Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Black Holes As Energy Sources Proven


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2695 posts

Posted 25 June 2020 - 04:55 PM

It seems a recent experiment has proven the Penrose Process and black holes as energy sources, read more at https://phys.org/new...on-exploit.html


  • Thoth101 likes this

#2 Mutex

Mutex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts

Posted 25 June 2020 - 06:23 PM

I'm very skeptical when people say 'confirmed' or 'proven', neither is the case here, we know next to nothing about black holes and how they operate. We make a lot of assumptions, but apart from the fact they have a lot of mass and do not radiate visible light we know very little.

 

Also, I have heard of this type of thing before where they 'simulate' a black hole using sound or magnetics or whatever, they don't you cannot simulate something like a black hole and expect 'negative energy' or some effect because you can do it with sound.

 

However, I do still like some of Penrose's idea's in regard to some aspects of space and time and energy and matter, it helped me with my model of relativity that matter gives space a fundamental property of space length, however not as a way of justifying the big bang. (although the model would still work). 

 

Also, if you need to include faster than light in your model I doubt you have confirmed or proven anything, sounds like Penrose is changing the rules somewhat. 

 

 

that energy could be generated by lowering an object into the black hole's ergosphere—the outer layer of the black hole's event horizon, where an object would have to move faster than the speed of light in order to remain still.

 

 

Penrose predicted that the object would acquire a negative energy in this unusual area of space. By dropping the object and splitting it in two so that one half falls into the black hole while the other is recovered, the recoil action would measure a loss of negative energy—effectively, the recovered half would gain energy extracted from the black hole's rotation.

 

 

Now, researchers from the University of Glasgow's School of Physics and Astronomy have finally found a way to experimentally demonstrate the effect that Penrose and Zel'dovich proposed by twisting sound instead of light—a much lower frequency source, and thus much more practical to demonstrate in the lab.

 

The problem here is it is not about frequency, it's about light and sound, and yes you can have light at sound frequencies that move at the speed of light, not the speed of sound. 

 

I worked on a radio (light) transmitter used to communicate with submarines it's frequency of operation was 44Khz (sound frequency) but it's radio/light. (same thing) and the difference is that sound goes way slower than light, and nothing goes faster than light. 

 

I don't think an advanced civilisation would require fishing in black holes to get their energy.  They also talk about 'negative frequency' as a way to extract energy, I think the only reason this was published is because of the name 'Penrose'. 

 

(man I am so cynical first thing in the morning before my first coffee  :vava: :D ) But things like this just seem like poor science and not great physics or the application of the scientific method.

 

But thanks for the post it is interesting, and interesting that it got posted in 'Nature Physics'.


  • OceanBreeze likes this

#3 Thoth101

Thoth101

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts

Posted 25 June 2020 - 09:49 PM

It seems a recent experiment has proven the Penrose Process and black holes as energy sources, read more at https://phys.org/new...on-exploit.html

That is some pretty amazing news. Now the question is how can they be used for an energy source?



#4 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2695 posts

Posted 25 June 2020 - 09:57 PM

That is some pretty amazing news. Now the question is how can they be used for an energy source?

of course they can it is great news for me(http://www.sciencefo...here-continued/).


  • Thoth101 likes this

#5 OceanBreeze

OceanBreeze

    Creating

  • Moderators
  • 1294 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 04:19 AM

I'm very skeptical when people say 'confirmed' or 'proven', neither is the case here, we know next to nothing about black holes and how they operate. We make a lot of assumptions, but apart from the fact they have a lot of mass and do not radiate visible light we know very little.

 

Also, I have heard of this type of thing before where they 'simulate' a black hole using sound or magnetics or whatever, they don't you cannot simulate something like a black hole and expect 'negative energy' or some effect because you can do it with sound.

 

However, I do still like some of Penrose's idea's in regard to some aspects of space and time and energy and matter, it helped me with my model of relativity that matter gives space a fundamental property of space length, however not as a way of justifying the big bang. (although the model would still work). 

 

Also, if you need to include faster than light in your model I doubt you have confirmed or proven anything, sounds like Penrose is changing the rules somewhat. 

 

 

 

 

The problem here is it is not about frequency, it's about light and sound, and yes you can have light at sound frequencies that move at the speed of light, not the speed of sound. 

