Silver Stackers logo

Silver Stackers

Discussion forum for those
who love to stack precious metals

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Forum registration is closed. It will reopen on Monday.
  • Index
  • » Platinum
  • » Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

#1 2016-02-29 15:52:55

Bullion Baron
Silver Stacker
From: Adelaide
Registered: 2009-09-14
Posts: 7,296
Trades :   139 
Website

Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

I was considering buying some platinum given the ratio to gold, but my concern is that a large shift to mostly electric cars over the next 10-15 years could seriously impact industrial demand for the metal.

Is any platinum used in electric vehicles? Roughly how much relative to a standard car today? What % of newly mined platinum supply is used for vehicles today?

Is falling industrial demand for platinum something that concerns you as an owner of the metals if so/not, why?

Offline

The following 3 users say thank you for this post: SpacePete, Holdfast, billybob888

#2 2016-02-29 17:04:32

tozak
Silver Stacker
From: Australia
Registered: 2011-05-05
Posts: 2,036
Trades :   177 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

When I looked into it a few years ago we were using approx 3g on average in every cat but 30g in a fuel cell so it was a 10x increase to switch to electric cars

http://forums.silverstackers.com/topic- … um-pt.html

However if you break it down to petrol/diesel then you typically use Palladium in petrol and Platinum in the Diesel

Also recent designs for fuel cells incorporate a PGM catalyst (Platinum Group Metals) so Palladium could be substituted and going by the price most probably would be

However combined mine production of the PGM class is very low compared to base metals and much harder to refine than most metals so if there was a massive push to fuel cell powered vehicles then expectation would be all PGM's to rise dramatically, however to date there is no such push while everyone is busy fighting over control of fossil fuels

Last edited by tozak (2016-02-29 17:05:06)


The whole world only one block apart

Offline

The following 2 users say thank you for this post: Bullion Baron, billybob888

#3 2016-02-29 20:14:48

SilverDJ
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2014-11-01
Posts: 2,527

Offline

#4 2016-03-18 10:26:08

leo25
Member
From: Sydney
Registered: 2010-06-08
Posts: 1,349
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

tozak wrote:

When I looked into it a few years ago we were using approx 3g on average in every cat but 30g in a fuel cell so it was a 10x increase

Well considering tesla only use standard 18650 lithium ion battery's in their electric cars I call BS on that. Just because one car might use platinum in their fuel cell (for now) doesn't mean everyone will. hydrogen fuel cell Is just one way of running an electric car.

Here are a few options.
Hydrogen Fuel cell
Current battery tech
Future battery tech
Solar
Nuclear fission
Nuclear fusion
Having a heap of mice running on a mill in the boot to generate electricity...

As long as they all have an electric motor that turns the wheel then they are all EV's

Anywho electric cars are so yesterday. I'm waiting for a gravity wave propelled car haha

Last edited by leo25 (2016-03-18 10:56:03)

Offline

The following 2 users say thank you for this post: ParanoidAndroid, spannermonkey

#5 2016-03-18 12:18:12

mmissinglink
Member
From: Everywhere...simultaneously
Registered: 2012-09-30
Posts: 6,081
Trades :   19 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

No precious metal is indispensable....not platinum, not gold, not silver. As difficult as it might be to believe, not even I am indispensable!    smile




.


In some ways, we are not that different

Offline

The following user says thank you for this post: Holdfast

#6 2016-08-06 12:32:48

Seedcoin
Member
From: NSW
Registered: 2016-07-14
Posts: 29
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Don't forget zero point energy, especially permanent magnet motors, the gravity idea is zero point too., so is static electricity, rare earth magnets could power electric motors that use no fuel, petroleum need only be used as a lubricant, wouldn't that be great!


You must be born again

Offline

#7 2016-10-03 10:36:14

Noxx
Member
Registered: 2016-09-29
Posts: 39
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

This is what I was just thinking about the other day. Every day we are getting closer to a tipping point to going all battery cars. Not only that but we are on the verge of self driving cars. Uber is starting to put out self driving cars as we speak. More and more people will not even buy a car. And on top of that Tesla is working on self driving cars. From what I saw of that they believe a family could only need one car. Or even share a car between relatives. And company cars even being shared. Because you can go to work, then send the car back to take the kids to school, or your wife to work. Also 3-D graphene could possibly replace platinum in solar panels. It seems we are at the cusp of a huge drop in demand for platinum. I'm sure at low enough prices it will still have some demand, but I wonder how low.

