-4

I was reading a site where I'm reading reputable news usually and this story about "E-Stablecoin" stuck out as something unexpected to me. The article claims:

This new blockchain concept – which they call “E-Stablecoin” – could allow electricity to be transmitted between users who are spread around the world, without the need for interconnecting wires or a grid-based transmission system.

The abstract of the linked paper claims:

We detail how statistical mechanics and information theory (via Maxwell’s demon) can be used to transfer free energy in the form of electricity between anonymous users of a decentralized network without interfacing with utility corporations, power plants, or even electrical grid networks.

The paper describes a "Szilard engine" which it claims allows electricity to be converted to information and back again.

Does the proposed protocol allow users to transfer electricity without the need for interconnecting wires?

Improve this question
10
  • 6
    Could you quote or at least summarise the key claim that you're challenging in the question itself, so we don't have to click through and read the full paper? Also, this site requires claims to be "notable", so you'll need to explain the context of why this should be taken seriously.
    – IMSoP
    Jun 16 at 11:10
  • 2
    There does not appear to be any notable claim here, just a link to a product and a statement asking if it is practical or not.
    – Joe W
    Jun 16 at 14:43
  • 1
    @Bobson, I amended the question to hopefully be more clear. I think it is more about physics - whether this concept is possible in the physical world. I'm less concerned about the cryptographic or blockchain mechanism.
    – akostadinov
    Jun 16 at 17:02
  • 2
    It's about as realistic as a bluetooth garden hose theonion.com/…
    – Aganju
    Jun 19 at 23:17
  • 2
    I've heavily edited the question to focus on a specific claim, quoted from both the news article and the actual paper. My only remaining doubt is whether the claim is in fact notable - note that by that we don't mean the same as "reputable" or "reliable", we mean that lots of people are likely to believe the source, so the fact that you normally believe that site doesn't quite get there.
    – IMSoP
    Jun 20 at 12:57

0

Reset to default

Browse other questions tagged .