Of Thestica free energy machine and the Methernitha community

[MoROmeTe]

So, a friend tells me of a community in Switzerland that developed a machine that offers free energy. I will skip the spiritually related ideas of the Methernita and post the "specifications" of the machine. Here goes nothing:

The two conterrotating discs generate an electrostatic charge. One disc represents the earth, the other the cloud. Using grid electrodes the charges are bound. After that they are collected by non-contacting so-called antenna keys and then sorted.

After being initially turned on by hand, the discs rotate by themselves according to the electrostatic laws about attraction and repulsion. A rectifying diode keeps the cycles in steady state. Otherwise the impulses of attraction and repulsion would accumulate and cause the discs to run faster and faster. The correct speed is of great importance and for optimal power generation the discs have to run quite steady and slow.

By means of grid condensers the energy is stored and then uniformly discharged, at the same time reducing the high voltage and building up power with additional devices. Finally the machine supplies a uniform direct current, which varies according to the size of the model. The machine furnishes about 3-4kW permanent output, depending on humidity, whereby the electric potential ranges from 270 to 320Volt. High humidity of the atmosphere prevents the build-up of electric potential. The drier the air, the better.

No doubt, through the so far achieved results one main objective has been reached, namely to prove that it is possible to use Free Energy. Nevertheless the research work is not yet completed.

To the educated physicist many a thing of this machine may seem impossible, maybe even crazy. Maybe he is also offended by the conceptions used to explain the whole. Only partly we could use the concepts of conventional physical terminology to explain and define only approximately the functions and properties of the various parts of the machine.

After all it will be necessary to create some more new concepts like the one we have already used before, when we termed the non-contacting collectors of electric charges as antenna keys.

This machine puts experts, which are just trained in conventional physics to a very hard test, because its mode of action is not explainable with the state of the art of officially accepted physical knowledge, or at the most only partially explainable. However also a trained specialist should remain free and independent in his thinking, and should avoid to be limited by the temporal framework of publicly admitted knowledge in any science.

It has to be remembered that the established science was already many times forced to change or give up some of its very fundamental concepts. Think about Galilee, to name only one example. Our human society almost condemned this man as a sorcerer and magician, just because he investigated and discovered a truth that seemed unacceptable by the established science of the days.

The book knowledge of any times is not wrong, but it is incomplete, and therefore allows to draw wrong conclusions.

Full article here: http://freeenergynews.com/directory/...ha/Thestatica/

One can also do a Google search on it... I came up with this:
http://energy21.freeservers.com/principles.htm
http://www.hmi.de/people/boenisch/ar...on_for_web.pdf
http://www.gatago.com/alt/bible/23532144.html

So, what I would like is an answer to two questions:
1) Does this sound even remotely plausible?
2) Is free energy posible considering the laws of physics?

[Simetrical]

1) No. The whole business about "according to the electrostatic laws about attraction and repulsion" is garbage; if you spin two plates next to each other in opposite directions you can get an electric charge, but the disks will slow down without external input, satisfying conservation of energy by converting mechanical energy to electrical.

2) Not as known. Several centuries of close inspection of all sorts of physical phenomena have turned up no evidence of any violation of the law of conservation of energy, anywhere. Total energy in a closed system will be conserved on average. Of course, in principle that law by itself doesn't preclude effectively "free" energy: matter is the same thing as energy, and it's an enormous amount per gram. It's just that the only known way of obtaining all the rest energy of a mass, matter-antimatter annihilation, is extremely inconvenient (because we happen to have very little antimatter lying around).

Is it possible that some awesome solution is out there that will be greatly cheaper than all modern power sources? Sure it is. But I'll believe it when I see it and not a minute before, because perpetual motion machines are a dime a dozen and none has ever been known to work to date. Keep an open mind that things like this are possible, but be extremely skeptical of absolutely any individual who claims that they have found the way, no matter their credentials.

(As an aside on how much energy exactly is in a given mass, the relevant equation is the famous e = mc², meaning that the amount of energy in a given mass is equal to the mass times the speed of light squared, i.e., a lot. One gram of matter is equal to 25,000,000 kilowatt-hours, meaning it would take about five metric tons of matter per year to fulfill the world's current power usage of around 1.8 terawatts, if my quick calculations are correct. Might seem like a lot until you consider the amount of fossil fuels we burn . . .)

[Bovril]

I agree this sounds like nonsense. The current research into solar cells and nuclear fusion (rather than fission) as energy sources seem to me to be far more reasonable.

[Denny Crane!]

Especially the solar cells, I have read some exciting stuff about recent advances in increasing the efficiency two fold and even more incredible claims of increasing efficiency up to ten times.

How credible or feasible they are I don't know but there certainly is legitimate verifiable sources backing up the research these people are doing and often multiple companies working on them.

A solar cell that operated with ten times the current efficiency would make domestic power generation a dream even in the cloudy UK, and would make solar panels financially very appealing.

Peter

[Bovril]

I'm very interested in solar cells myself because my brother is doing Phd in solar cells. But yes what you have reawd is true. Research into solar cells does suggest the possibility that their efficiency could be increased many, many times over. The project my brother is working on is one that is develloping solar celles which, when placed in the windows (they are that thin and inconspicuous) of tower blocks in the UK will be able to power those tower blocks' lights and computers all year round (imagine what they could do in sunnier climbs).
The most interesting story about solar energy I read recently was one which described a policy paper produced by an E.U. think tank which proposed creating several vast solar power 'farms' in the Sahara desert in order to provide Europe with energy when fossil fuels become prohibitively expensive.

[Denny Crane!]

Realistically speaking with only a moderate price rise in the UK (we are expecting massive hikes after all) and a moderate increase in solar cell efficiency and/or price drops then it is going to become so economically viable to get them.

At the minute a payback rate of 5-7 years doesn't make it seem like a good idea but the next few years will take that.

Peter

[Simetrical]

Bringing solar cells down in price is as useful as increasing their efficiency. The important thing is ratio of cost to power, not ratio of sunlight to power. Shortfalls in the latter could be made up for pretty easily, in principle, by just plastering everything in sight with less efficient solar cells.

Anyway, yes, "free energy" devices (i.e., those that create limitless energy without obeying the known laws of physics) are not viewed as a useful way forward, and don't really show much promise. Solar, wind, and nuclear look like the main energy sources of tomorrow.

[Denny Crane!]

Bringing solar cells down in price is as useful as increasing their efficiency. The important thing is ratio of cost to power, not ratio of sunlight to power. Shortfalls in the latter could be made up for pretty easily, in principle, by just plastering everything in sight with less efficient solar cells.

Anyway, yes, "free energy" devices (i.e., those that create limitless energy without obeying the known laws of physics) are not viewed as a useful way forward, and don't really show much promise. Solar, wind, and nuclear look like the main energy sources of tomorrow.

Thats a great idea if photlythic cells are limitless, there are manufacturing issues there.

Peter

[Simetrical]

Which are issues of cost.

[Lord Snibb]

There is no such thing as free energy.

[Denny Crane!]

Which are issues of cost.

Not quite, I have heard of problems in actual manufacturing capacity and raw materials. Admittedly if the market was there I am sure a way could be found and would be.

Peter