/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6892207]

Could perpetual energy be possible someday and if so, how?

And what effect might such a discovery have on society?

[Anonymous No.6892213]

Well we can't rule anything out with total assuredness, but I can't conceive of any way to achieve perpetual energy.

If it were ever achieved it would affect society drastically. With a source of infinite free energy, you could accomplish so many things that now are impossible. Use your imagination, man.

[Biologist'fag No.6892220]

>>6892207
In theory you can harvest free vacuum energy.
However, we've not yet devised a practical means of doing so. If such a device were contrived it would revolutionize power generation, and if the so-called EM drive really works, then you've got free transportation.

[Anonymous No.6892228]

>>6892213
Can you change a cisgendered male into a cisgendered female?

[Anonymous No.6892231]

>>6892207
you can't (reasonably) expect to create such a device because of muh conservation of energy
but you could cheat and extract energy from things with nearly infinite amounts of the stuff relative to our own energy consumption
suck it out of empty space, or out of a rotating black hole
hell even fusion would do the trick once they nail cheap ignition

[Anonymous No.6892235]

>>6892228

From my understanding of what is politically correct, gender is chosen by the gendee. Therefore, if the subject claimed to be a cisgendered male, and then claimed to be a cisgendered female, what you have described would have taken place.

Pretty stupid, huh?

[Anonymous No.6892241]

>>6892235
That doesn't answer the question, you little twerp.

[Anonymous No.6892248]

>>6892241

Can you?

[Anonymous No.6892310]

>>6892248
I know nothing about biology, neurology, and chromosomes so no.

[Anonymous No.6892382]

>>6892235
>gendee
Wtf, is that latest /sjw/ newspeak?

[Anonymous No.6892490]

>>6892207
This is the closest we could get to it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gods_Themselves

[Anonymous No.6892505]

>>6892235
i like you

[Anonymous No.6892673]

[Anonymous No.6892700]

>>6892220
>free transportation. The alleged EM drive doesn't produce energy, it's just doesn't need a reaction mass. It still needs to get all the energy it's outputting as thrust from electricity.

[Anonymous No.6892707]

>>6892207
you can create a "perpetual" motion machine (which will eventually fail) but you can't extract energy from it

[Anonymous No.6892749]

>>6892673
lol what s that from

[Anonymous No.6892767]

We already have the sun as an infinite energy source. A ring of solar panels around the equator could power the world easily. Oil companies don't want cheap energy, though.

[Anonymous No.6892776]

>>6892207
You can avert heat death with such technology.

If anything like that bullshit was possible...

[Anonymous No.6892777]

>>6892767
The sun is not infinite and solar panels around the equator can only provide power to areas close to the equator and only while the sun is shining on them. But I guess conspiracy theories are easier than actually creating solutions.

[Anonymous No.6892781]

>>6892700
no really the EM drive is a perpetual motion device if it works.

Let k be the force per watt

since power is force*speed:

P_out = P_in * K * speed

For speed > 1/K,

P_out > P_in

And you are getting more power out than you are putting in and you have a perpetual motion device.

[Anonymous No.6892782]

You can't get something for nothing. Not above the sub atomic level, anyway. Quarks and shit appear into and out of existence all the time with no net energy expenditure. The universe itself was once the size of a quark and it too came from nothing, only it decided to stick around, creating an energy debt that it still hasn't repaid. A vast amount of "negative energy" is spread throughout the whole universe.

[Anonymous No.6892791]

>>6892777
It's infinite as far as the concept of a free lunch is concerned. You're completely wrong about how much power it would generate, too. It's enough for the whole world a few times over.

[Anonymous No.6892798]

>>6892791
>It's infinite as far as the concept of a free lunch is concerned.
So it's not infinite.

>You're completely wrong about how much power it would generate, too. It's enough for the whole world a few times over.
I never stated anything about how much power it would generate. Nice reading comprehension.

It doesn't matter how much energy you can produce if you can't store it and/or transport it without losing it. How are you going to get that electricity to North America?

[Anonymous No.6892821]

>>6892791
Solar isn't all you people make it out to be.
It's expensive to manufacture, being silicon based, however new technologies are emerging in an effort to make it cheaper and more efficient.
They've yet to deliver. Not as if they won't... But their time has not come.
Building and maintaining such a vast solar array would be a pretty big feat of engineering, especially to meet growth.
We're talking space elevator type tech for that to be possible.
Just go online and buy up some solar shit to power your own home. It's expensive and barely scrapes by acceptable returns, under various nonoptimal circumstances.

Energy companies want to produce more energy, in effect making it cheaper.
The demand is so high and universal for cheap energy that you can make many times more money by selling more energy than to simply keep prices high and new technologies down.
It would be stupid to do so.
The truth is there is no easy way of getting it done.

>Pic related
It is how solar does not work.

[Anonymous No.6892830]

>>6892798
Powerlines, or wireless transfer. Enough energy could be made to account for losses.

[Anonymous No.6892835]

>>6892821
>you people

Am I detecting some oil company bias there?

[Anonymous No.6892843]

>>6892835
No I'm talking about you as a tinfoil.