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: 9
31
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
reply to post by boncho
 


Well you are taking the stance that free energy is impossible ......No ?

So I have shown that there is an energy source in our surroundings that we currently use for a free energy source, and that there is potential to harness that same energy from a weaker source....It just takes a breakthrough.

So i wouldn't discount other ideas.


The sun is a nuclear reaction so it has a set amount of fuel, it needs to be collected, transformed and then carried as a load through something conductive for us to use it. There is cost associated with all of this. I don't understand what the 'weaker source' is.

Free energy usually implies two things. 1, that you are getting energy or creating energy from nothing. As if there is some energy source that you can tap into that is infinite or limitless but the laws of thermodynamics negate this possibility. 2, is that you can produce energy for a cost of nothing, but that is also untrue, because every process to create energy will use energy to create it, and/or money.

That is why there is no 'free energy'. There is the possibility of lower cost energy in the future, but as far as a power source that turns on and never shuts off, that is currently science fiction.




posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 





We keep going back to "The laws of physics" and such to stop us moving forward, So lets look at the world around us...


Yeah, damn those stupid laws and whoever invented them.

I mean, what good have they ever done for us?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by XtraTL
reply to post by boncho
 


I looked up one of the references provided at the OP's link "Integrity Institute". It's a nature article.

Well, naturally, as a scientist, I have access to Nature. Not only do they give the wrong year for the "publication" and from what I can tell, a defective link, but the actual "article" referred to was on the Nature News site, i.e. a science aggregator website. So I didn't need my Nature subscription at all. This is open content:

www.nature.com...

No surprises there.

It was written a year earlier than claimed, and it is *completely misquoted*. The article on the "integrity website" says the effect should be a few centimetres per hour. The actual article says a few tenths of a millimetre per hour.

Compare the "integrity" website version here:

www.integrityresearchinstitute.org...

The actual article being referred to by the Nature News aggregator is:

Feigel, A. Quantum vacuum contribution to the momentum of
dielectric media. Physical Review Letters, 92, 020404,
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.020404 (2004).

(I guess the article had not actually appeared when the Nature News piece was written.)

And just in case there is any doubt that this article is misquoted, here is the abstract:

prl.aps.org...

Note it states 50nm/s which is 0.18 mm/hr.

Any response to this OP?


With this post and the information therein, this thread is leaning towards the Hoax zone is it not?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho


I'll give them 2 pts for not outright declaring they have a free energy machine. The problem is when you start looking into this free energy stuff you get plastered with bogus crap from all over the place. If you want people to have an unbiased critical view, number one, I would not have them be part of this FE circuit.

There are legitimate labs in Japan, China, Russia (Ok, well it is Russia so quasi) the US, and India, (possibly more) that work with LENR. These labs you do not find on this FE web circuit.

Sorry, but most of these places look like fraud. And when I questioned the one in the OP I got nailed with references to dozens of these stupid semi-professional labs. Maybe you argue, "But universities got linked too". Well I already posted an example of how the entire physic community was conned and that included Universities.

The point is, if you want an unbiased discussion on a real technology that has evidence to back up any claims it has made, post a new thread with evidence. This thread has been scamming from its inception.

All the labs I a


I agree that a lot of whats mentioned here is psuedoscience or fraud, but that's just not the case for Jovion Corp. Neither the company or the people involved (which are highly credible) have any history of fraud.

Also, even if the original post contains a sensational article, it still references a real paper claiming replication of Godin/Roschin's experiments. There may or may not be anything to it, but it's not scientific to claim fraud just because its controversial. Paul Murad has over 40 years of experience in aeronautical engineering and he was a senior member of the AIAA. Brandenburg has a PhD in theoretical plasma physics and also has several years of experience in the aerospace industry. They're not exactly clueless.

