It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Irish company challenges scientists to test 'free energy' technology

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordOfBunnies
Hell I worked on a project to provide basically free energy to the planet. But I'll be damned if I didn't have spend a lot of energy to get the stuff in place. Once the paper is published I can refer you guys too it, but until such time it's not leaving my computer. Don't worry it should probably be within the next month.


You haven't convinced me of anything because humans do not fully understand particle physics yet nor physics on the grand macro universal scale.

What you do not see nor understand seems impossible or non-existant.

An intelligent response to this challenge is to test it and see, if it is true than good if it is not then something can be learned.




posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by MichiKami
So to address everyone else: assuming you agree that this company's claims are bogus, why are they doing this? The out-of-pocket costs are significant. Just looking for suckers to "invest" in their company is my best guess. What's yours?


One possibility is that the company is about to go public. If they do, they know that lots of people will buy their shares thanks to the free publicity that the company has been enjoying (and of course the enticing prospect of rocketing share prices and nice dividends from the sales of the company's claimed device). When they sell these shares, they'll gain some nice capital they can expand the company with (IANA economist, don't kill me if this is an oversimplification :p ).



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:00 AM
link   
Alright, I'm posting from on campus and am away from my thermo book (which is my main resource in this one).

1) Magnetics, they don't do much all on their own, just like an electric field doesn't do much for you until you move through it. In order to get useful work out of magnetics, you have to spend more energy than you would get back. You lift the magnet off the fridge and let it go back and hit the fridge. You just spent more energy than that magnet had with respect to its motion. It's all about electron spin and aligning all that fun stuff.

2) Turbines, actually you burn coal to spin a turbine to spin a wire between two magnets and the changing magnetic field induces the current. You're at about 33% efficiency to get it to your house (according to the thermo prof, I couldn't understand him much anyway). It's pretty low efficiency because you're converting the energy so many times.

3) Perpetual motion machines means forever. That is its very definition, arguing definitions is pointless because that's what they are. You want to linearize over a given period of time, you can do that but it'll produce errors.

4) The earth does geothermal (molten core and all that fun stuff) the moon does tidal and a lot of the wind.

5) Yes, magnets do break down. Ever had one that falls off your fridge? It's losing is power as the electrons are going back to base state (chaos). Every time you introduce order to the world somewhere, you're creating more chaos elsewhere.

6) I've done a little checking on IEEE and AIAA (student member of the latter), there's nothing about the utilization of ZPE for anything useful. I'm going to do some more checking, but homework has been eating my time for lunch.

7) I'm not against new ideas, but you have to have some evidence based in reality for your idea. If you come forward and say, "Based on these principles, this should work." People will take you far more seriously than saying, "This is amazing, it works, but I can't show you how." Even without lengthy calculations people will take you far more seriously in the first case and may even be willing to help you.

8) Speed of light and absolute zero, if we were ever to get to or past them it would probably have to be by shunting around them. Tesling or some other silly high order physics problem. Those physics profs are crazy, but they've got some cool ideas. Absolute zero, I have no idea how you'd get around that one. You can never prove you got to absolute zero, and as soon as you do anything with the volume, its spent. Even the most efficient of cyles (Carnot I believe) is only 100% efficient if pumping based on absolute zero.

9) In engineering you define you own control volume. When looking at an airplane in flight you can look at the airflow around the airplane at any volume you want. You can take a piece off the wing or look at half a cubic mile of airspace. Your results won't change if you do it correctly. If you do it wrong, you're screwed anyway.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
First off, I know very little about engineering, energy production etc however I do have some common sense so think this claim is a total falsity.

1. Because of the testing thing, how they're only allowing the data to be studied not the actual machine. Anyone can write that kind of data & call it truth, eg I am a chicken, do you believe I'm a chicken because I wrote it? An idiot maybe but not a chicken & why put an ad in the paper for 12 scientists to ratify what they're saying? If they were in any way credible they'd easily be able to find the foremost brains in science to do it, who'd turn that opportunity down?

2. I'm not very hung up on morals, people basically do what they want & turn a blind eye to whoever gets hurt in the process, it's not perfect but it's how a lot of people live but keeping such a machine & using it to make profit would in my opinion be much much worse than what the hitlers, pol pots, sadam husseins etc combined have done. Any death from famine, poverty etc could be laid at their door if they have the technology to stop it.

3. I know you're thinking maybe if it was true they'd keep it for the money but come on if they did actually create such a machine they'd never have to pay for anything ever again anyway. Imagine being one of the inventors who stopped famine, poverty, basically changed the world? Everyone would know who you were, you wouldn't even need to ask for anything, it'd be given freely, global hero status would be theirs.

