Acoustical feedback energy system

[Willy]

Our discussion is of course in the realm of theory. As is also Einstein relativity, electron theory, atomic theory and so on.

Not "out of nothing" but perhaps out of "no thing".  If a "thing" is taken to be an object which
has mass.

An electron can absorb a photon or it can emit a photon and there by its energy state is changed.

Electrons are considered as "fundamental" "particles", by are they ?  Who knows ?

Among the (if not species of photons), then perhaps (variations of photons)  is that variety of
photon which is termed the virtual photon.

On way to phrase this next statement would be to say that,  conventional physics holds that the virtual photon can have an effect upon an interaction, before its actual arrival, at the position of that interaction.

[aleks]

An electron can absorb a photon or it can emit a photon and there by its energy state is changed.
on an interaction, before its actual arrival, at the position of that interaction.

Well, electron can emit photons e.g. when it loses kinetic energy (Bremsstrahlung), that's not what I mean. By common understanding all electrons are "fixed" particles created in Big Bang. And to me this is problematic overall as some examples indicate that unbonded electrons are too ubiquitous to not to consider appearance of electrons "out of nothing". And I do not mean transient, quantum-theoretic, electron-positron pairs, I'm talking about real electrons. In my reasoning I'm assuming that unbonded electrons appear and disappear constantly, and this is in tune with "conservation of energy", statistically speaking. But the catch is: the electron can collapse under controlled conditions, and that's the source of free energy.


Tesla Coil discharges is an important demonstration to the model/theory I'm proposing. Discharges constitute movement of energy - but where does it move to? ANYWHERE, it does not require an opposite potential, do not underestimate that fact. It means 0 potential is everywhere, which may be frequency-dependent. If one views electron as a spherical and collapsable EM wave, its frequency is in the order of 10^20 Hz, it may be extremely permeable, and returns to aether without any effects. By the way, this frequency range corresponds to Xrays and ionizing radiation: Xray beam dynamics is worth studying, to see if there are any unexpected "losses" associated with it exist.

[aleks]

In the model I'm offering, the ubiquitous "background ionizing radiation" that surrounds us, measured in sievert, may also be in part caused by appearing and collapsing unbonded electrons. However, this isn't in tune with "conservation of energy". But if we'll get to the level when "free energy devices" are commonplace, nobody will care about "conservation of energy" at all, the way Big Bang theorists do not care where the initial impulse energy originates from.

[Willy]

I like it.


"If we beamed electrons from a satellite which is within the vacuum of deep space,
could we reach a point at which the balance between the positive charge potential present
within the satellite exceeds the energy available to us (on board the satellite) required to
expel / beam more electrons from the satellite ? "

1. I would say that as electrons exit the system the energy needed in order to beam more
electrons from the satellite increases (per each electron expelled).

2. OK, we could perhaps resupply the satellite with energy via solar cells, but this does not supply us with additional electrons to expel.

3. If our wires become in effect, electrically insulating, by virtue of a lack of electrons which
can be mobilized as electric current then I say the beaming of electrons out of the system
ends.

Do I consider that it might be possible for electrons to pop into existence from an ether or
an aether or from the quantum fields or some other ?  I don't know, but I assume that if the right conditions exist, the answer would be yes.  The electrons that are here, came from some kind of some where and some kind of some thing, else they always existed.

[Willy]

It is a definite that a greater amount of energy can be obtained,

by the common electrolysis of water

when the energy from atmospheric buoyancy of the hydrogen so produced,

is compared to the electrical energy input into the electrolysis initially. 

Where does that energy come from ?

Sory if off topic.