Noble Gas Engine

A

Average Joe

Padawan Learner
The noble gas engine, or plasma engine, has been around since the early 1970's when Joseph Papp first introduced it. Papp was an eccentric sort and although he got the motor to run, he was very secretive about it's inner workings and ultimately failed to manufacture it.
A company call Inteligentry bought up the rights from the Papp estate and, with further R&D, got the thing to work.
This engine looks very much like an internal combustion engine, and works on the same mechanical principal. The difference is that the cylinders are sealed and filled with a combination of noble gases. The gases are stratified (coaxially) within the cylinder under the influence of a strong magnetic field. RF energy is then transmitted into the cylinder to excite the gases and an arc is generated by a spark plug which then transforms the gases from their normal gaseous state to a plasma state. This transformation causes a powerful expansion to occur. The expansion pushed the piston down creating torque on the crankshaft.
When the electrical excitation is removed, the plasma reverts back to a gaseous state, creating a partial vacuum, which also helps draw the piston back up.
Nothing is "consumed" in the process and the cycle can be repeated indefinitely. There is no pollution, and a gas recharge, which is required after several months of continuous operation, costs less than $1.
Here is a picture of the engine which is ready for production,

Inteligentry_120716eng2_400.jpg


More information can be found here: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Plasma_Energy_Controls%27_Plasma_Expansion_Motor#Official_Websites

This engine has been proven, manufacturers have been licensed to build it and it's set to be announced in September. The odd thing is that the PTB haven't stepped in to shut this down yet. This is abundant, clean, virtually free energy in a small and inexpensive package. This will put oil, coal and nuclear energy out of business if allowed on to the open market.
The only thing I can think of is "that" they are far enough along with their "other plans" that it won't make any difference.
Anyway, it's something to watch...
 
averagejoe said:
This engine has been proven, manufacturers have been licensed to build it and it's set to be announced in September.
Click to expand...

It seems that there is always a 'virtually free energy' device on the verge of being released 'in the next few months', yet it never happens...
 
Anart: Exactly!

Many years ago, I went through this phase and learned
quickly: "There is no free lunch!", just an obsession! Such
things causes one to focus/shift attention to the mechanical
world, outside, which is an illusion, and away from the personal
machine, which is in real need of fixing.
OSIT.
 
dant said:
Many years ago, I went through this phase and learned
quickly: "There is no free lunch!", just an obsession! Such
things causes one to focus/shift attention to the mechanical
world, outside, which is an illusion, and away from the personal
machine, which is in real need of fixing.
OSIT.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not sure about the "there is no free lunch" regarding to this topic. After reading The Wave, it occurs to me that such "free" energy devices, related to UFT, are not only possible, but probably already used by shadowy spheres of humanity. It's just that the PTB won't allow such devices to become freely available, because controlling the energy ressources of the planet is, well, control, and they're craving for it. What anart means is, whenever a new free energy device is discussed amongst the "alternative" sphere, it's always a decoy.
 