So the conclusion of me is everything about this reeks & I don't think anyone should give it any more thought & I know I didn't disprove anything about their claim in the technical sense but I don't need to



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordOfBunnies
Yes, ZPE exists, but its on a quantam level. I'm willing to bet that in order to harvest said energy you'd actually have to spend more energy to get it.


Which seems like quite the self serving uninformed statement those who hate being wrong would be making...


Have you ever wondered why science refuses to admit something? Mayhaps because said thing is not true?


A argument based on the assumption that science is different than any other organized and well established human endeavour. When governments are not suppressing their people they are suppressing the knowledge that could set them free.


If you're referring to a magnetic dipole, it's not a perpetual motion machine. Permanent magnets degrade over time, entropy causes the spins to change and the magnetic field to become less powerful.


No one can explain the source of energy the average old fridge magnet taps to stay against the fridge as it does. You would be a genius of the first order if you could explain many more than one third of magnetic phenomenon as that's were our current establishment science stands at this time.


Cold fusion is a joke, I know of one guy who thought he had it, but when they looked at his calculations they were all wrong. There's a vast difference between suppressing technology and getting it laughed off stage.


Cold fusion is very much reality and i guess now would be a good time to see how it's been validated repeatedly since it's it got suppressed by established science in 1989.


Many of these things, like Steorn, have no proof to back themselves up.


High energy fusion took tens of billions of dollars in research so far and we have not see a single watt of power for all that cost. Don't tell me about 'proof' as governments care not when they have set their minds to a certain scientific field. The US department of energy seems COMPLETELY uninterested in cold fusion even when it's been validated beyond any doubt. They clearly do not want to give us cheap energy.

peswiki.com...:LRP:A_Proposed_Proof_of_an_Overunity_Asymmetric_System_to_be_Tested

I had some doubts about Steorn but If Tom Bearden is interested then so am i.


Many of these technologies are half-cocked and have no basis in reality for how they work. I would love for these things to work, but it requires proof which no one provides.


Plants are well known to change one element into another and that's with micro-watts at their disposal. It's just ignorant to argue that there is no scientific basis for investigation into Cold Fusion even if it's been validated so many times over already.
If you wanted proof you would have gone and found it so do not come here and pretend to be some kind of objective observer;i can spot these types of diversion tactics miles away.


We're talking about science here. Presenting a device that has no proof is going to get you laughed off stage anywhere. Science is not religion, going on faith is not a viable option.


Science IS a religion and they practice as much faith in their 'laws' ( theories few of the cowardly self serving western scientist will even double check ) as the rest of humanity even if the articles of faith is more complex. You keep talking about no proof and i wonder how little time you must have spent to come up with a pathetic argument like that.


Here's one for you: There are aliens living in the crud under my left big toe. I can prove it too, but I can't show you the proof. Do you believe me?


Well you can take a shovel and make a hole and check and they validated low energy nuclear reactions a rather long time ago.


Aye, and do they have any proof of their works?


It's all over the Internet...


The internet is a wonderful place, but you can't believe everything you read on websites.


What about science journals? Do you really believe you can get away with such nonsense arguments? I have to start doubting science journals simple cause they are online? Lunacy...


There's a reason there's a validation step research. You have to be able to prove the math you used was right.


They did in the 600+ experiments that validated LENR so far...


I caught myself in a big problem this summer after I went back to validate my work. A little rework and it was fine, but you have to make sure the work is correct.


Your doing such a wonderful job of avoiding the real science here....

Get back to me with some quotes/reasons as to why you object to the conclusions published in journals all over the world.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
StellarX,

I don't doubt science, but perhaps there are things we don't know that allows "infinite" energy to exist. The energy could not be really infinite, but so much that is practically infinite.



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by MichiKami
Hi StellarX, I'm sure this is all very frustrating for you.


You have no idea how hard it is to deal with people like yourself. :0


Remember the old saying that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" and try not to embarass yourself too much.


I've been doing very well to avoid it so far but thanks for the warning; nothing like caring enthusiastic members to protect the rest of us idiots from 'embarrassing' ourselves.



Once you're a bit older and wiser (ie, out of high school) you'll be far better equipped to particpate in ATS discussions.


Actually i never want to be much older and wiser than i am now if what happened to you might happen to me. /me shudders.


I especially enjoyed how you "could" refute my statements, blablaBSblabla but failed to do so.


