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.

 

Anti-Gravity & Zero Point Energy Device Confirmed by Measurements in Morningstar Energy Box

page: 7
31
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Don't mention it again? Who exactly do you think you are? I have the right to say whatever I wish.

One the paper is obviously a translation from German

Knapp is a widely accredited scientist.

No it has nothing to do with static electricity.

Again he gives plenty of equations and lots of scientists respect his position. He holds a pretty high position at a prestigous university in a country that has higher standards than most.

Again who are you? Its very easy for keyboard tough guys with a little engineering backround to criticize.

There is not one bum link I gave you. Every single one has a connection to respected universities or labs.

It's a waste of time to talk to someone like you. Good luck. In life I need to prepare for work tomorrow which will be installing a houseful of x 10 dimmers and relays.


I have wasted far too much time in this exchange.




posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


The common theme among these crackpots (EX. Bearden, Steorn and all the rest) Is that they say they have developed working models of "free energy" devices.

They don't say they have discovered scientific laws or scientific data that allows this to happen. They all make media releases saying that they have done it.

But where are these machines? When they do a demo somehow it is always sabotaged. And when they are asked for evidence backing their claims they fail to provide.

The only other thing that is painstakingly obvious about these loons is that they all have received boatloads of cash from gullible investors. They are fraudsters. They take money from people and they don't provide results.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
How can you even say you know something about the Higgs Boson when they haven't even substantiated theories on it as it is. This is utter lunacy. Anytime there is a void of results or evidence it just hits the same area of lies.


Wow. Your reading comprehension is poor. Nowhere did I bring up bosons, Higgs or otherwise. I did mention the Heaviside/Briggs equations. And the fact that they truncated Maxwell's quaternion equations by half. Are you really that confused?
edit on 3/6/2011 by Amaterasu because: typo



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Movescamp
 


Are the dimmers and relays powered off of a ZPE device?

If his work is valid than where is his free energy device.

Please elaborate on what was going on in Wolfram's experiment. You have no idea.


I think Occam's Razor applies to this idea that free energy is already developed but no one can produce it. Is it more likely that a device that contradicts the very principles that it uses to make it valid exist, or do people misrepresent their positions and findings on something they want to work?

You post endless crap that you can't explain. Nothing more than that. You make bold statements that are backed by no evidence.

I have a bold statement, energy out requires energy in. To release the energy inside of compounds you need to use energy to separate their chemical bonds..

Here is another one, to have an output of energy in a mechanical apparatus you need to put energy in.

I know the last one is crazy, I guess I can't really prove it unless you go to your car, get it, turn it on and drive somewhere.






posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by GeeGee
 


Exactly deserves a Repost so it is harder to ignore.



TextOriginally posted by Drunkenparrot Originally posted by Movescamp reply to post by boncho Zero point energy university of Colorado There is nothing to this but fluff. I'm sorry if you were fooled by these people however the other posters are correct, this is scientific fraud. I'm skeptical of Jovian Corp's claims, but they are certainly not frauds. One of the people involved with this patent is Bernard Haisch who has published over 130 scientific articles, many of which were in Physical Review (one of the hardest physics journals to get published in). Do some research before slandering people you don't know.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Pretty funny guy but really....

Why don't you look him up so you dont appear like well I shouldn't say here.

Zero point energy. Requires input for a reaction. I never ever said there was no input? Are you dense. Does arguing get you excited? It is within the laws of thermo dynamic. Technically plugging in a vacuum device is using energy. Making the device took energy. Electricity takes energy to produce and is energy. Energy transforming is within thermodynamics.

Just like the Jovian labs device.

So they are all frauds huh? Quacks?



edit on 6-3-2011 by Movescamp because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Movescamp
reply to post by GeeGee
 


Exactly deserves a Repost so it is harder to ignore.



TextOriginally posted by Drunkenparrot Originally posted by Movescamp reply to post by boncho Zero point energy university of Colorado There is nothing to this but fluff. I'm sorry if you were fooled by these people however the other posters are correct, this is scientific fraud. I'm skeptical of Jovian Corp's claims, but they are certainly not frauds. One of the people involved with this patent is Bernard Haisch who has published over 130 scientific articles, many of which were in Physical Review (one of the hardest physics journals to get published in). Do some research before slandering people you don't know.




"Bernard Haisch, who is a co-inventor, is quick to point out that this is all purely speculative at this point and that they have not yet been able to prove anything in the laboratory. The sporadic signals they have seen can't be ruled out as experimental error. That said, the model is still "well worth pursuing"."



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Oh but wait they are quacks who wasted 20 million knowing they would fail. You are quite a trip.
It just goes to show what your big brain gets in the way of. You are very familiar with the lab henworks in right?
What a joke.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Movescamp
 





Oh but wait they are quacks who wasted 20 million knowing they would fail.


