1 Joule of Energy

[Jbignes5]

@jbignes5


I would agree with all the comments Aaron made in his post, if you are looking for magic there is none to be found here nor do we believe there is, LOL. You seem to be making many assumptions as to what you think we do believe, false assumptions I might add. I would agree with most of what you have said with the exception of plants. Most city folk may believe you have to feed plants and buy them in a store but in nature this is not the case, plants do very well without our help as does all nature.
The main point I would make is that syntropic reactions are related to absorbtion of energy not radiation of it as in entropic reactions. A plant does not need to run about and kill something or destroy something else to thrive, unlike humans. The conditions are such that ambient or radiated energy is absorbed when something creates the conditions of an energy sink.
Another good case against the fatalistic entropy crowd is obvious--gravity. Gravity acts inward, earth pulls all objects in space to itself and grows larger in the process by 30,000 tons a year roughly. I wonder how this relates to the second law of thermodynamics which states "energy systems have a tendency to increase their entropy rather than decrease it." , the earth and all living things take small things and/or energy then organize them into larger things and this is a decrease in entropy. We could argue context all day long but the fact remains that if a law is broken even once it has no application and should be replaced with a better one.
Regards
AC

What you belive is what most in this field try to say is magical. He expects a 10 foot hole to appear without cost and not adding that cost to your original input makes your point moot! End of discussion. It takes energy to creat a 10 foot hole it did not just appear there. Change the way you do it and you need to include that change in your problem.
But plants need to take in water and they need sun light to grow. Well most anyways. They have an input and you guys think it is this invisible energy or magical process. They are real and they are consumed. The water taken in from the plant is not available anymore to the envirenment it was removed from, the ground. It is used by the plant and released into the atmosphere. A seperate environment in the gross sense. Everything has these costs weather you want to know them or not. Also the reason plants survive is because they are in a system. Take that system away or even change the way the system acts, even add things like pollutants and the plants die off. Not having the complete picture is only part of your problem. The other is just plain ignorance.
You want to talk about subjects but don't have a complete understanding of those subject to talk about it. So you do what Aaron does. He never answers the important questions and only picks apart the ones that have little to do with the real points.
Give all the information in a problem and If I can not answer it I will be the first person to admit that. But time and time again when asked to supply the full information needed to answer his original question he uses a circular logic to dodge the attempt to find out the additional values needed to perform the calculations. Or in fact adds more to the original question by adding further parameters like a hole suddenly appears without any information about what created the hole or the energy that it took to create the hole.

I will say this again. Once your system disconnects from the ball the ball is in the environment. You are just an observer at that point and any input suddenly becomes a loss to your system. The one joule it took to put the ball where it is, is wasted once you let the ball go Period. Since as you said the ball has not changed in any way physically or energetically. Once it starts to fall the ball is then in the environmental system and not your system (the input of 1 joule on the ball to raise it x amount of heigth). Unless you keep connected to the ball then you have NO way to quantify anything that happens after you let the ball go. But you do not have that connection or system if you will to quantify anything but a loss.


***** Now here is the challenge to you! Either put up or shut up! Give all the information one would need for your problem or admit that just setting something in motion without staying connected means the only changes are to the environment and not your system. Oh unless you think you are the environment. What energy are you gaining and where is that energy going?******************************************** ***********

[Jbignes5]

I don't recall anyone saying anything about anything being magical...

You prove my point...what do plants need and what do we need to sustain? How much do we have to pay for the sunshine?

We take in sun and oxygen and QI (life force energy that potentiates our nervous system, etc...)...we are NOT separate from our environment and would die without it.

In addition to our own efforts, nature is feeding us from all directions, which we do not have to pay for. The cummulative amount of work that we do is MORE than what we have to intake as far as food or water. Sun, oxygen and lifeforce energy are free for the taking and add to what we have to personally provide.

Everything you describe as being nothing magical VIOLATES conventional thermodynamics.