Does Godzilla chase poodle's to prove his strength? I do not HAVE to prove anything as it's already proved in scientific journals....


So to address everyone else: assuming you agree that this company's claims are bogus, why are they doing this?


I mostly changed my mind but disinformation has always been a roaring business on this planet.


The out-of-pocket costs are significant. Just looking for suckers to "invest" in their company is my best guess. What's yours?


Well the only reason your going to place such adds is to attract attention from the science community and since their going to come down on your like a ( irrational) mountain i am kinda skeptical about the why and how their doing this. Whatever the case may be they clearly have big brass one's.

We can continue this discussion whichever way you like but i obviously recommend we get into the science whenever your ready to assume the responsibility old age should have imparted.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
StellarX,

I don't doubt science, but perhaps there are things we don't know that allows "infinite" energy to exist. The energy could not be really infinite, but so much that is practically infinite.


Well i always like to ask people what they think about the energy we get from the Sub? Is a energy source that you never paid for ( or will pay for) that will last you a life time not really free and infinite? I think the scienctist can have their arguments around the desks and benches ( they are after all getting paid to do that and getting it right too fast might mean no more job) but the rest of us should make the best decision we can base on what we know and move on. We honestly just do not have the time to as certain as they pretend to want to be.

Stellar



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   
OK StellarX, I have to admit that I was about to killfile you, but you know ... I think you're kind of intriguing.


You do tend to skip around a bunch, and I'm tempted to counter each issue you address but that gets distracting and boring for everyone to read. So I'll address just one of them. Aaargh, no - I can't resist. Two issues.


StellarX says:
Cold fusion is very much reality and i guess now would be a good time to see how it's been validated repeatedly since it's it got suppressed by established science in 1989.

You don't really believe cold fusion is currently feasible, do you? Maybe someday, sure. But no one has yet demonstrated getting more energy out of the system than they've put in. How can "established science" suppress something like this, when there are so many fans trying it and promoting it? Imagine the one guy who knows "the secret". He could be fabulously wealthy from selling electricity. Or perhaps he's motivated in other ways - his disclosure would bring fresh water to dying children in sub-Saharan Africa. If he's an environmentalist - he could bring a halt to creating electricity by burning oil & gas, and eliminate nuclear power plants. Amigo, not only are the science & proof non-existent, it just isn't logical.


StellarX says:
No one can explain the source of energy the average old fridge magnet taps to stay against the fridge as it does.

You're right, for a very simple reason - the magnet uses no energy at all to stay against the fridge! Let's use your example:


StellarX says:
Take a fridge magnet and hold it close to your fridge? Who spent the energy that moved it towards the fridge? You hand in fact gained momentum so feel free to explain how that all happens without any work getting done as our current physics tells us.

Current physics tells us work DID get done - see the things you have to look forward to when you get to a good university?
That magnet has mass, just before it hits the fridge it has velocity, therefore it has energy. And the explanation is simple: before you released it, the magnet had Potential energy; once in motion it had both Potential and Kinetic energy. The instant before contact it had only Kinetic energy, which was all converted to heat and sound waves when it hit. There's no mystery here.

In fact, it's exactly like finding a rock at the top of a cliff. It has Potential energy only, then Potential & Kinetic as it falls, and eventually thermal and sound energy. Exactly the same, but perhaps a little less mysterious.

I hope that helps shed some light for you.

(NightBlade40: good thought - going public would garner lots of cash. The SEC would never let them such a bogus company go public in the US, but in Ireland ... I have no idea.)



posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
I can sense a sabotage on their testing- or the disappearence of a leading scientist/ equipment. Even 'outsider' pressure forcing them to declare their testing unsuccessful or unreliable.


Ah, is this what this site is all about? Now I know why I rarely bother to check in here. You believers in free energy are in a perpetual win-win situation that's really quite unfair: If something works out, you were RIGHT. If it doesn't, you were RIGHT (and there was obviously a conspiracy that made the device never reach the market). How can you lose? Must be awesome to be you!

Seriously - free energy is like a person claiming they are SO strong they can lift themselves up by their shirt collar. If you challenge them to DO it, they either try to sell you a DVD, invite you to a seminar, or explain that they need to go off and get "just a WEE bit stronger" before they demonstrate publically.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by MichiKami
OK StellarX, I have to admit that I was about to killfile you, but you know ... I think you're kind of intriguing.


Thanks....


You do tend to skip around a bunch, and I'm tempted to counter each issue you address but that gets distracting and boring for everyone to read. So I'll address just one of them. Aaargh, no - I can't resist. Two issues.


How generous of you...


