Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby justdrew » Thu Aug 08, 2013 5:24 am

see here... it all works synergistic together, all the things we need... Indoor, optimized, organic farming (no more pesticides needed generally), the roofs of which produce electricity. Thigs could work out :thumbsup


With the new WSPV solar technology developed at UCSC, it would take only 4 percent of U.S. agricultural land to supply the amount of energy used annually in this country.

Truly renewable resources and self-sustaining systems are few and far between. But what if you could have one in your garden? Imagine strolling through your back yard, past the calming sound of your cherub fountain, breathing in the smell of fresh earth. You enter your greenhouse, and a fan gently blows air into your face. Your spinach and lettuce are looking good, and even the artichokes are coming along. Languid ladybugs and fragrant flowers live in happy harmony.

In this near-future scene, you’ll be happy with your power bill, too. The fountain, the fan and the pumps watering your garden will all be powered by the greenhouse itself.

A team of scientific innovators from UCSC has created a self-sustaining system like this, using a new generation of solar panels. These devices trap just part of the sun’s light to produce electricity. The rest passes through, nourishing the growing plants underneath.

<snip>

WSPVs use a pigment called LR305, which catches only green and blue wavelengths. Plants do not absorb green light. Instead, they reflect it, which is why they appear green. By taking light that plants don’t use for photosynthesis to generate electricity, the panels allow plants underneath to grow, flower and fruit.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.santacruz.com/news/2013/08/06/ucscs_solar_breakthrough
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Thu Aug 08, 2013 6:07 am

justdrew wrote...
see here... it all works synergistic together, all the things we need.


Not only in this particular instance, but in total, we have all the things we need. The key is to arrange things so that they work with each other, you know synergistically.

For this we need to create new correspondences between our categories to create better chances for resonance and mutual support.



That is excellent justdrew.

I will also be curious to see if anything comes of the work of the fellow that claims to have 'invented' a black box solar collector.

(There was a thread about him awhile back.)
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Hammer of Los » Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:36 am

...

JD is always excellent.

Things will work out!

Ha ha ha.

Things.

Will.

Work Out!

...
Hammer of Los
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Thu Aug 08, 2013 1:46 pm

So, apparently, harnessing the Powe of the Sun is more expensive than coal.

Hmm. If I really needed to discover why such a mindless situation truly exists,, I wonder if I could find out?

I might of course speculate that this is because the World is quite literally run by a tiny coterie of madmen, who need to be collectively confronted ASAP.

Its hard to imagine much else, when the most abundant source of "free energy" that we will ever know or need is there at our fingertips, (with all the advances in metallurgy, computer science, superconductors, et cetera ad infinitum), and yet its still more expensive than coal !

However, I digress. I guess Wintlers right. Free energy is too expensive. He's also spot on in this case as much as any with the laws of thermodynamics.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby DrEvil » Thu Aug 08, 2013 3:53 pm

slimmouse » Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:46 pm wrote:So, apparently, harnessing the Powe of the Sun is more expensive than coal.

Hmm. If I really needed to discover why such a mindless situation truly exists,, I wonder if I could find out?

I might of course speculate that this is because the World is quite literally run by a tiny coterie of madmen, who need to be collectively confronted ASAP.

Its hard to imagine much else, when the most abundant source of "free energy" that we will ever know or need is there at our fingertips, (with all the advances in metallurgy, computer science, superconductors, et cetera ad infinitum), and yet its still more expensive than coal !

However, I digress. I guess Wintlers right. Free energy is too expensive. He's also spot on in this case as much as any with the laws of thermodynamics.


But the energy isn't really free. You still have to build up the infrastructure to capture, convert and distribute it, and in that regard coal is still cheaper.

That doesn't mean it will always be like that. As soon as solar gets cheap enough that it actually makes sense to use it instead of coal, people will start converting, but it needs to become cheaper and more flexible.