Yes you did you said that a hole appears near the apple. How did that hole get there? Did you dig it? How much energy did it take for you to get that hole to exist?
We pay nothing for the sunshine. But there is a cost and that sun will run out of fuel eventually. However that might be along time it none the less consumes a fuel. Thats the magical part you elude to that it is totally free. It is not free. There is a cost if there wasn't it would not exist. The cost is determined by the system that runs that particular object you are talking about. Change one thing about the sun like "it now does not have any hydrogen" and the fundamental rules change. It would probably change everything about that object. It only exist because it has the right conditions to do so.
Remove water from the planet Earth and life seises to exist. Block the sun and Everything dies. Change one thing and everything that relies on that variable ends. The environmental system is being changed by us on a daily basis because we choose to do so. We have the way to get back to nature but we refuse to even look at it because we would have to slow down our consumption of energy. No one wants to go back to a more natural process to get the energy we need or even want because it is too slow of a process. We want a device to turn on and instanly provide us with ooodles of power to consume for free. Well I tell you that is magical thinking.
Energy can only be shuttled from one system to another. Take too much and you imbalance the whole larger system. The effects to the smaller system can be deadly and the larger system gets polluted or taxed to the breaking point. This is our problem today.
Shuttle too much power and you cause a sink of energy in that local environment. Much like what the stories about John Bedini and the testing of the converter he had. They ran it and then on a daily basis recharged the batteries to a reference point charge. After running the system for awhile the energy they were taking was the fundamental energy present in all things. The batteries were not getting "conditioned" they were being sucked dry of this natural energy. In fact it took 3 days after the test to get the batteries to accept a normal charge or act normal. Why is this? Because I think the energy that anything has in it is this fundamental energy and when you suck it out of the material that makes up the battery or that environment that makes the battery a battery, it will not act normal or accept a normal charge because the normal balance of the material is gone. It can not convey the energy thru the normal process because the transducer that is normally present has been sucked away.
There are other examples of weird happenings when trying to use this fundamental energy you guys keep talking about. Even though this energy is everywhere it appears to act like a fluid or gas. It has a flow and if you suck it too much it can take awhile before it gets back to a balance. Ronald Brandt is a good example. Not only did his battery blow his neigbors alternator but there was a report of him working on the car in his driveway and the system was running. His neigbor started shouting from a trailer that was in the yard out front. He went running to find out what happened and to his dismay the neighbor couldn't exit the trailer. The report I read said that Ronald tried with all his might to open the door but there was a dampening like field of something. The report said something to the effect that it was like being in a vat of heavy thinkness. Like it took everything just to lift his arm to the doorknob to try and open it. This makes perfect sense Ronald had been using the batteries for quite some time "Conditioned" and they got to a point where they could suck in so much energy from the surrounding area that it caused a sink hole of the very basic energy it takes to support energy transfers. Weather this is true or not it is what I read that happened to Ronald. Since then Ronald has stopped using it from what I hear. Why I don't know. Maybe he thought about how it would affect things on a mass scale and thought it wouldn't be worth it in the long run because of this affect multiplying.
Even the greates man in our history Tesla has commented about the effects of using radiant energy. These are clear warnings that trying to use this energy without it having a natural balance is destructive at best. If we are gonna use this type of basic energy that has many many phenomina associated with it like as I suspect Electricity then we need to find a natural way to let it flow into our system and not be a brute force system. When you extract instead of collect it damages the very system you draw from and will even affect the environment around the device.
These are clear imperical results that can be corrolated to all the experiments that have and will be done. But if you don't even take the time to even look at the entire picture, you can be doing extreem damage to the environment on a mass scale thru ignorance of the scientific methods that should be applied to the whole system and environment.
You clearly choose to ignor the very things that explain even simple physics to make it bend your way of COP. This is an injustice to the very concept of this forum.
Some of the good people here who would like to bring a bit of sanity to the testing of these ideas that are presented here are well intentioned people who would only like to get the complete understanding of the phenomina that some have manifested by using tried and true scientific ways to measure the inputs and outputs. Alot of which have been called names and such like nay sayers and unbelievers. Well to tell you the truth a Real reasercher should always examine and look and even question everything in such experiments. If you don't and you simple just believe without really looking at the devices or methods then you are not researching anything and have only become a reproducer of the stuff being presented. Nothing to gain by that method. Nothing new to discover if you don't question everything. Especially the methods of testing that some choose on this forum are vague and non scientific to say the least. How does one know if they are getting any results if one goes by how bright a bulb is and not what the whole circuit is drawing thru a shunt or meter. Looking at a bulb and how bright it is, is misleading at best a subject to interpretation or even subjective to the observers perception of how bright it is.
So again instead of answering my questions about the question you posed you skirt around it and attack from a different angle. Why not provide the information I need to tell you the answer. Why get your believers in here to bash me? Why tell me I know nothing about the real and not provide me with more information about the very subject you require me to answer. I need a complete set of variable to answer your question and you have given only a partial set. Why make up additional parameters about the environment after the fact?
The only deception I see here is in your tact to not answer the questions posed to you.
Telling me that it is an accepted fact and that it is the truth does not prove your point in one way! Prove that I am wrong then. If you are saying that I am wrong then where is your proof other then just saying it is wrong?

[Allcanadian]

@jbignes5

What you belive is what most in this field try to say is magical. He expects a 10 foot hole to appear without cost and not adding that cost to your original input makes your point moot! End of discussion. It takes energy to creat a 10 foot hole it did not just appear there. Change the way you do it and you need to include that change in your problem.
But plants need to take in water and they need sun light to grow. Well most anyways. They have an input and you guys think it is this invisible energy or magical process. They are real and they are consumed. The water taken in from the plant is not available anymore to the envirenment it was removed from, the ground. It is used by the plant and released into the atmosphere. A seperate environment in the gross sense. Everything has these costs weather you want to know them or not. Also the reason plants survive is because they are in a system. Take that system away or even change the way the system acts, even add things like pollutants and the plants die off. Not having the complete picture is only part of your problem. The other is just plain ignorance.

Maybe I should have said, I agree with what Aaron said in his "LAST" post concerning plants, as for the the ball scenario you guys seem so preoccupied with I won't even comment as I disagree with both you and Aaron. As well, you do not know what I believe and I can tell you as fact--again-- I do not believe anything is magical.
Concerning your thoughts on plants--in this post-- I agree, I did not say nor imply anything other than what you seem to understand. I said plants are syntropic, they absorb energy they then later give most of this energy back to the environment--entropy as you say. You seem to be making arguements with yourself and taking my statements out of context, Im really not sure what your point is. My point was that living things are not solely entropic like inanimate things that are always eroding and losing energy, that is all I was stating. You do understand that there is a difference between something that is alive and something that is dead, do you not?.
AC

[Armagdn03]

What you belive is what most in this field try to say is magical. He expects a 10 foot hole to appear without cost and not adding that cost to your original input makes your point moot! End of discussion. It takes energy to creat a 10 foot hole it did not just appear there. Change the way you do it and you need to include that change in your problem.