You don't really believe cold fusion is currently feasible, do you?


It's not a question of belief as much as it is one of observation. Biological entities have all been happily indulging in it for a very long time it seems and Kevran proved this to us a rather long time ago.

www.lasarcyk.de...

experts.about.com...

www.rexresearch.com...

www.cheniere.org...


Maybe someday, sure. But no one has yet demonstrated getting more energy out of the system than they've put in.


Not so.

www.wired.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.csmonitor.com...

www.loe.org...


How can "established science" suppress something like this, when there are so many fans trying it and promoting it?


There are not many promoting it and what they face is quite extraordinary in it's brutality and general vindictiveness. The last two men of stature who put their names to it fled to France to escape the campaign of hatred staged against them by the science establishment in popular press.


Imagine the one guy who knows "the secret". He could be fabulously wealthy from selling electricity.


Wealth that does not lead to control is perfectly useless to those who already have control. You might love money but that is mostly because you understand very little about the world.


Or perhaps he's motivated in other ways - his disclosure would bring fresh water to dying children in sub-Saharan Africa.


They are purposefully starving people all over the world so why on earth would they let free energy out of the bag?


If he's an environmentalist - he could bring a halt to creating electricity by burning oil & gas, and eliminate nuclear power plants. Amigo, not only are the science & proof non-existent, it just isn't logical.


The environmental movement is nearly fully owned by the same people who already control the world and they are using it very well to help restrict the flow of energy.


You're right, for a very simple reason - the magnet uses no energy at all to stay against the fridge! Let's use your example:


So work only takes energy when science can explain it? How perfectly logical and simple if you want to believe whatever you like...


Current physics tells us work DID get done - see the things you have to look forward to when you get to a good university?
That magnet has mass, just before it hits the fridge it has velocity, therefore it has energy.


I only held it close to the fridge and the energy required to move it towards the fridge was not provided by me but by the magnet itself.


And the explanation is simple: before you released it, the magnet had Potential energy; once in motion it had both Potential and Kinetic energy.


Where did it get the potential energy from? What is the energy source that powers the effect we call magnetism?


The instant before contact it had only Kinetic energy, which was all converted to heat and sound waves when it hit. There's no mystery here.


There is no mystery when you create illogical arguments with which to banish your own uncertainty.


In fact, it's exactly like finding a rock at the top of a cliff. It has Potential energy only, then Potential & Kinetic as it falls, and eventually thermal and sound energy. Exactly the same, but perhaps a little less mysterious.


Where does the potential energy come from? Gravity? They only know what gravity does so far and until they explain where it comes from and powers it you should not be nearly as smug.


I hope that helps shed some light for you.


Very illuminating to see just how much you think you know.


Stellar



posted on Sep, 1 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sophismata
Ah, is this what this site is all about? Now I know why I rarely bother to check in here. You believers in free energy are in a perpetual win-win situation that's really quite unfair: If something works out, you were RIGHT.


Why turn this discussion into a attack on those who believe in a universe where there really is a free lunch for anyone who is willing to grasp it?


If it doesn't, you were RIGHT (and there was obviously a conspiracy that made the device never reach the market). How can you lose? Must be awesome to be you!


What you need to do is study the world before assuming that the markets really decide a damn thin. Why have scientist never been right about most anything? Why do governments so rarely serve their people? It is all this running in place just one big coincidence where almost everyone are losers? What a cynical view of the world.


Seriously - free energy is like a person claiming they are SO strong they can lift themselves up by their shirt collar.


Well we know from personal investigation that lifting yourself by the shirt is not something most anyone is likely to manage any day soon but what do you know about the universe and science that suggest so strongly to you that there is not energy sources like the sun ( did you help build the sun or when last did you pay a installment to keep it running) that we can tap at no cost to ourselves?


If you challenge them to DO it, they either try to sell you a DVD, invite you to a seminar, or explain that they need to go off and get "just a WEE bit stronger" before they demonstrate publically.


Nonsense. Not only is the science that allows it well understood but we have had functioning over unity machines of one type of another for more than a hundred years.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordOfBunnies
Alright, I'm posting from on campus and am away from my thermo book (which is my main resource in this one).


Should you not know the (few) laws of thermodynamics by now?


1) Magnetics, they don't do much all on their own, just like an electric field doesn't do much for you until you move through it.


So fields are powered by nothing until choose to move something trough it? Trees do not fall unless you hear them?


In order to get useful work out of magnetics, you have to spend more energy than you would get back.


