Arugela

Obviously this isn't cold plasma. But it's similar. It's base application could be shared.(Components heavily using electricity as a primary source.) It could allow very specific long runs or other odd things to very specific circumstances. It could added to a boat. It could be a cheap easy system thrown into an existing ship to some extent. It could be emergency boats for rescue. If this could have cold plasma it could help decontamination features for those long dock quarantines. This could be a use for large boats. even if you keep current procedures you could reduce risk. It's fundamentally good for replacing UV and cancer concerns. Especially with increased use. Efficiency doesn't have to be a problem if you waist time or collect a lightning bolt or something. There are ways to practically get rid of the issue if desired. You can use another resource fundamentally. Plus one system being added makes the others potentially cheaper.

No, I'm not. the other fuel idea is the extremity of removing all things that cost money into the ship and trying to lower cost with fuel generated on the ship itself for autonomy. Obviously you can do this on the shore for independent fuel, but you could design a ship around it's own fuel generation for specialized tasks or for future ships in general. I would assume cold plasma is one of many methods usable. And it may be useful along a chain of other things. Either for efficiency or functional reasons. You might be able to lower overall costs also depending on changes. Probably depends on specifics like crew costs or other realities. Automated ships could reduce costs. Or at least adjust them. Maybe have a single crew running a small fleet of ships on a single run of automated vessels in a smaller boat moving along side them. It's a more radical change, but you never know. We're probably going that way to start with. But a crewless ship can do much more dangerous/radical things. cold or hot plasma or other methods could be intermixed in the ships design. It would depend on the ship. You could turn the entire hull into a massive machine designed for self maintenance. Cheap could be eventually replaced with added function by not needing dock based equipment.

None specifically. The point of the argument was to go over methods. Have you read the other hundreds of thread in this forum doing the same thing? The point was cold plasma application. I've said this repeatedly.

Any other way you can besides wind sails. Anything that works. You know wind sails also create friction. But because of this same reality one force can overcome the other circumstantially.

You are correct you can't gain without spending.(assuming that isn't wrong to start. Technically we could be wrong.) But if the spending is done by the earth rotation and moving the water itself. It's already spent. The motions is created by the massive universe, solar system, and galaxy we exist in. We live on a giant rotating ball of dirt and water. Moving at insane speeds. That is why wind power works.

But that's not important in a practical application as it's not significant enough to avoid using it potentially. This is what I'm referring to when I say real world application. And no, if there are multiple inputs and you are only taking from one input you are only reducing the one input by said amount. It could be independent of the other input which proportionally could be in an direction depending on design or circumstances. This is another example of oversimplifying a complex system. Just like a circuit you could have multiple converging sources at one point in the system and then you can have reduced loss. Because it's not really reduced cost. It was a mistaken premise. If you have two inputs. And this action results in the loss from only one intake source it reduces the whole in the end, but it does not reduce it as much if one input was used. If even proportions exist it literally halves the overall loss. Because assuming all input is from the engines would not have as much of a loss if part is from the water or other things in play. A boat in the water is in a big bunch of water with kinetic force. That is why the water can move the massively heavy ship to start with. So, we are already working with massive kinetic forces. If you take just from the waters inputs you can lessen the loss on the engines and maybe adjust things to be more efficient. Or if it's useful enough it doesn't matter. Or if it's used in a specialized matter it doesn't make any difference. That is part of a machines design. So, if your inputs from your water or other forces it take to make an additive and it outweighs the energy net loss from the ship you could hypothetically have a net gain. It depends on the circumstances. And a big boat is being pushed by a lot of water. So who knows. The potential is there.

If the maximum of the entire system electrical intake were 0.00000001% at maximum of the boats kinetic/electrical potential that doesn't matter to start with. It depends on the details. I'm assuming any electrical intake system would be far smaller than the hulls potential. Could be wrong, but I'm assuming it is. Plus the fun idea of blimps to do stuff in clouds. Again, useful without question if the boat is not moving and the sky and clouds are. We live on a giant generator. Even if moving function could outway fuel usage in application.

The point isn't to move. It's to gather energy for a battery. You don't need to invent a break. It's already generated by the fat hull of the metal ship being in the water. Plus physical realities of the boat act like an arc producer naturally. And if said application were turned on and used for a few minutes it doesn't matter if it's inefficient. The point is the function. Or if it's on for a small amount over the whole trip. The batteries storage could be massively less than the energy of the system. Then it doesn't matter if it's efficient. Only if the battery intake is on the same scale as the ships entire potential.