Last edited by Noxx (2016-10-03 10:37:06)

Offline

#8 2016-10-03 16:02:34

Gullintanni
Member
From: New Zealand
Registered: 2016-06-15
Posts: 359
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

mmissinglink wrote:

No precious metal is indispensable....not platinum, not gold, not silver. As difficult as it might be to believe, not even I am indispensable!    smile




.

You have got to be joking?
At SS id call you indispensable with your sound reason.
Up there with OZ and House....................................House does have that skill of being able to sound a bit mad sometimes which make them even more entertaining.

Offline

The following user says thank you for this post: House

#9 2016-12-26 01:45:42

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

tozak wrote:

When I looked into it a few years ago we were using approx 3g on average in every cat but 30g in a fuel cell so it was a 10x increase to switch to electric cars

No one is switching to fuel cells. It's too long to go into all the reasons, but there will never be mass production of fuel cell vehicles. Basically some car companies invested (and got taxpayers to invest) billions of dollars in this technology. The "hydrogen economy" is nothing more than another form of "taxpayer subsidy economy". Hydrogen is vastly more expensive to produce, distribute, and sell than gasoline. Now that lithium batteries can deliver 300 mile range cars, almost at normal prices, it's impossible to justify spending billions more on fuel cell fantasies.

Current lithium batteries don't use platinum, but chemistry is changing fast, and as others have pointed out, lithium air batteries might use it. Lithium battery technology is changing so fast it's not possible to predict what's going to happen with it, except that it's going to get better and cheaper.

Given price and performance trends of lithium batteries, I expect need for catalytic converter production to drop significantly within ten years. Within twenty years, there will be no more gas / diesel engine production for cars. Anyone who says otherwise is in denial or blind to the technology.

Offline

#10 2016-12-26 02:06:58

sfstacker
Member
Registered: 2016-10-25
Posts: 384
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Seedcoin wrote:

Don't forget zero point energy, especially permanent magnet motors, the gravity idea is zero point too., so is static electricity, rare earth magnets could power electric motors that use no fuel, petroleum need only be used as a lubricant, wouldn't that be great!

I'm extremely excited about zero point energy.

It was referenced along with extra terrestrial intelligence (ETI) in the wikileaks dump of hacked emails. (whatever that means)

However, if you understand zero point energy then how does that make you feel about PM's? ZPE technology could be used in conjunction with 3D printers to print sheets of gold/silver atom by atom.

Offline

#11 2016-12-26 02:10:54

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

sfstacker wrote:

However, if you understand zero point energy then how does that make you feel about PM's? ZPE technology could be used in conjunction with 3D printers to print sheets of gold/silver atom by atom.

It isn't real. But if it were real, then all our PM investments would be wiped out. But again, it isn't real, and I hope this important thread, which is an important topic, doesn't turn into a discussion of science fiction.

Offline

The following user says thank you for this post: radiobirdman

#12 2016-12-26 02:47:31

sfstacker
Member
Registered: 2016-10-25
Posts: 384
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

BullionQuestions wrote:
sfstacker wrote:

However, if you understand zero point energy then how does that make you feel about PM's? ZPE technology could be used in conjunction with 3D printers to print sheets of gold/silver atom by atom.

It isn't real. But if it were real, then all our PM investments would be wiped out. But again, it isn't real, and I hope this important thread, which is an important topic, doesn't turn into a discussion of science fiction.

It IS real...and guess what, all of our PM investments aren't wiped out. The science is there but the technology to manipulate that energy isn't.
The EMDrive was peer reviewed by NASA and confirmed to work. But the amount of thrust produced was so negligible that it wouldn't be cost effective to produce right now. This doesn't need to turn into a discussion of science fact because I can reference a piece of NASA technology that works of this same principle.
YOU can do the Googling if you'd like the name but there's a satellite we use that kept going off course ever so slightly. The same technology (wavelength bouncing off walls under a vacuum pressure to generate thrust) caused the item to twist while moving in its orbit.

Don't say contradicting what NASA has already found to be true and this won't turn into a discussion of science fiction.