You do find naturally magnetic elements you know... Once again it's the silly argument that we get no more than was 'in it' ( yeah right strong nuclear force just break down after a few years) completely forgetting to mention the fact that we had nothing to do with the energy input; just like the Sun from which all life already get a free lunch. Negentrophy on a massive scale which can not be denied.


You lift the magnet off the fridge and let it go back and hit the fridge. You just spent more energy than that magnet had with respect to its motion. It's all about electron spin and aligning all that fun stuff.


I did not lift the magnet off the fridge and simply held it close. I can in fact place it onn the floor in a rest position and it will still ( if close enough ) be moved to the fridge. You have no idea just how fun all of this really is...


2) Turbines, actually you burn coal to spin a turbine to spin a wire between two magnets and the changing magnetic field induces the current.


Why do you have to involve magnets if the power generation comes from the coal? Funny that our whole energy industry need all these magnets and coils and 'stuff' that sticks to our fridges without any help.


You're at about 33% efficiency to get it to your house (according to the thermo prof, I couldn't understand him much anyway). It's pretty low efficiency because you're converting the energy so many times.


Yeah and it's the reason they want centralized energy grids to energy massive wastage of energy.


3) Perpetual motion machines means forever.


Define forever in terms of a 100 year human life span? How will YOU know? Does it really matter if it perpetually gives energy for 4 billion years ( our sun ; supposedly) that no one paid for? The Sun has been a giant negentrophic source for all this time yet we refuse to call it perpetual motion/energy? How ludicrous that is!


That is its very definition, arguing definitions is pointless because that's what they are. You want to linearize over a given period of time, you can do that but it'll produce errors.


That's why the massive majority of scientist should all be locked up ( ideally shot for high treason in most instance ,but this is not a ideal world) so that we can have some real progress on the planet.


4) The earth does geothermal (molten core and all that fun stuff) the moon does tidal and a lot of the wind.


Which has also apparently been going on for a more 4.2 billion years. How much free stuff would we have to get before anyone in the science community notices?


5) Yes, magnets do break down. Ever had one that falls off your fridge? It's losing is power as the electrons are going back to base state (chaos). Every time you introduce order to the world somewhere, you're creating more chaos elsewhere.


Please provide me with a table/graph as to how long various type of magnetic substances ( natural or otherwise) is likely to last. The sun provides ordering energy to everywhere on the planet and arguing that ordering in one place on earth needs create disorder elsewhere is suggesting that you do not understand entropy which has nothing to do with disorder and everything to do with equilibrium.


6) I've done a little checking on IEEE and AIAA (student member of the latter), there's nothing about the utilization of ZPE for anything useful. I'm going to do some more checking, but homework has been eating my time for lunch.


I have not really bothered much with finding much in terms of journal published material as i have done my own investigation based on the source material provided mainly by Bearden.

Here is one paper ( of the many) that have done the journal circuit thing.

www.iop.org...

www.physica.org...

adsabs.harvard.edu...

peswiki.com...:LRP:A_Proposed_Proof_of_an_Overunity_Asymmetric_System_to_be_Tested


7) I'm not against new ideas, but you have to have some evidence based in reality for your idea.


One does not have to be 'against' new ideas when you have been educated to be close minded as you will disregard it out of hand anyways.


If you come forward and say, "Based on these principles, this should work." People will take you far more seriously than saying, "This is amazing, it works, but I can't show you how."


Well ideally i could do that but when you do not understand the assumptions inherent in the principles you defend what point is there for me to say and suggest that they allow for all of what has been suggested? It's the education ( or shall i deliberate spread of ignorance) in denial of observed reality that is the problem and NOT those who do not want to offer proof for something that universe already does each day. Why should anyone have to prove that a dipole draws energy from no known source when it's observed and well understood? Current science already assumes each dipole in the universe as perpetual energy gate ( from somewhere, or worse, from nowhere) just to make the rest of their models work.....


Even without lengthy calculations people will take you far more seriously in the first case and may even be willing to help you.


Stop pretending that the burden of proof should be on me ( or anyone who suggest this) when your the one assuming perpetual motion as fundamental basis of your current scientific dogma.


8) Speed of light and absolute zero, if we were ever to get to or past them it would probably have to be by shunting around them.


We already know that gravity must propagate ( assuming there is a medium or a requirement for propagation trough anything; all points may be fundamentally connected ) at faster than light speeds to result in our current observed universe and that absolute zero is one of those mental constructs that assumes a great deal based on limited current understanding.


Tesling or some other silly high order physics problem. Those physics profs are crazy, but they've got some cool ideas.