What if you only apply it when moving with the flow of water and it's doing part of the work?! You could even turn off the engines and sacrifice time with a large intake of the hulls energy potential and use existing energy. What about other oddities in the flow of water on a minute scale? Could they be utilized easily? The point is the boat is moving in a large existing system that could be accounted for and utilized. The ship is not an isolated system. Why do you have to be moving for this. What if you use it while sitting in dock.

You use a probe and make sure the electrical potential is higher going towards the battery compared to towards the water. The energy is already there flowing in a circuit. And by diverting it inside the ship instead of the water how is it a net loss? It's being gotten rid of by converting it. Or a small amount of it. Not to mention how much of that is actually used compare to the boats entire potential to have any significant impact. If you are charging a battery, even at a loss it's useful for the sake of the battery. If it's used for alternative system even if it's net loss it's useful. Even if it's for an additive it can be useful if it's need on demand for a specific time. that can outweigh general efficiency and cost. It depends. Practically realities outweight this. And such a device can be turned on and off. Can you generate any power without the engines running as the boat floats and the water naturally moves? The earth and solar system are literally doing the work then. which is again already in the equation when moving. It's not all done by the engines fuel usage!!! You could have modes for active travel with very low intake and high intake modes for sitting in the water. Assuming you are correct. You have to look at the entirety of an existing system. You are insisting it's all from the engines burning fuel. This is blatantly false. How much energy is from other things? The system is not by definition even just the ships equipment. As I said this is all a massive oversimplification.

How would moving it from the hull to the inside of the ship change kinetic energy if it's in a battery inside the ship? If you are already loosing the energy to the water wouldn't you be preserving kinetic energy by keeping it on the boat?

How does it slow the boat down? it doesn't add friction. You can apply the sensor to the inside of the boat. You are diverting resources already being grounded. It's already been generated...

No, that is a gross simplification. It absolutely doesn't work that way. You are oversimplifying optimized. It absolutely does change and drastically. You have to look at more detail as to the reason why and you'll see why something is not used circumstancially. The optimized industry is by definition very sluggish in practice. There is endless room for growth. That is not why changes don't happen. And cost is not a static thing. The way the changes happen also happen because of the work you put into the change. You are treating that overly simply also. And there are things that outway cost both in the immediate and long term. You can push cost to make something standard and cost effective. It depends. This happens on small scales also making technology development very useful even if it's not effective cost wise now. This is very real thing. There is a lot more too it. Much of what we have can be the result of not pushing. It's more versatile than you are describing. And it's a lot more complicated. And that would void the point of the discussion. And with corona we are talking about unknowns and a potential for morphing of the virus or other issues we may not be able to predict. So a little measure may go a long way. Especially, if it can be simplified down to a small piece of equipment and some special containers. What if we have to start being carefully of it changing from one eastern variation to a western one because of long travel distances. It may be important to be extra carefully and not assume it dies on the surface so easily. One mistake and it could get worse. And actually there are a bunch of methods using the flame looking variation simply going over the surface on a conveyor belt. Then the only gas it may need is oxygen.

And that brings up another idea if it's in the water around the hull isn't that how these methods generally work. Could it be used on the outside of the hull to be applied in some way? Interestingly if you could do it over the entire hull. Or if you could spot use it as part of a machine physically touching the hull. It doesn't result in the ship using more fuel. It results in the system using more energy. If the system is using more energy from a battery that still fills regardless of fuel usage in travel. The energy is taken from a different part of the system. It's not increasing fuel usage specifically. that matters in a system. And why can't the energy be collected. If you treat the entire ship like a device and let it slowly power a battery over time you have something. You can absolutely convert it and store it. The ship will not consume more fuel because you put a few diode to the hull of a ship and slap it to a battery. You are just utilizing more of the current ships fuel usage making it more efficient. You aren't even adding minute weight if the diode is already on the ship and just not being used.. Let alone something of insignificant weight to start with. Think practically. All you need is greater potential. That can be done in several ways regardless of the size of the ocean. The ocean potential is not the entire potential of the body of water. It's the potential at any point of contact. Which can be done with a probe of greater potential or even lower the potential on the opposite side of the probe at that point of contact to get a net gain or any equivalent. Does a barnacle increase or decrease potential compared to the ocean?