There are some intriguing uses of solar already, like this Ikea (yes, really) refuge housing:
Image
Via nextbigfuture: http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/07/ikea-s ... st-10.html

I'm actually quite optimistic about alternative energy sources in the developing world. They don't have the infrastructure that the west has, so we might hopefully see something similar to the way mobile payments have taken off in Africa, only for energy. They never had ATM's, checkbooks or credit cards to begin with, so they all just went straight to the latest technology instead.

That, of course, won't happen in the west, because there's already generations of vested interests in the energy business. They're not going to change until there's a good profit to be had.
Same thing as mobile payments, which are pretty much non-existent in the US atm (If I remember correctly: 8 million mobile payments last year, 7.5 of those at Starbucks), simply because you already have the old infrastructure in place, and there's no compelling reason to change it.

The developing world doesn't have all those "constraints", which makes me an optimist.
"I only read American. I want my fantasy pure." - Dave
User avatar
DrEvil
 
Posts: 3972
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 1:37 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby justdrew » Thu Aug 08, 2013 4:11 pm

The US should maybe consider it a good thing our long distance electric transmission grid is collapsing from neglect (aka profit extraction). :shrug:
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby wintler2 » Thu Aug 08, 2013 9:16 pm

DrEvil wrote:..
The developing world doesn't have all those "constraints", which makes me an optimist.

I'd agree that the unindustrialised world should do much better with lower levels of consumption, for reasons you give + that they've been 'spared' our decades of hedonic ratcheting. Us repletes in the West tho are going to die wishing & whining.

On renewables, pricing is a consequence of politics, so solar pv may one day be cheaper than coal; but that doesn't mean it pays for itself in the real physical sense of energy return on energy invested.
Some EROEI studies put wind & pv well into the black, but does anybody know of any end-to-end manufacturing process (for say solar pv or wind turbines) that is selfsustaining, fueled by renewable energy? No, there are none - all industrial renewable energy techs are gifts of fossil fuels. Action supported by observation: get hold of some of the former while the latter are still cheap.


slimmouse wrote:..Hmm. If I really needed to discover why such a mindless situation truly exists,, I wonder if I could find out?..

No, you couldn't, because you are addicted to your own opinion & techno-cornucopian wishful thinking, and couldn't falsify a hypothesis to save yourself.
E.g.
slimmouse wrote:Its hard to imagine much else, when the most abundant source of "free energy" that we will ever know or need is there at our fingertips, (with all the advances in metallurgy, computer science, superconductors, et cetera ad infinitum), and yet its still more expensive than coal !

Get thee to JM Greers blog & start recovery from your sadly mainstream programming.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Thu Aug 08, 2013 9:44 pm

Get thee to JM Greers blog & start recovery from your sadly mainstream programming.


How could I ever refuse such an offer from such an extraordinarily mainstream voice, with all this talk about how "free energy" is some kind of flawed concept ( even though it works) because its too damn expensive !

To my own simple mind, that kind of skewed logic is one step removed from the idea that we need to fight Al Quaeda over there, to stop them attacking us over here - when all it really needs is for people to start thinking for themselves a bit more, and deprogramme themselves from the mainstream noise.

And make no mistake, noise is all it amounts to essentially, as humanity is slowly allowing itself to be led to the electric chair of collective destruction by the Pied Pipers of insanity, with the often unwitting 'rationalists' leading the chorus.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Hammer of Los » Fri Aug 09, 2013 4:44 am

...

No, you couldn't, because you are addicted to your own opinion & techno-cornucopian wishful thinking, and couldn't falsify a hypothesis to save yourself.


I don't want to go off topic.

Freddie Ayer tried to prove in principle that a statement could be concusively verified.

When he quite obviously failed, he tried to prove in principle that a statement could be conclusively falsified.

When he failed at that too, he looked back at his long life's work and considered it a failure.

So much for logical positivism.

On the bright side, he did claim to have slept with over 400 women.

Ha ha ha.

...
Hammer of Los
 
Posts: 3309
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 4:48 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:47 pm

I miss Hammer of Los
Last edited by Sounder on Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:47 pm

Searcher08 wrote...
In alignment with the OP, I noticed many parallels between issues discussed in this thread and the field of archeology.


