Free Energy  searching for free energy and discussing free energy
New theories about free energy systems => The theory of energy streams => Topic started by: tinman on January 03, 2015, 04:08:31 AM

In order to achieve a free energy system,we first must know and understand what parts and laws of physics are fact/theory and fiction.
What you have to remember and think about,is the fact that phyisics is based around mostly theories that were given to us from people over 100 years agoand beyond. This is old,and needs to be torn apart to see what is true,and what is not. We need to find hole's in physics,so as we can increase our chances of finding a system/device that can indeed give us(what we know as)an OU machine. There are these(so called)laws of physics that are really nothing more than theories with variables. These variables are added into theories that dont always quite add upjust so as they look good on paper.
So time to find the holes in science and physics. MarkEi hope you will be our physics/science guru here,as you seem to fit the bill quite well.
The first thing we need to look at is light,and the photon. The increase and decrease of the mass of particals as they approach light speed. Dose the photon even have mass.
Then onto the !so called! fact that any current passed through a conductive element produces a magnetic field around that conductive element.
@ MarkEanyone else also welcome to make an oppening statement.
Could you please start us of,and tell us how the photon is related to light,and what is it's function. At what speed dose it travel,and dose it have mass,both at rest state and when in motion.

In order to achieve a free energy system,we first must know and understand what parts and laws of physics are fact/theory and fiction.
What you have to remember and think about,is the fact that phyisics is based around mostly theories that were given to us from people over 100 years agoand beyond. This is old,and needs to be torn apart to see what is true,and what is not. We need to find hole's in physics,so as we can increase our chances of finding a system/device that can indeed give us(what we know as)an OU machine. There are these(so called)laws of physics that are really nothing more than theories with variables. These variables are added into theories that dont always quite add upjust so as they look good on paper.
So time to find the holes in science and physics. MarkEi hope you will be our physics/science guru here,as you seem to fit the bill quite well.
The first thing we need to look at is light,and the photon. The increase and decrease of the mass of particals as they approach light speed. Dose the photon even have mass.
Then onto the !so called! fact that any current passed through a conductive element produces a magnetic field around that conductive element.
@ MarkEanyone else also welcome to make an oppening statement.
Could you please start us of,and tell us how the photon is related to light,and what is it's function. At what speed dose it travel,and dose it have mass,both at rest state and when in motion.
Photons may have very small masses or zero mass. Which of the two that it is is not resolved. In order to posess finite energy and for our ideas about special relativity to also be true they cannot: travel at the exact speed of light, have greater than zero mass, and posess only finite energy. For most situations, we treat them as having zero rest mass and traveling at the exact speed of light.

Photons may have very small masses or zero mass. Which of the two that it is is not resolved. In order to posess finite energy and for our ideas about special relativity to also be true they cannot: travel at the exact speed of light, have greater than zero mass, and posess only finite energy. For most situations, we treat them as having zero rest mass and traveling at the exact speed of light.
So which is true Mark,special relativity,or they have zero rest mass,and travel at the speed of light?. It would seem by your answer that special relativity may not apply to all that has mass.
A quote from a page you recomended to answer a question on another thread.
Quote; It is almost certainly impossible to do any experiment that would establish the photon rest mass to be exactly zero.
So we would have to agree that we just dont know the answer. This brings the questionif we dont know wether or not a photon has rest mass,and !Quote: traveling at the exact speed of light,then we cannot say for sure that an infinite amount of energy is required to accelerate that mass to light speed. We can also say that we dont know if that mass will increase to an infinite amount of mass at or near light speed.
If i have a 6kg bowling ball in space,and apply a continual unidirectional force of say 1kg to that bowling ball,then will that bowling ball reach the speed of light eventually without any additional force being required?. We are asuming that the bowling ball will not be hindered by any other force or mass,and is in the vacuum of space continuously.
Will that same bowling ball increase in mass as it gets closer to the speed of light?.