Yes, but adding mhd in an existing system would/could reduce or divert energy to a new system is it's needed. You could create clever ways to do this cheaply. Especially in a large ship with lots of energy to collect. It doesn't need to necessarily use lots of material to accomplish. Not to mention if enough existing means are present you can do something for relatively cheap. if something is multi functional it could change it's overall expense over time. These things could become useful. A lot of the systems already exist. So, a simple enough implementation would work potentially. Or even be useful as a cheap small device used when needed. Say it's only used on occasions. Or it expands cargo types or other opportunities. The other logic I'm running on is if cheap or existing means exist to gather power, like electricity in storms, you can afford to be wasteful. Plasma is energy base primarily. And can hypothetically use oxygen as the gas medium. so, you don't need to port things(although you can.) and periodic applications and other things could be useful for various reason. Not just the most efficient or cost effective. The applicability of pure energy or other means can outway the cost of efficiency. Especially if it's not much. Or doesn't have a lot of maintenance cost. Could a cold plasma hand cleaner be made to outlast a UV one and be more repairable at it's extremity or be made more convenient than other things. A bulb broken will be much harder to repair if they all break in a crash. Assuming. So, for safety sake could it be useful for odd circumstances and outway other uses. Or be a redundant means. You would only need one. You could have one of each or 50 of the cheaper one and one plasma based on for circumstances. Hypothetically, one single dialysis machine could open up a world of cargo for a single ship to carry specialized cargo to go with it. it could allow normal cargo or allow emergency things to be sent out in odd circumstances making it valuable. It doesn't even need to be on the boat. It could be kept at dock for an entire fleet to use when needed. A single mechanical arm or other when stopping at a point on a conveyor belt could apply it and you have special cargo on demand.

A metal boat on dry land can kill you because of the energy and static and other things in the hull. It's generated by the atmosphere and the shape/material of the hull. You could utilize it. And I'm not just talking efficient in the modern context. Assume things can change drastically. Maybe whole new ships could be designs to utilize it. Think Sci fi. Realistic sci fi. Someone with too much money on their hands. Those things could be useful later on as prices change or industries shift. And why can't you make low drag air collectors? If you had a tube through the ship it could reduce drag by only effecting things in the tube. Or MHD it! Aren't there existing liquid paths on a ship to start with? Make an MHD generator or similar using the existing parts of the ship as much as possible. Could you do a reverse version and use the water flowing on the outside of the ship instead of inside something? Maybe an alternative to solar? Could you use that to clean the hull of a ship by destroying the bonds of the algae and lifeforms from the hull? Either the entire hull or with equipment from the inside or outside of the hull on a small location? Here's a stupid idea. You could use small blimps or other objects to either do it in a cloud or part of the proccess to ease it. Could you utilize static or energy in a cloud to get the energy to some extent? Or could you collect energy from a cloud in general in this matter? Or anything else useful to a boat the extend it's functionality. https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_plasma_water_splitting_have_a_future_for_hydrogen_production https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330341968_Catalyst-free_highly_selective_synthesis_of_ammonia_from_nitrogen_and_water_by_a_plasma_electrolytic_system Other ideas could be utilizing storms to collect lightning for various purposes. It's not a constant but it could be used in several areas that need lots of power. Not to mention batteries are multi purpose. So, once you have the energy resource the main problem may presumable start to be removed. And there may be stupidly simple ways to do it. Maybe some of the tech could be utilized for emergency or unusual circumstances. I was forgoing this, but if you could break down hydrogen, could you use it to make a battery on the ship? Even on small scale the production capacity could work for repairs in case of a catastrophic failure hypothetically. Or other edge circumstances. Having the ability to repair/make something high tech in a low tech environment could be useful. That is a very distinct issue for a boat. It can go from one to the other and for longer and with worse extremities than other transport methods. Except planes. And they have greater limitation. So, they are ideal for such tech emerging potentially. The only thing more extreme would be subs or a rocket. https://patents.google.com/patent/US7384619B2/en The main proposed method I'm seeing is breaking the water down as much as possible before hitting it with the plasma. this is already done on a ship a lot. And there is lots of room in a ship to do this depending on scale or method. Especially if it's not in the cargo hold and for alternative reasons. Besides, in the extremity, wouldn't a ship packed full of cargo or a cargo container packed full be easier to use the electrolyses method even as proposed. It would have minimal air/space to fill with gas. So, the more full the cargo the less of a problem it should be. And the smaller the equipment used. There are ways to minimize the cost. Say if you use one piece of equipment to run over each part instead of having expensive probes on each cargo container. Or as the items leave the cargo hold. Even if it's not needed for grain now it might be later or for more general cargo. if it goes out a conveyor and probed and cleaned as each package goes that could be useful for redundancy. Or if not later maybe cheaper than the port doing it. It also makes more ports available as you don't need a speciality port depending on circumstances. Especially if things were to get worse somehow. Or other circumstances make it useful. It's cheaper to pay one ships cargo crew than all other ports hypothetically. Maybe. Depends circumstantially. Say you have a single or small group of ships that can do this for occasions or certain cargo.

