>if you try to confine something, like an electron, to an extremely small space, its momentum uncertainty explodes. it can't just sit still; it must jitter violently. that jitter is not because of heat or motion, but because the laws of quantum mechanics literally forbid total stillness. the more tightly you trap it, the greater that inherent energy becomesfree energy. easyif you can't do the math, get the fuck out of my sight. I don't want to risk getting infected with your shitty intellect
You're brain will be a source of infinite energy when someone invents a retard-to-watt machine.
>>16823559>uncertainty calculations>muh mathA grade skooler could do the necessary maths in this case.
>>16823559>the more tightly you trap it, the greater that inherent energy becomesDemonstrably false. Skinnier wires transmit less energy than fat wires
>>16823618>transmitBut we don't want the electron to go anywhere. OP wants the electron confined to a small space meaning there's only one "free energy" device and the irony is that it does no work lol.
>>16823559How do you confine the particles but then also yield net energy from realizing the particles momentum.
Interesting idea. However, I think you misunderstand the principle of uncertainty. Observing the position of a particle increases the uncertainty in its momentum, not necessarily increasing its momentum. You simply don’t know where it is going next. Because of this, quantum particles do not posses a trajectory: instead their dynamics is completely predicted by the Schrödinger equation which has solutions that are wavy. This means that enclosing your electron in a tight space does not change the average momentum, only changes your ability to know what the momentum is. Therefore no work can be done as work requires a change in energy. I hope I am clear here.
>>16823559how yonic
>>16823559are you sure thats not just lateral movement translating to vibration? kind of like the dvd icon being confined to a smaller screen
what about a proton squished between protons and nuetrons in a nucleus? If you dont bench 200 get out of my sight zoomer
electron cannot have 0 spin@connect it to a generator@free infinite energy
>>16823618Anon that's because the thinner wires dissipate more heat.
>>16823559Someone didn't read their Feynman, there's a nice clear logical engineering description of why this won't work IRL in one of the thermodynamics chapters of the LoP. I could throw equations at you but Feynman's verbiage is better.
>>16823949A feynmannian explanation will teach you nothing while at the same time convincing you that you have understood everything. It's the bane of midwits
>>16823559>its momentum uncertaintyyou almost had me einstein
>>16824039Surely a midwit schizo /sci/ poster knows what he is talking about and actual scientists do not.>muh plea to authoritymidwits hide behind muh fallacy, fallacycels are just wikipedia random article kids but older.
>>16824246There is no empirical evidence of an electron particle.
>>16823559you have to put in energy to confine the electron in the first place. I do wonder however how a atomic tip works if you are right it would imply that there is only one way forward thus its not really trapped?
>>16823680Just keep a camera pointed at it, then. Duh!
If the electron is always bouncing around, and it was contained in a container, would it transfer infinite amount of heat energy to the walls of the container given infinite amount of time?
>>16823559>free energy. easyno, you're charging the electron with your highly energetic constriction technique.
>>16823559The confinement would be made out of matter, and the electron would transmit momentum to it, thereby expanding it and making itself less confined
>>16823559yea but if it's confined gow do you extract energy from that jittery electron?
>>16825057Nta, but this is a great point too for others confused about this. You CAN point a camera at it, but how is it possible to get fine enough resolution to KNOW PRECISELY (as the other guy brushed upon) where the electron is? Consider how cameras work. Then ask yourself, what do small waveLENGTHs imply about the particle the camera is using? To interact with the electron would then imply the electron now has large momentum, and it's obvious where the source was, so OP (retard) can't say the energy is free.
>>16824693You can directly measure discrete and incremental charge. Do you suppose an electron is some sort of physical bouncy ball you could see a picture of? You have a horrible mind for science. What do you think a particle is exactly?
