If this result could occur at useful energy levels, it would be revolutionary. But very likely it's just an interesting anomaly that occurs at very low energy levels. My guess is that at such low energy levels, the disordered nature of the energy in the ambient heat doesn't come into play, but at higher energy levels it would. There simply wouldn't be enough heat energy in the surrounding environment to create the same effect at higher energy levels. Please let me know if there's a flaw in my undertsanding of the science.
I don't know if you can dismiss a theory of what is possible in the universe because you encounter a paradox. Paradoxes say more about the limits of human comprehension than they do about the reality of the universe. Much of quantum physics involves what we perceive as a paradox and yet there it is - the most successful theory ever devised. In fact, quantum theory provides a possible escape from the causality paradox of FTL travel with its many-worlds interpretation. The MWI gets into the whole parallel univeres thing and I really don't want to try to describe it here. (Google it for an explanation.) It's an interpretation that is being taken seriously by many physicists, though. My point is that too many basic assumptions about our universe are still unresolved and so things like FTL really can't be ruled out.
When my father had lung cancer, I did a lot of research on cancer treatments and came to believe that the best possible treatment for cancer was to get the body's immune system to attack it. Especially for cancer that has spread, you need a systemic treatment that targets the cancer cells while not damaging the healthy ones and nothing will ever be as effective at doing that as the body's own immune system. This treatment is very encouraging and is on the right track. There are also several cancer vaccines under development that train the immune system to fight cancer before it takes hold. In the future, you may be able to get vaccinated against the kind of cancers that you are genetically vulnerable to.
I think the myth that died is the one that existed within Microsoft which made them think they can herd their customers about like cattle no matter what kind of slop they dish out. The culture of arrogance has met with a bit of reality.
If Titan is massive enough to have a dense atmosphere, Mars certainly is. I don't think the mystery is how did Mars ever have an ocean in the first place. The mystery is what made the conditions change so that it couldn't have one now. There's a lot of evidence of a catastrophe on Mars in the distant past and I suspect that most of the atmosphere was violently blown off the planet and that the oceans then evaporated away.
Haven't we gotten past the point where the idea of Mars once having lots of water is controversial? I mean, it seems as if every new piece of evidence points in that direction, so what exactly still makes it controversial?
If the Democrats had nominated an old guy who'd been around forever and the Republicans had nominated someone fresh and dynamic whose candidacy was historic, the coverage disparity would have been the other way around. It's a mistake to say this is evidence of media liberal bias. Obama was simply more newsworthy and interesting.
You know, being a niche service is not such a bad thing. As you have probably noticed, the best things in life have to be sought out. I'm OK with Usenet being under the radar.
Even the Dept. of Energy now admits that cold fusion warrants further research. I was not setting up P&F as victims as much as suggesting that the interesting phenomenon they discovered has been a victim of bias. As far as P&F go, though, I recall that their university went public with their finding before they were ready.
If you look up "Bubble Fusion" on Wikipedia, you'll see that there have been replications. Perhaps not convincing enough replications to change people's minds, but there does seem to be something interesting enough going on with the collapsing bubbles to warrant further investigation. I'm concerned that everyone who makes a claim that could revolutionize energy production finds themselves facing attempts to destroy their reputations. What kind of environment is that to perform science in? If you follow the cold fusion research, you know that while cold fusion has not proved practical (it can be replicated, but not reliably), there is obviously some phenomenon at the heart of it that is certainly worth looking into. Pons and Fleishman reported a real phenomenon that - while it might never work out as an energy source - is nevertheless an aspect of nature that deserves study. However, it appears that whenever any natural phenomenon that could potentially make oil and coal obsolete, that science and anyone interested in it becomes a target. As badly as we need to get off of oil, people trying to find alternatives should be rewarded, not attacked.
If you've been following the discoveries about Mars over the last dozen years or so, you've probably noticed that each new revelation followed a trend of making the existence of past or present life on the planet more possible. This latest discovery certainly maintains the pattern. I think it's at the point where if evidence of life is dicovered, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Given how tenacious life is, and given how hospitable we now know Mars to be, I think it is likely that some form of life has evolved a way to survive on the present-day planet. Keep in mind that Mars is not always so cold. Tempatures can get well above freezing during the summer in some places. Condidtions just aren't as harsh as some of the places we find life on earth - like inside nuclear reactor cores.
I beleive it is obviously target practice. Since blowing up a satellite creates debris that can harm your other space assets, and yet a need exists to practice taking out enemy satellites, I would not be surprised if this top secret satellite was intended to fall to earth all along to provide the kind of target they needed. Blowing up a falling satellite avoids the problem of scattering debris. It will all fall to earth.