I dont believe Allcanadian was arguing no input energy with respect to living systems. Rather I think he was pointing out that syntropy and entropy are balancing conditions in systems we refer to as living. All natural systems I can account for are based balanced interchange between inverse conditions. As Allcanadian pointed out, all our technology as of now is based on entropic assumptions. However a device operating in a more natural mode WILL dissipate into a load (entropy) but will also gather energy for sustainability (syntropy).

[Aaron]

systems

Yes you did you said that a hole appears near the apple. How did that hole get there? Did you dig it? How much energy did it take for you to get that hole to exist?

You simply refuse to acknowledge any specific points at hand. What happened to the apple's potential as a hole is dug next to the apple?

It doesn't matter if a trillion joules of energy is used to dig the hole...the apple wasn't touched so HOW MUCH POTENTIAL ENERGY IS STORED IN THE APPLE after a hole is dug next to it? There is a 10 foot difference between the apple on the ground and the bottom of the hole.

It also doesn't matter that the sun will run out. It is interesting how you continue to ignore and refuse to answer anything. We do NOT have to expend any energy AT ALL in order to receive free energy from the sun. That is FREE input from the environment and that adds to the total amount of potential available to our body to operate. That is MORE than what we have to do on our own. That violates conventional thermodynamics AND is over 1.0 COP...or MCOP

The SYSTEM of the apple is from the moment the apple is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

The SYSTEM of the ball is from the moment the ball is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

Our input LEVERAGES nature to cause more work to be done in a more efficient manner until it is all dissipated at the ball or apple comes to a rest.

The system does NOT end from when we let go of the apple or the ball.

You are completely contradicting yourself and your own conventional concepts because IF that system ended there when we let go, you can never tell me that the apple or ball is "storing potential" from what we put in and then we just get out of the ball or apple what we put in by the time the ball or apple stops.

This means that even in the conventional physics with its closed system thermodynamics INCLUDES the ball or apple falling until it comes to a stop when accounting for how much energy was in and how much we got out.

If it did not, then conventional concepts could NEVER make a comparision between what was put in and what was gotten out of it because IF conventional teaching claims that a system ended when the ball or apple was let go of, then there is NO comparison that could be made as to efficiency or cop of the system.

That would mean that one system is lifting the ball and all energy is used up and therefore, NOTHING could ever be stored since it is all used up.

And if another system begins with the fall of the ball or apple, that means that the second system has an INFINITE COP since it cost NOTHING to get it going. This is EXACTLY what you are telling me.

This IS what you are telling me if you insist that the system ends when we let go and a new one is from the time the ball drops.

[Aaron]

dictionary

Damit Aaron you can not make up meaning and round about thinking when dealing with others. Why do you think they have dictionaries in the first place.

I am not making up any meaning, I am clearing up DISTINCTIONS, which leads to an INCREASE IN THE FRAME OF REFERENCE, which is the FIRST step to any form of empowerment. I understand the INTENDED purpose of the dictionary, but that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the dictionary serves that purpose or not.

For the most part, yes, it does serve the purpose but when getting to fine details in MANY specific areas of science, business, etc... the dictionary does NOT serve any useful purpose at all! That is why there are separate LAW DICTIONARIES, BUSINESS DICTIONARIES, SCIENCE DICTIONARIES, ETC.... because the regular dictionary does NOT fulfill its intended purpose for SPECIALIZED areas...it only serves a basic general purpose.

You're right. If potential isn't being consumed, it is potential. That is the point and I agree with you.

[Jbignes5]

I am not making up any meaning, I am clearing up DISTINCTIONS, which leads to an INCREASE IN THE FRAME OF REFERENCE, which is the FIRST step to any form of empowerment. I understand the INTENDED purpose of the dictionary, but that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the dictionary serves that purpose or not.

For the most part, yes, it does serve the purpose but when getting to fine details in MANY specific areas of science, business, etc... the dictionary does NOT serve any useful purpose at all! That is why there are separate LAW DICTIONARIES, BUSINESS DICTIONARIES, SCIENCE DICTIONARIES, ETC.... because the regular dictionary does NOT fulfill its intended purpose for SPECIALIZED areas...it only serves a basic general purpose.

You're right. If potential isn't being consumed, it is potential. That is the point and I agree with you.

YouTube - Lecture-10-Example Problems in Eletro Statics

This might show you what or how my thinking came about. These are for calculations only to understand the forces potential on an object, no matter what that object might be. This problem that you have posed has other variables as well but you know that like ball composition and design.
The last part talks about charge and objects and the effect of oscilations and escape velocities. Including pendulums and falling objects the only difference is that the setup you ask about is using a ball which has in it's design the capability to return force in the opposite direction thru compression but the basic phsics behind it are very very simular.
And yes I agree a common dictionary is that, for common use. This is what about.com defines about thier dictionary for physics " This physics dictionary provides useful terms in exploring the subject, where sometimes a common word can have a very specific interpretation. Learning the proper terms can help you focus your time on learning the more complex aspects of physics.


