FREE ENERGY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rrl2]

I just had an unbelievable idea. what if we had a self sufficient space station/power plant. Think of this a manmade moon, but it really doesn't have to be that big at all and send it around earth. Then we get another orb to go around the manmade moon in geo-syncranase orbit. attach ach a rod to the smaller one and bam the small one turn the turbine to make energy. I'm not done yet what it batteries could be charged up and parachuted down to earth.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />ITS A WHOLE NEW KIND OF ENERGY FOR THE TAKING!!!!!1<br /><br /><br />THINK HOW MUCH CLEANER THE EARTH WOULD BE!

 

[tap_sa]

Why don't we just attach rods to all the trolls!!!! Then they run around this site and rods turn the generator!!!!!!! Gigawattttzzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[tomnackid]

Or just put a long, electrically conductive tether in orbit and as it passes through he Earth's magnetic field it generates electricity, just like a gigantic dynamo. When NASA tried this experiment on the space shuttle the tether generated so much electricity that it burned through. The catch is that the electricity isn't free. For every erg of electricity you generate you loose an erg (actually more due to thermodynamic loses) of kinetic energy, and therefore your orbit slowly decays. You would have to keep reboosting the tether or--as science fiction writer David Brin did in his short story "Tankfarm Dynamo" pump electricity into your tether (from solar panels in the the story) and you can raise the orbit of your tether (and anything attached to it) without rockets!

 

[rrl2]

Real Funny, but if anybody actually has something to say beside this nerd with smurfs in his pants then answer!!!<br />

 

[tap_sa]

You need to return to the troll cave to hone your trolling skills, the clueless ideas are a bit too blatantly clueless. And don't overdo exclamation mark overdoing.<br /><br />Btw IP test between you and the Uhhhh!-dude is probably positive so take that with you, will you?

 

[mlorrey]

RRL2, you best listen to people who know better. There is no such thing as free energy.

 

[freeshark]

Seriously speaking.<br /><br />I do believe we will one day find a good method of reletively cheap or maybe even free energy.<br /><br />However, you might want to do some reseearch into your ideas before you make a post. And don't use 45 exclamation points either. It just isn't cool.<br /><br />As for your idea, I don't know if could work or not but if it could generate energy in the first place it would be more usefull for the station itself and not to send mack to earth in battery packs.<br /><br />Dave

 

[annodomini2]

You would need, every now and again to keep accelerating the smaller object to continue generating electricity.<br /><br />All you are doing is converting one form of energy into another. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[why06]

none the less why free energy may noot exist there is always other kinds of energy sources that may prove cheap or inexpensive.<br />One kind might be geo thermal energy. also solar power plant could be constructed in space to rescharge space ships on long space flights. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[rrl2]

/*deleted*/

 

[skyone]

Welcome to the board RRL2. <br />For courtesy sake, tell us about yourself.<br />How did you get interested in space technologies?<br />What middle school are you attending?

 

[rrl2]

Guest what SkyOne your rating is dust and I'm a molecule so who cares?

 

[yevaud]

All of you lay off the slurs. It's not getting you anywhere.<br /><br />(There. A "mere" Galaxy has answered you. Feel better now?) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[rrl2]

Actually I'm only 7, but I skiped to eigth grade. I think this whole thread is stupid though I started it. I thought smart people were suppose to be on the website but everyones just making insults. In the future people have got to stay on topic and I learned that in Kindergarden <br /><br />Bye Bye!

 

[jatslo]

When does quantity of posts equate to quality of posts? It probably does not!

 

[yevaud]

Probably not, but since he made the point, I thought I'd chime in.<br /><br />Besides, I don't think trying to calm down a thread is a bad thing, in and of itself.<br /><br />Call it one of my New Year's resolutions. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[why06]

your joking, right RRL2 ! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[why06]

anyway back to the point!<br />I believe th ony real way to create ABSOLUTELY free eneergy is to attach a string to the ends of the universe and let it pull something at the rate of expansion if that is possible.<font color="green"><br />But even that might have side-effects</font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Well.<br /><br />If we had the ability to generate and utilize enough energy to even *reach* "the ends of the universe," we'd already effectively be there as far as energy available to us. For starters, I don't really see how we could "catch up" with the expanding "edge" (which isn't an "edge," really. Read about the "no boundary" condition). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[tap_sa]

<font color="yellow">"When does quantity of posts equate to quality of posts? It probably does not!"</font><br /><br />In your case definitely not!

 

[vmiguy]

Actually, this is a long-standing idea but it has always been undercut by someone or by events.<br /><br />If anyone or anything were to actually succeed at this, it is a fairly safe bet that there would suddenly be a SNAFU at the patent office and some multi-national would end up with the rights. The guy who invented the weed-wacker never got a penny, and the guy who invented the smiley face got cheated, too. The movie "It's a Wonderful Life" was intentionally allowed into the public domain as a public service, but we all know how that ended up.<br /><br />Sundance showed a documentary on The Corporation (yes, very one-sided) where a major corporation had privatized the water supply in a Bolivian city, and one of the end results was incarceration of any citizen who collected rain water. Or in India which has bought into Genetically Modified agriculture, it is illegal in many areas to save seeds for future plantings.<br /><br />I think we have to remember that we're not in Kansas anymore.<br /><br />Talk to you later.

 

[nexium]

As several have suggested your idea likely is not profitable. 1 It would take a lot of energy to build the man made moon in geo synchronous orbit 2 the rod would need to less than a mile long or even CNT = carbon nano tubes would not be strong enough. 3 Even one turn per hour is optimistic/ I don't think we know how to build turbines that are efficient at that low a speed 4 Because the artificial moon has low mass, it does not store much energy in rotation, so it would slow down quickly, as electricity was produced 5 It would take more energy than you got to speed the moon up again. Your idea might be adapted to storing energy for future use, but it needs quite a few changes. Neil