I know there is no such thing as 'free energy' but what if it was possible?

[notbatman]

This was probably already commented on, but didn't Nicola Tesla find a way to tap into the earths...."hum"? Frequency, whatever you want to call it. I think that's what wardencliff was all about. But there we're some bazaar mental implications that came along with it. And he was afraid that it could be used as some kind of psychological weapon. It was also backed by a rockefeller who thought free energy would zap his plans at the money game. So it was scrapped.

Antenna towers are so informal, I prefer giant marble coated gold capped stone pyramids.

[1715228382]

1715228382

[1715228382]

1715228382

[1715228382]

1715228382

[Aterna]

This was probably already commented on, but didn't Nicola Tesla find a way to tap into the earths...."hum"? Frequency, whatever you want to call it. I think that's what wardencliff was all about. But there we're some bazaar mental implications that came along with it. And he was afraid that it could be used as some kind of psychological weapon. It was also backed by a rockefeller who thought free energy would zap his plans at the money game. So it was scrapped.

Antenna towers are so informal, I prefer giant marble coated gold capped stone pyramids.

Not phallic enough.

[Rassah]

A classic example of bigger output than the input, is nuclear energy. Nuclear energy uses the aether power. But you can see many other examples here:

If this were true, then why do we need to keep refueling nuclear power plants with fresh uranium, and keep having to dispose of spent fuel nuclear waste that is NOT uranium? Something is being added, and waste is being created. Meaning it's not an infinite source of energy, meaning once we run out of uranium, that's it for uranium powered nuclear reactors. This suggests that the energy is stored in the nuclear fuel itself, and is released when we use it, same as energy out of coal, oil, etc. No math required to understand this.

Tell me how much energy we need to create an atomic explosion and how much energy we take from the explosion. Is the output bigger than the input? Yes or no?

It takes very little energy, just a tiny spark, to extract much more energy from gasoline, too. That doesn't make gasoline some magic perpetual motion fuel. It just makes them sources of energy, where that energy came from something else, and can easily be released. For gasoline the energy came from the sun that powered the plants that dinosaurs ate, and then the sun and earth's pressure that decomposed those dinos and converted them into oil. For nuclear power, it was a star's pressure that fused lighter elements into heavier uranium. Either was, energy was already existing, was transfered into a fuel, and once we release it from that fuel, it's gone. Just like a magnet that's brought too close to another magnet, storing up energy, and once they are released, the magnets spring apart and all that energy is gone, or energy added to water to break it into hydrogen and oxygen, and once the two gases are recombined, that energy is gone.
Note that in ALL those cases, the energy put in is less than the energy we get out of it. Even for star created nuclear fuel.

[Jackgiant]

Well all the oil companies would be up shit creek and maybe there be a end to wars as well.

[cocos]

All effects in nature are related to aether. Aether can give us abundant free or very cheap energy.

[picolo]

Well all the oil companies would be up shit creek and maybe there be a end to wars as well.

Oil companies are not responsible of war, they are providing expertise for a much needed energy; Big Government make wars using fiat money; I never heard of a war started by Microsoft or Google, they don't even throw people in jail.

[cocos]

It takes very little energy, just a tiny spark, to extract much more energy from gasoline, too.

The same with water. Water is like gasoline. The energy is inside water with the form of hydrogen. You have only to release it with the help of the aetheric power.

[SquareApple]

All effects in nature are related to aether. Aether can give us abundant free or very cheap energy.

Aether?  More like everything in the nature is caused by the classical Greek Gods

[xkrishna]

I know this is a science forum and not a forum for conspiracy theorists but I have always been intrigued by the idea of a world where everyone has access to 'free' energy. What impact would it have on the world? Would it solve 99 per cent of all problems?

BUT this term confuses me : "MAGNET"

[gracejames482]

If there's such a thing, then people won't worry about working overtime. 