Definition of Potential energy is quite different from the word potential but only in the way it means it. Don't pick little bits out of the definition. Read the whole thing and in context it means what potential energy means in the physics world.
"Definition: Potential energy, or stored energy, is the ability of a system to do work due to its position or internal structure. For example, gravitational potential energy is a stored energy determined by an object's position in a gravitational field while elastic potential energy is the energy stored in a spring. "
Applying that definition to said spring. Knowing the position of one side of the spring in relation to the other as opposed to the full size of said spring and knowing the force in relation to a said given amount of compression gives it an ability to do only so much work when released. The "Potential" energy in that spring is never realized but is only a value from complex calculations so that when the spring is released we can approximate the results and predict the outcome. It is a method to predict and use the predictions to calculate the results. That prediction can give us useful information like being able to predict the oscolations of said spring after the spring has been released. It could also be used to analyze the difference between two different materials to make the spring and to be able to determine what is the best transducer to get the fullest effect of what we want. Much like the difference in the composition of two balls and what best transduces the release of the compression of the material to get a better results. Aka the difference between a tennis ball and superball.

[Jbignes5]

You simply refuse to acknowledge any specific points at hand. What happened to the apple's potential as a hole is dug next to the apple?

It doesn't matter if a trillion joules of energy is used to dig the hole...the apple wasn't touched so HOW MUCH POTENTIAL ENERGY IS STORED IN THE APPLE after a hole is dug next to it? There is a 10 foot difference between the apple on the ground and the bottom of the hole.

It also doesn't matter that the sun will run out. It is interesting how you continue to ignore and refuse to answer anything. We do NOT have to expend any energy AT ALL in order to receive free energy from the sun. That is FREE input from the environment and that adds to the total amount of potential available to our body to operate. That is MORE than what we have to do on our own. That violates conventional thermodynamics AND is over 1.0 COP...or MCOP

The SYSTEM of the apple is from the moment the apple is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

The SYSTEM of the ball is from the moment the ball is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

Our input LEVERAGES nature to cause more work to be done in a more efficient manner until it is all dissipated at the ball or apple comes to a rest.

The system does NOT end from when we let go of the apple or the ball.

You are completely contradicting yourself and your own conventional concepts because IF that system ended there when we let go, you can never tell me that the apple or ball is "storing potential" from what we put in and then we just get out of the ball or apple what we put in by the time the ball or apple stops.

This means that even in the conventional physics with its closed system thermodynamics INCLUDES the ball or apple falling until it comes to a stop when accounting for how much energy was in and how much we got out.

If it did not, then conventional concepts could NEVER make a comparision between what was put in and what was gotten out of it because IF conventional teaching claims that a system ended when the ball or apple was let go of, then there is NO comparison that could be made as to efficiency or cop of the system.

That would mean that one system is lifting the ball and all energy is used up and therefore, NOTHING could ever be stored since it is all used up.

And if another system begins with the fall of the ball or apple, that means that the second system has an INFINITE COP since it cost NOTHING to get it going. This is EXACTLY what you are telling me.

This IS what you are telling me if you insist that the system ends when we let go and a new one is from the time the ball drops.

You cannot change your systems configuration after the fact. If you dig the hole you are doing the work. Your system is changing. you are becomming part of your system by digging a hole and that input from you digging it must also be put into the calculations. Holes do not dig themselves.
It might seem like the second system has infinat cop but it doesn't. it cost something for gravity to be there weather we know it or not. you don't have all the variables and you are posing complaex "open" systems ideas without know what the inputs are and the costs for having gravity are... Gravity taken out of the situation and your "open system" falls apart.
Even though you let the ball go into another system that system is doing the work and just because you don't know what makes gravity work and what energy is being used to create gravity it is still a system and that system relies on something to keep it going. Obviously you are not in control of gravity and don't even know its components or even sub components and that means it is not an open system you are describing.
Like taking light away from plants and they will die so will gravities system if you take any of the sub components away from it. This form of energy everyone talks about is I suspect one component of a very larger amount of systems. Take or channel that energy away in a mass amount and you will get less effects of the systems behind it. And as I suspect it takes awhile before those systems rebalance.
Imagine for a second with me.
You find the source of every system we know that has to deal with energy transfers. You learn how to draw that energy in the wrong way like shuttling it to manifest a specific effect like sponaneous generation of electricity over wires (coil or battery). This is an analogy of shuttling. You have a pool filled with this basic fundamental energy. You shuttle it out of the pool onto the surface around the pool. It takes a little time for it to seep back to the poll under it's natural flow. Eventually it lowers the pool and you are getting more outside of the pool as the more you draw. Now take that and multiply that by 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000, 1000000 times. The pool would be seriously drained and the flow of energy comming back into the pool can not keep up with the draw. Remember that this is the energy or sub part of the process of the medium energy uses to go from point a to point b like a field of magnet. Like the medium that is in everything. Much like the batteries that were in use by Bedini in the cromwell converter they would not work anymore until that natural medium could seep back into the material in the battery fast enough to bring a balance back and let it operate normally. I suspect that is what the Bedini ssg deos on a smaller scale. This is proved by the people who talk about "conditioning" the batteries to work in the ssg system.
It this starting to sound dangerous to you?
What happens to living material next to these conduit batteries?
Does the living material get stripped of this fundamental energy medium as well?

This is just an example of not seeing the medium or the costs associated with it. It might look like we are getting Free energy but unless we do it with a passive mode it is not free. The costs are still there weather we see them or not.
Interupt a stream to generate power and you get a power source that is basically harnessing an already moving process without doing damage. Make a dam and everything behind it gets destoryed and we change the ecology of nature itself behind the dam and get way more of that energy. But at what cost?
Harness natual ways and yes it can appear free. Brute force it and it is deadly to everything behind it. Make a device to extract the motive force behind energy and we cause strange destructive effects. But harness it in a passive way and we can benefit from a system already in place without disrupting that natural process. We need to see the process though and as of yet we have no clear understanding of that process. Yes we are starting to see it but most devices that deal with this energy are brute force devices and not passive as it would safely be required to get any benefit.

