What went wrong in science that this doesnt exist yet?

>>7817738
Physics turned out to be a real thing.

[psychosis intensifies]

File: Abstract023g2.jpg (297KB, 657x613px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 657x613px

>>7817741
>Physics turned out to be a real thing.
implying electromagnetic fields dont exist
implying generating a stasis field doesnt create a reverse vacuum over solid ground.

>>7817741
>Physics turned out to be a real thing

First post, best post.

Modern QM theory suggests that negative mass particles are impossible,
therefore antigravity is just sci-fi voodoo

>>7817760

Who said anything about negative mass or "antigravity?" It's never mentioned in the movies what principle the hoverboard operates on.

Flying cars and such were the dream of the future when the power usage of the average American was skyrocketing. Futurist figured it wouldn't be long before everyone was burning through jet fuel like it's going out of style just to pick up groceries.

It turns out there the trend wouldn't last forever and that runaway consumption was going to kill us all.

The future of transportation is efficiency. Flying will always be less efficient than going by ground.

File: 1916516546413.jpg (51KB, 948x1064px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 948x1064px

>>7817738
pic related

>>7817784
Well then what other principle would it work on?
If it relied on EM then the ground would have to carry a net charge for the device to work
If you wanted to use some form of air pocket like a hovercraft
you would need massive motors and liquid fuel, hardly a hover board if you ask me,
not to mention that without the multiple contact points of a traditional skateboard
It would have no stability

>>7817750
>implying electromagnetic fields dont exist

The Ground doesn't have a EM that is sufficient or regular enough for Hoverboards

>implying generating a stasis field doesnt create a reverse vacuum over solid ground.

explain

Lexus built one of those and as it turns out you need hundreds of rare earth magnets under the pavement for it to hover.

>>7817807
Just build a device that's strongly repelled by radiation of the sort emitted by hot asphalt.
Get on that, science people.

>>7817741
>>7817751
>>7817760
>>7817807
You lot are a bunch of narrow minded virgins, all that is preventing a real hoverboard of similar size is our current battery energy density. A guy did fly on a drone that was no more than 3x as big as Marty's hoverboard and the flight lasted 1 minute. Once this reaches 10 minutes people will probably start selling them. Honestly the military could have done it already with mini-turbojets, probably have in Area-51, but unlike the pleb market who is happy to spend $5,000 in jet fuel whizzing around for 10 minutes the military needs something long lasting in the field. The closest thing they ever declassified was the Williams X-jet so that shows they were working in that direction for years. And then of course there was Lexus' effort, If you really hate reaction thrusters then maglev tech is the closest you are ever going to get. It did manage to work in an extremely similar way to the one in the movie which had zero physics behind it which is quite commendable.

/sci/ has an awful engineering ethos, you think every new problem requires totally new physics, if you had any real skill you would be able to work with what you already have.

File: QyPRkSb.webm (338KB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 720x404px

>>7817738
But we have those already?

>>7817807
>Well then what other principle would it work on?

Obviously something we hadn't thought of yet in 1985. The mere fact that something is hovering doesn't violate anything fundamental (conservation of energy, etc.).

>>7817921
>all that is preventing a real hoverboard of similar size is our current battery energy density

Anon about that... We've pretty much reached the maximum of what's achievable. We can maybe bargain on like 10-20% in the future but that's the outlook on it. That's why new phones always get bigger and then advertise with longer battery life. It's not really that the batteries changed they just made them bigger.
Actually that was the main reason behind the invention of tablets. I remember when everyone thought Tablets were stupid, but now everyone uses them simply because phones need to be charged all the time

>>7817950
That's not true, tablets came in because people wanted a bigger screen, same reason why phones are getting larger. Nobody gives a shit about battery life anymore, if they did they would keep using a 2005 Nokia because that will last a week on one charge. Plebs today will accept shit battery life for whatever bells and whistles they throw in phones today.
Also
>We've pretty much reached the maximum of what's achievable.
This is another common belief all over /sci/ that I cannot stand. Like honestly why the fuck do any of you go into STEM if you all believe it's already cut and dried?

Guys, I figured it out! I present: the hoverboard!
It uses maglev technology. The board on top (hereafter referred to as a "hoverboard") is magnetized, while a second board, on wheels (hereafter referred to as a "rollboard"), carries the opposite polarity. The two boards are joined by non-rigid but taut connectors, and the hoverboard constantly hovers above while the rollboard rolls along the ground.