The video was about discoveries made in the 1950s and 60s which points in the direction of the New World being inhabited for several hundred thousand years, which blows up the "New World was virgin territory till settled from Siberia at the end of the last Ice Age" theory.

The relevant takes away's were:
1 If a person comes up with evidence that is not an extension of an existing framework, but rather demolishes it / shows it is wrong, then the degree of reaction from the system will be proportional to the number and strength of vested interests affected by this information.

2 The system will rapidly eject any internal element which 'turns against it' by
firstly removing resources then
secondly excluding the element from functioning within the system the system, then
thirdly removing awareness / communication regarding the element with the wider system. Academic reputations in particular will be retroactively down graded or erased from institutional memory.

3 Unique physical artifacts, field / research notes and models in particular will be subject to being destroyed or dissappeared.

Thanks searcher08, this says quite a lot about how easily novel thinking can be seen or taken as being a hoax.


On maybe a different note, it would seem that 'suppression of evidence' is a source of energy for schismatic groups. The Mormons may be an example of a response to being dissed for taking the evidence of giants seriously. I bring it up to point out that 'evidence' can and often is misused, no matter in whose heads it resides.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Tue Feb 03, 2015 6:25 am

I often wonder how much and what kind of ‘science’ will it take to show the general population that there are indeed possibilities for development that lie outside of current normative structures of ‘knowledge’.

A response from Dr. Evil or Rory would be nice, but I do suppose that they have left this pop stand given that the consensus here is safely in their camp on the AGW question.

Still I do wonder in general, is Wired a credible enough source for folk (around here) to consider that maybe, just maybe, there is something to this ‘Cold Fusion’ thing?

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... ances-2015

The cold fusion race just heated up

Cold fusion
30 January 15 by David Hambling
The E-Cat, or Energy Catalyser, is an alleged cold fusion reactor invented by Andrea Rossi. While many researchers claim to have produced small quantities of excess heat using nickel and hydrogen, Rossi claims he can produce kilowatts and his technology is ready for industry. Rossi's claims are far-fetched, but the E-Cat refuses to go away. Now it appears to have been not only verified, but replicated. Should we start taking Rossi seriously?

Rossi's style is striptease: punters are led on with big promises, followed by obsessive secrecy and occasional fleeting glimpses. He addresses the world only via statements in idiosyncratic English in the comments section of his web page, the grandly and misleadingly-titled Journal of Nuclear Physics. Scientists have never been allowed to examine the E-Cat, details of the supposed physics have never been revealed, and even the identities of his US business partners were only discovered by online sleuthing.

Given his keep-'em-waiting approach, few believed Rossi's repeated assertions over the years that an independent scientific study of the E-Cat really was on the way. Amazingly enough, in October a report appeared authored by, among others, researchers from the University of Uppsala and University of Bologna. Even more astoundingly, it was completely positive.


The Lugano Report details how, for the length of a 32-day continuous run, a 900-watt electrical input produced 2,800 watts of heat from the reactor. The 20-cm long E-Cat was run for an extended period to prove that the energy could not be produced by hidden batteries or other sources:

"The total net energy obtained during the 32 days run was about 1.5 MWh. This amount of energy is far more than can be obtained from any known chemical sources in the small reactor volume."

Further, the isotopic composition of the nickel powder had changed:

"The isotope composition in Lithium and Nickel was found to agree with the natural composition before the run, while after the run it was found to have changed substantially. Nuclear reactions are therefore indicated to be present in the run process".

What to make of Andrea Rossi's apparent cold fusion success

The report was promptly savaged by sceptics, pointing out that Rossi was present for the test and questioning how independent it was. Steven B. Krivit, editor of New Energy Times, headlined his account "Rossi Handles Samples in Alleged Independent Test of His Device".

The arguments about the Lugano Report continue, meanwhile there has been an even more surprising development. Prof Alexander Parkhomov of Lomonosov Moscow State University has published a paper describing his successful replication of the E-Cat, based on the available information about it. The paper is in Russian; there is a link and commentary and video in English on E-Cat World. Parkhomov's results are more modest, but the energy output of his cloned E-Cat claimed to be up to 2.74 times as great as the input.