[Joit]

Hows about a Meteor did dig the Hole, and after that it did dissapears,
would it been at an other Day, the Meteor maybe dont wanna impcat beside the Apple,
but someone did drop acid there, and it makes the Hole.
Not the Point, to count the Energy where the Hole comes from.

Same, as you try to bring anything into connection to eachother.
Hows about a Ocean of Waves, the Waves will allways be there.
Put a Generator on it, the Waves will still swing, and nothing will change,
if there is a buoy or nothing, the Balance overall will not really disturbed.

Our Universe did blow up, and now its at the Way to collapse, or opposite.
Who knows, it maybe allways depends at the Side of View.
Who did that? A bad Guy with some switches? Or does it do it by itself
in an endless repeating Cycle.
A lot, and really a Lot of Energy is there, what is convected.
So sticking on Gravity or other Forces, what appears anyway is not the Point too.
Its more like, to use unused Energy that it can serve for you.

[Jbignes5]

You simply refuse to acknowledge any specific points at hand. What happened to the apple's potential as a hole is dug next to the apple?

It doesn't matter if a trillion joules of energy is used to dig the hole...the apple wasn't touched so HOW MUCH POTENTIAL ENERGY IS STORED IN THE APPLE after a hole is dug next to it? There is a 10 foot difference between the apple on the ground and the bottom of the hole.

It also doesn't matter that the sun will run out. It is interesting how you continue to ignore and refuse to answer anything. We do NOT have to expend any energy AT ALL in order to receive free energy from the sun. That is FREE input from the environment and that adds to the total amount of potential available to our body to operate. That is MORE than what we have to do on our own. That violates conventional thermodynamics AND is over 1.0 COP...or MCOP

The SYSTEM of the apple is from the moment the apple is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

*********** Which is when it reaches the top... At that point it doesn't matter if it is the apple that falls from where you put it or if another apple happens to fall from a tree. Your input stoped and you lost all that energy you inputted after it stops.**************

The SYSTEM of the ball is from the moment the ball is lifted UNTIL it is at a dead stop.

**************Read above statement***********

Our input LEVERAGES nature to cause more work to be done in a more efficient manner until it is all dissipated at the ball or apple comes to a rest.


**********Your input is wasted to the background environment You did nothing to create gravity and there would be no difference if a stone had dropped 50 miles away the same distance. Are you claiming that after you raise you apple that if anything happened to fall afterwards that it is due to you?***************

The system does NOT end from when we let go of the apple or the ball.

************ Yes it does in reference to your input it does... Anything after the ball falls is becuase of any of the systems that support it moving aftewards. Again you didn't create the gravity systems and you are not gonna get anything from the outcome... Thats like saying I just donated 1 joule to the environment and anything that happens afterwards no matter if it is what I put there or not I can claim the results... If you can not stay connected to the apple and convert the energy gained then you can not and have nothing to do with the out come. Again this is like claiming that you are the results of anything falling no matter if you put it there or not. The apple would fall the same way everytime no matter if you put it there or not. The results would be the same. You are wasting your input when the apple detaches from your system. Just because gravity is affecting the apple afterwards you did not cause gravity to make you input the energy. That is an environmental effect and not something you designed into your system. Your system is a lifting system only. Just because the ball falls doesn't mean you made it move x amount of inches. Aagin taking gravity away and you got nothing. No energy was expended and no movement was gained.********

You are completely contradicting yourself and your own conventional concepts because IF that system ended there when we let go, you can never tell me that the apple or ball is "storing potential" from what we put in and then we just get out of the ball or apple what we put in by the time the ball or apple stops.

********* I never said it was storing potential. What I did say is that if the ball fell then it would have x amount of energy on impact that it could use to deform the structure and rebound back with. The potential is just a reference about parameters about the heigth of the ball or applle, weight.. Balh blah blah about the situation of the ball being x inches above the ground.**************

This means that even in the conventional physics with its closed system thermodynamics INCLUDES the ball or apple falling until it comes to a stop when accounting for how much energy was in and how much we got out.

********** Ok what did you get out of the ball being raised x inches? NOTHING... Because you have no way to quantify what "you" got out.. Where is your output? Thats why perpetual motion doesn't exist except for in the thoerectical world of quantum physics. At the scale of the quantum physics resistances are near zero but try to apply those to the macro scale and our resistances are soo high that perpetual motion doesn't exist.********

If it did not, then conventional concepts could NEVER make a comparision between what was put in and what was gotten out of it because IF conventional teaching claims that a system ended when the ball or apple was let go of, then there is NO comparison that could be made as to efficiency or cop of the system.

********** You shifted the potential to the environment by not staying connected. There is no defined output to your system so you can not claim an output at all. The output does not stay connected to your system and since that is the case the output shifts to the environments input, output and any gains. You donated your 1 joule to the environment thats plain and simple to understand.***********

That would mean that one system is lifting the ball and all energy is used up and therefore, NOTHING could ever be stored since it is all used up.

********** No it means you shifted the input to the environment and donated your energy to that system. It is not stored it is a calculated potential that can only be realized by it dropping.************

And if another system begins with the fall of the ball or apple, that means that the second system has an INFINITE COP since it cost NOTHING to get it going. This is EXACTLY what you are telling me.