>>7817968

What's the point of hovering if you need rolls anyway?

File: 3054003-poster-p-1-dont-give-a-hoverboard-this-christmas.jpg (167KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1280x720px

>>7817977
gimmick

Gimmick

GIMMICK

>>7817977
This. That is dumb

File: Hoverboard.png (20KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 300x300px

>>7817977
Once you see the prototype you'll be all in

>>7817738
You could just strap two high-temperature superconductors to the board, but you'd have to be moving on magnet rails then.

>>7818015
So you're saying all I need is a shitload of sand to make the hoverboard-rollboard design work?

>>7817950
>we've pretty much reached the limit with chemical based voltage sources

Ftfy
While you're right that "batteries" as we know them are about at their limit
There are other methods of energy storage which could be explored and MIGHT be able to surpass batteries in the long run.

I actually have an idea for a crystal based system
>Inb4 crystals lol
Let me explain.
From the study of optics we know that crystals refract light at a unique angle based on the elemental structure and geometry of the molecules
Based on this it has been known for centuries that, in theory, a crystalline structure can exist such that light entering it will become basically trapped if the angle is correct.
Now we also have lasers which are just light that has been polarized to have uniform directionality
Also there is no theoretical limit to the amount energy that can be carried by a laser
So my idea is that if you had perfectly uniform crystal and you focused a laser beam on it at the right angle you could effectively trap that laser beam in the crystal for use at a later time
>but anon crystals in the real world aren't perfectly uniform
True, but with modern nanofacturing technology we could get pretty close
Of course there would still be some imperfections which lead to "leaking", but modern batteries have the same problem
>ok cool you got the laser in there now what?
Not sure about this one yet, obviously still a problem,
Maybe a controlled method of disrupting the structure to allow light to leak out in a controlled way?
>even if you could get the laser back out how are you going to do anything useful with it?
This is the easy part, PV cells work literally by converting light into electricity

Also I've heard that one of the most efficient known methods of storing energy is in the magnetic fields of capacitors,
but for this to be practical we need room temperature superconductors
Otherwise the line losses in the capacitor winding would make it far too inneficient

>>7817738
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plwX5NtF530

Pave the streets in copper I say.

>>7818063
I prefer capacitors. I have a 90F supercap and it is amazing. I want more, but they are damn expensive for the high quality ones.

>>7818042
What?

>>7817738
No one wants to found meme technology.

>>7818063
What are you smoking?

>>7818063
>Based on this it has been known for centuries that, in theory, a crystalline structure can exist such that light entering it will become basically trapped if the angle is correct.
How would that work? I'm having trouble picturing it geometrically.

>>7818101
I read in a book about renewables not to long ago that a collapsing magnetic field in a capacitor has an almost 100% conversion rate from stored energy to electrical energy.
Basically the idea the book put forth was that every population center could have a facility that was in essence just a gigantic capacitor.
The device would store energy from solar/wind/thermal etc plants during peak generating times, and then release it during peak use times

Because that is actually the biggest problem with renewable energy, it isn't generation,
it's the fact that our power grid was designed for immediate use
and often times when renewables are the most effective at generating is when that energy is least needed

For example the reason wind turbines suck so hard is that they have to have throttling mechanisms so that they don't generate TOO MUCH energy and blow themselves up
However if we had an efficient method of storing their their high burst output...
Well that would change things considerably

>>7818163
I'd draw a picture if I could,
Basically all matter has what is known as a reflection, and refraction index
Reflection is pretty obvious, it is the light that bounces off of a material
However not all light is reflected away, some light penetrates the material
This light is also deflected by a certain angle
This is known as refraction
This process of reflection and refraction happens at boundaries between dissimilar materials (surfaces, or like in a mirror the boundary between the glass and the metal coating)
So basically the light gets reflected and refracted twice, once when entering and once when leaving.
The specific levels of reflection and refraction depend on what the material is made out of, and the geometry of the molecular structure
This is why some stuff you can see through and some stuff you can't
It is also why when looking through something that is clear the image appears distorted
It is also how glasses work
Now in theory crystal structures can exist such that a photon of light will be refracted at such an angle that when it is about to leave the matrial it is reflected back into the material also at such an angle that it will be reflected again when it tries to leave again on to infinity.
The "leaking" occurs when the the light goes to leave through a part of the crystal that has an imperfection
If it isn't reflected at the right angle the light will scatter and leave the crystal
This process is also dependent on the wavelength of the light
This is why prisms work

Make more sense?