Parkhomov presented his results earlier this week at a cold fusion seminar at the Research Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Operation in Moscow.

Rossi has always maintained that his design would be hard to copy and harder to control. Parkhomov provides images of a half a dozen prototype E-Cats which have been destroyed by localised overheating: the container is made of alumina because of its ability to tolerate high temperatures, but if the reaction is uneven it may get hot enough to burn through.

Independent US researcher Jack Cole also claims to have reverse-engineered the E-Cat and produced 11 percent excess heat, though he does not have the status and credibility of the Russian scientist.

A key aspect of Parkhomov's work is that it is entirely open.

"Parkhomov has openly revealed his reactor design, ingredients used and experimental process, which is not terribly complex, and this allows for further experimentation to take place in the public domain, not under a cloak of secrecy," says Frank Acland of E-Cat World. "If someone now replicates Parkhomov's work, I don't think anyone can rationally deny that Rossi has what he has always claimed."

Race for cold fusion: Nasa, MIT, Darpa and Cern peer through the keyhole

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is now working with Parkhomov on its opensource E-Cat replication called "Project Dog Bone," having previously failed to produce excess heat.

Rossi appears unconcerned. He congratulates Parkhomov, but says his own work is way ahead: "We are close to go commercial massively. I think now is too late to catch us [sic]."
None of this is likely to bother sceptics in the global energy market, though there are signs of panic among conspiracy theorists. Russian media has repeated a rumour that President Obama discussed Chinese E-Cat production under licence with Xi Jinping in his recent visit, a move that might destroy Russia's vital energy exports.

If Parkhomov's work can be copied, the Chinese may not need a licence. It is a big "If"; whether any of this is real is still very much open for debate and unlikely to be settled soon. Expect to hear more on the E-Cat.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby Sounder » Tue Feb 03, 2015 6:25 am

I often wonder how much and what kind of ‘science’ will it take to show the general population that there are indeed possibilities for development that lie outside of current normative structures of ‘knowledge’.

A response from Dr. Evil or Rory would be nice, but I do suppose that they have left this pop stand given that the consensus here is safely in their camp on the AGW question.

Still I do wonder in general, is Wired a credible enough source for folk (around here) to consider that maybe, just maybe, there is something to this ‘Cold Fusion’ thing?

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/201 ... ances-2015

The cold fusion race just heated up

Cold fusion
30 January 15 by David Hambling
The E-Cat, or Energy Catalyser, is an alleged cold fusion reactor invented by Andrea Rossi. While many researchers claim to have produced small quantities of excess heat using nickel and hydrogen, Rossi claims he can produce kilowatts and his technology is ready for industry. Rossi's claims are far-fetched, but the E-Cat refuses to go away. Now it appears to have been not only verified, but replicated. Should we start taking Rossi seriously?

Rossi's style is striptease: punters are led on with big promises, followed by obsessive secrecy and occasional fleeting glimpses. He addresses the world only via statements in idiosyncratic English in the comments section of his web page, the grandly and misleadingly-titled Journal of Nuclear Physics. Scientists have never been allowed to examine the E-Cat, details of the supposed physics have never been revealed, and even the identities of his US business partners were only discovered by online sleuthing.

Given his keep-'em-waiting approach, few believed Rossi's repeated assertions over the years that an independent scientific study of the E-Cat really was on the way. Amazingly enough, in October a report appeared authored by, among others, researchers from the University of Uppsala and University of Bologna. Even more astoundingly, it was completely positive.


The Lugano Report details how, for the length of a 32-day continuous run, a 900-watt electrical input produced 2,800 watts of heat from the reactor. The 20-cm long E-Cat was run for an extended period to prove that the energy could not be produced by hidden batteries or other sources:

"The total net energy obtained during the 32 days run was about 1.5 MWh. This amount of energy is far more than can be obtained from any known chemical sources in the small reactor volume."