**************What I am telling you is that we have no idea of any of the parameters that makes gravity manifest. We have no idea of the costs associated with it being there. Are you saying that gravity has no cause that it is magically there? No we just don't have the understanding to see the driving forces behind it. What we do not understand we ignore and that also includes the costs associated with it being present! Thats what I am saying!
We do not know a thing about what causes it for a fact hence we can not understand what is costs to have gravity. If we did we would be the masters of gravity and we would know how to make the perfect system to get what we want. Thats what we all are looking for isn't it?**********

This IS what you are telling me if you insist that the system ends when we let go and a new one is from the time the ball drops.
************The new one is a system that exists already that we have no idea of what it behind it. We for now can only see the effects after the fact. Your system ends and the environments system takes over. You wasted (donated) your energy to the back ground environment Which took over as soon as it left your control (your device).************

Answered in the quote with ************ around them*************

[Jbignes5]

Hows about a Meteor did dig the Hole, and after that it did dissapears,
would it been at an other Day, the Meteor maybe dont wanna impcat beside the Apple,
but someone did drop acid there, and it makes the Hole.
Not the Point, to count the Energy where the Hole comes from.

Same, as you try to bring anything into connection to eachother.
Hows about a Ocean of Waves, the Waves will allways be there.
Put a Generator on it, the Waves will still swing, and nothing will change,
if there is a buoy or nothing, the Balance overall will not really disturbed.

Our Universe did blow up, and now its at the Way to collapse, or opposite.
Who knows, it maybe allways depends at the Side of View.
Who did that? A bad Guy with some switches? Or does it do it by itself
in an endless repeating Cycle.
A lot, and really a Lot of Energy is there, what is convected.
So sticking on Gravity or other Forces, what appears anyway is not the Point too.
Its more like, to use unused Energy that it can serve for you.

There is a cause to the waves. Take the moon out of the equation and you loose the waves. We do not understand the back ground causes and effects and what it would do to suck in mass from the effect. You ever heard of feed back? It exists in everything especially on the quantum scale. Affect one side and you affect the other through feed back. But then again we are talking about very little know ideas here. Tidal waves are in fact caused by the moon. Make a resistance to tidal waves and the moon might not stay where it is. The equalibrium that sustains the orbit of the moon gets unbalanced and who knows what happenes from that.
Listen in all of history has there been anything in our self-destructive nature that we haven't messed up? Why? Because we don't bother to look at the problems in the scale that it needs to be looked at. We are in a mess today because of that methodology. We can't be bothered to look at all the angles because why should we. If we had the forethought to analyze gasoline before we made that step we would have seen the dangers before it happened. Greed and Greed only is our downfall. We think just because we can harness the stream and get "Free" energy that we are doing no damage. And that my friends is dangerous thinking.
Ever heard of for every action there is an equal and opposit reaction. Well thats the definition of nature. Damage it too badly and it will damage you back. In nature it has a system and when we block that system or divert too much of it it destroys that ecology that is neccesary for 100's of species to survive in that local environment. Keep that thought going and apply it to everything we do and you see that all those little damages add up to massive results all comming back on us. HIV, N1H1 and a slew of other ailments are the direct results of destroying natures ways of keeping those contained as we loose the natural containment of those viruses they flail wildly out of natures control as we are seeing today. This is a direct proof of this concept and if we do not learn from our mistakes and find a passive way to get what we need then it has only one ending.
The concept of passive and more natural design is what we should be looking at. It is a proven design that has powered our natural world for millions of years. Some how we never put 2 and 2 together and learned that the natural way is the only way to do or use energy safely. Both for us and our world.

[Aaron]

you're not arguing the classical viewpoint

Answered in the quote with ************ around them*************

It is obvious you simply draw one assumption after another and each one has nothing to do with the point at hand and you ignore the points and argue something that has nothing to do with the point, over and over.

Yes, our energy is dissipated when lifting the ball... we don't create gravity? REALLY? And you draw an assumption that you think I implied that? lol

You are basically arguing with yourself because there is a communication diode you have in place somehow.

We lift the ball and that is the INPUT energy into the SYSTEM, which includes the ball being lifted and then dropped and bounced until it stops.

According to you... if a system stops the moment the initiator of the system lets go or finishes inputting potential... well, , do you realize what you're really saying? I spelled it out before but I'm having a difficult time actually believing you believe what you're telling me.

1. If there is a merry go round and I push it and get it going, according to you the moment I let go of it, my energy is all dissipated and the merry go round is now turning at an INFINITE COP since in that second system that is "separate" than the system of me turning it to get it going, that means that it is turning for free and since it is disconnected from my input energy at that point, all the turning is free since you can't account for my input into that system - therefore violating thermodynamics.
2. If there is a board on the ground with a ball on it - I can lift that board to create a potential difference, the ball rolls and keeps rolling off the board and rolls across the ground. According to you, one system ends when I let go of the board and a separate system begins with the ball after I let go. Therefore, 100% of all the rolling of the ball that happened after I let go of the board is all FREE and it rolling at a INFINITE COP since you can't count my input into that system and therefore violating thermodynamics.
3. If I lift a pendulum and let go, according to you, one system ends when I let go and another begins. So according to you, 100% of all the swinging happening in the pendulum is FREE and is operating at a COP of INFINITY since you cannot count my input into that second system....all these second systems are producing work without having any input to account for since you can't add my input since it is a separate system that ended when I let go. Your claim of these systems ending violates thermodynamics in the second system.