There's a big difference between "I don't think there's anything to this because the science doesn't work, probably" and "These people are deliberately misleading people in order to gain material wealth." The former may be true, but the latter is just unjustified slander (in this case).
edit on 6-3-2011 by GeeGee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


My paper aeroplane:

0.01 pounds, wing area 0.3 sqft == 0.033 pounds/sqft.

Hmm. Seems that not all aeroplanes have the same characteristics.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by GeeGee
 


Look, I've read so much through these sites about their experiments and their creators in the past two days than I can't separate them. What I noticed was that in general, a large number of them were making unsubstantiated claims. That is fraud. You say there are some good ones among the mix that have been posted in this thread. Fine. Maybe there are.

I would sort through them all, but really I find it too taxing. I will sum it up as this field of science is clearly rife with fraud (as it has always been -energy from nothing).

And that caution should be taken when looking at it. Just as caution is taken in the scientific community when analysing results.

I'm not entirely closed to the idea of them producing data that is useful. But comparing the papers I read from the DOE to some of the papers provided here today, I see a major difference.

If you'd like, create a thread for someone who is doing legit work and back up their claims with evidence. This thread has been poo flinging from the get go.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by GeeGee
 


Look, I've read so much through these sites about their experiments and their creators in the past two days than I can't separate them. What I noticed was that in general, a large number of them were making unsubstantiated claims. That is fraud. You say there are some good ones among the mix that have been posted in this thread. Fine. Maybe there are.


What makes it really difficult is that Zero Point Energy is (probably) real. The Casimir force has been measured (though later reinterpreted) and there is other good evidence that ZPE is possibly not a fiction. But note that ZPE does not equal free energy.

It's still disputed whether useful work can be extracted from ZPE. Some fairly serious scientists are actually working on trying to figure this out, if only to understand the universe better.

Scientific orthodoxy would probably have it that ZPE cannot be extracted. So scientists researching this field know that they are basically looking for new physics. The whole area is highly speculative.

But the difference between the real scientists and the crackpots is they know where it makes sense to look. The laws of physics don't rule out every device that has not been invented yet. What they do is give quantitive (and sometimes just qualitative) descriptions of how various processes in the universe work. Once we understand with sufficient clarity how the laws of physics in a certain area constrain things then we don't expect to find devices that violate those laws.

So instead of looking for devices that do violate the laws of physics, it makes the most sense to explore the forefront, where the laws are not fully understood or known. Unfortunately for your garden variety back yard inventor, this tends to mean they are unlikely to make as much progress as a well funded scientific laboratory run by super smart physics dudes who know what to look for. The latter can afford to construct devices that actually exploit effects which represent physics on the forefront. And they are in a much better position to understand what qualifies and what doesn't, because they've spent years studying the literature to understand what has already been tried.

Of course back yard experimenters can discover interesting things. But the likelihood of their discoveries representing a massive surprise and challenge to orthodox science is low.

Sometimes scientists can be blinded by what they think they know. This also happens in mathematics. Occasionally, although it is extremely rare, an amateur discovers a solution to a mathematical problem which puzzled professional mathematicians for a very long time. Of course in every such case, those amateurs have taught themselves perfectly standard mathematics and learned how to use it very well. The same is true if you want to advance theoretical or experimental physics.

You have to put some meat in to get sausages out.

In my personal opinion, the device mentioned by the OP is a giveaway scam. They're asking for money for something that has not been described in any way, shape or form.

It's also known that scam artists exists in the area of free energy. They set up shell companies, milk investors dry, then fold the company and try again with a different group of investors a few years later. Others aren't intentionally scamming anyone. They really believe, based on faulty measurements, or ignorance of basic science, that what they have represents a breakthrough. If qualified physicists spent time debunking such ideas in detail every time they popped up, they'd spend all their time debunking worthless physics instead of doing forefront research. That's simply not a good investment of an education that you spent your whole life getting.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Just want to point out one more time you called Jovian a hoax. I provided the link. And every other link I provided was by reputable scientists. You have been slandering people over and over simply because hoaxers exist. It's all here in plain English. Just like discrediting the German scientists how did you put it rubbing balloons on hair? (still have no idea what you are referring to there).