Offline

#13 2016-12-26 13:53:09

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

sfstacker wrote:

It IS real...  The science is there but the technology to manipulate that energy isn't.
The EMDrive was peer reviewed by NASA and confirmed to work. But the amount of thrust produced was so negligible that it wouldn't be cost effective to produce right now. ..
Don't say contradicting what NASA has already found to be true and this won't turn into a discussion of science fiction.

It is not real.

The indicators that something is bogus science are a) there's no theory that explains the effect and b) the magnitude of the effect is so small it's just at the limit of detectability and c) it's difficult to reproduce. The EM drive fits all of these indicators. NASA will retract it when the figure out that it's experimental error and no one can reproduce it reliably.

When someone comes up with a theory to explain it, and a gives written instructions in how to build a test apparatus that confirms it, then it's real.

Extraordinary claims, such as a new force that violates the laws of physics, require extraordinary evidence. In this case, the evidence isn't extraordinary. It isn't even reproducible as science.

Forbes article wrote:

It's important to note that passing peer review means that experts have found the methodology of the experiments reasonable. It doesn't guarantee that the results are valid, as we've seen with other peer-reviewed research such as BICEP2. But this milestone shouldn't be downplayed either. With this new paper we now have a clear overview of the experimental setup and its results. This is a big step toward determining whether the effect is real or an odd set of secondary effects.

Again, an apparatus that violates laws of physics as we currently understand them is EXTRAORDINARY. Our skepticism should be at the maximum level for claims like that. Read what Forbes said there.

What would validation of the EM drive, as a real effect, look like? There would be a clear description of how to create it and measure it. It would be reproduced by several independent laboratories. The effect would be clearly measurable and consistent.

A great example of this was the measurement of the speed of light pre-1905. There was an effect that was happening (it was constant) that violated known laws of physics. Multiple laboratories kept on confirming that it's a real effect. Finally there was an experiment called the Michelson–Morley experiment, which was repeated by independent laboratories from the 1880s to 1905. These repetitions of the experiment kept getting the same results with more accuracy, until by 1905 the effect was measured with extreme precision and no one could dispute the effect (non-existence of aether) and a new theory of physics was needed. Einstein's theory of special relativity came along and explained the situation, and was consistent with the observations.

Ok, let's see a few more labs reproduce the EM drive, with increasingly precise measurements and perfect reproducibility. That's what Michelson-Morley demonstrated. That's the kind of proof you need before you say a new phenomenon in physics is real.

Offline

#14 2016-12-26 15:01:35

sfstacker
Member
Registered: 2016-10-25
Posts: 384
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

BullionQuestions wrote:

It is not real.

The indicators that something is bogus science are a) there's no theory that explains the effect and b) the magnitude of the effect is so small it's just at the limit of detectability and c) it's difficult to reproduce. The EM drive fits all of these indicators. NASA will retract it when the figure out that it's experimental error and no one can reproduce it reliably.


It is real. I just told you that the same technology has already been seen in one of NASAs satellites. Clearly you're too lazy to take five minutes to Google it so I don't even know why you're commenting on it.

Offline

#15 2016-12-26 15:36:16

radiobirdman
Silver Stacker
Registered: 2011-04-25
Posts: 2,300
Trades :   59 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Google knows everything

Offline

#16 2016-12-26 15:57:04

radiobirdman
Silver Stacker
Registered: 2011-04-25
Posts: 2,300
Trades :   59 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

And so do anthropologists

Offline

#17 2016-12-26 18:21:14

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

sfstacker wrote:

It is real. I just told you that the same technology has already been seen in one of NASAs satellites. Clearly you're too lazy to take five minutes to Google it so I don't even know why you're commenting on it.

I'm not too lazy. I did take time to search for that. I could only find this article on Science Alert: http://www.sciencealert.com/the-impossi … d-in-space

which said that there is a plan to test it in space but they don't know when. And Science Alert is not a high quality site. I couldn't find any references to this on NASA's websites. If you can find a reference on a NASA website that says something along the lines of, "we tested an EM Drive in space, and it worked, and here's the measurement from it", great, please let me know because I can't find it, and it would be front-page science news for the entire year if they did it. I did find a reference to NASA testing Hall effect thrusters, which work on a well-understood mechanism.

