This video below doesn't really get interesting until 3:30 in were it then starts to talk about a said discovery, which I just have to be a bit skeptical of and reserve judgment of for now because if the claim of this said discovery is true it would appear to break the known laws of thermodynamics by making a device that generates usable electricity from the random thermal spontaneous vibration of a very small sheet of graphene, to generate completely free energy!
IF that claim proves true, this certainly could one day solve all our energy problems!

YouTube

One thing that makes this extraordinary claim a bit more believable is that it involves quantum effects because it exploits how quantum physics makes the graphene sheet vibrate in a relatively predictable way and the reason why that makes it a bit more believable is that the laws quantum physics actually operate outside the laws of thermodynamic and thus that makes it more believable that this said discovery works by exploiting some kind of loophole around the laws of thermodynamic.

But note that, even if this claim is true, the amount of energy that can currently be generated using just current technology would be minute and it would be extremely difficult to scale this up using current technology to produce any useful amounts of energy and mainly because there is currently no efficient way to precisely synthesize the required vast number of separate tiny graphene sheets and with each made into exactly the right size and shape and within the very last atom. But, of course, if this claim is true, because technology is improving all the time, it would be just a matter of when, not if, one day that problem would be solved; And then we would be generating unlimited free energy and we might even then cease to have any need for batteries!

There is also this link;
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339470879_Fluctuation-induced_current_from_freestanding_graphene_toward_nanoscale_energy_harvesting
"fluctuation-induced current from freestanding graphene"
which is a direct link to the study this video refers to.

What do you physics experts here think about the credibility of this incredible claim!? Do any of you think its probably false and based on some kind of flawed idea or flawed measurement?

My misedit;
That first "were" in the first sentence should be "where".

I found most of the contents of the second of the two OP links I gave (reminder; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339470879_Fluctuation-induced_current_from_freestanding_graphene_toward_nanoscale_energy_harvesting ) an extremely hard read (and you probably see why if you try and read it yourself unless you are a pretty good physicist), so I won't post all of it here. But the summary at the end of it makes for a much easier read (relatively speaking) and this is what that summary says;

"...
In summary, we have studied the thermal fluctuations
in freestanding graphene membranes using point-mode
scanning tunneling microscopy. After disabling the STM
feedback circuit, a displacement current was measured.
We modeled the ripple closest to the STM tip as a
Brownian particle in a double well potential. When the
graphene moves, charge must flow through the circuit
and perform electrical work. Our model provides a rigor-
ous demonstration that continuous thermal power can be
supplied by a Brownian particle at a single temperature
while in thermodynamic equilibrium, provided the same
amount of power is continuously dissipated in a resistor.

Here, coupling to the circuit allows electrical work to be
carried out on the load resistor without violating the sec-
ond law of thermodynamics. Nonequilibrium fluctuations
due to extra noises [34, 35] or to different temperatures
in electrical circuits [36] will produce entropy and mea-
surable deviations from detailed balance [35, 36], and are
worth investigating in freestanding graphene.
..."

ANYONE;

Seriously, and while bearing in mind the OP study claims indirectly implies a true perpetual motion machine is possible after all despite the many false claims previously made in the past of perpetual motion machines by many of a loon, do you think the claim made by that study must be, or at least is probably, somehow wrong as in false?

So far I found nothing in that study that to me smells of the usual pseudoscientific nonsense that is unfortunately incredibly common all over the net these days and I have come to believe that OP study certainly isn't the usual pseudoscientific BS but that by itself doesn't mean it couldn't be flawed although, if it is somehow flawed, I have so far failed to spot that flaw.

I certainly WANT to believe the OP study claim is correct but one must always be very cautious about this kind of extraordinary claim.

@humy said
This video below doesn't really get interesting until 3:30 in were it then starts to talk about a said discovery, which I just have to be a bit skeptical of and reserve judgment of for now because if the claim of this said discovery is true it would appear to break the known laws of thermodynamics by making a device that generates usable electricity from the random thermal spont ...[text shortened]... Do any of you think its probably false and based on some kind of flawed idea or flawed measurement?

@metal-brain said
There is no such thing as free energy. Even a simple device for converting energy into useable form costs at least some money.

@humy said
Are you here talking about manufacturing costs of the device or some other kind of 'cost'

If you mean the former; "free energy" in this OP narrow context does NOT mean free of manufacturing costs of the device that gives that 'free energy', idiot!
It just means, and only in this OP narrow context, once the device is made, there are no costs in keeping the devic ...[text shortened]... ast part of if not the whole of the point!

Either way, you don't know what you are talking about.

@metal-brain said
Then we already have free energy.

@humy said
ANYONE;

Seriously, and while bearing in mind the OP study claims indirectly implies a true perpetual motion machine is possible after all despite the many false claims previously made in the past of perpetual motion machines by many of a loon, do you think the claim made by that study must be, or at least is probably, somehow wrong as in false?

@humy said
Apparently you cannot read. I just said;

"...
If you mean the former; "free energy" in this OP narrow context does NOT mean free of manufacturing costs of the device that gives that 'free energy', idiot!
It just means, and only in this OP narrow context, once the device is made, there are no costs in keeping the device continually and sustainably converting thermal energy i ...[text shortened]... opposed to a temperature difference therefore we currently do NOT have 'free energy' in that sense.

@metal-brain said
Your title is misleading. There is no such thing as free energy. Even a simple device for converting energy into useable form costs at least some money.

Why is my tablet calling it grapheme when I typed graphene?

Is grapheme something? When I type graphene it changes it to grapheme and if I correct it I get a red underline which implies a misspelling 🤔

Grapheme definition.

The smallest unit in a writing system.

Now we know.

@cheesemaster said
And just because a company can make free energy or low cost energy doesn't mean those companies or the government would just give it away to the people.

Grapheme was supposed to replace precious metals in technology but that never happened.

(Apparently the device can't turn off

I believe it has a lot of potential but people will still have to pay for energy regardless.

It just occurred to me that if the OP device actually works if developed for real-world applications then it would double as a cooling device and thus would be also useful for refrigerators and freezers and air conditioning but, and unlike with traditional refrigerators and freezers and air conditioning, these refrigerators and freezers and air conditioning that uses this new device would generate electricity rather than use up electricity!
If anyone doesn't see how so after reading the OP links then I will try my best to explain how so here on request.