Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by dereks

---

dereks, are you joking? I'm really getting the feeling that you know nothing about physics at all. You keep asking "what vacuum?"

THE VACUUM THAT IS ALL AROUND YOU, the one that radiant energy comes from. You obviously do not realize that the earth floats in the vacuum of space, and that physics operates in this vacuum. Particle and energy physics does not depend on the atmosphere of the earth. I am not talking about the simplistic idea of an atmospheric vacuum (which seems to be what you are referring to), but rather the PHYSICS concept of the ethereal vacuum of space, of which science has confirmed is not empty at all, but is filled with "dark matter", "dark energy", etc.

How do you think satellites or space shuttles work if electronics depends on an atmosphere? Please stop arguing from such a position of ignorance and get on the same wavelength, if you can.

It is very hard to explain anything to you if you refuse to educate yourself about anything that surpasses simple 7th science class of 30 years ago.

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by dereks

---

dereks, are you joking? I'm really getting the feeling that you know nothing about physics at all. You keep asking "what vacuum?"

THE VACUUM THAT IS ALL AROUND YOU, the one that radiant energy comes from. You obviously do not realize that the earth floats in the vacuum of space, and that physics operates in this vacuum. Particle and energy physics does not depend on the atmosphere of the earth. I am not talking about the simplistic idea of an atmospheric vacuum (which seems to be what you are referring to), but rather the PHYSICS concept of the ethereal vacuum of space, of which science has confirmed is not empty at all, but is filled with "dark matter", "dark energy", etc.

How do you think satellites or space shuttles work if electronics depends on an atmosphere? Please stop arguing from such a position of ignorance and get on the same wavelength, if you can.

It is very hard to explain anything to you if you refuse to educate yourself about anything that surpasses simple 7th science class of 30 years ago.

"Ethereal vacuum of space", huh?. Even the 7th grade texts of 1979 knew that the ether had been disproven in 1887. The ether, or aether, was the stuff that supposedly filled the vacuum, and allowed the transmission of light waves. As such a physics expert, you surely know of the Michelson-Morley experiment. And as such an expert, perhaps you can explain how these vacuum energy machines evade the obvious problems resulting from the annihilation operator in the Bogoliubov transformation. Please.
Oh yes, and please show the mathematics for the computation of the average energy densityof both the Dirac vacuum and the bare vacuum.

Originally posted by broli
reply to post by seethelight

---

Proof is meaningless to the blind. Steorn has released the first short presentation among a total of four which shows some characteristics and the idea behind the motor.

If you are not willing to do the science step down and let someone else do it. A lot of people here are armchair babies, using "scientists" would be giving too much credit, who besides twitter and facebook know nothing about true science.

Build a small home lab and do your own science if you want to do anything of value for this planet in your life time, besides selling crap.


[edit on 20-12-2009 by broli]

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Originally posted by seethelight
So has Steorn provided any proof yet...?

Didn't think so.

The real point is not whether Steorn did any proof. You and others seem to say that Steorn can't provide any proof because ZPE is not possible, so that is why I don't center on Steorn because I don't think they really know why their machine works, if indeed it does. There are MUCH better examples of reputable companies out there who have made ZPE work, companies that understand why they work, they understand the science behind their machines, and are much farther ahead than Steorn. For example:

Over Unity Generators by Hungarian company

They are installing a big unit in a Canadian power company, according to their video. Obviously, this company has a lot invested in their work, and they are moving full steam ahead. Their machines are based on the science developed by Byron Evans, and his new ECE Unified Field Theory, which is gaining a larger scientific following all the time. Evans IS a scientist who has had peer-reviewed papers published, and who engages in theoretical arguments with top scientists all over the world. The fact is, even those who think he may be wrong in some things (just like many thought Einstein was wrong) seem to respect him as a legitimate scientist.

Here is Evans website:

Byron Evans website with scientific papers


[edit on 20-12-2009 by downisreallyup]

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Originally posted by seethelight
So has Steorn provided any proof yet...?

Didn't think so.

