[abelardlindsay]

Another very novel energy idea. Way far out there, way out. This guy is either the next Einstein or just another one of the many new energy dreamers. Lots of theoretical stuff on the guys site.

Chukanov's Ball Lighting Interview

And his Ball Lightning website

[EnergySpin]

Did you notice the Quantum Free Energy phrase?
At least he is selling a book of BS and not stock .
Free+Energy = Do not mix together

[abelardlindsay]

Did you notice the Quantum Free Energy phrase?
At least he is selling a book of BS and not stock .
Free+Energy = Do not mix together

To someone who doesn't understand Quantum Physics, nuclear energy seems like "free energy". You mean you're not burning anything? How do you make energy without burning something?

Basic physics has been stuck in a big rut for the past 60 years. The billions spent on Hot Fusion, String Theory, Partical accelerators, etc. have not produced the energy messiah yet. I think new physics theories deserve some entertaining and the ocassional attempt at replication of well documented devices. The outright scoffing and ridicule is kind of unnerving. After all Einstein was a patent examiner who published a paper basically saying that 100 year old Newtonian theories that had been the gospel were wrong when he got started.

[EnergySpin]

Did you notice the Quantum Free Energy phrase?
At least he is selling a book of BS and not stock .
Free+Energy = Do not mix together

To someone who doesn't understand Quantum Physics, nuclear energy seems like "free energy". You mean you're not burning anything? How do you make energy without burning something?

Basic physics has been stuck in a big rut for the past 60 years. The billions spent on Hot Fusion, String Theory, Partical accelerators, etc. have not produced the energy messiah yet. I think new physics theories deserve some entertaining and the ocassional attempt at replication of well documented devices. The outright scoffing and ridicule is kind of unnerving. After all Einstein was a patent examiner who published a paper basically saying that 100 year old Newtonian theories that had been the gospel were wrong when he got started.

There is no free energy .. even with nuclear physics. String Theory and Particle Accelerators were never meant to provide energy ... they concern the genesis of the universe and the the structure of matter. The "outright" scoffing is because that guy deserves it. Every new physical theory has conservation laws built into its structure: you cannot get something for free. Einstein did not attack the conservation laws in Newton's theories, in fact he extended them by proving that matter is energy and vice versa in fact this is what we do with fusion. And research has been severely underfunded worldwide. This proves again the validity of conservation laws: garbage in, garbage out. You can either spend money on subsidies and strip mall construction or spend them on research. Which route was pursued?

[abelardlindsay]

You know it might be a good thing(tm) if this guy was full of it.

I mean which would you rather have? Lots of nifty little solar farms + stirling engines and a hydrogen/biodiesel economy. Or endless free energy for anyone who wants it with the ability to scale to world devastating levels of energy? If there are advanced civilizations out there periodically observing us, they are probably waiting to see if when we discover new sources of energy (i.e nuclear/oil) that we are mature enough to utilize them without destroying ourselves and our planet.

http://www.chukanovenergy.com/index.php?section=27

In the chain of energy evolution, every newly discovered source of energy is much more powerful than the previous one. For example, the range of nuclear ene4rgy is a few MeV per particle, while the range of chemical energy is only a few eV per particle. In short, the transition from chemical to nuclear energy is millions of times higher. Quantum energy produced from the phenomenon of ball lightning, could reach enormous levels--10^15-10^20 eV/particle. Quantum energy particle beams created by humankind could be thought comparable to the power of our sun--a terrifying concept.

[EnergySpin]

You know it might be a good thing(tm) if this guy was full of it.

I mean which would you rather have? Lots of nifty little solar farms + stirling engines and a hydrogen/biodiesel economy. Or endless free energy for anyone who wants it with the ability to scale to world devastating levels of energy? If there are advanced civilizations out there periodically observing us, they are probably waiting to see if when we discover new sources of energy (i.e nuclear/oil) that we are mature enough to utilize them without destroying ourselves and our planet.

http://www.chukanovenergy.com/index.php?section=27

In the chain of energy evolution, every newly discovered source of energy is much more powerful than the previous one. For example, the range of nuclear ene4rgy is a few MeV per particle, while the range of chemical energy is only a few eV per particle. In short, the transition from chemical to nuclear energy is millions of times higher. Quantum energy produced from the phenomenon of ball lightning, could reach enormous levels--10^15-10^20 eV/particle. Quantum energy particle beams created by humankind could be thought comparable to the power of our sun--a terrifying concept.

The guy is probably talking about the "zero-point energy" a hypothetical source of energy related to quantum fluctuations and quite likely the Kassimir effect. Even though the latter is real ... no one has figured out (and will likely never will) a practical way to get to that energy. In any case those forces operate close to Plank space constant which is tiny tiny tiny. BTW do the calculations E=mc2 to see the kind of mass his particles should have to give that kind of energy. You will end up with a particle really BIG! Which safely proves that the guy is looking for victims (sorry investors)

[abelardlindsay]

Ball Lightining does appear to be an interesting phenomenon though. According to Wikipedia, it has been confirmed to be real but does not have a good scientific explanation yet.

BTW, this is not ZPE. I know all about the ZPE theories, Casimir effect ,etc. I would have posted this guy under the ZPE forum if that's what he was talking about. Cold Fusion, ZPE that's mainstream "New Energy" rambling. This theory is a new one. Some kind of macro quantum effect.

http://www.chukanovenergy.com/index.php?section=27

My explanation of this energy may seem quite fantastic, but it accounts for all of the phenomena involved. As Figure IV-14.1 shows, the ball lightning, because of the quick and complete ionization of its atoms, appears to be below the bottom quantum boundary R(k,p) (point 3). In this state, it is "hidden," undetermined. It has no contact with the surrounding, determined world and remains unnoticed. To escape its isolation and at the same time to preserve the density of its substance (R=R3) unchanged, the ball lightning appears on the bottom boundary R(k,p) at point 2. But its very appearance in the determined world is accompanied by a bonus--additional energy, which is not taken from the ordered world but which is a quantum present from the vacuum (more precisely from nothingness).