anart said:
It seems that there is always a 'virtually free energy' device on the verge of being released 'in the next few months', yet it never happens...
Click to expand...
Well, you're right. Most of them have been suppressed over the years so we have to continue buying our power from someone else. However, this doesn't mean that the technologies aren't viable.
People have been conditioned to think that there is no "free lunch" when it comes to energy production. This is just more brainwashing which I see is still in full residence, even here.
If you read and understand the mechanism involved with the noble gas engine, you will see that it is quite viable. Joseph Papp proved the concepts with his engines, and Inteligentry has finished the job. I've read the patents and followed this technology for a number of years. Many prototypes have been built and run successfully for extended periods of time.
I agree that the "free energy" community has more than it's share of con artists, but they're not all fakes. Active suppression of these forms of energy have been in full swing since the days of Tesla.
Does it seem odd to you that automobiles are still getting roughly the same gas mileage as they did 100 years ago? At most, only about 25% of the energy in a gallon of gas is actually used to move your car. The rest is wasted in heat or remains unburned and exits out your exhaust pipe. Thousands of patents have been filed to dramatically improve the performance of gasoline engines, yet the car manufacturers have largely ignored them. Why do you think that is? Charles Pogue invented a catalytic carburetor back in the 1930s which was proven to increase gas mileage beyond 100 MPG. What happened? Oil companies added lead to gasoline, under the pretense of increasing octane levels. What it really did was to coat the metal catalyst in the carburetor with lead, rendering these types of carburetors ineffective. This is why lead had to be removed from gasoline when catalytic converters were required to be installed in new cars.
When one researches the history of energy innovation, one becomes aware that there has been a long running program of suppression and defamation towards anyone who dares to challenge the status quo.
You also have to understand that producing energy is like printing money. Since money represents power, there would be a huge shift of power from the central banks back to the people who produced their own energy. The last thing the PTB want is to lose any power that they have accumulated.
It's all about controlling the masses, and controlling energy is one of the main tenets in their scheme.
That's why I am a little surprised that this motor, as well as cold fusion, have gotten along as far as they have. The more these technologies are exposed, the harder it will be to undermine them.
 
The problem with these inventions is that they are displayed in controlled conditions without outside measurements allowed. So, we don't know how much energy is inputted, example the arc, which itself takes energy to produce (in some cases arcs can cause explosions stronger than explosives!). Some cars use cylinder deactivation, where the air compressed gets expanded without fuel. In an ideal situation without friction, the sum of energy of contraction and expansion is ZERO, meaning nothing is produced.

Have they put a load on this engine to see the work produced, or are they just spinning it?

The 100mpg carburetor is something that plays on the idea that we can run engines very lean (excess air to fuel) in order to get maximum efficiency. Even at 100% efficiency, the amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline, if fully utilized cannot drive a car 100 miles at the speeds claimed. It takes X amount of work (force times time) to move the car against air friction. Also, not only the engine itself wastes energy as heat (through the radiator), the transmission, differential, and the wheels have frictional losses.

Simple calculation... if a typical car at the time of the 100 mpg carburetor (as we don't use them nowadays due to inefficiency)gets 20 mpg at 30% efficiency, at 100% efficiency it would get 67mpg. If the car got 30 mpg, it would do 100 mpg.. but that requires 100% total efficiency. Perhaps if they followed the tactics of hypermilers, who drive ridiculously slow on highways, they would get these numbers.
 
Average Joe said:
Sorry man, I've been censured by anart and told I can't talk about this stuff anymore. C'est la vie
Click to expand...

Censured? Being a bit dramatic, aren't we?

The thread you're talking about is here - http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,28599.msg358431.html#msg358431 - where you were obsessively going on and on about electronics. This is not an electronics forum and you've clearly stated that you have an electronics forum on which you can talk about such things, so it's best to do it there.

That doesn't mean that a few comments about perpetual motion can't be made in this thread, obviously.
 
anart said:
Average Joe said:
Sorry man, I've been censured by anart and told I can't talk about this stuff anymore. C'est la vie
Click to expand...

Censured? Being a bit dramatic, aren't we?

The thread you're talking about is here - http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,28599.msg358431.html#msg358431 - where you were obsessively going on and on about electronics. This is not an electronics forum and you've clearly stated that you have an electronics forum on which you can talk about such things, so it's best to do it there.

That doesn't mean that a few comments about perpetual motion can't be made in this thread, obviously.
Click to expand...
The problem with introducing any new idea is that people want you to prove it. I try and be as general as I can, and provide links for further information, but there is always some armchair expert who thinks they have it all figured out.
I have spent years studying and researching energy generation, so I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my a**. Part of the reason I introce these concepts is to get people to realize just how much they have been duped into thinking of energy in terms of nonrenewable resources.
"Build a better mousetrap and the public will beat a path to your door" is utter nonsense. You build something that the PTB doesn't like and either it dissapears or you do.
Clean, renewable "free" energy is not a scientific problem, it's been around for over 100 years. The problem is that it's just flat not allowed.
 