>>7818063
i want what he is having

>>7818211
I'm sure there are probably more problems with it than I mentioned
But that is why I'm studying electrical theory, optics, and materials
Also why I havnt invented it yet

I have just enough knowledge about the subject to think this might be possible, but not enough to actually sit down and crunch numbers to design a prototype, hence why I used the word "idea"

>>7818225
but just in theory without going deep.

how woud the laser be trapped without interacting with the crystal leading to a wayelength decline and leading to a complete loss of energy?

>>7818238
That I'm not sure about, I havnt studied QM yet in any detail,
As far as I can figure though it seems as if the light is never actually "absorbed" into the structure itself
As in the light is simply deflected by the electric fields of electrons, as opposed to being absorbed and increasing their energy states
I could be wrong though and even if I'm right there would likely still be some level of absorption
This might put a cap on the actual amount of energy which could be stored
Exactly what that cap would be I don't know, again I don't know enough yet about the math involved to calculate it.
I also know that the wavelength of the light is an important factor, and I know that wavelengths add through superposition.
This is why laser beams can theoretically carry infinite energy.
And again I don't know the numbers to predict how this would affect things
It's possible that it would limited to carrying a very specific energy level,
In which case exceeding or going below that level might actually result in a massive explosion as all of the stored energy is released instantaneously due to wavelength decay
Still it would be a cool new form of explosive if that is the case

I just don't have the necessary math skill yet to find out the answers

I once had an idea for a society whose primary form of energy storage was compressed springs. You'd have impossibly powerful stationary machines that compressed impossibly strong metal springs into tiny containers. All portable machines would be designed to slowly release the spring force inside the container to power themselves, like a pneumatic system running off of compressed air.
Actually, it's a pretty fun physics problem to figure out how an extremely large force acting on a tiny mass over a tiny distance could be used to power various mechanisms.

>>7818265
>As far as I can figure though it seems as if the light is never actually "absorbed" into the structure itself
nah that's not true.

I'm not an expert myself but I had QM and condensed matter physics and I don't think it would work in any way you described it. you can maybe go around it by implementing some synthetic shit but that would be more work than just using algae (or bacteria) for batteries

>>7818268
would be better off just using air or liquids since springs will brake after a certain amount of time, which is what we already do.

>>7818277
Could be, I honestly don't know

My life's goal is to work on designing energy energy systems
I believe that all of the world's problems can ultimately be solved by designing better energy generation and storage systems

I've never heard of an idea for using algae/bacteria for batteries, sounds interesting

>>7818278
And thanks to thermodynamics those systems are highly inneficient
Which is why we don't use them any more than we already do.
They are good for what we use them for but not much else

>>7818289
>My life's goal is to work on designing energy energy systems
this is really good man

>>7818298
Th-thanks?

File: thumbsup.gif (3MB, 176x176px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 176x176px

>>7818320
no seriously. it's just as you stated: it's one of the biggest problems of today.

energy production
and
energy storage

>>7818096
copper is the cheapest monetary denomination why dont we use pave the streets with copper?

>>7817760
Really? Do you have any evidence to back that up?

Implant + magnet in roads everywhere. Implant - magnet below cars, bikes, boards. Profit

>>7819049
>>7818872
This isnt needed an electrical field DOES generate lift, its the basic principal of ionization ya dinguses

>>7817738
Ok. So this confirms my theory that there exists a population of people here that would rather complain about the state of a world they know nothing about than actually explore it like scientists.

Hendo uses modified arxpax hover engines to make hoverbaords. Right now they work by generating eddy currents in a metalic surface below. The resulting magnetic field is what keeps the thing hovering.

http://hendohover.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFoRvQbP-y4

File: 1401356584174.png (130KB, 293x277px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 293x277px

>>7817738
what if instead of using a power source it was powered by psychic energy like the hormones that regulate the spirituality of our shakras?

