Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #579035 > unrolled thread

geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 14:23 -0700
    Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 16:28 -0500
      Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-05-19 14:58 -0700
        Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 17:15 -0500
          Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 16:03 -0700
            Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-05-20 00:18 +0000
      Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-05-19 22:32 +0000
      Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-19 23:20 -0700
        Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 09:14 -0500
          Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 13:03 -0700
            Re: geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 16:44 -0500
              stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 21:54 -0700
                Re: stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 08:14 -0500
                  Re: stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Fusion Barrier Principle is too logical for modern day physics Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 15:24 -0700
                    Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 22:18 -0700
                      Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 19:53 -0700
                        Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 08:09 -0500
                          Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 14:11 -0700
                            Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 16:33 -0500
                        Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 17:03 -0700
                    Re: stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Fusion Barrier Principle is too logical for modern day physics Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-23 11:17 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#579035 — geothermal making oil/coal/gas obsolete; using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.

One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.

AP

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#579038

On 5/19/16 4:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.
>
> One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.
>
> AP
>

   Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
   World Forever
 
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579052

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:28:24 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/19/16 4:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.
> >
> > One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.
> >
> > AP
> >
> 
>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>    World Forever
>  
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
> community, and physics-related social issues.


http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579057

On 5/19/16 4:58 PM, Double-A wrote:
> On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:28:24 PM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 5/19/16 4:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.
>>>
>>> One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.
>>>
>>> AP
>>>
>>
>>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>>    World Forever
>>
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
>> to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
>> community, and physics-related social issues.
>
>
> http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/compact-fusion.html
>
> Double-A
>


   Some good posts today.


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579067

Sam Wormley
- show quoted text -
   Some good posts today 
---------------

I don't want to be a pin in the party balloon here, but i see an awful lot of puffery in that fusion article and very, very little fact.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579096

HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wormley
> - show quoted text -
>    Some good posts today 
> ---------------
> 
> I don't want to be a pin in the party balloon here, but i see an awful
> lot of puffery in that fusion article and very, very little fact.
 
Just like every other earthshaking fusion announcement for the past
50 years.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579064

Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/19/16 4:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>> In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.
>>
>> One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.
>>
>> AP
>>
> 
>   Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>   World Forever

A LOT of people have claimed that for about 50 years now.


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579181

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/19/16 4:23 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > In the early 1800s it was hard to imagine that anything would make whale-oil obsolete and then came gasoline. Well, today, in the thick of oil/coal/gas, it is hard to imagine anything would make them obsolete. But there is just that form of energy that is clean safe abundant renewable that can make oil/coal/gas obsolete. I am not talking about solar nor wind, or combined solar and wind. What I am talking about is tapping into Earth's internal heat energy-- geothermal.
> >
> > One of the last posters said that some city had a zoning law that all new buildings had to be geothermal buildings. Was it the Iceland capital city? Or was it some other progressive city? Probably in Europe.
> >
> > AP
> >
> 
>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>    World Forever
>  
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
> 

Read my fusion barrier principle which basically says that to control fusion in a machine requires the Ampere/Maxwell law which is a 1/3 greater of a force than the Coulomb force which is only 2/3 the force strength of Ampere/Maxwell. And so, to get controlled fusion on Earth you have to spend 1/3 more energy than the energy output of the machine. This is what happened in Nagamine fusion of cold fusion and this is what happened in JET in the 1990s. 

Fools look at the Sun and think that fusion energy has no barrier and that the energy from the Sun is surpassing breakeven. The Sun is controlled fusion but it is more energy input to create that fraction of fusion energy output.

Fools look at H bombs and say-- there is more output than input, and that is true, but is a H-bomb controlled fusion. So fools often trip up on the word "controlled".

So, here we have Sam trying to sing along with all those science wasters of money of USA on fusion machines that never reach breakeven. Science pork barrels.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579229

On 5/20/16 1:20 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> And so, to get controlled fusion on Earth you have to spend 1/3 more energy than the energy output of the machine.


   More energy out than in has already been demonstrated AP, showing
   your "theory" is rubbish.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579305

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 9:14:47 AM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/20/16 1:20 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > And so, to get controlled fusion on Earth you have to spend 1/3 more energy than the energy output of the machine.
> 
> 
>    More energy out than in has already been demonstrated AP, showing
>    your "theory" is rubbish.
> 
> 
Liar, for JET reached slightly less than 2/3 breakeven.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579322

On 5/20/16 3:03 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 9:14:47 AM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> On 5/20/16 1:20 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>>> And so, to get controlled fusion on Earth you have to spend 1/3 more energy than the energy output of the machine.
>>
>>
>>    More energy out than in has already been demonstrated AP, showing
>>    your "theory" is rubbish.
>>
>>
> Liar, for JET reached slightly less than 2/3 breakeven.
>
> AP
>

   Big leap for fusion: more energy produced than spent igniting fuel
> http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579383 — stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:45:02 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
(snipped)
> 
>    Big leap for fusion: more energy produced than spent igniting fuel
> > http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/
> 

Sam being caught like a fat fish in water by those who want more government pork barrel who know they are only 3% to reaching breakeven when they need 100% to be at breakeven. If I remember Rick Spielman of the 1990s who headed a laser fusion research saying that JET was at 66% breakeven and that laser fusion was at 3% breakeven at best.

And what Rick warned us, is that scientists will keep changing the meaning of the concept "breakeven" so long as they are given the funding money.

Anyone can point to a bomb and say the breakeven was surpassed, but is a bomb explosion a controlled fusion machine.

So it is little wonder that Sam would go along with such propaganda nonsense.

Here on last Thursday is Sam puffing puffery that fusion has a breakthrough:

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:

> 
>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>    World Forever
>  
> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
> 

But if fusion had reached breakeven several years back as per  http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/

Why is there not a fusion power station from Lockheed?

So what we see here is a game played by Sam, by Lockheed and by Arstechnica to try to fool the public and the government officials who are in charge of pork barrel fusion physics.

Physicists do not want to hear the truth, that it takes the Ampere/Maxwell law to control fusion which is an amount of energy that is 1/3 greater than the energy output of fusion which is the Coulomb law. 

Our Sun is fusion but there is more energy input into keeping the Sun together than the fusion output the Sun provides.

The H bomb has more fusion output than the input, but then again, a H-bomb is not a controlled machine. When you control fusion, you can never reach breakeven, for the input has to be far greater to keep it together.

Sam should stop liaring about fusion energy.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579412 — Re: stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

On 5/20/16 11:54 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:45:02 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> (snipped)
>>
>>    Big leap for fusion: more energy produced than spent igniting fuel
>>> http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/
>>
>
> Sam being caught like a fat fish in water by those who want more government pork barrel who know they are only 3% to reaching breakeven when they need 100% to be at breakeven. If I remember Rick Spielman of the 1990s who headed a laser fusion research saying that JET was at 66% breakeven and that laser fusion was at 3% breakeven at best.
>
> And what Rick warned us, is that scientists will keep changing the meaning of the concept "breakeven" so long as they are given the funding money.
>
> Anyone can point to a bomb and say the breakeven was surpassed, but is a bomb explosion a controlled fusion machine.
>
> So it is little wonder that Sam would go along with such propaganda nonsense.
>
> Here on last Thursday is Sam puffing puffery that fusion has a breakthrough:
>
> On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>>
>>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
>>    World Forever
>>
>> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
>>
>
> But if fusion had reached breakeven several years back as per  http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/
>
> Why is there not a fusion power station from Lockheed?
>
> So what we see here is a game played by Sam, by Lockheed and by Arstechnica to try to fool the public and the government officials who are in charge of pork barrel fusion physics.
>
> Physicists do not want to hear the truth, that it takes the Ampere/Maxwell law to control fusion which is an amount of energy that is 1/3 greater than the energy output of fusion which is the Coulomb law.
>
> Our Sun is fusion but there is more energy input into keeping the Sun together than the fusion output the Sun provides.
>
> The H bomb has more fusion output than the input, but then again, a H-bomb is not a controlled machine. When you control fusion, you can never reach breakeven, for the input has to be far greater to keep it together.
>
> Sam should stop liaring about fusion energy.
>
> AP
>


   AP is resistant to the progress, slow as it might be, toward
   sustainable nuclear fusion. We are currently in the learning phase
   of hot plasma behavior and control.