They wasted their own money? Please support that with evidence.

Thank you.

BTW Still waiting for the credentials for Tom Bearden, maybe you have them?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Is Tom Bearden and infolded Whittaker potentials something you have read about? Is the fact that "Maxwell's" equations as taught are really Heaviside/Briggs reductions from Maxwell's quaternion equations, and throw out half of Maxwell's whole, suggestive that anything mainstream science offers just might be lacking?


Please tell me you aren't talking about free energy Tom Bearden, certified scammer?

ohhh.... no ...you
di'nt! you di'n't just mention "Tom bearden"up in heah dijooo??

[ex ]
actually ["int"ernal] ats post.:

While I wholeheartedly agree that Bearden is a fraud, I cannot follow what the original post is supposed to be saying that's a fraud about him.

You need to look for fraud no further than the MEG. He was supposed to be producing those by 2003, right? I heard it on Art Bell myself. Now its forgotten about. Oh right, its because of the evil conspiracy that's preventing people from having the desire to make billions of dollars in profit by putting comparatively tiny investment capital into a product that'll save the world and is a sure thing. Guess the conspiracy is so vast that it prevented Bearden from doing a single convincing demonstration of the device to ANYONE. Yeah right. I'd mortgage my left nut if someone convinced me he had a free energy device that I could invest in. And I know lots of other people would too!

And try sending the guy a polite email calmly asking some detail about the physics of his device. His response will be nothing but insults about how you don't know any physic and he does and you're just too stupid to ever understand. And in the end, he won't answer the question! And he's even proud of his lunatic-sounding responses to people's emails that he actually has the audacity to post them! He's proud of being an a-hole!

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Heres a good read on Thom Beardens credentials and a majority of the psuedo science crap propagated here as being openmined":

The principal public proponent of pseudoscientific scalar field theory is Thomas Bearden, a retired Lt. Colonel in the U.S. Army. Most web articles about scalar weapons cite Bearden's writing as their principle source. He has often written under the guise of a Ph.D. purchased from an unaccredited "life experience" diploma mill. Most of his many books, papers, and web sites are about perpetual motion machines, free energy, magnetic motors, and other "over-unity" violations of the laws of thermodynamics. Among his claims are that scalar weapons and other such techologies are responsible for Chernobyl, the destruction of the space shuttle Challenger, the downing of TWA Flight 800, the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, and Hurricane Katrina. You might be surprised to hear it, but I actually like Bearden. His science is largely fantasy based, but he seems a good genuine guy who hopes that scalar technologies will benefit humanity. On one page of his web site he shows a pile of his books about to be shipped out, and he comments "There's the information, on its way to going out, and perhaps to the very grad student who eventually turns the academic energy world upside down and makes it happen." That's a hope a lot of us share, but the cold hard reality is that scientific progress is almost always the result of long, hard, tedious work, and rarely a fortuitous sudden rewriting of the rules from the fringe. Bearden's profound and uncritical belief in nearly every conspiracy theory imaginable is fairly typical among many proponents of scalar weapons, and it clearly clouds their judgement.

Bearden notes that a letter he received from the National Science Foundation, in response to an email describing his perpetual motion machines, states "There is a uniform support for your 'out of the box' thinking about conventional models and mathematical approaches." What's often omitted by Bearden's supporters is that this letter diplomatically concludes by emphasizing the need to "(1) demonstrate the strength of evidence that perpetual motion machines have worked as advertised, and (2) address how something works that appears to violate our present understanding of engineering and physics." He's wrong and has a lot of pretty crazy theories, but so do a lot of other good people. It's great to be well intentioned, but it's also equally important we better inform ourselves before propagating misinformation. And this is the reason to quarrel with Bearden. He is very well informed, but about a fantastical, non-scientific universe.

Just Google for "scalar weapon" and you'll find more than enough reading material to keep you occupied for days. One interesting trend to watch for is the frequent use of the terms "old" and "new": The "old" understanding of physics and electromagnetism, and the "new" understanding. Make no mistake; "old" and "new" physics really mean "real" and "made up" physics. You'll see that virtually every authoritative link or reference is to one of Tom Bearden's books or web pages. You'll see all the familiar warning signs of the classic conspiracy mindset: Huge lists (like this and this) linking nearly every aerospace or weather-related disaster to scalar weapons, and the uncritically presumed existence of worldwide networks of secret weaponry, men in black, and confessions of anonymous insiders claiming that such things are real.