Average Joe said:
anart said:
Average Joe said:
Sorry man, I've been censured by anart and told I can't talk about this stuff anymore. C'est la vie
Click to expand...

Censured? Being a bit dramatic, aren't we?

The thread you're talking about is here - http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,28599.msg358431.html#msg358431 - where you were obsessively going on and on about electronics. This is not an electronics forum and you've clearly stated that you have an electronics forum on which you can talk about such things, so it's best to do it there.

That doesn't mean that a few comments about perpetual motion can't be made in this thread, obviously.
Click to expand...
The problem with introducing any new idea is that people want you to prove it. I try and be as general as I can, and provide links for further information, but there is always some armchair expert who thinks they have it all figured out.
I have spent years studying and researching energy generation, so I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my a**. Part of the reason I introce these concepts is to get people to realize just how much they have been duped into thinking of energy in terms of nonrenewable resources.
"Build a better mousetrap and the public will beat a path to your door" is utter nonsense. You build something that the PTB doesn't like and either it dissapears or you do.
Clean, renewable "free" energy is not a scientific problem, it's been around for over 100 years. The problem is that it's just flat not allowed.
Click to expand...

That is all well and good - my only point is that this is not the forum for lengthy discussion on the details of electronics. Very simple, really.
 
Average Joe said:
The problem with introducing any new idea is that people want you to prove it. I try and be as general as I can, and provide links for further information, but there is always some armchair expert who thinks they have it all figured out.
I have spent years studying and researching energy generation, so I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my a**. Part of the reason I introce these concepts is to get people to realize just how much they have been duped into thinking of energy in terms of nonrenewable resources.
"Build a better mousetrap and the public will beat a path to your door" is utter nonsense. You build something that the PTB doesn't like and either it dissapears or you do.
Clean, renewable "free" energy is not a scientific problem, it's been around for over 100 years. The problem is that it's just flat not allowed.
Click to expand...

I agree that a lot of people want to see proof of how/why it works. We may never know if it concerns something that is not discovered yet in science (a particle or field or what not). That is something that won't change something that is actually happening. Like Laura writes, we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

However, a lot of these devices that I have read about (including browns gas) don't seem to have a proper energy analysis.

All they need to do is account for the energy inputted, and measure the energy output. That doesn't require an explanation of how/why it works, but it will show scientifically that the machine indeed does run on little to no energy. What I see now is pseudoscience, where an engine is run under no load, without measurements taken. No measurements but just a visual analysis is not impartial, we have no clue what other forces may be added to the mix. In some cases we have an announcement of a device with wild claims, and then magically the inventor disappears (without revealing the full plans on how to recreate the device). Somehow this causes the invention to be believable despite no real data.
 
Average Joe said:
People have been conditioned to think that there is no "free lunch" when it comes to energy production. This is just more brainwashing which I see is still in full residence, even here.
Click to expand...

Not "full" residence. Do you really know what others here know? Do you necessarily interpret what you 'see' correctly? You seem to have a similar issue as some of the classical adherents with which you appear to be negatively identified.

My main point: Classical energy science mostly assumes a closed system and assumes that entropy is positive (net loss). All scales of reality are quantum, however, and quantumists are working to make this generally known but in a useful way. It would be like saying that if you want to trash Newtonian mechanics, don't just point out anomalies here and there, do some work.

Newton's physics can describe the arc and path of a football thrown from one person to another. Richard Feynman's path integrals (which describe similar 'path-taking' in a quantum context) can do the same thing. Someone just needs to sharpen their pencil, do the math and scale it up to the macroscopic level so the rest of us can see it too.

This is something humanity needs a lot more of, I'd say. Let's paint a perfect picture by making ourselves 'perfect' first, so we can then just paint naturally. :)
 
Average Joe said:
You build something that the PTB doesn't like and either it dissapears or you do.

Clean, renewable "free" energy is not a scientific problem, it's been around for over 100 years. The problem is that it's just flat not allowed.
Click to expand...

Sure, and I almost stated this in the other thread: you're fishing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom