Lockjaw Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think they are working on an anti gravity aerosol to allow folks to defy the laws of physics and travel to the moon with just one quick squirt. It doesn't work yet but it must be just a matter of time. It's not rocket science! Um... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 So that's the pinnacle of understanding of the known laws of science? Yes that might be true....for now..... Of course I couldn't hope to contradict your knowledge of the current known laws of anything, cos you'll make a fool of me, yet again! I just don't understand how you can be so arrogant as to say that the known laws of anything, are the be-all and end-all of everything! I don't know what the actual figures are (and I'm sure you will), but our understanding of all known and unknown things are infinitesimal compared to reality. Must rush out and buy and electric car! We might find modifications to these laws as we understand the universe better, maybe even weird little exceptions at the quantum level or something, but the chance that we will discover some process at a macro level that breaks them seems to be vanishingly small. If a study had demonstrated that though, they wouldn't care about creating petrol, they'd be getting the nobel prize in physics and probably be the most famous scientist since newton! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 I think they are working on an anti gravity aerosol to allow folks to defy the laws of physics and travel to the moon with just one quick squirt. It doesn't work yet but it must be just a matter of time. I've already discovered superior intelligence, just by posting this thread! :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 It's been true for a long time Pete, and until proven otherwise will remain so. You can try if you wish, but the only person who will make a fool of you is yourself - if you are going to come to a debate based on science and engineering with a profound lack of knowledge in the subject it's like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Very messy, and you tend to lose. It's not being arrogant to say that because a well founded law that has stood rigorous scientific tests for a century and a half predicts that something will come true. That's not arrogance, that's science. To then apply that science to building something useful is again not arrogance, that's engineering. I'd go and buy an electric car when fast charging ones become available. At the moment that's the way that things tend to be going. I'm really not trying to invent or discover something ground breaking, or something that breaks the known laws of anything, but I do draw the line at being so arrogant as to say that something is utterly impossible. Your scientific knowledge of such things and others is actually quite impressive, albeit, you frequently break into techno-babble to reenforce that fact. Yes those laws you refer to may have been proven and unshakeable for 150 years! They thought the earth was flat for thousands of years! Does that make it an unshakeable and dispovable theory in today world? Oh, and I won't be investing in an electric car anytime soon. They're too expensive to insure, too costly to buy and the range is crap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I'm really not trying to invent or discover something ground breaking, or something that breaks the known laws of anything, but I do draw the line at being so arrogant as to say that something is utterly impossible. Your scientific knowledge of such things and others is actually quite impressive, albeit, you frequently break into techno-babble to reenforce that fact. Yes those laws you refer to may have been proven and unshakeable for 150 years! They thought the earth was flat for thousands of years! Does that make it an unshakeable and dispovable theory in today world? Oh, and I won't be investing in an electric car anytime soon. They're too expensive to insure, too costly to buy and the range is crap! Much cheaper to buy a petrol car and run it on petrol made by combining solar energy, CO2 and water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 Much cheaper to buy a petrol car and run it on petrol made by combining solar energy, CO2 and water. And fits with existing ownership of cars and current technology! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I'm really not trying to invent or discover something ground breaking, or something that breaks the known laws of anything, but I do draw the line at being so arrogant as to say that something is utterly impossible. Your scientific knowledge of such things and others is actually quite impressive, albeit, you frequently break into techno-babble to reenforce that fact. Yes those laws you refer to may have been proven and unshakeable for 150 years! They thought the earth was flat for thousands of years! Does that make it an unshakeable and dispovable theory in today world? Oh, and I won't be investing in an electric car anytime soon. They're too expensive to insure, too costly to buy and the range is crap! I fear it's utterly impossible to have a reasoned civil debate with you for sure. You quite cleary don't understand science, and have no intention whatesoever of entering into civilised debate, so I shall merely confine my comments to correcting your more egregrious errors for the benefit of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I fear it's utterly impossible to have a reasoned civil debate with you for sure. You quite cleary don't understand science, and have no intention whatesoever of entering into civilised debate, so I shall merely confine my comments to correcting your more egregrious errors for the benefit of others. I’m still puzzled as to why these engineers and scientists are trying to do something that you claim isn’t worth doing, and why other engineers and scientists think they are onto something. The science looks straight forward to me combining solar energy, CO2 and water to make fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I’m still puzzled as to why these engineers and scientists are trying to do something that you claim isn’t worth doing, and why other engineers and scientists think they are onto something. The science looks straight forward to me combining solar energy, CO2 and water to make fuel. The process to do this is relatively easy - it's not too dissimilar from the Fischer Tropsch process that makes synfuel from coal. The problem is that it uses immense amounts of energy. To revert back the products to the reactants, costs more energy than you get from the reactants. If for example you were going to use this for solving carbon emissions from a coal power station, you would need to provide renewable input to do this. It's be far far better to never burn the coal in the first place - you would then have the renewable input of electricity still. If you wanted to store the power, then pumped storage is far and away a better bet. Looking forward on the long term, moving from IC cars that do burn fuel to something like a hydrogen powered car, or electric would be a better bet as well, and would be vastly more energy efficient too. As I've said before, this really does seem to be a solution looking for a problem - it can't fix the large scale issues, and where you want to look at the small scale issues it's just easier to refine the fuel normally. For something like making specialist pure lubricants, it's probably got some significant advantages, but that's hardly the "solving the fossil fuel shortage" that the media is touting about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 I fear it's utterly impossible to have a reasoned civil debate with you for sure. You quite cleary don't understand science, and have no intention whatesoever of entering into civilised debate, so I shall merely confine my comments to correcting your more egregrious errors for the benefit of others. It does seem strange that others on the forum have no problem in talking to me and debating other subjects. But to converse with you, I have to have a degree in physics! I'm glad you'll be watching over my posts to ensure scientific accuracy, it's very reassuring! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.