I do not think they are crazy by any stretch of the imagination as that normally requires one to be test new things which is not exactly something conservatives indulge in. Considering how desperately conservative our science establishments are ( due to who provides their funds and writes the text books) it's no surprise that we have so few truly crazy seeming one's in main stream science.


Absolute zero, I have no idea how you'd get around that one. You can never prove you got to absolute zero, and as soon as you do anything with the volume, its spent. Even the most efficient of cyles (Carnot I believe) is only 100% efficient if pumping based on absolute zero.


I tend to never assumes or think in terms of 'never ( or worse , 'impossible') as all it proves is that i think the limitations of my understanding and mind must somehow correspond to limitations and constraints in reality ( he universe) which our scientific history has well proved to normally be quite inaccurate.


9) In engineering you define you own control volume. When looking at an airplane in flight you can look at the airflow around the airplane at any volume you want. You can take a piece off the wing or look at half a cubic mile of airspace. Your results won't change if you do it correctly. If you do it wrong, you're screwed anyway.


In aero engineering you can normally get away with assuming you have a controlled volume ( relatively isolated but not closed) as the forces and energy you are assuming away are not significant enough to degrade performance on the full scale model if you choose to disregard it.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
According to wikipedia, absolute zero has never been reached.


Here is why i claimed what i did ....

math.ucr.edu...


But surley magnets lose their magnetism over time?


And i would be delighted to see a chart describing how long the various types lasts under which sort of conditions and why the word ' permanent' ever comes up when 'perpetual' is such a evil word.


Thats a contradiction... u can't explain something that isn't understood


Understood by who?

Stellar



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 03:44 PM
link   
StellaX - leaving all this endless theoretical argument aside, do you think these Irish guys have achieved over-unity and if so why?

They have presented no evidence that they have achieved what they claim. You mearly support them as they go against a scientific paradigm which you have become convinced is wrong.

You can go on about half understood theories for ever, but at the end of the day the proof is in experimental results. People have been trying to achieve >100% effeciency by artful arrangement of magnets since the 19th century and....they have never succeded. Might that tell you something?

Yeah, yeah "big oil" have surpressed all the ideas


For every company that would supress this idea there would be hundreds who would want to ruthlessly exploit it and make billions. Aside from that all these apparently "supressed" schemes are all over the web, including designs etc. Also these inventors are still alive and well and trying to hawk their crap to anyone daft enough to buy it. Perhaps "big oil" can't find decent hit-men anymore


Maybe the "law" of the conservation of energy will one day be broken, but if definitely won't be by putting a few magnets near each other.



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
StellaX - leaving all this endless theoretical argument aside, do you think these Irish guys have achieved over-unity and if so why?


I honestly do not care if they have or have not as it is in fact the theory that matters most. We can from the historic record note quite clearly that these devices have been built and that they did work so the idea is to make people familiar with the science behind it instead of trying to convince them that patented devices worked or not. People like you will always be able to claim " why is it not on the market' as in your vast ignorance the market somehow has the magical ability to decide things.


They have presented no evidence that they have achieved what they claim. You mearly support them as they go against a scientific paradigm which you have become convinced is wrong.


They have a machine that they claim works and that is good enough for me who understands that there are dozens of like machines which prove the basic feasibility of the concept of tapping energy from the vacuum. I do not personally care if this specific machine works or not.


You can go on about half understood theories for ever, but at the end of the day the proof is in experimental results.


Our world runs on top of a very poorly understood reality ( we do not know what energy is or understand for that matter what the nature of gravity is) and that has not stopped us from managing what we did so far. Why do you think reality is in some fundamental way connected to the way we are currently living?


People have been trying to achieve >100% effeciency by artful arrangement of magnets since the 19th century and....they have never succeded. Might that tell you something?


They have never succeeded you say? Here is a list i am working trough www.spots.ab.ca...

and here are some finds from prior research

Tom Beardens' Meg

appft1.uspto.gov...
Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-
adv.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=6%2C362%
2C718&OS=6,362,718&RS=6,362,718

Alfred Hubbard

patft.uspto.gov...
Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PALL&s1=1,723,422.
PN.&OS=PN/1,723,422&RS=PN/1,723,422 Hubbard

www.rexresearch.com...

John Huston

patft.uspto.gov...
%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PALL&s1=1,781,062.PN.&OS=PN/
1,781,062&RS=PN/1,781,062

www.rexresearch.com...

Meyers

www.rexresearch.com...

Patent in Uk ( must still go find it)

Moray

www.rexresearch.com...

Patent rights refused as he could not explain where the energy was coming from...