But that is for cars. Boats are a different thing. They are bigger and can carry other things. Plus as I said their hulls do generate energy hypothetically if they are metal. It's normally grounded in the water though. Either way it's usable. And again it's exploring an extremity. It's still possible to make it work. You could also collect it for other reason. I'm also assuming given the fuel they normally use it wouldn't be hard to improve it in various manners. Wouldn't pure oxygen also be useful? I'm also assuming the cost of these boats they have some money to do things others can't. And money might not always be the full defining factor. Or that the realities of what makes the cost what they are will stay static. Can't cold plasma and plasma in general also help catch other things in the atmosphere like nitrogen?! And those prizes were for people making things for modern vehicles. That isn't going to be the same thing or as serious as someone actually working to make something for a shipping vessel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_fuel_enhancement And yes the energy can in essence be obtained for free if it exists in a system and is not being utilized..... It's not important if it's net use of energy is higher if in the correct circumstances. Especially if it gains some other function sufficiently. You can become what you consider inefficient in a simplified sense and still be useful or more useful in practice. And many other things. It's called broadening the scope of the design. I'm not talking about a system in an insular manner. I'm referring to potential system design. And that was just a random off suggestion. It's a purposeful extremity just for the sake of exploration.

And if you understood anything being said that is irrelevant to anything in this conversation besides you and several people insinuating this has anything to do with any free energy concept(The resource is free itself.). This can replace other things or be gained for no money as in the cost of the resource. I has nothing to do with the cost or energy of obtaining it!!!! I don't see how a person with a real life engineering job could even jump to that conclusion. It's absurd! This has nothing to do with net gaining more than you put out. It has to do with efficiency or changing methods. At it's extremity doing something for free within context has nothing to do with free energy. It's the same as solar. It's free to the extent the sun freely gives out energy. It's not complicated. If you can collect water it's free up to that point. There is no mention of free energy anywhere in this conversation!! I'm just starting a light fun conversation about the potential applications. The natural extent of it also. Not just financially feasible under a set of circumstance. Especially as that can change in the real world. I'm sorry, but yes you can manipulate efficiency. You collect something. Make a fuel additive and you add it to the fuel and burn it for longer travel time. I'm referring to real world end results. You know, how you think to actually design something in a normal circumstance. And quit nitpicking over terms. Next you're going to say you don't get more travel time because it increase the explosion in the engine instead of the obvious that is means less fuel can be used and hence more fuel exists to travel longer. [snip] Too simplify this more for you. It's about the net efficiency of the system or whatever else can be done with the technology. It's not even a specific proposal or idea. [snip]

Do you have any understanding of what you just said in context to your previous statements?!

[snip] Did it have other things in it? Was there a way for other things to get in it over time? [snip]

So, was the AN isolated or did it have stuff in it to start with. I thought it was literally highly concentrated fertilizer and not pure.

I wasn't posting the source to state it was to be used. I was posting it to give ideas of the range of use and potential sources for things like electricity used. I wasn't trying to be specific. Except the one with gas in the bags as it might be useful because of the general ability to simply apply electricity. I'm not trying to be that specific. If it works in one way it will have a range of potential other variations. I'm assuming that is not the extent of the application. That is why I asked what is the extremity. How far can it be taken. There are probably other ways to do it. I'm assuming that method is either for testing or for a specific environment/application. I'm also not stating a single thing to be applied. I'm talking about the range of potential applications in general. Different circumstances there will be different methods. Why do you people keep thinking I'm proposing any hypothesis. That was not part of the post at all. You guys are the one insinuating things. And yes hulls of metal ships do create massive amounts of energy. Empty ships can be very dangerous because of it. It was a big issue when we switched to all metal hulls. Part of it has to do with the shape of the hull naturally. Why do you think the way to achieve that is with the exact methods used in the video? Or that you even need to use those exact parts?