I also found references to a Chinese satellite test that they say generated a tiny amount of thrust, and they plan to use it on more satellites. Cool.

This level of verification is far far below any kind of scientific credibility. If that's all the evidence we need to believe something, we would believe many crazy things.

Claims with this level of evidence come up all the time. The Fleischmann–Pons experiment is a classic example: no scientific mechanism, the effect is at the threshold of measurement, and no description of how to create an apparatus that demonstrates it. You would think we would learn from that, but no, after that, millions of dollars were invested into Steorn's impossible "battery".

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Can you even post a URL on a NASA website that validates this? Should be easy right?

Offline

#18 2016-12-26 21:10:11

sfstacker
Member
Registered: 2016-10-25
Posts: 384
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

BullionQuestions wrote:
sfstacker wrote:

It is real. I just told you that the same technology has already been seen in one of NASAs satellites. Clearly you're too lazy to take five minutes to Google it so I don't even know why you're commenting on it.

I'm not too lazy. I did take time to search for that. I could only find this article on Science Alert: http://www.sciencealert.com/the-impossi … d-in-space

which said that there is a plan to test it in space but they don't know when. And Science Alert is not a high quality site. I couldn't find any references to this on NASA's websites. If you can find a reference on a NASA website that says something along the lines of, "we tested an EM Drive in space, and it worked, and here's the measurement from it", great, please let me know because I can't find it, and it would be front-page science news for the entire year if they did it. I did find a reference to NASA testing Hall effect thrusters, which work on a well-understood mechanism.

I also found references to a Chinese satellite test that they say generated a tiny amount of thrust, and they plan to use it on more satellites. Cool.

This level of verification is far far below any kind of scientific credibility. If that's all the evidence we need to believe something, we would believe many crazy things.

Claims with this level of evidence come up all the time. The Fleischmann–Pons experiment is a classic example: no scientific mechanism, the effect is at the threshold of measurement, and no description of how to create an apparatus that demonstrates it. You would think we would learn from that, but no, after that, millions of dollars were invested into Steorn's impossible "battery".

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Can you even post a URL on a NASA website that validates this? Should be easy right?


http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2012-209

A thermal photon, which is just a pulse of electromagnetism at a specific frequency and wavelength that produces heat and light, provided thrust and knocked the thing off trajectory. Same concept as the EM Drive except the EMDrive is making use of microwaves.

The problem with the EMDrive isn't proving that it works. You didn't look hard enough because it's already been tested and published.
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120 - Direct link to the published article on the subject.
You probably didn't find any references to it because you probably searched for it in incorrect. The experiment is titled Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio-Frequency Cavity in Vacuum. You're not going to find that referenced to NASA

The problem with the EMDrive is that the thrust it generates is so little that current technologies we have right now are so much more efficient and cost effective. Especially in terms of scaling up to something that can help us navigate the galaxy.

MY problem with the EMDrive is if they ever figure out how to scale this up then they potentially have a device that can use small amounts of energy to create or even easier manipulate atoms. Printing the individual atom would be the hardest technology to master. However, just taking an element and adding an electron to it although difficult to master it's easier than creating the atom from scratch.

Thats the basis of zero point energy.

Last edited by sfstacker (2016-12-26 21:50:15)

Offline

#19 2016-12-28 02:18:59

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

sfstacker wrote:

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2012-209

A thermal photon, which is just a pulse of electromagnetism at a specific frequency and wavelength that produces heat and light, provided thrust and knocked the thing off trajectory. Same concept as the EM Drive except the EMDrive is making use of microwaves.

No. Absolutely different. Let me explain...

One of the laws of physics is conservation of momentum. A system of objects can't change its total momentum. When you shoot a gun, the bullet goes one way, the guy holding the gun goes the other way. We experience recoil because momentum is conserved.

It has been known for over 100 years that photos have mass, and therefore, momentum.

Just like if I shoot a gun, I experience recoil, if I shoot a photo, which has mass, I also experience recoil. In fact, a spacecraft could be propelled by shooting a laser out of it, or bouncing a laser off of it.

The effect is quite small because photos have very small mass, but if you do enough of it, it adds up.

And even though the effect is small, it's big enough to observe quite easily, using a Crookes radiometer:

220px-Crookes_radiometer.jpg

Shine a light on it, it spins, due to the momentum of photos bouncing off the white plates, while being absorbed into the black plates.