The first time most people hear about scalar weapons is usually through a YouTube video or chain email from some doomsayer. Whenever you hear such a wild, far-out story, you should always approach it with skepticism, and not just accept it at face value because the chain email was forwarded by a trusted friend. The proponents of scalar weapon conspiracy theories are not backed by any valid science. The idea makes for some fine science fiction, but at a minimum, spend five minutes on Wikipedia before accepting and repeating such wild stories as science fact.



skeptoid.com...

edit on 6-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-3-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho



"Bernard Haisch, who is a co-inventor, is quick to point out that this is all purely speculative at this point and that they have not yet been able to prove anything in the laboratory. The sporadic signals they have seen can't be ruled out as experimental error. That said, the model is still "well worth pursuing"."


This is exactly why I said it's wrong to label Jovion Corp as frauds. They're real scientists, not psuedoscientists. They understand what they're doing is very controversial and high risk/high gain. Puthoff, Haisch, Rueda and others are some of the most credible scientists that seriously investigate fringe ideas. In fact, Puthoff runs Earth Tech International - a research organization which falsifies (or replicates) breakthrough energy/propulsion claims.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
ohhh.... no ...you
di'nt! you din't just mention "Tom bearden"up in heah dijooo??
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Oh THAT's definitve. First reply:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So clearly the disinfo people are trying to discredit him in any asinine way they can. Good luck with that.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Um what are you talking about? That wasnt me dude.

That was your quote. You called the Jovian labs quacks and fraudsters back on like page five. Then you said they wasted money. Then you said you don't have to prove patents. You basical just say anything to prove what you are saying isn't utter crap. I don't have the ability to explain Knapps device to you in a post on ATS. But apparently you do since all it is, would be rubbing balloons on my hair. Eventhough prestigious physicists take the guy seriously and he works in a prestigious lab. But yeah it probably just rubbing Balloons on his head.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Also, I'm surprised no one has posted the abstract for the paper mentioned in that article.

The Morningstar Energy Box

Okay, so it's a partial replication. That's great. But I'm going to be remain very skeptical of this until other replications are done. That's how science works. Just because one person replicated the experiment doesn't make it true. Let's not forget the high likelihood of experimental error, either.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Just to make it clear. I never said any of this is truth. And provided skepticism of for instance the op device. I think you have me confused. But I did provide you with klinks to people working on real theories. The whole theme from menhas been stop telling people it's all a scam. Everything I listed you said was a fraud including Jovian labs. No you retract your statement?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Movescamp
 





Zero point energy. Requires input for a reaction. I never ever said there was no input? Are you dense. Does arguing get you excited? It is within the laws of thermo dynamic. Technically plugging in a vacuum device is using energy. Making the device took energy. Electricity takes energy to produce and is energy. Energy transforming is within thermodynamics.


Please, explain in detail.

You began but didn't finish.


I'll do the same so you don't get the idea that I am just trying to argue. Gasoline (a reserve or unit of energy) when ignited creates heat, from a gallon you get roughly 36KWH of energy from this process. Now, you might ask where does that energy come from? It comes from the make up of the gas itself in the form of hydrogen and carbon atoms. These are a store of energy that were made many years ago. So by burning the gasoline you are just releasing that store of energy. Very simple.

That's an easy one because the energy is just lying around all over the place for us to use.

Now explain vacuum energy...


Just so you know, the calculation that states that vacuum energy or zero point energy is infinite is also cancelled out by the renormalization calculation.

That is why I said before, the very Quantum Mechanical Theory that states that ZPE exists also says that it is impossible to harvest. Which is why, if one of these machines actually worked, it would have to be on some other basis. But maybe you can explain where I got it wrong.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I would invest in a fart harvesting schema before I would invest in this crap.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by 46ACE
ohhh.... no ...you
di'nt! you din't just mention "Tom bearden"up in heah dijooo??
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Oh THAT's definitve. First reply:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So clearly the disinfo people are trying to discredit him in any asinine way they can. Good luck with that.


LOL That is awesome. So you found his credentials for me to prove the dis-info agents wrong?

Because you know, any legitimate Scientist will acknowledge their credentials if they have them, that should be something we can all agree on.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Second Line: Show me dude, prove it! It really looks like a scam to me. Are you looking for investors by chance?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeeGee
Also, I'm surprised no one has posted the abstract for the paper mentioned in that article.

The Morningstar Energy Box

Okay, so it's a partial replication. That's great. But I'm going to be remain very skeptical of this until other replications are done. That's how science works. Just because one person replicated the experiment doesn't make it true. Let's not forget the high likelihood of experimental error, either.



They are trying to make a perpetual motion machine




A prototype device is currently under test and unfortunately self-accelerated motion has yet to be obtained. The Russians have made several serious claims that their device produced self-acceleration to generate electricity, created a relatively large weight loss, generated discrete walls of magnetism far from the device and that a temperature drop exists when the device loses weight. To date, no one has validated these outrageous claims.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join