The flip side to all the Big Brother concerns with ebooks is the potential for little known authors of merit to reach an audience. Without the choke hold of a narrow and tighly controlled distribution channel, many more more voices can be heard. There is also no reason why any book ever needs to be out of print again. The Kindle and other ereaders do support user-owned content. And Amazon has a program for letting authors publish to the Kindle through Amazon. eReading is the future and it could be a very rewarding future.
Jasker.com has added the following text to their web site:
Since the release of the Reuters story concerning Jasker Power System on January 22nd 2002, we have received thousands upon thousands of enquires and many notes of congratulations from all around the world.
We find this remarkable as we had not published our web site address. It is our desire to answer your enquires but in order to do so it would significantly assist us if we have your complete information, including your title, company name, and the substance of your interest so as to prioritize our response.
We very much appreciate the public's warm reaction to our innovative technology and in the coming weeks we will be posting a lot more information concerning Jasker Power System on our site.
If this is a hoax, it looks like it's going to be an ongoing affair as opposed to a quick Gotcha! We'll see. I know that Michael has already done all the thinking for us, the verdict has been pre-rendered, the conclusions rushed to market in convenient, bite-sized morcels, but I for one would like to see some substanative information on the device before I announce to the world that I know all about it.
Exactly right. The Slashdot reaction to the Jasker device article has been over the top, sophomoric, and frankly just plain weird. The "News Media Scammed by 'Free Energy' Hoax" title is the real scam. Misleading in the extreme. Where does this type of reaction come from? Obviously a nerve has been touched.
"Three 100 Watt light bulbs created a drain of 4500 Watts", - it should be 300 Watts.
When the inventor referred to a drain of 4500 Watts in the news release, isn't it possible that he was refering to what the devise itself was drawing in addition to the three 100 watt bulbs. 4200 Watts for the machine and 300 for the bulbs equals 4500 Watts. Yes, that would have drained the batteries in about a minute and a half, so the device was obviously drawing on something else.
There's just not enough information available on the devise for people to have so much certainty about what it can and cannot do.
I'm really surprised at the hostility and shrillness displayed in most of the replies on this topic. I mean, yeah it is probably a hoax. I think it is a hoax, but I don't KNOW that it is a hoax. Most of the people commenting on this are coming on like they know something, like they have inside information or, more typically, they are just so smart that they know for sure. Especially the original poster, who implies the article has been officially revealed to be a hoax. It has not.
What's the harm in keeping an open mind? After all, if it is real it solves a number of fundamental problems we are struggling with. I don't expect anything is going to come of it, but I would like to find out more, see a better demonstration of the devise.
There is actually a credible person quoted in the Reuters news release who says it is possible the thing could be for real. This is Nick Cook, aviation editor for Jane's Defence Weekly. Last time I checked, JDW was a highly credible publication.
The biggest objection to the credibility of the Jasker devise is that it can only function as advertised if it is violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The energy has to come from somewhere, right? Well, maybe it is coming from somewhere. I've done enough reading on zero point energy to know that breakthroughs are possible. Personally, I think we are at least ten years and billions of dollars away from a breakthrough, but history is full of individual inventors pulling rabbits out of their hats. So, like I said, I'd like to find out more.
Slashdot Mirror
If this result could occur at useful energy levels, it would be revolutionary. But very likely it's just an interesting anomaly that occurs at very low energy levels. My guess is that at such low energy levels, the disordered nature of the energy in the ambient heat doesn't come into play, but at higher energy levels it would. There simply wouldn't be enough heat energy in the surrounding environment to create the same effect at higher energy levels. Please let me know if there's a flaw in my undertsanding of the science.
I don't know if you can dismiss a theory of what is possible in the universe because you encounter a paradox. Paradoxes say more about the limits of human comprehension than they do about the reality of the universe. Much of quantum physics involves what we perceive as a paradox and yet there it is - the most successful theory ever devised. In fact, quantum theory provides a possible escape from the causality paradox of FTL travel with its many-worlds interpretation. The MWI gets into the whole parallel univeres thing and I really don't want to try to describe it here. (Google it for an explanation.) It's an interpretation that is being taken seriously by many physicists, though. My point is that too many basic assumptions about our universe are still unresolved and so things like FTL really can't be ruled out.
When my father had lung cancer, I did a lot of research on cancer treatments and came to believe that the best possible treatment for cancer was to get the body's immune system to attack it. Especially for cancer that has spread, you need a systemic treatment that targets the cancer cells while not damaging the healthy ones and nothing will ever be as effective at doing that as the body's own immune system. This treatment is very encouraging and is on the right track. There are also several cancer vaccines under development that train the immune system to fight cancer before it takes hold. In the future, you may be able to get vaccinated against the kind of cancers that you are genetically vulnerable to.
I think the myth that died is the one that existed within Microsoft which made them think they can herd their customers about like cattle no matter what kind of slop they dish out. The culture of arrogance has met with a bit of reality.