Within the limits of deltaR=R=R(k,p,3), this seeming violation of the law of energy preservation is permitted. Nature rather observes the principle of minimum effect--in this case, the minimum gift of energy from the vacuum. The ball lightning appears exactly on the quantum boundary Rk,p to receive its minimum gift of quantum energy deltaE from the vacuum. This "fight" also explains why ball lightning has a preference for the form of a sphere. The energy emitted is proportional to its surface; and when the volume does not change, the shape of a sphere presents the minimal surface.

The idea of a violation of the law of energy preservation is not new but this violation concerns only the restriction : deltaE x deltaT>=H. It is believed that within the span of deltaT quantum time, so -called virtual particles could be initiated, a process which, in itself, violates the law of energy preservation. However, in the course of this quantum time-span, all energies are restored. The quantum moment ends with no losses or extra energy.

Things, however, are quite different with deltaR=Rk,p. If the ball lightning contracts another body which is at a distance deltaR<Rk,p from the ball lightning, that second body receives energy from the ball lightning, much as a child roaming around a room would receive heat if he learned against a warm radiator (although, to make the analogy exact, it would be the radiator which was in motion). The "hot" ball lightning loses nothing in the contact. It emits energy but does not lose energy because it has to stay on the quantum boundary Rk,p. Therefore the structureless nuclear component of ball lightning makes an energy transfer from its body to another body only when it is in a direct contact with the later.

[abelardlindsay]

Some Earlier Coverage of the whole thing. Looks like even the ZPE forum folks aren't convinced at all. Good, the last thing I needed was another Tunguska.

[abelardlindsay]

Here's a link to Free Energy New's Directory Entry about Chukanov and His Ball Lightining.

Pretty comprehensive including links to all his patents, statements from skeptics, etc.

[gnm]

I have personally seen/heard ball lightning - it resulted immediately after a nearby lightning strike - (The whole area was hugely charged, High mountaintop ridge at the cloud base - mist/rain with little crackling discharges jumping through the trees etc)

Anyways it makes a freaky buzzing noise and basically looks like a ball of bluish plasma with lots of little tendrils. It jumped around a lot then sort of broke into smaller balls and small tendrils.

-G

[Drjay]

It is always interesting to watch other's judge a technology (or potential one) based upon their own lack of understanding. He makes a lot more sense then the "string theory" boys. I wish him lots of luck.

Turning a concept into the engineering to bail us out of a big hole is going to take a lot of work, no matter which answer (or combination of answers) is used.

[MD]

I won't call "bullshit" on something I don't understand. Don't come looking to me for investments though.

[Drjay]

Don't get me wrong, he has got to deliver before I completely buy his theories. But if he can deliver what he believe is possible, then lots of things will change dramatically. I understand that he is working on turning it into a practical system.

It will be quite a trick to pull out lots of power out of a system that likes to melt electrodes.

[Ming]

It is always interesting to watch other's judge a technology (or potential one) based upon their own lack of understanding. He makes a lot more sense then the "string theory" boys. I wish him lots of luck.

Turning a concept into the engineering to bail us out of a big hole is going to take a lot of work, no matter which answer (or combination of answers) is used.

I won't call "bullshit" on something I don't understand. Don't come looking to me for investments though.

Seems to me you don’t understand it, and so you think no one can understand it.
So everyone must at least keep an “open mind” right?
Like in cold fusion or in homeopathy…

But let me assure you: Lots of people understand a lot more physics than you do.

Lots of people can look at that concept and see it for what it is…

[Caoimhan]

What do people mean when they say, "Free Energy"?

Do they mean it comes out of no-where, violating the universal laws of conservation?

Do they mean that the mechanism by which we can obtain it would be so cheap to produce, that it would cost more to send utility bills to people than the paper and postage would be worth, and therefore should be given away for free?

Or do they mean "Free of environmental hazards"?

Or how about "Free" in the sense that the energy isn't bound up in chemical bonds or the strong nuclear force... but instead "Freely floating" out there around us?

Which "Free Energy" do you object to?

To reject an idea because it is colloquially called "Free Energy" is stupid.

[Drjay]

Seems to me you don’t understand it, and so you think no one can understand it.
So everyone must at least keep an “open mind” right?
Like in cold fusion or in homeopathy… Very Happy

When you combine quotes from two different people, it often doesn't make a lot of sense. I've been in various aspects of the energy fields (nuclear, solar, power generation) for close to 30 years. I presently teach physics at a private university. But I certainly don't claim to have all the answers. I do know that when it come right down to it, we don't "KNOW" much about anything. Lots of experimental data, and lots of conflicting theories to explain that data. Remember that a theory is still a guess.

I don't expect everyone to keep an open mind, for that is beyond most people's nature. I'm just glad that there are people out there that are willing to put in the sweat and put up with the naysayers and make it happen anyway.

The material that I've studied so far on this gentleman, although it is very different, it is very consistant. There are many aspects of his theories that predict much more accurately actual experimental results than the main stream theories. Unlike many of the zero-point energy people, he doesn't try to overwhelm the reader with obscure mathematical relationships. His books are loaded with pratical formulas and calculations that explain many relationships that conventional physics cannot explain.

His experiments and prototypes indicate that he may have something that can be useful. I'm personally in a "wait and we will see" mode. Time has a way of exposing bad ideas and vindicating good ones. I hope that we can all keep an open mind to the point of accepting a truth when it yields technology that can change our lives, no matter what label those before have put on it.