Talk:Main Page

Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

Not editable

By clicking "Add topic", you agree to the terms of use for this wiki.

four forces control the universe

محمود-الدسوقي-66782 (talkcontribs)

There are four forces control the universe: 1- Gravity force: Is found between any two bodies as our bodies and earth or earth and sun This force depends on the masses of the bodies and distance between them

2- Electromagnetic force: Is found between molecules and atoms Which makes attract and repulse between them as a result of the charges of them it is very strong as compared with gravity force .It equals 10^36 gravity force

3- Strong nuclear force: Is found between protons inside the nucleus of the atoms Which have the same charge and this force hold them it equals 10^38 gravity force

4- weak nuclear force: Is responsible for the radiation of radiated materials

محمود-الدسوقي-66782 (talkcontribs)

New Technology, Beyond Current Choices

Toby-Grotz-69104 (talkcontribs)

This HeroX prize specifically states “the world will be much better if global clean

energy generation is dramatically improved beyond current choices”.

It also states “we need new and better sources of energy to pioneer breakthrough new energy technologies”.

Beyond current choices.  Solar, wind, fission, biodiesel, biogas, waves, hydro, coal, petroleum are the current choices.  By definition, none of there should be on this Wiki.

New energy technologies.  New energy technologies by definition do not include Solar, wind, fission, biodiesel, biogas, waves, hydro, coal, petroleum.

New and Beyond Current Choices implies deletion of a great deal of what has been entered on this Wiki.

This HeroX prize was inspired by the following talk. I suggest a review by all participants.

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

@Toby - thanks for the link. I agree with you, and feel it would be appropriate that you put this up for discussion also on the herox forum. Because beyond what's on the wiki, the crucial question is how we position the multimillion$ XPrize with regards to innovators in the classical (clean) energy space.

محمود-الدسوقي-66782 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the link; but this competition interested in renewable sources as this technology was new or old


Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

World energy consumption


1. Generating electric energy from any possible source.

2. Strength and unified electric energy by grids.

3. Minimise the loss of power by conductors.

4. Improve the electric storage systems and electric power banks.

5. Facilitate the replacement of electric storage systems and improve the methods of recharges the energy.

To enhancement electric car usage the manufactures have to develop a way to make electric car battery not strictly attached to the body of the car but more faster and easy to be replaced within minutes in available service centres for cars like main gasoline pump stations and this will give the advantage of instead of waiting the battery to be recharged in four or five hours the owner of car will leave the empty battery and took the fully chargeable one from that service centre and pay the cost of charging the electricity (yes, so simple like that). And instead of putting fuel in car tank in normal car the owner of electric car will replace his empty battery and renew his trip within minutes for extra 150 miles and so on in next service centre.

6. Diminish generating electricity from sources increase carbon dioxide content and enhance clean renewable sources.

7 -Founding WORLD ELECTRIC ENERGY ORGANISATION be responsible about global electric energy generation and management.

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

Electricity from ocean waves

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

Electricity from wind

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

Electricity from volcano

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

Experimental Free Electricity

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

hi Samy - thanks for the contributions. Would you care to add those on the relevant wiki pages ? I reckon they'll get a better visibility there than in these "talk" pages. Most of your contributions would fit best on the "Other technologies" page.

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

Dear Joris-van-der-Schot Thanks for your advice but I think some of us doesn't know how to do these changes. I try to move the page but this is the result.

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

I see... I guess we need some external help. I've asked Paul to contact me to sort this out.

Toby-Grotz-69104 (talkcontribs)

This HeroX effort seeks a new understanding of physics and Abundant Clean Energy and was inspired by Barry Thompson talk here:

Please review this video interns of the topics on this page.

Samy-mahdy-68122 (talkcontribs)

My understanding of HeroX competition that it is for all people who have the concern about better tomorrow for our next generation . It doesn't need scientists or persons have excellent theses handwriting to share but a human worry about the future and able to give ideas for correcting the mistakes of present time (like CO2 emission).It is an open discussion for solving a Particular problem where all of us got beneficiary.

Adam-Bostock-57773 (talkcontribs)

Some of the references lack scientific credibility. Don't assume that because something has a reference that it is a fact.

"Fake news" gets everywhere :-)

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

A good point: many of the references on this wiki are to scientifically doubtful technologies.

At the same time, I think that is partly the premise of this X Prize: to look beyond the boundaries of today's accepted science in the hope that among all the background noise, errors and fake technologies some legitimate solution pops up that can effectively provide an Abundant Clean Energy source.