I have a limited amount of knowledge (as I have stated) but I do know when reading ZPE theory which you outright call a scam at least 3 times in different post (the research and claim of being able to harness it) finding Energy in a physical vacuum is pretty incredible. Do I have a complete grasp of quantum electrodynamics? No. I do happen to think the fact that randomly appearing virtual photons jumping around the zero point field and the material world probably has an energy application as they collide with subatomic particles and can create higher states of energy.

In quantum mechanics things do appear out of no where. Both elementary particles and photons. They must come out of he zero point field but I don't know how. I actually can't say. But seeing as thermodynamics came from studying steam engines and quantum mechanics studies sub atomic particles I would imagine there is going to be some discrepancies or misunderstandings. As we evovle past such obvious mechanical energy and learn to exploit more advanced quantum mechanics for energy.

Where do these particles come from in the vacuum? I am not saying there isn't an answer but by today's standards they appear out of no where. Which may not negate thermodynamics but require a modification if energy can be produced in this way. Or that the photons and particles come from somewhere we don't know yet.




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



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Nor is ZPE "free" in the sense of energy from nothing. There's a huge something pumping energy into the universe such that is accelerating in its expansion - so obviously it does interact with ZPE... We don't know WHY the energy is there or what that something is yet, but we know it is there and it can interact/be interacted with.


Interacting with it and exploiting it are two separate things.


Um... Yeah. But that just means we have to figure out how to exploit it.




But that something pumping the energy in is equivalent to the sun in the solar energy illustration you offer. And the energy is there to be used. The PTB, however are VERY threatened by its presence (relying on oil to control others), however, and it would be naive to assume that They wouldn't suppress it as best They could.


Please back these assumptions up with facts. You are going back into fiction. Why don't you just read Twilight for your fix. Why make stuff up?


Which? That something is pumping energy into this universe? Or that the PTB would try to suppress an energy source that threatened them?


Explain this to me, if I made a FE device tomorrow, than would "TPTB" come knocking on my door? How would they know, what if I gave working models and blueprints to hundreds of people, would they come for all of us?


They would not know until you tried to sell it, patent it, call for investors, whatever. Greed would be your downfall. If you gave it away to others, They are very likely to try to do something - contain it, poopoo it in the media, marginalize any who spoke of it with character assassination and nay-saying, threaten any who would continue to speak, kill them if necessary. The hope would be to quietly keep spreading the info until there is no way They could contain it.


And tell me, you never explained why Tom Bearden never released the device he claimed was ready for production, why was that again?


Why are you asking me? I think he would be the one to ask. I am not privy to his life. I can speculate and suggest it could be HE was threatened - he clearly was marginalized and had his character assassinated, so there is some reason to suspect things went further...



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Movescamp
reply to post by boncho
 


Just want to point out one more time you called Jovian a hoax. I provided the link. And every other link I provided was by reputable scientists. You have been slandering people over and over simply because hoaxers exist. It's all here in plain English. Just like discrediting the German scientists how did you put it rubbing balloons on hair? (still have no idea what you are referring to there).


Hmmmm.... Do those tactics sound familiar? Oh, yes. They're right out of the disinfo manual. I mean, exactly that behavior.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   


Why are you asking me? I think he would be the one to ask. I am not privy to his life. I can speculate and suggest it could be HE was threatened - he clearly was marginalized and had his character assassinated, so there is some reason to suspect things went further...


Did you ever think that he assassinated his own character by claiming something existed and failed to provide that?

And what do you think is real dis-info...questioning something that looks fishy or blindly believing in unproven nonsense.

My only stance on this subject is that the evidence doesn't support the claims provided, whether the claims are by people in this thread or the scientists themselves.