So which is true Mark,special relativity,or they have zero rest mass,and travel at the speed of light?. It would seem by your answer that special relativity may not apply to all that has mass.
A quote from a page you recomended to answer a question on another thread.
Quote; It is almost certainly impossible to do any experiment that would establish the photon rest mass to be exactly zero.
So we would have to agree that we just dont know the answer. This brings the questionif we dont know wether or not a photon has rest mass,and !Quote: traveling at the exact speed of light,then we cannot say for sure that an infinite amount of energy is required to accelerate that mass to light speed. We can also say that we dont know if that mass will increase to an infinite amount of mass at or near light speed.
If i have a 6kg bowling ball in space,and apply a continual unidirectional force of say 1kg to that bowling ball,then will that bowling ball reach the speed of light eventually without any additional force being required?. We are asuming that the bowling ball will not be hindered by any other force or mass,and is in the vacuum of space continuously.
Will that same bowling ball increase in mass as it gets closer to the speed of light?.
According to Einstein it will. Why this is...I do not know.
Referencing my question on the other topic about photons... what I think might be happening is that a photon actually has mass...at rest. (can't really measure) As it accelerates up to the speed of light, or near it...it trades its mass for energy and therefore gives off light? Then, the reason my light beam from my simple flashlight only goes so far is because I only added enough energy to create only a few photons and...they burned up this energy going X distance?
I, for one, do not like the terms that refer to a photon at rest...we can't really measure its mass at rest. Maybe then, at rest, it is not really a photon? Maybe it only becomes what we know as a photon when it has energy added to it such that is accelerates to light/near light speed? (and emits light)
Hard to believe that all of this very complicated physics takes place when I turn on my flashlight. (Not even a JT flashlight)
This is the reason I brought this up at the other topic as...there seems to be some inconsistencies concerning the "simple" photon as it was taught to me in various courses.
Bill
PS Good topic Tinman.

According to Einstein it will. Why this is...I do not know.
Referencing my question on the other topic about photons... what I think might be happening is that a photon actually has mass...at rest. (can't really measure) As it accelerates up to the speed of light, or near it...it trades its mass for energy and therefore gives off light? Then, the reason my light beam from my simple flashlight only goes so far is because I only added enough energy to create only a few photons and...they burned up this energy going X distance?
I, for one, do not like the terms that refer to a photon at rest...we can't really measure its mass at rest. Maybe then, at rest, it is not really a photon? Maybe it only becomes what we know as a photon when it has energy added to it such that is accelerates to light/near light speed? (and emits light)
Hard to believe that all of this very complicated physics takes place when I turn on my flashlight. (Not even a JT flashlight)
This is the reason I brought this up at the other topic as...there seems to be some inconsistencies concerning the "simple" photon as it was taught to me in various courses.
Bill
PS Good topic Tinman.
Einstein said in his theory of special relativity that the correct formula for the momentum is mass times velocity times the Lorentz Factor. I might add that the Lorentz factor is just another theory,and is yet to be proven correct.

Photons may have very small masses or zero mass. Which of the two that it is is not resolved. In order to posess finite energy and for our ideas about special relativity to also be true they cannot: travel at the exact speed of light, have greater than zero mass, and posess only finite energy. For most situations, we treat them as having zero rest mass and traveling at the exact speed of light.
Hi,
please question?
what is the difference betwin mathematics and physics?
Best Regards
luc2010

There is no flaw in physic law, just we avoid to recognize the energy filling all the space aoround us.

There is no flaw in physic law, just we avoid to recognize the energy filling all the space aoround us.
Forest
We are talking about the laws of physics that man has set for him self,and you will note that most are theories,not set law's. Nature set's the law's,not man,and we are here to see what is set in stone,and what is theory and faulse.

So which is true Mark,special relativity,or they have zero rest mass,and travel at the speed of light?. It would seem by your answer that special relativity may not apply to all that has mass.
We don't know for certain. That's why we keep conducting experiments to try and close in on an answer.
A quote from a page you recomended to answer a question on another thread.
Quote; It is almost certainly impossible to do any experiment that would establish the photon rest mass to be exactly zero.
So we would have to agree that we just dont know the answer. This brings the questionif we dont know wether or not a photon has rest mass,and !Quote: traveling at the exact speed of light,then we cannot say for sure that an infinite amount of energy is required to accelerate that mass to light speed. We can also say that we dont know if that mass will increase to an infinite amount of mass at or near light speed.
However, we do observe and can say that the energy required to accelerate a particle with known mass increases exponentially as the velocity we accelerate it to approaches the speed of light. Those observations agree with special relativity. We do not have any observations, ( at least not any that I know about ), that indicate above a certain velocity the exponential energy increase described by special relativity breaks trend. If i have a 6kg bowling ball in space,and apply a continual unidirectional force of say 1kg to that bowling ball,then will that bowling ball reach the speed of light eventually without any additional force being required?. We are asuming that the bowling ball will not be hindered by any other force or mass,and is in the vacuum of space continuously.
Special relativity says that you will never quite get there. As you get closer and closer to light speed, the amount of time it takes to accelerate by any fixed amount takes exponentially longer time.
Will that same bowling ball increase in mass as it gets closer to the speed of light?.
From a Newtonian F=mA standpoint it will seem more massive because for a fixed F, A keeps getting smaller and smaller and smaller.