Do you realize that you are not even making a case for conventional thermodynamics as your claim REQUIRES the system that provided the input to be completely separate - therefore anything happening after that is happening with no accountable joules of work to start it!

You are actually making a case for something you completely and totally fabricated all by yourself and is totally DIFFERENT from conventional closed system thermodynamics AND non-equilibrium thermodynamics.

You cannot argue this! lol - Even in conventional thermodynamics, the input is still INCLUDED in the total measurement when accounting for efficiency.

The conventional model that you are not even arguing for simply tries to show a COP of under 1.0 WHILE INCLUDING the input we gave to the entire system to get it going but tries to convince you that all work done (from the time the ball is lifted until it stops) - is less than what was required to lift it.

Again, you are NOT even arguing even a conventional viewpoint in any way whatsoever! You really are the one that is totally fabricating your own description that is completely different from conventional thermodynamics.

[Jbignes5]

Definition of system

d. A group of interacting mechanical or electrical components.

This one relates to what we are talking about. You raise your ball with your system. There is no further interaction of the originating system to the one the ball drops into. The energy inputed into your system was to use to lift x amount of weight x amount of inches. Then you disconnected your ball from the lifting system and let it fall into the environments system. After the ball enters the enviroments system there is no further interaction to your system. The output of your system was to lift the weight and thats what it did. A complete waste or transfer of potential only shifted as the ball entered the environments system.
This word system implies a connected group. It is in fact a closed system because you break the interconnection as it enters the environments system. No further input to your lifting system is going to get you anything after the ball leaves that system. Ie raise the platform or hand further after the ball enters the environments system and you get nothing but waste.

[Aaron]

Gravitational Potential

The definition of potential you gave is incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is in the dictionary or not. The dictionary is full of erroneous definitions.

Gravitational potential is NOT stored...it is a constantly moving flow that moves TOWARDS the center of the mass that displaced the aether - and this aether is rebounding back from where it was displaced from.

On the way back, it exerts a push on the mass of any object it encounters pushing it to the ground direction. When moving towards the center many transformation take place where "electrons" are created and rise to the surface of the planet like spring water, magnetic field is constantly potentiated and the density of the field at that depth causes heating of the core, etc... so the downward flow never meets equilibrium and always has a downward movement and it is transformed on the inside - so that it can be dissipated outwards. Perpetual motion of an energy flow.

This is what the gravitational potential is and it is never stored in an object at any height and is ONLY available to an object that is not being prevented from moving downward - of the purposes of turning into work. If an object is prevented from moving downward (ground, table, shelf, stand, whatever), then all of that potential that is pushing on the mass of the object is dissipated from the resistance to downward movement.

When it can fall, work is not done for the fall itself but work is done to over come air resistance, etc... as it is falling, then it is no longer in equilibrium and there is a real potential difference that will cause work from the gravitational potential...overcoming resistance and anything that happens when it hits the ground.

Also, you evade the point about the hole...the QUESTION was how much energy was stored in the ball or apple when the hole was dug next to it? You don't need to explain about the hole needing work to be dug - you think that is an observation unique to you? lol

The POINT is that when digging a hole, a POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE is established that will determine how much work will be done WHEN and ONLY WHEN the objects downward movement is not being resisted by the ground or an elevated stand. There is NO storing of potential.

LIFTING the object does NOT store any potential - only a potential difference or gradient is established.

Digging a hole next to the object does NOT store any potential in the object - only a potential difference or gradient is established.

When the object is pushed off an elevated stand to the ground or pushed over the ledge into the hole, THEN AND ONLY THEN is the gravitational potential not being totally and completely dissipated by sitting still and resisting movement. That potential will turn into work when resistance to movement is encountered. Damage to object, bounce or rebound, rolling, damaging ground, etc...

[Jbignes5]

The definition of potential you gave is incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is in the dictionary or not. The dictionary is full of erroneous definitions.

*********It is erronious I suspect because it does not fit your defintion. But choosing between the actual definition I choose the accepted form that is presented in the dictionary of both the general and physics one. You my friend are trying to justfy your erroneous understanding of the word Potential. As I have said before if you read or pick out one little part of the context of the definition it will never make sense.***********

Gravitational potential is NOT stored...it is a constantly moving flow that moves TOWARDS the center of the mass that displaced the aether - and this aether is rebounding back from where it was displaced from.

No one said it was stored in the real sense. The only way to see a potential or predict the outcome is to have a base and a reference point to have that potential. Do you even know what potential means I have shown you both descriptions of the potential and you show no potential to understand it. Obviously you are are good at taking things out of context by picking one word from a sentence instead of reading the whole sentence to get it's meaning. I suspect you do this for a reason. What reason are you doing this for to prove that I am wrong. Even a first grader can understand the meaning of it once they read the entire concept of potential. Potential is said to be stored because it can be calculated to the nth degree at any point how fast something is going. compared with the rest of the fall which can be measured you can infer how fast it will hit at the end of the fall. At any point in that fall one can calculate how much potential or added energy it will hit at any height. It doesn't have to happen to know how much force it will hit with. So the potential can be thought of, as an analogy as an imaginary gas tank with 100% potential and as it falls inch by inch you can calculate how much potential has left the tank and become real. If you can not get the fact that it is a form of calculation to define the parameters of the experiment before said experiment happens then you are plainly ignorant!*************

On the way back, it exerts a push on the mass of any object it encounters pushing it to the ground direction. When moving towards the center many transformation take place where "electrons" are created and rise to the surface of the planet like spring water, magnetic field is constantly potentiated and the density of the field at that depth causes heating of the core, etc... so the downward flow never meets equilibrium and always has a downward movement and it is transformed on the inside - so that it can be dissipated outwards. Perpetual motion of an energy flow.

