It’s a formulation of various hydrocarbons.
You excite it in a closed chamber and capture the expansion of gasses. You then use this captured energy to make something magnetic spin around next to some coils.
This in turn will create a flow of electrons you can use to drive a motor.
And we have come full circle. That was a really small circle.
E = mc² + AI must be the obvious answer
What i think is funny is that AI has to equal 0 so its actually saying that AI is useless
So people fond of AI are criticising it themselves XDYeah. Because screw laws of thermodynamics, am I right?
As long as AI = 0 it works
Unfortunately, AI is currently negative, as in it makes things worse.
I is 0, as it is nonexistent
True. One cannot expect statistical parrots to be intelligent, no matter how sophisticated they are.
“Antrepreneur” HAHAHA
I’ve legitimately had someone suggest adding a small wind turbine to a car to generate power to charge the car as it’s moving.
the CIA doesn’t want you to know this
Someone give this man a job now
You’re eating the air resistance anyway so probably not the worst idea if it generates a more than negligible amount.
It will increase air resistance, so you don’t gain anything (a turbine will need more power to spin when there is an electric load).
It will increase air resistance,
Not if you position it, say, in front of the car so that you’re getting energy without getting hit without much additional force. If you somehow don’t need to see, the whole front of the car can be turned into a turbine. Now obviously we’re not making a perpetual motion machine here, but this could theoretically be the air resistance equivalent of regenerative braking.
Still increases air resistance. It gets hit by air, and that pushes it back into the fuselage.
Larger aircraft commonly have a ram air turbine (RAT) or Air Driven Generator (ADG) to provide some electrical power and hydraulics in certain emergency situations.
On CRJs, it’s right up the front: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxgPrpjByTE
Still delivers a percent or two penalty to fuel burn, and the tiny little generator doesn’t even come remotely close to making up for that.
It doesn’t work because the car’s front is shaped to minimize drag, and a turbine would add drag — forcing the motor to work harder to maintain speed. Turbines generate energy by resisting airflow, not letting it slide past. So you’re not harvesting free energy; you’re paying for it with more fuel or battery.
So you’re not harvesting free energy; you’re paying for it with more fuel or battery.
Of course it’s not free energy, but strictly theoretically if the turbine, say, doubles the air resistance in the area where it’s installed and works at 80% efficiency, then instead of losing A amount of power you’re losing 2A and getting 1.6A, for a total of 0.4A net loss. Now I have no idea if these numbers are even remotely realistic, but that’s kind of beside the point. Of course the turbine would simply be turning battery into less battery, but that’s better than the car’s front turning battery into no battery.
You have just invented a perpetuum mobile machine. The turbine will power the car which, whilst moving, will in turn power the turbine. Pure genious.
I hated working in startups and I’d get so many wackos pitching their bazillion dollar ideas to create the next Facebook.
Antrepreneur = Entrepreneur for ants?
what is this, a battery for ants?
Battery for vehicles for ants?
Simple really:
(Smaller battery) + (Greater capacity) + (Inexpensive Cost) = More Sales
Now the secret to achieving all three of those things rather than just two can be revealed to you for a small nine figure sum for the next ten years…
The Antrepreneur
Formula 2. He wants to make F2 cars.
So kind of you to take the time to consider his auspicious offer, what with all the millions of messages you receive!
A gullibility filter