The real point is not whether Steorn did any proof. You and others seem to say that Steorn can't provide any proof because ZPE is not possible, so that is why I don't center on Steorn because I don't think they really know why their machine works, if indeed it does. There are MUCH better examples of reputable companies out there who have made ZPE work, companies that understand why they work, they understand the science behind their machines, and are much farther ahead than Steorn. For example:

Over Unity Generators by Hungarian company

They are installing a big unit in a Canadian power company, according to their video. Obviously, this company has a lot invested in their work, and they are moving full steam ahead. Their machines are based on the science developed by Byron Evans, and his new ECE Unified Field Theory, which is gaining a larger scientific following all the time. Evans IS a scientist who has had peer-reviewed papers published, and who engages in theoretical arguments with top scientists all over the world. The fact is, even those who think he may be wrong in some things (just like many thought Einstein was wrong) seem to respect him as a legitimate scientist.

Here is Evans website:

Byron Evans website with scientific papers


[edit on 20-12-2009 by downisreallyup]

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by dereks

---

ECE Unified Field Theory - Byron Evans



.

I thought the disgraced ex chemistry teacher who coattailed onto Einstein and Cartan was Myron Evans. Who in the wide world of physics is Byron Evans. Surely your not talking about the middle linebacker for the Philly Eagles. I looked at the website and it is nothing but a self-aggrandizing shill piece for Evans, complete with an online store.
Right now I am posting from Fermilab, where the Cyrogenic Dark Matter Search Experiment team is giving a seminar on the results of the experiment. I am already familiar with Cartan, since his theories had some interesting takes on electron spin, or the electromagnetic angular momentum field. Evans, on the other hand offered nothing more than second level derivations of the Cartan equations.
BTW, they found it. Dark matter, that is. 2 different events, both right in the area predicted by supersymmetry. The official release of the paper containing the results will be at the end of today's session, or about 5 PM CDT. Anyway, this seminar is a lot more productive than this thread, so I guess I'll listen to some real physics for a while.

[edit on 20-12-2009 by 4nsicphd]

Originally posted by ThePeoplesSoldier
reply to post by downisreallyup

---

Wow! Nice find! hmm But all those scientist, documented results, and government backing has to be a hoax. It goes angainst all scientific laws we follow! lmfao Its just amatter of time before all the "debunkers" eat their words. But what do I know im just a blind follower that puts my hopes and dreams into "fairy dust".

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by seethelight

---

Stop looking for reasons to not have to address the facts. That is just the kind of stuff I've been talking about in my other thread. People don't discuss, they just spew epithets and think that qualifies as meaningful discussion.

I gave you two links. Did you watch them? If not, then WHY NOT? Are you afraid you might see something that you would have to respond to?

Come on... be a man and RESPOND to the FACTS

Originally posted by seethelight

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by seethelight

---

Stop looking for reasons to not have to address the facts. That is just the kind of stuff I've been talking about in my other thread. People don't discuss, they just spew epithets and think that qualifies as meaningful discussion.

I gave you two links. Did you watch them? If not, then WHY NOT? Are you afraid you might see something that you would have to respond to?

Come on... be a man and RESPOND to the FACTS

What facts?

The FACTS the discredited hoaxers at Steorn refuse to let anyone see?

Those facts?

Or the random other scammers who are claiming the same lie?

Are far as I can tell, the only thing you see capable of doing isa saying, "look other people are lying about the same thing, some none of them are lying", which is a combination of:

Appeal to probability: assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.

Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.

Negative proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false.

# Demanding negative proof: attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Originally posted by seethelight

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by seethelight

---

Stop looking for reasons to not have to address the facts. That is just the kind of stuff I've been talking about in my other thread. People don't discuss, they just spew epithets and think that qualifies as meaningful discussion.

I gave you two links. Did you watch them? If not, then WHY NOT? Are you afraid you might see something that you would have to respond to?

Come on... be a man and RESPOND to the FACTS

What facts?

The FACTS the discredited hoaxers at Steorn refuse to let anyone see?

Those facts?

Or the random other scammers who are claiming the same lie?

Are far as I can tell, the only thing you see capable of doing isa saying, "look other people are lying about the same thing, some none of them are lying", which is a combination of:

Appeal to probability: assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen.

Base rate fallacy: using weak evidence to make a probability judgment without taking into account known empirical statistics about the probability.

Negative proof fallacy: that, because a premise cannot be proven false, the premise must be true; or that, because a premise cannot be proven true, the premise must be false.

# Demanding negative proof: attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim

I knew it! Another troll! See, you are incapable of actually watching or reviewing linked information that I gave to you and then commenting on it. Clearly someone not worth one more second of effort on.

Okay people, move along, nothing to see here...