So in terms of the wiki, I guess we need to go broad - and by its collaborative nature, different people will have different convictions and references about what constitute credible technologies. The actual X-Prize design will need to separate the "wheat from the chaff", and this wiki can really help to inform such a design.

What we can do, however, is try and keep the wiki as readable as possible. By being concise, structured and precise.

Adam-Bostock-57773 (talkcontribs)

Good points Joris.

What are useful patent references ?

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

Patents can be an important vector to search for and characterise the current state of research in new energy technologies.

However, extensively copying the WIPO database may not be the best way to make this wiki as informative as possible. Therefore I suggest some editorial guidelines :

  • Ensure the patent claims a new energy source

There's a near infinite amount of patents. The ones that should be of most interest to us are those at least claiming to describe a method to tap into a new energy source. For example, patents describing a "dynamo" aren't necessarily claiming a "new abundant clean energy source", they're possibly just describing a device that turns motion into electricity. Note : this may require that you actually read the patent you're citing. As you're doing so, it would be helpful to explicitly show the reader that the patent is relevant, either by including the abstract, or by copying specific phrases within the patent description or claims.

  • Limit the amount of patents on any single class of technologies

If well chosen, the first dozen or so patents are probably the most valuable. It can be helpful to add more, to show activity in the field and identify current researchers, but keep in mind there's the law of diminishing returns.

  • Prefer recent patents

Recent patents would seem more relevant than ancient ones to our goal of designing an XPrize. Perhaps one or two early patents can help explain the context of a particular field, but listing dozens of patents from before WWII is probably less relevant.

  • Avoid duplicates

Sometimes inventors get several patent numbers for essentially the same invention. You can generally tell because the title is the same or very similar, or the abstract, or the claims. Including multiple references to essentially the same patent is less informative. (Some inventors genuinely have several different patents, which may be worth quoting to show a level of activity over time, for example)

  • Identify and order the patents

It is helpful to group patents by author and by date, so readers can easily place the patents in some context. This also allows contributors to see if a new patent they've found is already on the list (the patent number alone is not enough, unfortunately).

  • Suggested Format

Taking into account the above, I suggest we try to include the following info on patents.

 - (Inventor, Year) or (Assignee, Year), e.g. (Airbus, 2011)
 - Number + link
 - Title of the patent
 - Abstract / text : somehow show that the patent is about an abundant new energy source.
 - optional : comments / interpretation / context are often helpful...

Thoughts & comments welcome !

Paul-Musille-39972 (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the great tips and suggestion for patent references Joris! This will help maintain the readability and organization of the wiki!

How to manage entries that are not energy sources ?

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)


I feel we need some kind of mechanism to ensure these pages only discuss potential new energy sources.

Any suggestions on how to manage this ?

As an example: the fuel free engine page contributions currently only talk about EMdrive. Whilst this is fascinating technology, it's not an energy source : the engine runs on electricity.

If such contribution go unchecked, we risk ending up with an avalanche of interesting tech, which will only distract from information relevant to the actual ACE X Prize.

Thoughts ?

Adam-Bostock-57773 (talkcontribs)

Yes, could flag them up as not being sources of energy.

Separate page for Hot Fusion

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

Hi - (hot) nuclear fusion is currently on the "other technologies" page. I think it would merit a separate page, as it is one of the most promising Abundant Clean Energy sources around, with thousands of scientists working in the field and billions of funding.

It's also sufficiently new: unlike many of the other technologies, hot fusion is not yet a practical energy source.

Adam-Bostock-57773 (talkcontribs)

Yes, I agree.

Similarly for solar energy (that lives in Other Technologies).

Merge pages : Van Allen and Ionosphere ?

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

Since Ionosphere and Van Allen belts seem to relate to very similar energy generation techniques (and patents), might it be worthwhile to merge them ?

Adam-Bostock-57773 (talkcontribs)

Could do they are similar. Equally I'm happy to leave them as they are.

Joris-van-der-Schot-69328 (talkcontribs)

All, do you think it might be helpful if we got a bit of an editorial discussion going on this page ? As the Wiki grows, maintaining readability becomes increasingly difficult, so perhaps if we just bounced around some ideas on this talk page, we could help to keep the wiki as useful as possible.

Paul-Musille-39972 (talkcontribs)

Welcome to the The Abundant Clean Energy Wiki Main Page!

Paul-Musille-39972 (talkcontribs)

Please use this talk page for discussing editorial issues and suggested organizational improvements.