Does this model of the casimir effect extracting energy have flaws?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a proposed method to convert the Casimir effect into usable energy through a rotating drum system with magnetized plates. The system aims to generate heat via the magnetocaloric effect as the plates pass close together and then cool down when they separate. However, skepticism arises regarding the actual heat production, as the expected energy conversion may not be feasible. A response dismisses the proposal as scientifically flawed, indicating that the concepts presented lack coherence and validity. Overall, the feasibility of the energy extraction method is heavily questioned.
clearwater304
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
I'm doing a project in thermodynamics and after seeing the movie "atlas shrugged" tryed determining a method to convert the casimir effect into usable energy.

My system would have a rotating drum inside of a cylinder, with plates on the sides of the drum and the cylinder. The normal function of this system would be to produce heat and pump the water. I would expect each time the plates pass close to each other, they would become magnetized due to the casimir effect. This would cuase the plates to heat up due to the magnetocaloric effect. When the plates move away from each other, they would cool down due the magnetocaloric effect, making the heat produced essentially null. However, the plates would not normally completely demagnetize, yet the heat from the water will cuase it to lose hysteresis. This loss in hysterisis should produce extra heat in the system. This cycle should completely turn the energy stored from the casimir effect, to heat due to the magnetocaloric effect.

I'm very skeptical this system would produce much heat, but I saw this video on youtube and it seams to be the exact same system, in which he claims, produces more heat. Can anybody tell me what's wrong with this system?

[Crackpot link deleted]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. Nothing you wrote is correct. It's a string of scientific words placed together in a seemingly random order. Thread closed.
 
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K