I have a dis-info theory for you: to keep curious scientists (because they are all curious) from experimenting in a field that the "TPTB" don't want them in.... The government employs other scientists to portray themselves as crack pots and publicly announce they have discovered free energy. When the claims are proven to be false, the media, the public and all scientists everywhere are so violated by the subject they go on to ignore it. Leaving every competent physics professional to stay away from the idea to protect their own career. Didn't you say one of these guys is former military?


Now that, actually sounds like a plausible conspiracy, the one you create in your head just sounds like you are projecting anger towards the world because you feel like you've been unfairly treated.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


OH LOOK! REAL 'VACUUM' ENERGY SCIENCE!

I knew if I did some digging I could find legitimate work in this field. The journal is Linked Here but only the abstract is available without subscription. So what they are saying is that by means of laser (not magic contraptions) they are releasin virtual particles from the quantum state.

"If the electron has a capability to become three particles within a very short time, this means it's not an electron any longer," Sokolov said. "The theory of the electron is based on the fact that it will be an electron forever. But in our calculations, each of the charged particles becomes a combination of three particles plus some number of photons


Now if this article is 100% bonafide (which I have no reason to believe otherwise) , this is related to the other nonsense being portrayed but is inherently different. For one, they are using a laser to interact with the quantum state. Not a magic box.

The most interesting thing, (if you like physics you will love this) is that they formed anti-protons with protons.

The interaction is still kind of moot when trying to apply it to energy creation because of the energy used to cause this effect. However, interesting nonetheless. The headline is a little misleading, and I should warn there was dissenting opinion among the readers that this could be caused by laser and magnetic field as opposed to the vacuum.

Oh look, real science, -exhale- No claims of any magic device...
edit on 7-3-2011 by boncho because: oops



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by boncho



Why are you asking me? I think he would be the one to ask. I am not privy to his life. I can speculate and suggest it could be HE was threatened - he clearly was marginalized and had his character assassinated, so there is some reason to suspect things went further...


Did you ever think that he assassinated his own character by claiming something existed and failed to provide that?


Possible. But then, I have read his work and give the probability of that as much lower than that he was "talked to."


And what do you think is real dis-info...questioning something that looks fishy or blindly believing in unproven nonsense.


Well, nay-saying (as opposed to saying one does not personally believe it but doesn't have all the info), calling people names and otherwise trashing the person rather than the ideas, misdirecting discussion, ignoring valid points and focusing on extraneous issues, that sort of thing. There is a far cry from between this behavior and mere questioning. Like, "That's BUNK!" is disinfo tactic; "I'm not convinced, what about this?" is questioning. And just the inclusion above of the "nonsense" term is a disinfo tactic. A questioning term would be "claims."


My only stance on this subject is that the evidence doesn't support the claims provided, whether the claims are by people in this thread or the scientists themselves.


With my knowledge from my father, I can say that evidence is difficult to impossible to come by about things in black ops, and that electrogravitics is in there. Lucky me to have that knowledge. It just seems to me that a questioner would take what I say and grant some possibility that what I say is true. A disinfo person, on the other hand, would come up with any and everything they could to suggest I am wrong (like perhaps my father lied to me).



I have a dis-info theory for you: to keep curious scientists (because they are all curious) from experimenting in a field that the "TPTB" don't want them in.... The government employs other scientists to portray themselves as crack pots and publicly announce they have discovered free energy. When the claims are proven to be false, the media, the public and all scientists everywhere are so violated by the subject they go on to ignore it. Leaving every competent physics professional to stay away from the idea to protect their own career. Didn't you say one of these guys is former military?

Now that, actually sounds like a plausible conspiracy, the one you create in your head just sounds like you are projecting anger towards the world because you feel like you've been unfairly treated.


I agree that that is a very plausible theory, and probably is used too, along with nay-saying, character assassination, ridicule, misdirection, threats and murder if necessary - but what has the military got to do with it? (Tom Bearden is ex-military...)