 

I worked on a radio (light) transmitter used to communicate with submarines it's frequency of operation was 44Khz (sound frequency) but it's radio/light. (same thing) and the difference is that sound goes way slower than light, and nothing goes faster than light. 

 

I don't think an advanced civilisation would require fishing in black holes to get their energy.  They also talk about 'negative frequency' as a way to extract energy, I think the only reason this was published is because of the name 'Penrose'. 

 

(man I am so cynical first thing in the morning before my first coffee  :vava: :D ) But things like this just seem like poor science and not great physics or the application of the scientific method.

 

But thanks for the post it is interesting, and interesting that it got posted in 'Nature Physics'.

 

 

Count me as another skeptic

 

If I understand this correctly, this is what I think is happening:

First, they send a sound wave into a rotating foam disk where the sound energy is absorbed, and they continue to increase the rotation speed until they reach a null in the energy of the sound wave coming out, meaning most of the sound wave energy is now in the rotating disk. By continuing to increase the speed of rotation, the absorbed energy now is re-emitted and adds to the incident sound wave, making the emitted sound wave stronger than the incident wave.

 

This could be interpreted in terms of a heterodyne effect that happens when two signals are mixed. In this case, the incident signal is mixed with the absorbed signal giving a sum (peak) and difference (the null) that was observed.

Or, put more simply, a variation on the ice skater raising her arms above her head and spinning faster due to conservation of angular momentum, could explain it.

 

How they see this as a verification of anything to do with black holes is a mystery, to me anyway, since we know so little about BH phenomena.


  • Mutex likes this

#6 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2695 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 05:45 AM

Actually after reading your comments and reading this again, I do think this science news report is pure crackpottery! This is not up to the standards for the average science news report, honestly I don't know how this S**T passed peer review. I would have rejected it on the principal that a spinning cylinder and sound waves have nothing to do with spinning black holes, completely different phenomenon. This has greatly shaken my belief that mainstream science is correct that this A*S was accepted. the peer reviewers probably don't even understand how black holes work is the only thing I can chalk this up to.


Edited by VictorMedvil, 26 June 2020 - 05:58 AM.


#7 Thoth101

Thoth101

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 06:08 AM

Actually after reading your comments and reading this again, I do think this science news report is pure crackpottery! This is not up to the standards for the average science news report, honestly I don't know how this S**T passed peer review. I would have rejected it on the principal that a spinning cylinder and sound waves have nothing to do with spinning black holes, completely different phenomenon. This has greatly shaken my belief that mainstream science is correct that this A*S was accepted. the peer reviewers probably don't even understand how black holes work is the only thing I can chalk this up to.

Peer review is another story. Investigation of suppressed innovations,inventions,treatments,cures, and so on, rapidly reveals that the peer review system is arguably better at one thing above all others:censorship. 



#8 Mutex

Mutex

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 86 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 10:05 AM

 

 

This could be interpreted in terms of a heterodyne effect that happens when two signals are mixed. In this case, the incident signal is mixed with the absorbed signal giving a sum (peak) and difference (the null) that was observed.

Or, put more simply, a variation on the ice skater raising her arms above her head and spinning faster due to conservation of angular momentum, could explain it.

 

How they see this as a verification of anything to do with black holes is a mystery, to me anyway, since we know so little about BH phenomena.

 

I tend to agree and a heterodyne effect sounds about right, or even just a positive feedback loop, somewhere you need either above unity gain or it's just a payback from what you put in. 

It also reminds me, in your description of a parametric amplifier where you have a 'pump frequency' input. My suggestion would be not to go fishing in black holes and trying to keep things still and moving over the speed of light at the same time! You might just break the universe!!! (that would be a bad thing).


  • OceanBreeze likes this

#9 OceanBreeze

OceanBreeze

    Creating

  • Moderators
  • 1294 posts

Posted 26 June 2020 - 10:36 AM

I tend to agree and a heterodyne effect sounds about right, or even just a positive feedback loop, somewhere you need either above unity gain or it's just a payback from what you put in. 

It also reminds me, in your description of a parametric amplifier where you have a 'pump frequency' input. My suggestion would be not to go fishing in black holes and trying to keep things still and moving over the speed of light at the same time! You might just break the universe!!! (that would be a bad thing).

 

A parametric amplifier! Yes, that is the best description. I haven't seen one in years. We had some on board ship, used as satellite receivers but the doped LNSa and LNBs became so good with noise figure that we stopped using the parametrics.


  • Mutex likes this