Talk:GravityLight

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GravityLight article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Technical Quibble

It may make a neat headline, and conjure up dreams of a vast inexhaustible energy source available everywhere, but in order to avoid confusing and misinforming schoolchildren (and some adults) it should be pointed out that this gadget is not 'powered by gravity'. A gravitational field is 'conservative': that means that one cannot make a net energy gain by moving objects around within it; no matter how ingenious and convoluted the path. The energy comes from whoever set the gadget up: he or she had to raise a weight within the gravitational field to do so. The energy needed to do that came from the biologically generated energy in his/her body when it consumed food. The energy in the food came ultimately from sunlight (provided by a nuclear fusion reactor). Although the energy exchanges may seem trivial, it is ultimately dishonest not to take account of them. For instance, suppose one villager was given the task of setting-up all of the gadgets in the village: the effort involved would soon become clear to him and he might have to buy extra food to restore his forces. So the energy for the lamps is not coming from 'gravity', it is coming from an increase in food purchases. Yes, it might seem to be a trivial quibble, but it is harmful in several ways to imply that the only cost involved is that of the gadget. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.88.241 (talk) 08:45, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have restructured the article to make this clearer to the reader much earlier. Reify-tech (talk) 02:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source 7 taken out of context

The article uses source 7 to back up the claim that the GravityLight lasts for about 25 minutes on one charge. However, source 7 is actually a website claiming that the entire invention and it's specifications are a complete hoax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.69.251.77 (talk) 07:54, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great points. I've tried to reflect that in a revised citation and in the text. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 22:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some reorganizing and updating, but the article may need further revision and updates. As a tech note, it is best not to refer to footnotes by number, since this number may change radically whenever the article is edited. The "Museum of Hoaxes" URL generated a browser error and displayed nothing when I tried to follow it in Firefox on an up-to-date Mac Mini. Reify-tech (talk) 02:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]