Kawai

patft.uspto.gov...
netahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=5436518.
PN.&OS=PN/5436518&RS=PN/5436518

Tesla

patft.uspto.gov...
netahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PALL&s1=3971938
.PN.&OS=PN/3971938&RS=PN/3971938

Rogers

patft.uspto.gov...
Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PALL&s1=0958,829.PN
.&OS=PN/0958,829&RS=PN/0958,829

I suspect there will be full patent pdfs at rexresearch but i really do not bother much with the devices themselves as it's redundantly evident to me that they are real.

What fascinates me is the science and that is where most of these people got in trouble is when they were asked to explain the source of the energy.


Yeah, yeah "big oil" have surpressed all the ideas


It's partly big oil but mostly the science establishment and their government sponsors who have attacked and maligned this area of research.


For every company that would supress this idea there would be hundreds who would want to ruthlessly exploit it and make billions.


No one profits when energy is nearly free and this shows your completely lack of comprehension of what really makes the world go round. People can only control others when those are dependent on them for some reason.


Aside from that all these apparently "suppressed" schemes are all over the web, including designs etc. Also these inventors are still alive and well and trying to hawk their crap to anyone daft enough to buy it. Perhaps "big oil" can't find decent hit-men anymore


Some have been killed but you can only kill the one's who are not well known or with the kinds of connections and understanding that can bring this to a wide market very suddenly.


Maybe the "law" of the conservation of energy will one day be broken, but if definitely won't be by putting a few magnets near each other.


The law of conservation of energy needs not be broken even if our current science community already assumes each dipole in the universe as perpetual energy generation entity. The claim that these machines somehow break the rules of physics is just a diversion to mislead the scientifically illiterate like yourself.

Stellar.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX
I honestly do not care if they have or have not as it is in fact the theory that matters most.

You don't care if it works? Strange. And the theory is?



We can from the historic record note quite clearly that these devices have been built and that they did work

Quite cleary they don't work otherwise people would be running their homes and businesses on this power source. If you came round my house with one of these devices, and hooked up my power supply so I no longer had to use the mains electricity, and no longer had fuel bills, I wouldn't give a crap about "paradigms" or prevelant theories, I'd just use it. Not only would I do that, I would pay thousands for the machines. Businesses would pay much more, and most people who run businesses would never have heard of the conservation of energy and wouldn't care one bit about it. So why has nobody ever done that?? Why are these devices nearly always "just about to go into production"?



They have a machine that they claim works and that is good enough for me

You going to put your money where your mouth is and invest in them then?



who understands that there are dozens of like machines which prove the basic feasibility of the concept of tapping energy from the vacuum.

Why do you think these guys are "tapping energy from the vacuum"? They say:



"What we have developed is a way to construct magnetic fields so that when you travel round the magnetic fields, starting and stopping at the same position, you have gained energy,"

It's just yet another classic artfully arranged magnets device.



What fascinates me is the science and that is where most of these people got in trouble is when they were asked to explain the source of the energy.

As I said: they should just build a device take it to some business owners and demonstrate how it could power their offices or factories. Company directors wouldn't give a flying crap where they energy was coming from if the device worked and saved them money.



No one profits when energy is nearly free and this shows your completely lack of comprehension of what really makes the world go round.

If you control the means of producing the energy then you make money, and money is what makes the world go round. I think it is you who lacks a basic understanding of capatilism. What do you think these Irish guys are trying to do if not build a business selling their device?



The claim that these machines somehow break the rules of physics is just a diversion to mislead the scientifically illiterate like yourself.

Call me scientifically illiterate if you like, but you are essentially calling all the world leading physicists and engineers scientifically illiterate as well. You have just read half a book by that sad old lunatic Tom Bearden and you think you know more about the subject than people who spend their entire lives studying or building devices based on electromagentism. That sort of arrogance is pretty breathtaking.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
You don't care if it works? Strange. And the theory is?


I do not care if this SPECIFIC device works as what is is attempting to do has been proven to be realistic a few dozen times. How can you still claim not to understand the theory when we have spoken about this before in detail ? You know i will just keep at it till you quite trying to spread your ignorant point of view ( well related to this issue) so how do you reckon your managing anything?


Quite cleary they don't work otherwise people would be running their homes and businesses on this power source.


They do work ( it's been proven over and over again) so how can you attempt to make the argument that the market dictates reality? It's nonsensical and completely illogical as the market depends entirely on keeping people dependent. This nearly free energy would invalidate the market concept that leads to vast wealth thus it would destroy those who control the world today. Get it?