Again, these things have been known for over 100 years.

One other interesting fact is that hot objects emit photons. That's how your old-style incandescent light works: the filament gets hot and emits photons. In fact, your light is turning electricity into thrust by generating photons! It's very little thrust, but you could measure it if you had an accurate scale. Any hot object that is emitting photons in one direction will generate this force, which could be called "thermal recoil force". It's just that hot objects generate photons and photons have mass and momentum is conserved, so an object that's hot on one side is going to experience thrust. It's a very small force, but it's big enough to be relevant to spacecraft.

The Pioneer anomaly is in fact caused by this "thermal recoil force". It's not a new force at all. It's been known to physics for 100+ years. It just took them some time to do the right calculations to account for all the factors to fit the observations.

NASA did not learn anything new from the Pioneer anomaly or from thermal recoil force. In fact, the idea of thermal recoil was proposed as the reason why comets have tails that always point away from the sun, and this was proposed 397 years ago.

The EM Drive is something totally different. Photons (microwaves) are bouncing around (resonating) inside a closed chamber. They aren't leaving. If they were leaving, it would be exactly the same thing as conservation of momentum and the same effect that makes the Crookes radiometer spin and makes comet tails point away from the sun and makes the Pioneer anomaly happen.

No, in the EM drive, momentum is not conserved. It's like a gun that generates recoil, without firing a bullet. It's a rocket that generates thrust, without anything coming out of it. If this is real, it shatters all our ideas of physics since Newton. Calling this claim "extraordinary" isn't even enough of a word. It's something that has never happened before. Even the Michelson Moorley experiments are not quite as shocking.

sfstacker wrote:

The problem with the EMDrive isn't proving that it works. You didn't look hard enough because it's already been tested and published.
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120 - Direct link to the published article on the subject.
You probably didn't find any references to it because you probably searched for it in incorrect. The experiment is titled Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio-Frequency Cavity in Vacuum. You're not going to find that referenced to NASA

That's interesting. They detected a minuscule amount of thrust. This happens in experiments all the time. That's why we need replication. This result violates our entire understanding of physics, so, cool, let's replicate it 100 times, measure it accurately, and then we know something is going on. Until then... it's easy to detect non-existent effects at the limits of detection. That's the same thing as Fleischmann–Pons did. They detected energy production, but at the limits of their detection equipment, and the more they tried to reproduce it with more accurate experiments, the effect kept on receding to the limits of detection. I'd love to be wrong but the same thing is going to happen here, because these "impossible" energy sources keep on happening in physics. 

There's a whole Wiki page on history of perpetual motion. You could write a similar history page on free energy sources, most recently the Steorn Orbo which swindled investors out of about $45mil.

sfstacker wrote:

MY problem with the EMDrive is if they ever figure out how to scale this up then they potentially have a device that can use small amounts of energy to create or even easier manipulate atoms. Printing the individual atom would be the hardest technology to master. However, just taking an element and adding an electron to it although difficult to master it's easier than creating the atom from scratch.

Ok... more basic physics. You change an element by adding neutrons and protons. Adding or removing electrons is easy. Every time you turn on a fluorescent light, you're removing electrons from the atoms in the gas. Every time you rub your feet on dry carpet and get a static charge, you're adding electrons to your own atoms.

sfstacker wrote:

Thats the basis of zero point energy.

Ah... I've posted enough already. There's some lack of basic understanding of physics here...

Offline

The following user says thank you for this post: radiobirdman

#20 2016-12-28 02:22:21

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Correction: I made a typo. Everywhere where I said "photo" should be "photon" of course.

Offline

#21 2016-12-28 02:37:25

radiobirdman
Silver Stacker
Registered: 2011-04-25
Posts: 2,300
Trades :   59 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

This bloke ffsfstacker

Offline

#22 2016-12-28 03:44:28

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

radiobirdman wrote:

This bloke ffsfstacker

Yeah. Cool video btw.

Btw, I said in my post that "photons have mass". I know that physicists say that photons have zero rest mass. I'm not a physicist and so I don't understand what that means or how to explain it. But photons can never be at rest, so if you're looking at calculating motion, you treat photons as having momentum and velocity, and therefore mass.