Further, the isotopic composition of the nickel powder had changed:

"The isotope composition in Lithium and Nickel was found to agree with the natural composition before the run, while after the run it was found to have changed substantially. Nuclear reactions are therefore indicated to be present in the run process".

What to make of Andrea Rossi's apparent cold fusion success

The report was promptly savaged by sceptics, pointing out that Rossi was present for the test and questioning how independent it was. Steven B. Krivit, editor of New Energy Times, headlined his account "Rossi Handles Samples in Alleged Independent Test of His Device".

The arguments about the Lugano Report continue, meanwhile there has been an even more surprising development. Prof Alexander Parkhomov of Lomonosov Moscow State University has published a paper describing his successful replication of the E-Cat, based on the available information about it. The paper is in Russian; there is a link and commentary and video in English on E-Cat World. Parkhomov's results are more modest, but the energy output of his cloned E-Cat claimed to be up to 2.74 times as great as the input.

Parkhomov presented his results earlier this week at a cold fusion seminar at the Research Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Operation in Moscow.

Rossi has always maintained that his design would be hard to copy and harder to control. Parkhomov provides images of a half a dozen prototype E-Cats which have been destroyed by localised overheating: the container is made of alumina because of its ability to tolerate high temperatures, but if the reaction is uneven it may get hot enough to burn through.

Independent US researcher Jack Cole also claims to have reverse-engineered the E-Cat and produced 11 percent excess heat, though he does not have the status and credibility of the Russian scientist.

A key aspect of Parkhomov's work is that it is entirely open.

"Parkhomov has openly revealed his reactor design, ingredients used and experimental process, which is not terribly complex, and this allows for further experimentation to take place in the public domain, not under a cloak of secrecy," says Frank Acland of E-Cat World. "If someone now replicates Parkhomov's work, I don't think anyone can rationally deny that Rossi has what he has always claimed."

Race for cold fusion: Nasa, MIT, Darpa and Cern peer through the keyhole

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is now working with Parkhomov on its opensource E-Cat replication called "Project Dog Bone," having previously failed to produce excess heat.

Rossi appears unconcerned. He congratulates Parkhomov, but says his own work is way ahead: "We are close to go commercial massively. I think now is too late to catch us [sic]."
None of this is likely to bother sceptics in the global energy market, though there are signs of panic among conspiracy theorists. Russian media has repeated a rumour that President Obama discussed Chinese E-Cat production under licence with Xi Jinping in his recent visit, a move that might destroy Russia's vital energy exports.

If Parkhomov's work can be copied, the Chinese may not need a licence. It is a big "If"; whether any of this is real is still very much open for debate and unlikely to be settled soon. Expect to hear more on the E-Cat.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby slimmouse » Tue Feb 03, 2015 6:46 am

Striictly an offhand observation, but could this also be what the recent Oil Price fun and games is all about, or at least has something to do with?
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Hoaxes or Creativity Suppressed?

Postby BrandonD » Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:05 pm

I recently had a talk with someone who is apparently high up in the oil & gas industry (in Houston, every other person works in oil & gas).

He was explaining to my boss and I that there is no incentive to make renewable energy because it is still more expensive than coal. There is no infrastructure for it, for example it would require building massive new factories to convert the solar/wind/etc to electrical power.

I asked him, what if the devices that collected the solar or wind power were themselves able to convert what they received directly into electrical energy? Then there would be no reason they couldn't just use the existing infrastructure.

He responded that there exists no way to store renewable energy. This statement seemed a bit absurd to me, as I have cheap little solar lights in my front yard that glow in the nighttime from the solar energy that they collected earlier that day. Also, if the device is converting the energy directly into electrical energy, then it could conceivably be stored by your standard battery, right?

I was wondering if anyone who is more knowledgeable on the subject would like to comment on this, maybe shine some light on a point I might be missing. Or perhaps this guy just believes whatever he needs to in order to justify his involvement in the oil industry.
"One measures a circle, beginning anywhere." -Charles Fort
User avatar
BrandonD
 
Posts: 768
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests