Arc reactor, would it be feasible?

Hello, I'm new here but I hope to stay here. I have a question for you, is it possible to build an arc reactor in a form similar to iron man? But its end would not be plugged in with a cable, but more screwed / put into a "pocket" in which it would transmit some sensible power to a socket in that "pocket"? This question is general whether such a thing would be real at all.

CezarII wrote:

Hello, I'm new here, but I hope to stay here.

Welcome

CezarII wrote:

I have a question for you, is it possible to build an arc reactor in a form similar to iron man?

Yes in form, no in action.
http://joemonster.org/art/27612

CezarII wrote:

But its end would not be plugged in with a cable, but more screwed / put into a "pocket" in which it would transmit some sensible power to a socket in that "pocket"?

I guess birdie. And he did not upload, only download

CezarII wrote:

This question is general whether such a thing would be real at all.

It is as real as the source of your inspiration.
You have "Utility Electric" in the caption, maybe it's worth changing "utility" to something less confusing? Exotic?
Sorry, this is a typical tech forum, so you can joke about such ideas. I didn't mean to discourage you.
You probably don't have physics in school yet, and you don't know that there are things shown in movies that aren't possible in the real world.

It can be, but it needs to be transformed a bit and it is real ready

Naukowiecelektro wrote:

It can be, but it needs to be transformed a bit and it is real ready

Well, I'm waiting for further explanations, materials, etc. Because you probably won't stop there?

And don't you want an enchanted pencil?

thereminator wrote:

And don't you want an enchanted pencil?

There were electrodes in the shop

I know the topic is old, but I think nothing will happen if I answer :P

The Arc Reactor is a perpetual motion machine that is an infinite source of energy. In the movie, he could run forever if nothing is using his power, in the case of Tony Stark's armor is powered by this reactor and she takes a lot of power from the reactor, but the reactor is able to handle it easily, because the first one of his the version produces 3 GJ / S (three gigajoules per second), the later, improved versions produce more power. For example, if Tony had been flying his armor all day without interruption, the reactor would eventually collapse, or the power he would produce would have dropped by higher draw.

Is this reactor buildable? of course it is, but it will be a long time before a person can create such a source of energy.

Energy is not "produced", it is transformed.
Any fuel used is actually energy in material form.
Wind, hydro or solar power plants - they use the energy of the surrounding environment.

If you were to use, for example, uranium as fuel - it would consume about 2 grams per minute, i.e. you would need almost 3 kilograms per day.

It is possible that nuclear fusion could be used, 1 gram of matter would be enough for ... 5 minutes of work. This is only about a 10-fold increase in capacity, so the fusion reactor would need about half a kilogram of fuel a day.
And we're talking about a technology that doesn't really exist yet.

Although ... if you had used, for example, air as fuel for nuclear fusion ... those few cubic meters would give you enough mass to get the energy you need.
But is the annihilation of the air around you ... really a good idea?

200 years ago we had no idea that electricity existed. Someone finally forced the flow of electricity. Then, electromagnetic waves were artificially created. They are possible, but people are too limited as individuals to jump that border in one generation. If we assume that the Big Bang really led to the creation of the universe, it released a lot of energy, the density of matter decreases, then by converting matter into energy according to Einstein's emc, we get energy. But it is still unknown whether we already know all its forms that exist in our dimension of consciousness. Maybe it is enough to catch a new unknown form and force it to cause the movement of electrons.

As far as I remember correctly, 3/4 of the mass of the universe is an unknown form of energy. But she does not move electric charges - if she did, she would have been known long ago ...

Norbi007c wrote:

its first version produces 3 GJ / S (three gigajoules per second)

With such power, one could accelerate to Cosmic I in a second, with an acceleration 800 times greater than the gravitational one on Earth ...

_jta_ wrote:

As far as I remember correctly, 3/4 of the mass of the universe is an unknown form of energy.

Actually, you don't know what it is. It's just that calculations made by known models of the universe don't match. This means that either our models are not accurate and consistent with the facts, or we do not know something.
The latter option has been chosen and scientists are trying to find what we do not know yet, instead of building new models according to different patterns (which we do not have and do not know either). It might as well be something well-known that our current tools simply cannot detect, so they detect "nothing". Hence, a calculation error may arise.

It can be an additional constant (the so-called cosmological constant ) in Einstein's equations. She gives such input as energy. Einstein proposed it when it turned out that the universe cannot be stable without it - then it was discovered that the universe was expanding and Einstein mistaken it, and then it was discovered that without it the calculations did not match.

you could use the method like in Chernobyl but after 1 radiation and after 2 you will not get such materials. Regards

Look for the book In Search of Unlimited Energy
Keith Tutt

Energi of point 0. It is this black part of the universe, it is known about it, but it is not obtained because it has a bad influence on our world. They were in the 50's experiments. And 40 theses, but blue-eye and pink fanatics ....... have been examining it and it's not good to write about it.

Added after 53 [seconds]:

If you have 200 kg of mercury in stock, we will experiment. I do the copper coils.

I have an opinion on this subject confirmed by facts and also by the laws of physics. Tony Stark's Arc Reactor could be built today! It would be enough to use anti-matter as the main fuel, and then change the meaning of the phrase "perepeetum mobile", because it would not be possible anymore. It would be enough to create the above-mentioned arc reactor from anti-matter. How to do it, you ask? Very simple. a piździk what connects it to the phone and recharges this phone. present if I had as much hay as he. The conclusion is that everyone can and who does not try this moron could be made an arc reactor as the above sentences said, but you need hay, and if there is no hay, you need to call the stork, i.e. Elon Muska, because she has a lot of money of this type. If he gave me half, he would not even feel it. You have to call him and involve him in creating IRON MENA. Peace. Bedoesiar with you. Your Dear Friend. Loyal Joe.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

I would have been a present-day Putin long ago if I had had as much hay as him.

If you would do it, you would have the entry of the self-appointed elite of this world and the electrophile account would also disappear.
Realize finally that pinheads mean nothing, and only widely announced discoveries will have their raison d'?tre, otherwise they will be bought up by the foreskin negative and will end up in drawers.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

It would be enough to use anti-matter as the main fuel,

It is expensive to produce (requires much more energy than can be obtained) and difficult to store.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

I would have been a present-day Putin long ago if I had had as much hay as him

It's good that you don't have one - one such thug who threatens the whole world and will probably kill millions of people, that's too much.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

I have an opinion on this subject confirmed by facts and also by the laws of physics.

And will you reveal which "laws of physics" you follow? Because we, for example, the Principle of Conservation of Energy.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

It would be enough to use anti-matter as the main fuel, and then change the meaning of the phrase "perepeetum mobile" because it would no longer be impossible.

This is called the paradox - the mental suspension of the laws of physics for a thought experiment. Only that "perpetual motion" is such a paradox. It breaks one of the fundamental principles of physics to describe a non-existent object.
And "perpetual motion" doesn't exist, not because the definition is wrong, but because you can't break the laws of physics.

ironmankochamcie wrote:

It would be enough from anti-matter to create the above-mentioned arc reactor. How to do it, you ask? Very simple. All you need to do is connect this little puff that connects it to the phone and recharges this phone. And then, when we have a charged powerbank, we connect it to the battery and force anti-matter into it.

And the doctor, what time does his ward tour start? Have you taken your medication yet?

ironmankochamcie wrote:

Seems simple, there's just an idiot not to do it.

You don't seem to have done it yet?

ironmankochamcie wrote:

Bedoiara with you. Your Dear Friend. Loyal Joe.

Sorry, we don't understand Klingon. Try Earthly - we have 7,000 languages to choose from.