THIS IS THE NEW BOOK THAT GOES WITH THE VIDEO

 Energetic Forum Profiles
 Homepage Energetic Science Ministries Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Photo
shawnnweed
No information to display.
Contact Info
No contact information available.
My Interests
No interests yet.
Forum Info
Join Date: 05-19-2011
Total Posts: 323 (0.35) posts per day
No discussions to display.
Recent Blog Entries
05-21-2011

I would like to submit to the Physics community a proposal for Perpeptual Energy. Now usually when a bonafide physicist catches wind of a nutjob claiming perpetual energy; it is commesurate to blood in the water, the sharks come calling.
However, to establish a common ground let me first say that while I am not a physicist, I do understand the laws of physics very well. And I know that this has been said countless ways, all of them valid in their own perspective however the laws are essentially this; 0. there is a game. 1. You can't win. 2. The best you can do is break even. 3. The only way to break even is at absolute zero.
Now I will present my idea, the mathematical theorum, and the actual numbers plugged into the theorum to prove its validty. To save time I will do my utmost to argue your points for you so that you do not have to waste your keystrokes or breathe as it were.
The idea is simple, combine photovoltaic cells with Light Emitting Diodes, to exchange light for electricity in a perfect balance. The mathematical theorum is as simple as the pathogorium theroum and is none less valid. Led input - PV output = 0. Now I know immediately that this is how you feel. How many times do we have to go through this?
Now let me argue your points for you. OK, Shawn let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say that there is a new solar cell just invented that is 100% efficient and it is connected to a revolutionary LED just created that is 100% efficient. Now lets even say that they are connected with a superconductor (that does not require power hungry machines). Let's even say that we placed all this inside a 100% reflective box so that no light is lost. Even with all this do you not understand that light carries heat and that some of that heat would be absorbed into the mirrors therefore depleating the whole process until it completely shut down? To put it bluntly, you are wasting your time. Hopefully, I have argued your point well enough.
Now as to not waste your time I will share with you my viewpoint. Gentlemen, we have been approaching this problem from the wrong perspective. I will explain. I have actually run this experiment at my house with a reflective box lined with solar cells. I used a 200 watt LED that at 6 amps put out 16,000 lumen. This 16,000 lumen caused the solar cells to put out 670 milliamps. A small recap 200 watts of light (input) produced 16,000 lumen which produced 670 milliamps (ouput). I used 6 amps to produce the light but only created a tenth in ouput, nowhere near perpetual. Now comes the I told you so's. The rational train of thought would be to try to raise the ouput somehow. Yet the best we could do any any situation is to get out as much as we put in. 6 amps in and 6 amps out. Yet as previously stated it is a waste of time. My proposal is this what if we tried to make up the difference electrically. God grant me the patience to accept the things i can not change, the bravery to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference. Instead of using the input as the base of comparison/goal what if we used the output as the goal. By raising the voltage on an led you can drop the amperage required. So if we used a high voltage LED at 200 volts and 1 amps it would still produce the same 200 watts required which would still make the same 16,000 lumen of light and 670 milliamps of output. A small recap. 1000 milliamps Input produced 670 milliamps ouput. Now this is 67% of perpetual. Does an LED like this exist...yes. Could we make the required voltage...yes by using amorphous silicon to produce the voltage combined with monocrystalline solar cells to produce the amperage. Now in your head you are probably saying 67% is not even close enough to get a nod from me.
Alright let me tempt you once more. what if we used an Led that was 400 volts and 500 milliamps? This would still be 200 watts and still produce 16,000 lumen of light which would still produce 670 milliamps of output. A small reacap: 500 milliamps of input produces 670 milliamps of output. In case you were sleeping that is perpetual because the equation just changed to (Led input - PV ouput = +1.) I would appreciate constructive feedback and focus on the proposal and not my poor spelling, grammer or punctuation.

My Network
Social Actions

My Quotes
No quotes to display.

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:35 PM.

 Energetic Forum - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top