It's pretty easy to calculate how much force photons exert as thrust. NASA has a cool explanation for how to calculate the force of sunlight. It's small but quite easy to measure: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/Numbe … essure.htm

They derive that the force of sunlight is  4.53e-6 Newtons per square meter. If you had a square meter of white paper, it would experience a force from sunlight of 0.000461931 grams. Small, but not difficult to measure. This is about the level of "thrust" this Chinese satellite experienced from the EM drive, showing just how small it is and how it can be difficult to separate out other effects at this small level.

If you look up "solar sail", you'll find many proposals, going back many years, for using lasers or light sources to propel spacecraft. These all work on simple momentum of a photon, they all conserve momentum, and none of them are connected to this impossible EM drive thing.

I'm sad that US taxpayers keep getting taken in on these things. I know US taxpayers blew millions and millions of dollars on the Fleischmann–Pons experiment. I know that we all wish for some magical source of free energy, free thrust, freedom from laws of physics, and the ability to fly to the stars, and that wish will overwhelm our reason, so I'm sure that we will unfortunately blow millions more on similar things in the future.

Offline

#23 2016-12-28 03:52:19

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Wish I could edit: Solar sails (as well as thermal recoil, the Hall effect thuster and the Pioneer anomaly) are real, supported by long-established physics, in particular, conservation of momentum. They all work the same way recoil of a gun works: you send something out in one direction, you experience force in the opposite direction. In contrast, the EM drive, which claims to violate conservation of momentum, goes against the laws of motion as we have understood them since Newton's time. In the EM drive, nothing goes out, and you experience force, and the laws of physics say that that's impossible.

Offline

#24 2016-12-28 03:58:58

Ipv6Ready
Silver Stacker
From: North Sydney
Registered: 2016-01-08
Posts: 2,204
Trades :   39 

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

BullionQuestions wrote:

I'm sad that US taxpayers keep getting taken in on these things. I know US taxpayers blew millions and millions of dollars on the Fleischmann–Pons experiment. I know that we all wish for some magical source of free energy, free thrust, freedom from laws of physics, and the ability to fly to the stars, and that wish will overwhelm our reason, so I'm sure that we will unfortunately blow millions more on similar things in the future.

I don't know, many many endeavours that was a waste a money can become relevant.

Many everyday things were invented by institutions like NASA, ESA, Skunkworks and even DARPA, and at first what they were Researching might not have amounted to much and at the time could have been seen as waste of money. But ten twenty years later, with better technology what was thought as useless reasearch could become a cornerstone of new industry.


WTB 4 to 6 grams of pure gold. Don't care if it is coin, bar or granules. Near spot, suits anyone who has been tempted to open a certicard or just have some granules to make a ring

Offline

#25 2016-12-28 04:07:23

BullionQuestions
Member
Registered: 2016-12-26
Posts: 20
Trades :   

Re: Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Ipv6Ready wrote:

I don't know, many many endeavours that was a waste a money can become relevant.

Yeah but these "free energy" and "perpetual motion" schemes all have a certain smell about them. They're easy to spot. They play to human fantasies of being free of the laws of physics. They're offering us super-powers basically. And the non-scientists on funding committees fall for it. Not often, but once every couple of decades. Can you imagine that the Orbo "battery" got about $40mil in investments, for something that violates all the laws of physics and had no mechanism? They are playing to peoples' dreams, and hope overpowers reason, most often among non-scientists.

We know what it looks like when the laws of physics are broken. It looks like the Michelson-Morley experiments, over 100 years ago. They set out to test the existence of something (aether), and it didn't show up as they expected, so they tested more and more accurately, getting highly repeatable results. The commercial exploitation of those results came about 50 years later.

In contrast, with the Orbo "battery", the F-P cold fusion experiment, and now with the EM drive, the pattern is, someone observes an effect which is so tiny it's barely observable, and then immediately starts commercializing it without explaining anything, as if breaking fundamental laws of physics is the same as creating a new type of hard drive.

Any free energy or perpetual motion schemes should be viewed with utmost skepticism, because it's been happening throughout the history of science and they always always fall apart upon examination.

Offline

  • Index
  • » Platinum
  • » Will Platinum Demand Tank With Move Toward Electric Vehicles?

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB