Free, clean technology

>>16853309
Based on my limited physics and ECE knowledge, this is unlikely to be a possibility.

If you wanna dedicate your life to a cause, work on fusion tech. It has the potential to output ~300x the worlds current electrical demand all from one reactor. It would create clean and super cheap energy. The third world would come online overnight, the world would change, good minds from all over would have access to education and each other via the net.

If you wanna change the world, get a good degree and move to france because we dont fund this kind of research in the US.

>>16853309
>self supplying
I can stop you right there

A light generator to be FULLY self supplying would need to be at 100% ECE and also to be in an enviroment so cold, that only quantum tunneling could actually make it that cold.

I don't think it'll happen but i honestly hope you or someone else will pull it off one day, OP.

>>16853318
What are you talking about? Of course the US funds energy research.

>>16853778
This person is kind of right. Laser cooling is pretty efficient these days just fyi.

Your idea sounds like it would violate conservation of energy. Do you have any experience with physics OP? You should probably study it more if you really want to get into energy research.

>>16853309
>I ask that because I'm researching a way to create a light generator based in self supplying. And it would make computer processing a lot faster and hardware a lot lighter.
You can't just "create" light any more than you could any other form of energy. Even if you could somehow violate the laws of thermodynamics snd whip up a machine that reverses entropy, the cost and enviromental damage of replacing the entire planet's power grid and every electronic device connected to it would be several orders of magnitude more than just carrying on with the way we do things now for the next 1,000 years.

File: image.jpg (105KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 500x333px

>>16853888
Sure you can create light. The punch of a mantis shrimp is powerful enough to create photons.

>>16853976
Those photons don't arise from nothing. They arise when the cavitation bubbles formed by the punching motion collapse. Some of the energy released during that process is released as light.

The problem with your idea, OP, is that you need some kind of perpetual motion machine as the power source. Contrary to popular misconception, building a perpetual motion machine is not impossible: spin a gyroscope in a dark zero-gravity vacuum, or induce current in a ring of superconducting material, and you're done. What you can't do is extract any energy from what you've built: it cannot produce any light, sound, or heat, because if it does, the system will collapse once it loses enough energy (though this may take some time). For similar reasons, you can't draw on the current in the superconducting ring, because that drains the current from the ring.

I bring up the ring, because a proof-of-concept on that one has actually been accomplished. There are two problems that keep it from being more than a proof-of-concept, though. One if that we don't have room-temperature superconductors yet, so some external energy has to be used to keep the ring cool enough, but this energy can be accounted for. The other problem is that they have to draw on a minute amount of the current every so often in order to verify that it's still running, but this, too, can be accounted for. The system has been running for some years, drawing on no energy beyond what's needed to cool it, and losing no energy beyond what's needed to check it. The result is useless, but it runs. It would keep on running indefinitely if we didn't need to cool or check it, but it would still be useless.

That's the big obstacle to your technology, OP. You need to power it with something that can't be used as a power source. You actually can make things like this that use more mundane power sources, and they're already being used in some applications. But without that power source, they don't solve the problem.