Talk:Free energy

Sorry

Sorry to say, that "This theory is opposed by mainstream science" is correct and in this regard I am a mainstream scientist. What about logic: If it were possible to abandon the law of energy preservation, could you imagine the consequences? To say it constitutes "Renewable energy", however, or "Suppressed technology" is extreme, so please let me change that to reflect the very hypothetical nature of a theory completely overthrowing the core foundation of physics as we know it. -- Urban (talk) 07:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Argument back and forth does not make sense, it comes down to if you can believe that such thing like the m. motor can work or not. The article is still fair I would say, if you want to remove the terms in "constitutes", please go ahead. -- Sunvalley (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Fluctuations in Zero-point energy might be usable some day, like other quantum effects. Energy "is getting created in a process..." This is wrong, according to conventional physics including quantum mechanics. Energy is never created. Energy is transformed. It is confusing that a simple machine like the m. motor is cited as an example for an ongoing business war which is invisible to me AND a way to break free of almost all human "dependency", which is certainly appealing. This is more a question of a power dynamics, of fair distribution of resources, which is obviously more corrupted than any time in history these days. If the m. motor can do the trick I am the last one to object. I'm not shure what it "constitues", however, maybe an "idea" or "utopia"? -- Urban (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)