Originally posted by subz
There was also a guy who found an method for efficient electrolysis of water. Instead of the standard electrolysis his machine uses low voltage but extremely high frequency electricity. It shows you the machine get filled with tap-water and he switches it on and instantly hydrogen comes billowing out. He then lights on outlet pipe and it ignites to form a constant flame. The energy released in the form of hydrogen was upwards of 1000% of that used to seperate it from water.

Yes his name is Stanley Meyers and he was murdered. His food or drink was poisoned. Thats who I was talking about, and the reason why people shouldn't try to patent these devices that use uncommon knowledge. Instead freely publish it's design so that nobody in the future can be killed for obtaining what should be common knowledge.

Subz
thanks a lot for those links but is the thechnical information avaible any where? Or the video to the documentry?
It just seems that is the information that everyone is saying needs to be made avaible.

The problem with Dr. Michio Kaku is that he is a theoretical physicist. He only knows what is theoretically possible. For him to close his mind and think that because something hasn't yet been proven theoretically, that it is impossible, tells me that he is a useless waste of a Doctor, and he will never help develop the revolutionary inventions of the future.

And yes.. Stanley Meyers was murdered, that means his invention worked. His invention could have lead to free energy as well, since his device produced more energy than it consumed.

Just finished watching that documentary Subz. Very interesting devices on there, it stuns me how the scientific community are so reluctant to investigate things that demonstrate "outside the box" thinking. I honestly thought thats what science was fundamentally about!

It seems such a shame that people are demonstrating technology that could totally change the world that nobody wants to accept. I understand the ramifications of such devices being proved to be true, we would see a huge shift in economic and political strength throughout the world. In my opinion that is why we will never see such devices implemented in our lifetime.

Im glad you watched it Bez

The problem the scientific community has is that they base their entire world view on the principles that other scientists have devised. They are exactly how the church was during the Enlightenment. They perceive any theory that contradicts their world view to be heretical and actively stifle it.

All too often scientists forget how many times the scientific community has been ravaged by a lone scientific discovery that negates vast swathes of accepted research. It's human nature and scientists are just as prone to protect their world view as the clergy and the average man.

But where the topic of free energy comes a real cropper is that it's not just scientists who are horrified at what the ramifications would be, but also big business and our very politicians who derive their power from big business also fear what it could do to society.

Resistance of this magnitude has not been seen since the days of Gallileo and Coppernicus.

[edit on 23/8/06 by subz]

Originally posted by Regenmacher
In order to make such an idiotic statement, would mean you have no idea who Kaku is or quantum mechanics. Might as well tell us Einstein was a moron and didn't aid scientific advancement and technology either.

Compared to Nikola Tesla..... Kaku and Einstein were lab rats. Nikola Tesla had invented a free energy device. Heck I can tell you a single object that gives free energy. Its called a permanent magnet, it has a constant pulling and repelling force, and its free. But very few people, including Tesla, realized that.

I, myself, believe "cold" fusion is an achieved state. There's just too much data where others are trying to figure out the technology, and too many loose ends trying to keep others from knowing it.

Someone, somewhere, somehow, knows it.

I'm pretty skeptical of "free energy" claims, however I'm also not inclined to disbelieve them simply because they don't fit into the accepted theoretical framework.

If these people can demonstrate a physical, measurable effect, IMHO it's worth loooking into. While "free" energy may be physically impossible, it's also possible that the device may be tapping into an an energy source simply not yet understood: IE it's not "free" energy any more than, say, solar, we simply can't yet identify where the energy is coming from.

It wouldn't be the first time physical experiment blew accepted theories out of the water.

Name one physical invention from Einstein, you can't.

Laes,

. You are writing nothing using a computer that works on the principles of quantum mechanics that Einstein made great contributions to. Ever heard about Bose-Einstein statistics? Its role in superfluidity? Didn't think so.

Finally, apart from his upnsurpassed achievements in science, Einstein was also capable of inventing stuff that even arrogant and uneducated people like you can appreciate:

In 1926, Einstein and former student Leó Szilárd co-invented the Einstein refrigerator.[23] On November 11, 1930, U.S. Patent 1,781,541 was awarded to Albert Einstein and Leó Szilárd for the refrigerator. The patent covered a thermodynamic refrigeration cycle providing cooling with no moving parts, at a constant pressure, with only heat as an input. The refrigeration cycle used ammonia, butane, and water.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by asala]

Originally posted by StellarX
Maxwell makes Einstein look rather silly

Why? That's because you understand Maxwell's equations and you don't understand any or most of Einstein's work?

(when your using mathematical languages only a few even understand)

It is quite silly to complain that there are no easy ways in science. The mathematics describing things like superconductivity or interaction of light with matter on the atomic level is complex and likely well beyond your understanding. This absolutely doesn't make it any less valuable for either fundamental science or applied research.