-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579467 — Re: stop the liaring on fusion breakeven; Fusion Barrier Principle is too logical for modern day physics Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 8:14:05 AM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/20/16 11:54 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> > On Friday, May 20, 2016 at 4:45:02 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> > (snipped)
> >>
> >>    Big leap for fusion: more energy produced than spent igniting fuel
> >>> http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/
> >>
> >
> > Sam being caught like a fat fish in water by those who want more government pork barrel who know they are only 3% to reaching breakeven when they need 100% to be at breakeven. If I remember Rick Spielman of the 1990s who headed a laser fusion research saying that JET was at 66% breakeven and that laser fusion was at 3% breakeven at best.
> >
> > And what Rick warned us, is that scientists will keep changing the meaning of the concept "breakeven" so long as they are given the funding money.
> >
> > Anyone can point to a bomb and say the breakeven was surpassed, but is a bomb explosion a controlled fusion machine.
> >
> > So it is little wonder that Sam would go along with such propaganda nonsense.
> >
> > Here on last Thursday is Sam puffing puffery that fusion has a breakthrough:
> >
> > On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-5, Sam Wormley wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>    Lockheed Martin Claims Fusion Breakthrough That Could Change
> >>    World Forever
> >>
> >> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/lockheed-claims-breakthrough-on-fusion-energy1/
> >>
> >
> > But if fusion had reached breakeven several years back as per  http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/giant-leap-for-nuclear-fusion-as-scientists-get-more-energy-out-than-fuel-put-in/
> >
> > Why is there not a fusion power station from Lockheed?
> >
> > So what we see here is a game played by Sam, by Lockheed and by Arstechnica to try to fool the public and the government officials who are in charge of pork barrel fusion physics.
> >
> > Physicists do not want to hear the truth, that it takes the Ampere/Maxwell law to control fusion which is an amount of energy that is 1/3 greater than the energy output of fusion which is the Coulomb law.
> >
> > Our Sun is fusion but there is more energy input into keeping the Sun together than the fusion output the Sun provides.
> >
> > The H bomb has more fusion output than the input, but then again, a H-bomb is not a controlled machine. When you control fusion, you can never reach breakeven, for the input has to be far greater to keep it together.
> >
> > Sam should stop liaring about fusion energy.
> >
> > AP
> >
> 
> 
>    AP is resistant to the progress, slow as it might be, toward
>    sustainable nuclear fusion. We are currently in the learning phase
>    of hot plasma behavior and control.

Wormley continues to "brown-nose" with other physicists to hide the fact that fusion research has reached only 2/3 breakeven, and has now started to use all sorts of stupid wrong and misleading forms of the concept "breakeven" in order to keep government money flowing towards building more wasteful fusion machines that will not work.

Why is it so difficult for the physics community to seriously investigate the idea that a barrier exists in a machine that can control fusion.

Why is it so difficult for the illogical minds of most physicists to not see that a H bomb delivers fusion in abundance but also destroys any sort of machine that controls fusion. So, if you want to breakeven in fusion, the H bomb is the only item. The Sun yields fusion, but its fusion is orchestrated by the immense gravity pull and is far less than 2/3 breakeven, which is likely to be 20 to 40% breakeven for the Sun and Stars. When a star reaches 2/3 breakeven, it explodes like a H-bomb into what is called a supernova.

Why is it that physicists will not explore a Fusion Barrier Principle-- the Ampere/Maxwell law that builds a controlled machine is 1/3 more energy consuming than the Coulomb law or Faraday law which is a fusion run.

Why is it? It is because most physicists are poor in logic, they are mostly illogical minded and when they are paid by government funding, they are even more illogical in thinking straight and correctly.

It was E. Teller in the last century that would popp up and say,-- in the next 5 years we will engineer a fusion machine and it never happened. Teller was a leader of the "illogical fusion tribes" and here we have Sam as a covey of illogical fusion tribe.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579496 — Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

Back to geothermal.

This is a good website on geothermal energy progress from Texas where Southern Methodist University is researching geothermal.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/environment/article/Geothermal-energy-is-gaining-ground-in-Texas-784784.php

Nice to know at least one University is researching geothermal, and where all universities should have a subject field of geothermal.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579673 — Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

Yes, hard to imagine that today's oil/coal/gas energy will
be as obsolete as whale oil with the emergence of geothermal.

iPhone post

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579761 — Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

On 5/22/16 9:53 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Yes, hard to imagine that today's oil/coal/gas energy will
> be as obsolete as whale oil with the emergence of geothermal.
>
> iPhone post
>
> AP
>

   Why did you choose ATT as your carrier? Just curious.

-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579892 — Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

Why choose physics when you are poor in it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579900 — Re: Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

On 5/23/16 4:11 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Why choose physics when you are poor in it.
>

   Because it interesting, exciting, beautiful and profound. You should
   take the time to bone up on it more, AP.


-- 

sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#579947 — Southern Methodist Univ researching geothermal Re: using Stefan Boltzmann law, can anyone in sci.physics prove that Geothermal is 5000 times superior to Solar?

And I believe the oil companies know the threat of geothermal and begun to mislead the public as they did in Global Warming.

AP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web