Experiment to mimic Earths self-sustaining electromagnetic field.

**tommo** · 12-08-2011 12:10 AM

Dynamo maker ready to roll : Nature News & Comment

Two rotating spheres separated by thousands of kilograms of liquid sodium aim to mimic Earth's interior.

07 December 2011

Expand
Daniel Zimmerman is part of a team that has been working for ten years to simulate Earth's magnetic field.
S. TRIANA
The 3-metre-tall ribbed sphere looks like a 'visitor' from another planet, dramatically lit and encased within a sturdy steel box. In fact, the giant orb, housed in a cavernous warehouse at the University of Maryland, College Park, is meant to approximate Earth's core.
Ten years in the making, the US$2-million project is nearly ready for its inaugural run. Early next year, the sphere will begin whirling around while loaded with 13,000 kilograms of molten sodium heated to around 105 °C. Researchers hope that the churning, electrically conducting fluid will generate a self-sustaining electromagnetic field that can be poked, prodded and coaxed for clues about Earth's dynamo, which is generated by the movement of liquid iron in the outer core. If it works, it will be the first time that an experiment that mirrors the configuration of Earth's interior has managed to recreate such a phenomenon.
“Dynamos are easy to generate in nature,” says project leader and experimental geophysicist Daniel Lathrop. “The same is not true for the lab.” Yet simulating this process in the laboratory will guide our understanding of processes that take place 3,000 kilometres below ground, at depths that can be probed only indirectly — by analysing seismic waves that have travelled through Earth's deep interior, for example.
“There's no way for us to measure anything near the core directly,” says Lathrop. “It exceeds the deepest well by a factor of 100.”

**nina** · 12-08-2011 12:39 AM

Not sure why you put this in the Lounge.

Moved.

**Xei** · 12-08-2011 12:50 AM

Seen that before... Horizon show, I think. Not sure how an electromagnetic field can be 'self-sustaining'.

**tommo** · 12-08-2011 02:45 AM

Oh crap, I'm sorry again Nina lol

Originally Posted by Xei

Seen that before... Horizon show, I think. Not sure how an electromagnetic field can be 'self-sustaining'.

Me either.... should be interesting.

**Original Poster** · 12-08-2011 09:49 AM

Watch the movie Thrive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8CjG...eature=related

**Xei** · 12-08-2011 03:53 PM

Skipped to random point. Some dude talking about how he discovered free energy. Closed tab.

**Original Poster** · 12-08-2011 05:49 PM

Another award winning post by xei

**tommo** · 12-09-2011 02:27 PM

Tesla invented free electricity.

**nitsuJ** · 12-30-2011 08:51 PM

Saw this today on How The Universe Works on the Science channel. The episode was talking about how the planets in our solar system formed and what their existence was like until up to today. They were on the topic of solar winds and how if our planet didn't have our protective magnetic field then we'd end up like Mars, so they wanted to build something to mimic that and see if the magnetic field was actually generated from our core. Thus they built this object.

They lower a large ball--core of the planet--inside the sphere--planet--which is surrounded by the molten sodium. The molten sodium mimics the outer core in which the convection takes place that generates the field.

From watching the show the way I understood it, they've already recreated this event. But the article states they're not doing it until next year.

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 01:15 AM

Originally Posted by tommo

Tesla invented free electricity.

Nnno.

**cmind** · 12-31-2011 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by Xei

Seen that before... Horizon show, I think. Not sure how an electromagnetic field can be 'self-sustaining'.

Could be taken to mean that it continuously draws its energy from some source, without ever needing to be re-initiated. For example, a battery-powered watch could be called 'self-sustaining' compared to a watch that must be wound up every day.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 03:16 PM

Step 1: Do no research
Step 2: Assume lack of knowledge is evidence of falsehood
Step 3: Profit

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 03:24 PM

I always wondered how you were able to get any income to survive on.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 03:32 PM

Good job you twisted my remark back around.