[BADecker]

I believe that 5,000 years ago and before, natural magnetic strength of the earth and many materials - possibly the essence of magnetism itself - was hundreds of times as strong as it is now. I think that the strength of magnetism on the earth collapsed do to some cosmic happening, maybe a near collision with another planet-sized body, and that this is what changed magnetism on earth forever. I believe that this also changed the way radiation acts, and that because of it, we can't get accurate readings using carbon dating.

[dank]

You say antiscientific nonsenses. I cant talk seriously with you. You paid by the oil companies? They pay well?

You say antiscientific lies. Nothing you said is based on actual observable science. You must be paid by shucsters and charlatans selling their fake motors and bullshit conspiracy books.

There is more to the universe than science can explain.

[dank]

This was probably already commented on, but didn't Nicola Tesla find a way to tap into the earths...."hum"? Frequency, whatever you want to call it. I think that's what wardencliff was all about. But there we're some bazaar mental implications that came along with it. And he was afraid that it could be used as some kind of psychological weapon. It was also backed by a rockefeller who thought free energy would zap his plans at the money game. So it was scrapped.

Antenna towers are so informal, I prefer giant marble coated gold capped stone pyramids.

Not phallic enough.

That is shaped like a mushroom.  Coincidence?

[Ibian]

It isn't.

What is wrong with you people?

[Vod]

You say antiscientific nonsenses. I cant talk seriously with you. You paid by the oil companies? They pay well?

You say antiscientific lies. Nothing you said is based on actual observable science. You must be paid by shucsters and charlatans selling their fake motors and bullshit conspiracy books.

There is more to the universe than science can explain.

No.  Science can explain everything - there is no such thing as magic.

We just need time.

[xkrishna]

A classic example of bigger output than the input, is nuclear energy. Nuclear energy uses the aether power. But you can see many other examples here:

If this were true, then why do we need to keep refueling nuclear power plants with fresh uranium, and keep having to dispose of spent fuel nuclear waste that is NOT uranium? Something is being added, and waste is being created. Meaning it's not an infinite source of energy, meaning once we run out of uranium, that's it for uranium powered nuclear reactors. This suggests that the energy is stored in the nuclear fuel itself, and is released when we use it, same as energy out of coal, oil, etc. No math required to understand this.

Tell me how much energy we need to create an atomic explosion and how much energy we take from the explosion. Is the output bigger than the input? Yes or no?

It takes very little energy, just a tiny spark, to extract much more energy from gasoline, too. That doesn't make gasoline some magic perpetual motion fuel. It just makes them sources of energy, where that energy came from something else, and can easily be released. For gasoline the energy came from the sun that powered the plants that dinosaurs ate, and then the sun and earth's pressure that decomposed those dinos and converted them into oil. For nuclear power, it was a star's pressure that fused lighter elements into heavier uranium. Either was, energy was already existing, was transfered into a fuel, and once we release it from that fuel, it's gone. Just like a magnet that's brought too close to another magnet, storing up energy, and once they are released, the magnets spring apart and all that energy is gone, or energy added to water to break it into hydrogen and oxygen, and once the two gases are recombined, that energy is gone.
Note that in ALL those cases, the energy put in is less than the energy we get out of it. Even for star created nuclear fuel.

Well for atomic explosions, each and every single atom has huge energy, whatever we are seeing is only conversion , so its true that smaller inputs may seem to have larger outputs ........

[notbatman]

What a dark place, so many mushrooms growing here.

Oil from dinosaurs, you've got to be trolling!

Nukes are a weapon and everything you believe about them is probably wrong, a lie and a complete fabrication.

Q: What do we know about energy for sure?
A: It can't be created or destroyed.

...but the question is "what if it was possible".

Ok so we've created energy, now what? What are you going to do with that energy? Are you going to make money with it? That money belongs to your elite masters!

I hope this answers all your questions. 

[Furio]

Move to Turkmenistan, free energy for ALL citizens, yeah you saw that right, look it up!

[bornil267645]

The universe would have been destroyed in an instant.

[BADecker]

The universe would have been destroyed in an instant.

Maybe it has been destroyed. Maybe life and everything else is simply an echo across the remains of the dimensions.