If you came round my house with one of these devices, and hooked up my power supply so I no longer had to use the mains electricity, and no longer had fuel bills, I wouldn't give a crap about "paradigms" or prevelant theories, I'd just use it.


And that has been done by the various inventors as they power their own homes and so forth.


Not only would I do that, I would pay thousands for the machines. Businesses would pay much more, and most people who run businesses would never have heard of the conservation of energy and wouldn't care one bit about it. So why has nobody ever done that?? Why are these devices nearly always "just about to go into production"?


Because the forces ranged against free energy do not allow the 'market' to get involved as they ARE the market that you imagine would benefit by this. They will all lose and what they will do to me or anyone else to prevent this from reaching the market in any scale i would not like to imagine.


You going to put your money where your mouth is and invest in them then?


I do not have a death wish and i would rather apply my ,limited, powers where i may stand a chance.


Why do you think these guys are "tapping energy from the vacuum"? They say:
t's just yet another classic artfully arranged magnets device.


Which serves as the best way to gate that energy from the vacuum? I am sure you must have read at least some little parts of what i have provided for you over the last year so why still demand that this is more complex than it clearly is? Tesla had over unity device as long ago as 1889 so why pretend this is so hard to do with modern materials and understanding?


As I said: they should just build a device take it to some business owners and demonstrate how it could power their offices or factories.


Why do we not all drive electric cars? Why are medicine ( that saves lives) so prohibitively expensive in the USA while the top ten US corporations are basically a list of big pharmaceuticals? Since you argument is so completely vapid i am not going to bother with more example's till you explain why just two simple situations occur.


Company directors wouldn't give a flying crap where they energy was coming from if the device worked and saved them money.


Shows that you do not understand a thing about economics or those who do their best to control it. Those who run the world trough industry have deliberately over many centuries chose class interest ( keeping us poor and generally dependent) over profits and until you can explain that in market terms i will not indulge in discussion of the fantasy world you believe in.


If you control the means of producing the energy then you make money, and money is what makes the world go round.


Electric cars are not on the market on any scale because they simply do not wear out or break down anywhere near fast enough to keep the current industry profits where they want them. If you sell someone a device which will provide them energy to power their homes cars and greenhouse ( for food) for the rest of their lives tens of millions of people will simply leave the job market as their energy cost are basically covered while those who remain will suddenly gain vast bargaining powers and drive up wages tremendously. It's a negatively freed back loop for industry where they will keep losing as people become ever less dependent as they create their own economy which will actually respond to their needs.


I think it is you who lacks a basic understanding of capatilism. What do you think these Irish guys are trying to do if not build a business selling their device?


Oh many have tried to get their energy to a world wide market ( i believe Tesla came the closest nearly a hundred years ago ) and they have obviously failed thus far. Will we believe that electric cars do not work as well as regular cars ( they have for many decades) simply because everyone is not driving one? Will we believe that that not enough food can be produced world wide because hundreds of millions are starving to death? Will we believe that flying cars are not possible because they are not on the general market? This fantasy that demand creates supply may be widely sold but it's very far removed from the truth if one actually looks at the world.


Call me scientifically illiterate if you like, but you are essentially calling all the world leading physicists and engineers scientifically illiterate as well.


They all hold some of the pieces but most refuse to put them together as they fear for their pathetic reputations , and obviously their jobs, which will be savaged if they lent their name to this area of scientific investigation. It's strange how scientist that goes against the establishment can overnight go from the hero's in their fields to complete outcasts for just being truthful and telling us what they have observed.


You have just read half a book by that sad old lunatic Tom Bearden


I have read work from many people but all you and your ilk can normally manage is character assassination. Why do you think you can invalidate reality by attacking the messenger that tries to tell you about it? Talk about arrogance ( " I just could NOT POSSIBLY been fooled so completely as i am just such a smart guy") and misplaced anger!


and you think you know more about the subject than people who spend their entire lives studying or building devices based on electromagentism.


I do not have to know MORE than them to understand where they are making mistakes and those mistakes do not make them wrong about EVERYTHING as much as it indicates how much more they could know had they allowed themselves that area of investigation. This is very much hard science as much as the science establishment ( worse than the church as they are actually dealing with at least some parts of reality) will deny it to protect their salaries and reputations. Those who tell mostly truths are also the best liars by a wide margin.


That sort of arrogance is pretty breathtaking.


You have not raised a single objection based on scientific fundamentals and i believe that is most revealing about who the arrogant party in this discussion is. Non of those patents and articles indicated to you that something was going on here?

Stellar




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join