It's as if one one quick act of wit you can some how ignore the huge derp you pulled.

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 03:38 PM

Ohhh I see, you think the burden is on the person hearing the claim rather than making it. Haha, classic OD!

Anyway, I strongly suggest you leave DV and become the world leader in this marvellous technology. You would save the planet and become pretty rich out of it. Bye.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 03:48 PM

Um... no.

The proof is in the film. You skipped to a random part that you did not agree with. You provided absolutely nothing to back up your claim opposing the film (that there is no free energy).

The burden of proof is in your court, this time. Just like it was in my extra dimensions thread and every other thread your spew this crippled narrow attitude of yours. If I make a claim and I support the claim with evidence or logic you can't slap the claim down without responding to the evidence or logic first.

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 03:52 PM

First law of thermodynamics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Noether's theorem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm confused, why are you not busy making plans to secure an investment?

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 03:58 PM

Why must you assume, when we say free energy, that its created from nothing?

Again I stress, watch the video. The Dynamo collects more energy than it uses. It doesn't create more than it uses. Nikola Tesla wanted to pull energy directly from the ionosphere, giving us an infinite amount. Of course rather than respond with a clarification you have to just say "nnno" as if that's a preferable response to nothing at all.

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 04:20 PM

There's an infinite amount of energy floating around the ionosphere which we can just suck out? Wow!

What you meant was 'renewable energy'. My roof is covered in solar panels so I'm quite aware that it exists.

The validity of whatever kind of renewable energy it is that you're talking about though, is so far totally unsupported, nor does there seem to be any evidence that Tesla had experimental support for it, or even made any claims about what it was and how it would work.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Xei

There's an infinite amount of energy floating around the ionosphere which we can just suck out? Wow!

What you meant was 'renewable energy'. My roof is covered in solar panels so I'm quite aware that it exists.

The validity of whatever kind of renewable energy it is that you're talking about though, is so far totally unsupported, nor does there seem to be any evidence that Tesla had experimental support for it, or even made any claims about what it was and how it would work.

First of all you're wrong when it comes to everything you said about Tesla

Nikola Tesla On Wireless Energy Transmission

Secondly, I am technically talking about renewable energy but you obviously have not watched the video or you'd know this already and you'd know it's not limited to solar power. Since you have not watched the video, you are not fit for this debate. Please watch it and try again.

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 04:36 PM

Thanks for the article on energy transmission; how is that related to renewable energy in any way?

How about you try to watch the video. Derp.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 05:12 PM

You can lead a horse to the water...

**Xei** · 12-31-2011 05:15 PM

You told me I was 'totally wrong about Tesla' and then linked me to an article that showed that you didn't even have a schoolchild's conception of what this conversation was even about. You have failed utterly, please go away now.

**Original Poster** · 12-31-2011 05:24 PM

I haven't read the article but I can only assume it sums up Tesla's views on the potential of energy.

Since your views on the potential of energy are contradictory to Tesla's, I naturally assumed it would be a good fit.

Now that I've gone back and read the article, my point remains valid. It's not that you're wrong, you're just wrong about what you think we're trying to argue, but you manage to keep your points vague enough as to provoke a response without having to make a claim of your own.

This attitude would have been perfect 40 years ago

"Solar panels!? Matter cannot be created nor destroyed therefore the only type of energy we can have is obtained through combustion!"

Believe it or not, that's not too far off the anti-green movement's slogan powered by Big Oil's PR machine back in the 70s

Again, the answers you seek are in the video.

**cmind** · 01-02-2012 06:15 PM

Enough of this "argument from ridicule" horseshit, OD. People saying you're wrong does not constitute proof that you're right and it's all a conspiracy. That's called paranoid delusions and you should get help. To make a scientific claim requires verifiable, peer reviewed scientific evidence. And that's just the beginning. You then need to repeat the verifications for decades afterward to prove that the peer review wasn't biased in some way. That's science. If you want pseudo science, there's the door -->