A Real Life Lightsaber

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Improving on some of CraigDs ideas using my own recently articulated methods for a type of perpetual energy device

 

A lightsaber that ejects from the hilt would need diodes that light during ignition to send rays through a polarizing light filter, when the rays pass through a pair of magnifying glass should be set along its polarity. The polarity will beamify sorrounding light if the magnification is strong enough, then more magnifying glasses would curve about the concave interior of the hilt bending the light paths of the beams in a loop of perpetually increasing thermodynamic intensity.

 

Upon reaching ample intensity to heat steel to 2,862°C the beams will pass through two layers of cylindrical magnets that are locked in place by one another until the lasers heat up the outer layers of a steel rod fitting inside the hilt, ionizing these outer layers into expanding plasma.

 

The lasers will also heat up specific areas of the plasma to make it spin and rotate, this spin will force the magnetically locked layers of magnets atop it loose creating an em flux that focuses the expanding plasma as a gyrates into an elongating cylinder, dispersing the magnets but accelerating their spin to compensate for loss of magnetic resistance during separation, until a blade of plasma contained by an electromagnetic flux is formed and the diodes turn off to preserve the steel rod in the hilt allowing for hundreds of future blade ignitions.

Edited December 27, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[Vmedvil2]

People have already made a lightsabre but it requires a great deal of energy as in "Real Life" things require energy and there is no perpetual energy sources.

 

Making the Blade

 

 

Making the Battery Pack

 

 

 

Dr Michio Kaku's Scifi Science: How to build a Lightsabre.

 

 

 

Edited December 27, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Yeah you keep saying that magnifying the poles of a ray won't create a beam but you're not explaining why.

 

I have shown videos of using magnifying glass to bend light beams so I know that even if you can't turn a ray into a beam the method of achieving Planck temperatures by looping a beam into itself like a snake eating it's own tail will allow for a perpetually increasing energy output without increasing input which is sufficient for my designs as well. It's just that you can lower the input to zero in my UAps when exposed to sunlight, or to the ultra lower energy requirements of an led in my lightsaber if one can beamify a ray.

 

However, even if one has to generate a beam, the em flux would be sufficient to do so, so my beam bending designs still get not just infinitely more output than input, but zero input once the cogs are set in motion, so a onetime input. The key word being infinitely, so it's still better than stable fusion, and more efficient of reaction than annihilation, to loop a beam by curving its path by angling arrays of magnifying glass.

Edited December 28, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[Vmedvil2]

Yeah you keep saying that magnifying the poles of a ray won't create a beam but you're not explaining why.

 

I have shown videos of using magnifying glass to bend light beams so I know that even if you can't turn a ray into a beam the method of achieving Planck temperatures by looping a beam into itself like a snake eating it's own tail will allow for a perpetually increasing energy output without increasing input which is sufficient for my designs as well. It's just that you can lower the input to zero in my UAps when exposed to sunlight, or to the ultra lower energy requirements of an led in my lightsaber if one can beamify a ray.

 

However, even if one has to generate a beam, the em flux would be sufficient to do so, so my beam bending designs still get not just infinitely more output than input, but zero input once the cogs are set in motion, so a onetime input. The key word being infinitely, so it's still better than stable fusion, and more efficient of reaction than annihilation, to loop a beam by curving its path by angling arrays of magnifying glass.

 

See that is nonsense you cannot achieve a plank temperature by looping the light into itself unless you have a power source for the light which is equally powerful generating the light. You cannot just harvest light and create energy from it, you can merge it into a single beam however you would need a "Light Source" which would require energy even the light of our sun is made from a Hydrogen Fusion Power source.

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

See that is nonsense you cannot achieve a plank temperature by looping the light into itself unless you have a power source for the light which is equally powerful generating the light. You cannot just harvest light and create energy from it, you can merge it into a single beam however you would need a "Light Source" which would require energy even the light of our sun is made from a Hydrogen Fusion Power source.

A magnifying glass will strengthen beam, or intensify it:

 

 

Merging two beams into a single beam is no different than narrowing a single beam.

 

As I said the EM flux generated by laser heated plasma spinning a couple layers of magnets (which would be locked in place by magnetic repulsion without the pressure of the heated plasma) is enough feedback to continously pump laser into the loop.

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

You still haven't explained to me why the polarity of a ray won't charge sorrounding photons if it's being blueshifting in this process. New rays continously flow into the apparatus either by free sunlight in my UFO design or by the diodes/LEDs in this lightsaber design.

 

The only fuel that needs to be replaced is the steel as it melts away after several uses. Which is why I picked steel, although tungsten would last longer and make a much more ionized plasma it might end up created micro black holes instead due to the temperatures involved in melting something like tungsten (which has the highest melting point of all metals) into ionized gas.

Edited December 28, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[Vmedvil2]

You still haven't explained to me why the polarity of a ray won't charge sorrounding photons if it's being blueshifts in this process. New Ray's continously into the apparatus either by free sunlight in my UFO design or by the diodes/LEDs in this lightsaber design.

 

The only fuel that needs to be replaced is the steel as it melts away after several uses.

The Density of the light changes but the overall energy of each photon packet does not change, how close together they get changes however each packet will still have the same energy meaning would require a energy source for each packet to receive its energy, you could get to a planck temperature if you made the light dense enough however the total energy would be a manifestation of the individual photons's energy meaning it would require a source that emits that amount of energy. It doesn't matter how much the energy density is it matters the power of the source of those photons. E_Source = E_Photons will still hold.

 

 

 

While Each photon is still 400 to 800 nm, the density of these packets change during magnification.

 

Energy of each light packet from wavelength.

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

The Density of the light changes but the overall energy of each photon packet does not change, how close together they get changes however each packet will still have the same energy meaning would require a energy source for each packet to receive its energy.

You're just repeating yourself now, why won't the polarity of a ray with, a shorter wavelength than the light sorrounding it, shorten the wavelengths of the aforementioned energy given off by the electron orbitals of the residual matter sorrounding it into a beam if it's continuously being shortened by convex nanoglass?

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

I get there's the issue that it would take 1,000 years on the macroscopic scale. Too bad my UFO designs aren't on the macroscopic scale :p

[Vmedvil2]

You're just repeating yourself now, why won't the polarity of a ray with, a shorter wavelength than the light sorrounding it, shorten the wavelengths of the aforementioned energy given off by the electron orbitals of the residual matter sorrounding it into a beam if it's continuously being shortened by convex nanoglass?

 

Because that is not how it works, you cannot shorten the packets or change those packets by any known means in transit, however your "Nanoglass" would change the density of those packets meaning the space between each packet, however not the packet itself.

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Because that is not how it works, you cannot shorten the packets or change those packets by any known means in transit, however your "Nanoglass" would change the density of those packets meaning the space between each packet, however not the packet itself.

The wavelength is a measurement of the duration in which a wave achieves its particle state. Decreasing the space between each packet effects this duration because length contraction=time dilation.

 

Lambda max is directly tied to thermodynamic intensity, decreasing length in this way is equivalent to reducing entropic freedom which is the same thing as thermodynamic intensity.

Edited December 28, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[Vmedvil2]

The wavelength is a measurement of the duration in which a wave achieves its particle states. Decreasing the space between each packet effects this duration because length contraction=time dilation.

magnification doesn't literally change the size of space but rather the space between each packet meaning their density not the actual size of space itself.

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

It doesn't literally change the size of space but rather the space between each packet meaning their density not the actual size of space itself.

It lowers lambda max. Lambda max is directly tied to thermodynamic intensity, decreasing length in this way is equivalent to reducing entropic freedom which is the same thing as thermodynamic intensity.

 

Everything is spacetime, it's the elixir of fluid reality.

[Vmedvil2]

It lowers lambda max. Lambda max is directly tied to thermodynamic intensity, decreasing length in this way is equivalent to reducing entropic freedom which is the same thing as thermodynamic intensity.

 

Everything is spacetime, it's the elixir of fluid reality.

You cannot compress the actual photons, it is the same way that you can change the density of a fluid by temperature however not the size of each nucleon within the atoms of the fluid. You would need to change the intrinsic Electromagnetic properties of the light to do this or the intrinsic Strength of the Strong Nuclear Force in nucleons to change this is not something temperature can do. 

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

You cannot compress the actual photons, it is the same way that you can change the density of a fluid by temperature however not the size of each nucleon within the atoms of the fluid. You would need to change the intrinsic Electromagnetic properties of the light to do this or the intrinsic Strength of the Strong Nuclear Force in nucleons to change this is not something temperature can do.

 

Are we talking about cooking a material into ionized gas or creating a black hole?

 

If we're talking about creating a black hole, it still has to do with temperature:

 

 

If a ton of photons are in close proximity it does effect their wavelengths, or he wouldn't have proposed dumping 20% of the sun's light into a Planck length as a means of exceeding the Planck density. Thermodynamic black hole I think is the term he used.

[Vmedvil2]

 

 

Are we talking about cooking a material into ionized gas or creating a black hole?

 

If we're talking about creating a black hole, it still has to do with temperature:

 

 

If a ton of photons are in close proximity it does effect their wavelengths, or he wouldn't have proposed dumping 20% of the sun's light into a Planck length as a means of exceeding the Planck density. Thermodynamic black hole I think is the term he used.

That is a function of gravity which is the interaction of Energy-mass on Energy-mass, now it is possible to create a black hole by this method by increasing the density of the Energy-mass at a location to the critical density required to make V_g = C

 

 

If you can satisfy this equation by increasing the density of light you could make a black hole.

 

 

Mass is just energy so plug your  M = E/C²  @ radius r ,which would be the prelude to such a calculation for how many photons you would need at what radius to create a black hole.

 

ΣE= Σhf , which would be the total energy of all the packets at radius r required to make a black hole form.

Edited December 28, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

I think your understanding is fundamentally flawed because you're not looking at light as phonon vacuum fluctuations, you think it's made of "photons" which is based on an outdated understanding.