No it cost energy in one location(the engines/props). It produced it in another(hull or other natural generators.). You have to unsimplified the formula and look at it in real world terms. Lots of other things like solar are at play in the hull that are very powerful and potentially dangerous normally. You are not understanding how thing work in real life. think of the hull like a giant generator. It has nothing to do with the motion unless it adds to the equation. It minimally has to do with the atmosphere and other factors including the hull shape etc. Again using a formula simply has nothing to do with real world application. Look it up. the ship is simultaneously producing energy already but it's not being utilized most likely. Unless they started diverting this to internal systems normally. It was traditionally grounded. Look up the history of metal boats. In this case something normally grounded could be diverted to power a subsystem or do various things. If you want to argue look it up and go over the numbers. I'm not going to change my argument because you said so. If you want to argue prove me wrong and go over it. They could also design ships to maximize these sorts of factors. I think the normally avoid it because of crew safety. One of the methods for food decontamination was to package it in a gas then pass current over it. If you controlled any thing from the hull you could periodically do this to the entire cargo at once with the press of a button in essence for free from the hull's generation of power. Install a capacitor(or general battery packs.) or something and let it fill and give a controlled blast of current. You could similarly use a storm with a lightning rod. Obviously there are a lot of other factors in play. But there are a very large amount of very applicable methods. And relatively mature ones as this is just cold plasma and plasma application isn't a new thing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016545/ What if we had dentistry boats floating around the planet fixing teeth? It might help with the decay of the british empire! (I wonder if it does whitening or cleaning for more sensitive teeth.) Maybe it could be used to replace teeth brushes in some ways. Aren't there traditionally heavy problems potentially with dental issues at sea. If a ship gets stranded it could be useful if you can still produce power. If the ships hull or other passive means are used it still may be useful(or batteries and solar.). It might be good for on board dental care on ships. Especially more periodic cleaning. I wonder if it could be used for hull cleaning. Might be useful for various odd things in maintenance. Who knows. Could it be used to clean pipes or internal in a ship to any extent that normally require replacement or removal or diving? Water is already a conductor and easily turned into a gas. cold plasma still might be useful as hot plasma might be too hot and deteriorate surfaces. Especially on old boats. Unless rust is also taken off easily with cold plasma. Maybe it can be used for delicate cleaning in various circumstances?! might be odd situation where a substance spills. It could amend or replace current safety measures if it's useful. Particularly for people. It also generally replaces UV things in many areas to get rid of cancer concerns. Although I don't know if it has it's own problems. They are looking into that for water and air filtration.

I don't see why you couldn't make a suit with both biological and other things to generate air and other resources. Start with poop from the person. Maybe even poop from the ship itself for added help. Then maybe pre setup it and plants or something similar and have a speciality suit for long rescues. Some things could be done ahead of time put in the suit other things could be done along the way to expand it's use and recycle things in the suit. it's crappy, but you would survive. I think astronauts area already used to that sort of thing to start with. The systems could be improved over time to make them less nasty. It could even try to recycle food and basic nutrients for the host. Day five journal: I'm still waiting to be picked. It's been another long crappy day. The tang is starting to become very diluted. I'd imagine it wouldn't be fundamentally hard to make a green house with the visor, have some bacteria or none growing plants in dirt or packages to be released inside a dirt containment area for fungi or something and eat mushrooms and other things in dirt and recycle pee and flavor it with tang or other dried astronaut foods. Mushrooms literally grow daily and predictably. Not sure on the nutrients though. Just need a simple efficient oxygen scrubber and recycling plant. It could be high or low light. But you might need both incase of shadows. And maybe artificial lights for the same reason. There are very low light plants and bacteria like things you could put in water or dirt for varying circumstances. Account for cold or other things also somehow. can you use a peltier or other things to convert heat or generate enough for minimal temps? Or even a psuedo cryo sleep. Either for longer periods or more realistically just for nights or dark periods behind planets. wake up eat and poop and drink etc. Wait for, "night," etc.