************** Tell me about this mysterios "Electrons" you are talking about? Speaking of made up or imaginary. If you want me to believe in such a thing then please reread the definition of potential and understand that is imaginary too but it is a scientific imaginary that has values associated with it.**********

This is what the gravitational potential is and it is never stored in an object at any height and is ONLY available to an object that is not being prevented from moving downward - of the purposes of turning into work. If an object is prevented from moving downward (ground, table, shelf, stand, whatever), then all of that potential that is pushing on the mass of the object is dissipated from the resistance to downward movement.

************** How many times must I define what a potential is Aaron you are about as thick headed as they can get. A Potential is a name for a calculation based on where the item is in reference to the end plane or destination. It is based on alot of factors like weight. It can be said that it is imaginary but once the item falls this potential is realized and becomes real. At any point the calculation can predict the gain in realized speed based on all the factors. If a potential is calculated from the beginging and the ball drops the potential get subtracted from the realized gain they are in balance. You can never have more then the potential+the realized gains-all the resistances. You can try to play the name game all you want and pick one term from an enitr paragraph of meaning but it remains a fact that potential is a set of data that predicts at any point in the line of travel of said ball to be the remaining gain.****************

When it can fall, work is not done for the fall itself but work is done to over come air resistance, etc... as it is falling, then it is no longer in equilibrium and there is a real potential difference that will cause work from the gravitational potential...overcoming resistance and anything that happens when it hits the ground.

************Resistances take away from the whole calculation of potential and only go to balance the real from the potential. If it resists falling it looses potential for the rest of the fall... Nothing more, nothing less..**************


Also, you evade the point about the hole...the QUESTION was how much energy was stored in the ball or apple when the hole was dug next to it? You don't need to explain about the hole needing work to be dug - you think that is an observation unique to you? lol

****************I have never said there was anything stored in the physical ball or apple itself but in the potential calculations.***********

****************I have not evaded anything that you have asked. If you change the environment you are inputting additional costs to get the "gain" you think you are getting. And that is my entire point Aaron. You are changing the system to which it is falling if you were not there would be no potential at all would there? You are creating the hole you are paying the price to creat the hole end of dicussion.******************

The POINT is that when digging a hole, a POTENTIAL DIFFERENCE is established that will determine how much work will be done WHEN and ONLY WHEN the objects downward movement is not being resisted by the ground or an elevated stand. There is NO storing of potential.

***********When digging the hole you are paying extra energy to dig such a hole to creat the potential difference***********

LIFTING the object does NOT store any potential - only a potential difference or gradient is established.

************ Now you are getting it...***************

Digging a hole next to the object does NOT store any potential in the object - only a potential difference or gradient is established.

**************Agreed... Now how much did it cost you to make that potential difference**********

When the object is pushed off an elevated stand to the ground or pushed over the ledge into the hole, THEN AND ONLY THEN is the gravitational potential not being totally and completely dissipated by sitting still and resisting movement. That potential will turn into work when resistance to movement is encountered. Damage to object, bounce or rebound, rolling, damaging ground, etc...

***********There is nothing being disapated because right underneath the ball when at rest on the there is no potential difference, it is in equalibrium. When and only when the ball goes over the edge does it get anything in a potential difference. But if one knew the heigth of the balls fall you could calculate what was going to happen anywhere in that fall and how much force it would hit with by using the potential rules.

Aaron you seem to like to justify your views by picking apart single words in a concept without using thier true and in context meaning. This does nothing but confuse you to no end. I am right in the definition of what potential is and how one uses it to predict the outcome of a falling object in this case.
You seem to think I am like the other sheep here who have not studied the actually real scientific methods for doing an experiment. You bash Physicists as being wrong because you lack the understanding of thier concepts. Instead of reading what they are trying to convey to you in context you take one thing out of what they say and say thats inpossible. Lets say that potential is a variable. The potential is a name for a variable that can be calculated but all the data present. It is not a physical thing only the holder for all the data associated with that object falling. When they say they store it it is much akin to a program storing variables in a holder. This holder is call the potential. as the potential is realized the potential get the data calculated and balanced with the realized distance. In this case acceleration is also included and only a certain amount of accelration can be realized in a given distance. There are a slew of calculations on needs to perform to even see the true potential<the real amount of this potential in an object that is about to fall. It in no way is to be meant that this potential is physically stored in the item. But they have constants for gravity and such that help to normalize the calculations and give it a better accuracy to the actual final hit.
So potential is a description of what will happen if let go and at any point it can be calculated what the item has left before it hits it's mark.

Stop making this about storing potential BS... This is about you trying to get around some valid points about your system. I have shown you the flaws as I see them and how real physicists see it. Just because you wrote your beliefs into a book and are selling those beliefs doesn't mean you are any more correct then the established physics being taught today.

The only one who is not being honest here is you. Instead of answering my questions, which by the way, not one answer from you except for you to pick on one word from something I have tried to answer your points about.

This is my answer to your question you posed You get nothing because just letting a ball fall does not make a system you designed. Remember what the world defines as a system. When you seise your interaction with the ball you are not in your system anymore.