File: interdasting.jpg (40KB, 480x397px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 480x397px

>>7819067
Hyees, I see where you're going with this. Perhaps I we could apply the knowledge from Quantum healing, we could make quantum entangled chakras between the road chakras and hoverboard chakras. We could tweak them by making one repell the other, yet kindly and not harshly, so they don't blow each other away.

>>7818265
Can't work.

No reflection is perfect. With every "bounce" some light will be converted to heat.
Same within the crystal structure as it passes through.

Look up molten salt batteries though for some interesting developments.

>>7818265
So if light is deflected by the electric fields of electrons, because of conservation of momentum the electron must be deflected too, so with enough light the electron gets delfected enough to fly off the atom. At the macroscale this translates to the system going BOOM!

>>7818166
>> a collapsing magnetic field in a capacitor
What are you smoking?

You are probably referring to superconducting magnetic energy storage. Where energy is stored in a superconducting coil. You just set up a current in it, and it doesn't decay because it's a superconductor.

Energy density is really low, but it can respond very fast

>>7818268
Except that metal yields under large stresses

Now if you really want crazy energy storage you get some neutronium make it into a disk and spin it really really fast. Because neutronium is held together by strong nuclear force, and the energy stored in a flywheel is proportional to how strong something is, the energy density is really fucking high. like nuclear reactions high. Like a tiny disk could power a car for 100 years high.

Of course bulk matter held together by strong nuclear force does not exist so it's worthless

File: 1417657633403.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>7818298
>>7818289
>My life's goal is to work on designing energy energy systems

why cant we just install a smaller nuclear reactor like they did in cars and do in subs?

>>7819109
I have an idea? Why don't we simply invent micro fusion batteries? Or better yet perpetual energy batteries?

>>7817921
Except that's not a hoverboard anon. A hoverboard floats silently above the ground. Presumably it exerts some repulsive force against a volume of matter below it, which is necessary to explain why it does not work on water.

IE board repels a column of dirt below it, dirt repels back, hoverboard floats. Board repels column of water, column of water moves, force experienced by board is now proportional to the rate of change of the water's momentum

We know of no such phenomenon that allow this.

>>7817738
hoverboards don't work on water, not unless you got power

>>7818015
Lexus already did that.

I remember coming across a paper on how EM fields could generate artificial gravity (theoretically enough to support hovercrafts). The very very basic idea is that if you put enough energy into a field you're gonna warp space-time. The problem is creating a technology that is capable of generating a safe and localized gigantic-ass-motherfucking EM field underneath a vehicle. Other than that I didn't really read into the specifics cuz I don't really care, it's not gonna happen anytime soon.

>>7819144
>Presumably it exerts some repulsive force against a volume of matter below it, which is necessary to explain why it does not work on water.

Its less about volume and more about mass. To hover requires a dense or higher number of particles for the board to be able to hover bouncing the energy through a return intake allowing it to hover.

>>7819144
>>7819175
There's also no form of friction for controlling turning.

>>7819096
>So if light is deflected by the electric fields of electrons, because of conservation of momentum the electron must be deflected too, so with enough light the electron gets delfected enough to fly off the atom. At the macroscale this translates to the system going BOOM!

all of the literarue i have read suggests photons have such insignificant mass compared to molecular structures that the desplacement would be infinitessmal

>>> a collapsing magnetic field in a capacitor
>What are you smoking?
>You are probably referring to superconducting magnetic energy storage. Where energy is stored in a superconducting coil. You just set up a current in it, and it doesn't decay because it's a superconductor.
>Energy density is really low, but it can respond very fast

ya my bad, meant to write inducer, i was thinking about it during class today and realized i got those 2 confused

>>7817926
I live in Philly and so many ppl at uni have these.

>>7820456
also the reason the energy density is really low is because with current superconductors they lose their superconducting properties if the electron density gets too high

File: radiation-pressure.gif (2KB, 246x248px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 246x248px

>>7820456
>>all of the literarue i have read suggests photons have such insignificant mass compared to molecular structures that the desplacement would be infinitessmal
What I have described is called radiation pressure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure

>>7820465
well it's really more due to the magnetic field strength than electron density:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_field
The energy density is also low due to the fact you need a large structure to prevent the structure from repelling itself apart

>>7817738
we couldnt figure out how gravity works.

>>7817738

yeah. YEAH!

you stupid fuckin scientists!

cure cancer and make me a hoverboard you lazy motherfuckers!!!

>>7820855
thank you anon.