If Titan is massive enough to have a dense atmosphere, Mars certainly is. I don't think the mystery is how did Mars ever have an ocean in the first place. The mystery is what made the conditions change so that it couldn't have one now. There's a lot of evidence of a catastrophe on Mars in the distant past and I suspect that most of the atmosphere was violently blown off the planet and that the oceans then evaporated away.
Haven't we gotten past the point where the idea of Mars once having lots of water is controversial? I mean, it seems as if every new piece of evidence points in that direction, so what exactly still makes it controversial?
If the Democrats had nominated an old guy who'd been around forever and the Republicans had nominated someone fresh and dynamic whose candidacy was historic, the coverage disparity would have been the other way around. It's a mistake to say this is evidence of media liberal bias. Obama was simply more newsworthy and interesting.
You know, being a niche service is not such a bad thing. As you have probably noticed, the best things in life have to be sought out. I'm OK with Usenet being under the radar.
Even the Dept. of Energy now admits that cold fusion warrants further research. I was not setting up P&F as victims as much as suggesting that the interesting phenomenon they discovered has been a victim of bias. As far as P&F go, though, I recall that their university went public with their finding before they were ready.
If you look up "Bubble Fusion" on Wikipedia, you'll see that there have been replications. Perhaps not convincing enough replications to change people's minds, but there does seem to be something interesting enough going on with the collapsing bubbles to warrant further investigation. I'm concerned that everyone who makes a claim that could revolutionize energy production finds themselves facing attempts to destroy their reputations. What kind of environment is that to perform science in? If you follow the cold fusion research, you know that while cold fusion has not proved practical (it can be replicated, but not reliably), there is obviously some phenomenon at the heart of it that is certainly worth looking into. Pons and Fleishman reported a real phenomenon that - while it might never work out as an energy source - is nevertheless an aspect of nature that deserves study. However, it appears that whenever any natural phenomenon that could potentially make oil and coal obsolete, that science and anyone interested in it becomes a target. As badly as we need to get off of oil, people trying to find alternatives should be rewarded, not attacked.
If you've been following the discoveries about Mars over the last dozen years or so, you've probably noticed that each new revelation followed a trend of making the existence of past or present life on the planet more possible. This latest discovery certainly maintains the pattern. I think it's at the point where if evidence of life is dicovered, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Given how tenacious life is, and given how hospitable we now know Mars to be, I think it is likely that some form of life has evolved a way to survive on the present-day planet. Keep in mind that Mars is not always so cold. Tempatures can get well above freezing during the summer in some places. Condidtions just aren't as harsh as some of the places we find life on earth - like inside nuclear reactor cores.
I beleive it is obviously target practice. Since blowing up a satellite creates debris that can harm your other space assets, and yet a need exists to practice taking out enemy satellites, I would not be surprised if this top secret satellite was intended to fall to earth all along to provide the kind of target they needed. Blowing up a falling satellite avoids the problem of scattering debris. It will all fall to earth.
I wonder if the Beta - VHS struggle would have turned out differently if there had been Internet discussion forums back then. It might have.
The flip side to all the Big Brother concerns with ebooks is the potential for little known authors of merit to reach an audience. Without the choke hold of a narrow and tighly controlled distribution channel, many more more voices can be heard. There is also no reason why any book ever needs to be out of print again. The Kindle and other ereaders do support user-owned content. And Amazon has a program for letting authors publish to the Kindle through Amazon. eReading is the future and it could be a very rewarding future.
Exactly right. The Slashdot reaction to the Jasker device article has been over the top, sophomoric, and frankly just plain weird. The "News Media Scammed by 'Free Energy' Hoax" title is the real scam. Misleading in the extreme. Where does this type of reaction come from? Obviously a nerve has been touched.
I'm really surprised at the hostility and shrillness displayed in most of the replies on this topic. I mean, yeah it is probably a hoax. I think it is a hoax, but I don't KNOW that it is a hoax. Most of the people commenting on this are coming on like they know something, like they have inside information or, more typically, they are just so smart that they know for sure. Especially the original poster, who implies the article has been officially revealed to be a hoax. It has not. What's the harm in keeping an open mind? After all, if it is real it solves a number of fundamental problems we are struggling with. I don't expect anything is going to come of it, but I would like to find out more, see a better demonstration of the devise. There is actually a credible person quoted in the Reuters news release who says it is possible the thing could be for real. This is Nick Cook, aviation editor for Jane's Defence Weekly. Last time I checked, JDW was a highly credible publication. The biggest objection to the credibility of the Jasker devise is that it can only function as advertised if it is violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The energy has to come from somewhere, right? Well, maybe it is coming from somewhere. I've done enough reading on zero point energy to know that breakthroughs are possible. Personally, I think we are at least ten years and billions of dollars away from a breakthrough, but history is full of individual inventors pulling rabbits out of their hats. So, like I said, I'd like to find out more.