No power is "unlimited." There are always limits of harvesting, even if there are not limits to supply. We could have far more electric power than we do, from the exploitation of nuclear energy, but that would require someone to decide to facilitate or promote the construction of nuclear powerplants. So, why don't we do it?
The fact that we don't have more useful power than we do is not related to a deficiency in technology. It is related to a deficiency in public policy and industrial investment. And that is related to a deficiency in public knowledge and understanding.
Again, and I don't say this to belittle your thoughts, you are thinking of current propulsion technology and the harvest of that fuel. Imagine if you can, that you can tap into the entire universe energy supply through one atom (any atom)... yes, unlimited. Law of conservation of energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed... it can only change form. All matter is just energy transformed. It also has a homeostasis frequency that you, yourself cause and generate... this is measureable. Read "The Human Primer"
Unbeknownst to you, I have spent a career considering advanced propulsion technology. One can imagine many magical things, such as the violation of thermodynamics. Not helpful to do so. Have you read up on Frederick Kantor's theory of information mechanics? Very insightful and potentially powerful. With it he predicts the masses of all the leptons to an astonishing level of accuracy. Have you studied the field of "cold fusion"? Something is definitely going on there, but U.S. science has become impatient and given up on it. The level of research going on in the rest of the world is sufficient to support companies that make specialized experimental apparatus. Have you read the journal "Galilean Electrodynamics"? Not for the faint of heart. Extremely hard physical theory. So, I do my reading where I can.
I stand as humbled by your tenure. I am a simple closet-physicist as a hobby, yet surprise myself at what I have comprehended. Thanks for the referred reading... headed to the beach in a few weeks and will take the book to read. :)
I must disagree with you on one point regarding ... the not so helpful to do so comment. What occurred to me when hearing these words was the same disposition that sustained the "central dogma" regarding DNA research and how "Junk DNA" suffered from that disposition. Cutting edge research now suggest incredible active roles are indeed occurring in this former forbidden playground of Junk. Some, not all, theorize that a great deal of the function within this junk is happening in a higher dimensional plane... thus our difficulty in detecting its function.
The deficiency is in both policy and tech. Hard to imagine (I know) but contained in the the universe is unlimited power that can be tapped into. All matter is built from energy. It is unlimited. Thus it could be available at literally zero cost. That, by itself, will dictate new policy. It frees up so much of our ideas to be expanded. It exists.
You believe this, but where is the experimental evidence? And the greenies tout solar and wind power as being at "zero cost," except that they omit all the actual costs of making it available.
Look up the "double slit" experiment. It illustrates wave energy where all possible outcomes exist until you intervene with consciousness (free will). That collapses all waves' possibilities to the one you consciously chose and it becomes a particle. That is energy transformed. It is a good start. I can send you more if you like.
I've known about the double-slit experiment since university. It involves only two possible outcomes. And free will has nothing to do with it. The removal of the effect arises if there is a material interaction with the photon (or electron, or whatever) before it hits the screen. A satisfactory explanation is that the unaffected particle's wave function extends laterally and results in self-interference with the other slit when it passes through a slit. There is no energy "transformed." The photon is absorbed by whatever it interacts with.
From an aperture, you get a similar structure of diffraction rings. In the laser weapon field, we referred to this as near-field beam loss. Diffusion of the beam pattern by pointing jitter and aberrations was termed far-field beam loss.
No power is "unlimited." There are always limits of harvesting, even if there are not limits to supply. We could have far more electric power than we do, from the exploitation of nuclear energy, but that would require someone to decide to facilitate or promote the construction of nuclear powerplants. So, why don't we do it?
The fact that we don't have more useful power than we do is not related to a deficiency in technology. It is related to a deficiency in public policy and industrial investment. And that is related to a deficiency in public knowledge and understanding.
Again, and I don't say this to belittle your thoughts, you are thinking of current propulsion technology and the harvest of that fuel. Imagine if you can, that you can tap into the entire universe energy supply through one atom (any atom)... yes, unlimited. Law of conservation of energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed... it can only change form. All matter is just energy transformed. It also has a homeostasis frequency that you, yourself cause and generate... this is measureable. Read "The Human Primer"
Unbeknownst to you, I have spent a career considering advanced propulsion technology. One can imagine many magical things, such as the violation of thermodynamics. Not helpful to do so. Have you read up on Frederick Kantor's theory of information mechanics? Very insightful and potentially powerful. With it he predicts the masses of all the leptons to an astonishing level of accuracy. Have you studied the field of "cold fusion"? Something is definitely going on there, but U.S. science has become impatient and given up on it. The level of research going on in the rest of the world is sufficient to support companies that make specialized experimental apparatus. Have you read the journal "Galilean Electrodynamics"? Not for the faint of heart. Extremely hard physical theory. So, I do my reading where I can.
I stand as humbled by your tenure. I am a simple closet-physicist as a hobby, yet surprise myself at what I have comprehended. Thanks for the referred reading... headed to the beach in a few weeks and will take the book to read. :)
I must disagree with you on one point regarding ... the not so helpful to do so comment. What occurred to me when hearing these words was the same disposition that sustained the "central dogma" regarding DNA research and how "Junk DNA" suffered from that disposition. Cutting edge research now suggest incredible active roles are indeed occurring in this former forbidden playground of Junk. Some, not all, theorize that a great deal of the function within this junk is happening in a higher dimensional plane... thus our difficulty in detecting its function.
I have no problem with "junk DNA." It is simply a reflection of the fact that we don't know everything.
The deficiency is in both policy and tech. Hard to imagine (I know) but contained in the the universe is unlimited power that can be tapped into. All matter is built from energy. It is unlimited. Thus it could be available at literally zero cost. That, by itself, will dictate new policy. It frees up so much of our ideas to be expanded. It exists.
You believe this, but where is the experimental evidence? And the greenies tout solar and wind power as being at "zero cost," except that they omit all the actual costs of making it available.
Look up the "double slit" experiment. It illustrates wave energy where all possible outcomes exist until you intervene with consciousness (free will). That collapses all waves' possibilities to the one you consciously chose and it becomes a particle. That is energy transformed. It is a good start. I can send you more if you like.
I've known about the double-slit experiment since university. It involves only two possible outcomes. And free will has nothing to do with it. The removal of the effect arises if there is a material interaction with the photon (or electron, or whatever) before it hits the screen. A satisfactory explanation is that the unaffected particle's wave function extends laterally and results in self-interference with the other slit when it passes through a slit. There is no energy "transformed." The photon is absorbed by whatever it interacts with.
From an aperture, you get a similar structure of diffraction rings. In the laser weapon field, we referred to this as near-field beam loss. Diffusion of the beam pattern by pointing jitter and aberrations was termed far-field beam loss.