through before
committing them to publication under the pretense of "authority" for monertary gain
one may be forgiven for thinking that a energy flow is required to 'power' a orbit or circular motion if one was thinking about the issue from some position of ignorance... ie a human of limited knowledge.. but to then insist this was the truth of some paradox in current physics without trying to inform one self of the facts is a appalling crime..
even a human of moderate intelligence with no real understanding of physics should be able to deduce that circular motion does not necessitate continually energy inputs from everyday experience...
for instance if one pedals a bicycle and stops pedaling a universe that worked with this "energy flow" concept should require that the bike comes to an
immediate infinite G(!) stop as no energy is being added to the system...
this is not the case as the bike rolls on for a while before stopping...
this is because the energy put into the system is lost though friction not some concept of renewal.. lot less friction in space compared to a bike wheel.. hmmm says average not well educated bloke let me think on that
citing orbital mechanics as an example of "physics is broke" because of this renewal concept is just so stupid it beggars belief
I wonder if the disseminators of this sort of rubbish may get sued for damaging peoples education and fraud thru the use of bogus credentials?
0/10 go straight to jail do not collect £200
Boris
london
He has best crackpot format I ever seen
