I don't get this idea. Why is watching TV bad? Seriously... I like TV, and it seems the submitter does as well. I don't know how often I hear, "Oh, I don't watch any TV." in a condescending voice. What is it with people who don't like television looking down on those of us who enjoy it?
What you propose, which is what this inventor seems to propose, is impossible. Think about it this way:
You have to use energy to start the car moving. You have to use energy to keep the car moving. Now the batteries have used up some portion of their stored chemical energy. "Simple", you think, "let's use the energy in the turning motor to recharge the battery! It's a beautiful concept!" Ok, so you use some energy in the motor to recharge the batteries. That is impossible, as energy has been lost to friction, drag, and inherent inneficiency in the electric motor. So there is not enough energy built up in the moving car to 'top off' the batteries. It just cannot happen. This is (yet another) case where someone is claiming greater than 100% efficiency. It just cannot happen.
Your point about welf-winding watches and such is irrelevant, as they harness energy from your body. A person wearing such a watch is burning calories to swing his/her arm, and thus chargin the watch. And trust me, there is energy being wasted here. There is no 'free energy'.
Your point about a flywheel is simply misinformed. You will always spend more energy getting a flywheel started than you will gain by harnessing the mechanical energy in the spinning flywheel. Remember, when you start to harness mechanical energy, the flywheel will SLOW DOWN. It's a fact, man.
This is actually VERY practical...
on
Type With Your Eyes
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I know a guy who was born with a serious physical handicap where he has very little motor control.
He cannot write, type, or even speak. For the longest time, he actually used a board covered with the alphabet to 'talk'. He would look at the letters on the board, and you had to decifer what was being looked at. This way, he could spell out what he wanted to say. His parents were quite quick at it, and they could carry on a conversation very well.
He actually upgraded to a pair of glasses w/ a small laser on the frame a few years ago. He could then spell by looking at the keyboard, which was covered with photo-receptors. Then, the computer would talk to you Hawking-style. It was a groovy innovation. It was quite pricey, though.
Perhaps an open-source innovation such as this could open up doors for people like him. It would make equipment used for social interaction cheaper and more readily available.
It often puzzles me as well. I was adopted (at one month) and I think I turned out alright. Granted, finding a tech job isn't the easiest thing these days, but I am doing well. My parents love me, and I love them.
I would like someone to tell me why abortion is seen as an ethical alternative to adoption. Being conceived in a post Roe v. Wade U.S.A., I am lucky my biological parents had the forsight to know that I am a person.
So if I buy an Athlon 500 and find out it runs 750 w/ no problems, I should keep it at 500?
That is stupid. I will overclock it to 750. Chips are coming off of the lines running at much greater speeds than the manufacturers want us to realize. The yields are just too damned good to ignore.
btw, this is from Sharky Extreme's CPU price guide: Athlon 750: $311 Athlon 500: $146
If you cannot see wthat overclocking is a viable alternative to spending too much money, by all means don't do it. For the rest of us who can barely afford the 500, it is worth a shot to at least try 750.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get this idea. Why is watching TV bad? Seriously... I like TV, and it seems the submitter does as well. I don't know how often I hear, "Oh, I don't watch any TV." in a condescending voice. What is it with people who don't like television looking down on those of us who enjoy it?
What you propose, which is what this inventor seems to propose, is impossible. Think about it this way:
You have to use energy to start the car moving. You have to use energy to keep the car moving. Now the batteries have used up some portion of their stored chemical energy. "Simple", you think, "let's use the energy in the turning motor to recharge the battery! It's a beautiful concept!" Ok, so you use some energy in the motor to recharge the batteries. That is impossible, as energy has been lost to friction, drag, and inherent inneficiency in the electric motor. So there is not enough energy built up in the moving car to 'top off' the batteries. It just cannot happen. This is (yet another) case where someone is claiming greater than 100% efficiency. It just cannot happen.
Your point about welf-winding watches and such is irrelevant, as they harness energy from your body. A person wearing such a watch is burning calories to swing his/her arm, and thus chargin the watch. And trust me, there is energy being wasted here. There is no 'free energy'.
Your point about a flywheel is simply misinformed. You will always spend more energy getting a flywheel started than you will gain by harnessing the mechanical energy in the spinning flywheel. Remember, when you start to harness mechanical energy, the flywheel will SLOW DOWN. It's a fact, man.
I know a guy who was born with a serious physical handicap where he has very little motor control.
He cannot write, type, or even speak. For the longest time, he actually used a board covered with the alphabet to 'talk'. He would look at the letters on the board, and you had to decifer what was being looked at. This way, he could spell out what he wanted to say. His parents were quite quick at it, and they could carry on a conversation very well.
He actually upgraded to a pair of glasses w/ a small laser on the frame a few years ago. He could then spell by looking at the keyboard, which was covered with photo-receptors. Then, the computer would talk to you Hawking-style. It was a groovy innovation. It was quite pricey, though.
Perhaps an open-source innovation such as this could open up doors for people like him. It would make equipment used for social interaction cheaper and more readily available.
It often puzzles me as well. I was adopted (at one month) and I think I turned out alright. Granted, finding a tech job isn't the easiest thing these days, but I am doing well. My parents love me, and I love them. I would like someone to tell me why abortion is seen as an ethical alternative to adoption. Being conceived in a post Roe v. Wade U.S.A., I am lucky my biological parents had the forsight to know that I am a person.
So if I buy an Athlon 500 and find out it runs 750 w/ no problems, I should keep it at 500?
That is stupid. I will overclock it to 750. Chips are coming off of the lines running at much greater speeds than the manufacturers want us to realize. The yields are just too damned good to ignore.
btw, this is from Sharky Extreme's CPU price guide:
Athlon 750: $311
Athlon 500: $146
If you cannot see wthat overclocking is a viable alternative to spending too much money, by all means don't do it. For the rest of us who can barely afford the 500, it is worth a shot to at least try 750.