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.
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.
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.
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.
Oh but wait they are quacks who wasted 20 million knowing they would fail.
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?
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.
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"."
Originally posted by 46ACE
ohhh.... no ...you
di'nt! you din't just mention "Tom bearden"up in heah dijooo??
www.abovetopsecret.com...
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.
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.
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.
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.