Introduction to FREE ENERGY Part 2
Free Energy reality
Suppose a bank robber enters a bank and steals money from the bank. How much can he take? Answer: "all money and all note". Limit the total amount of all money in the building. This is the "Law" of Energy Conservation that is all about it. What it says is very simple - you can never get more out of what you have in the beginning. That sounds pretty straightforward, doesn't it?
As another example, consider a glass jar filled with water. Using common sense, tell me, how much water can be poured into a glass? For the purposes of this model, please take into account that temperature, pressure, gravity, etc. Everything always stays the test time.
The answer is: "exact volume contained within melting". Allowed. This is what modern science has to say. To be more precise, you will never be able to pour all the water on it as there will still be a small amount, moistening the inside of the glass. One way to put this is to say that the “efficiency” of the pouring function is not 100%. This is normal for the rest of life, was very few if any, 100% effective.
So, are we allowed to think science now - the maximum amount of water that can be poured into a victim is the total amount within a fall? This sounds simple and straightforward, doesn’t it? Science thinks so, and emphasizes that this is the end of the matter, and nothing else is possible. This arrangement is called a “closed system” as the only consideration is for glass, water, and gravity.
Well, unfortunately in current scientific thinking, this is not the end of the situation and the "closed systems" are almost unknown in the real world. Seriously, the assumption is that the effects of anything else around it will cancel out and increase to zero. This idea is very simple but unfortunately has no real basis.
Let's refill our glass with water and start pouring it again, but this time we put it under a spring of running water:
So, now, how much water can be poured into a tumbler? Answer: "Millions of times the volume of the fall". But hold on for a moment, didn't we just say that the water limit completely emptied of the victim should be the volume within the descent? Yes, that's exactly what we said, and that's what modern science teaching means. What is important here is that what modern science says is true most of the time, but there are cases where the basic idea of a “closed system” is not true.
One popular idea is that you can’t get more power into the system than you put it into. That's wrong, because the sentence was carefully named. Let me say it again and again, emphasizing the keywords: "You can get more power out of the system than you put into it". If it were true, then it would not be possible to sail a yacht all the way around the world without burning gasoline, and that has been done many times and there is no driving force at all from the group. If it were true, then a grain mill driven by a stream of water would not have been able to produce flour as the rider would certainly not be pushing the stones. If that were true, no one would build air miles, or make solar panels, or power stations.
What the statement has to say is that “more power will not be removed from the system than it is incorporated into or into the system” and that statement is very different. When traveling in a yacht, the wind provides the driving force that makes the trip possible. Note that it is nature that empowers, not sailors. The wind came out of them to do something about it, and less than 100 percent of the wind power that reached the yacht actually had the power to move forward, contributing to that journey. Most of the power that comes with the yacht ends up stretching, making a whirlwind, producing sound, and pressing the wheel.
Comments
Post a Comment