Why would you say that last... The one I created? ("In your head" is a disinfo phrase tucked into the line - it is unnecessary other than to subtly disparage me...) Projecting anger? Anger about what? "...you feel like you've been unfairly treated?" That last bit... Where are you getting this from? I see more disinfo tactic here, as what I offered was in no way angry, made rational sense, and had no indication of my feeling about how I was treated on any score one way or another.


edit on 3/7/2011 by Amaterasu because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Actually, I think that would be the definition of uneducated.


Maybe you meant intelligent?


No... The ability to read and to think make it rather easy to self educate. I mean just because someone did not confer a piece of paper upon one does not mean one lacks education.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Oh....what journal do you contribute to again? Or are you an editor? Why should we care what you think. What gives you the qualifications to say what's "real"?

Especially when you say labs like Jovian are frauds. By the way thu are "real" researches.

Pretty lame and laughable

Everything you don't understand is "magical". Your knowledge of quantum mechanics is obviously pretty low. Since there is a lot of "magic" there. There are actually bonefies scientist who have put forth theories of reality being a hologram or thoughts effecting the zero point field. Which to me sounds crazy. But I have a degree in anthropology so what do I know.

Plain and simple you come off as arrogant. You slander scientists and make definite decisions on things you can't possibly understand. No offense or you wouldn't be wasting time here on ATS.

I don't pretend to understand comepletly what these things mean. I have an overabundance of common sense from starting out my adult life as a carpenter, 4 years of military service and 1 year of anthropological field work. Now I install cutting edge electronics in peoples homes. So I think I can smell a quack.

Again by you slandering good peoples names (not the science) you have discredited yourself to probably everyone here bur the mean spirited folks who don't believe anything new can be done.
edit on 7-3-2011 by Movescamp because: Edit



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by boncho

With my knowledge from my father, I can say that evidence is difficult to impossible to come by about things in black ops, and that electrogravitics is in there. Lucky me to have that knowledge. It just seems to me that a questioner would take what I say and grant some possibility that what I say is true. A disinfo person, on the other hand, would come up with any and everything they could to suggest I am wrong (like perhaps my father lied to me).




Quite true, they possibly have anything under the sun in the black ops.
While every1 is skeptic to some extent, but 'What if' should never be ruled out



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Possible. But then, I have read his work and give the probability of that as much lower than that he was "talked to."


If you read his work and he built free energy than why don't you replicate it yourself?



ike, "That's BUNK!" is disinfo tactic


Perpetuating false and misleading information and/or information not based on fact is disinformation.



With my knowledge from my father, I can say that evidence is difficult to impossible to come by about things in black ops, and that electrogravitics is in there. Lucky me to have that knowledge.


What knowledge? That isn't knowledge. If you have knowledge on 'electrogravitics' than go build something. Otherwise you have hearsay. And just because the Gov researches something it does not make every fantasy in your head about the technology real.

Perhaps your father did lie to you? I would be critical of someone who told me magnificent claims. I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just saying one person telling you something isn't proof there is working technology of said idea.



("In your head" is a disinfo phrase tucked into the line - it is unnecessary other than to subtly disparage me...)


Because every time there is something you can't explain "TPTB" show up and there is a conspiracy behind it. No facts, no decent evidence that would imply something, just claims that seem to cover any holes that develop in the story you are trying to weave. -hence, in your head. As in, "I made it up to cover my claims."



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Movescamp
 





Again by you slandering good peoples names (not the science) you have discredited yourself to probably everyone here bur the mean spirited folks who don't believe anything new can be done.


I never said nothing new can not be done. I even linked an article that shows promise in the QM field. I am not slandering, I'm pointing out that there is fraud in this field of new/cheap energy production. And that scientists are making claims without evidence, which is something they are not supposed to do.

The paper from Germany is crap. It is crap because it is not a well written paper. It is confusing, overly technical and fails to address many questions that arise in the paper. It is not because I am not a physicist that I see this, I read well written papers often. It is because it was made intentionally over elaborate.



There are actually bonefies scientist who have put forth theories of reality being a hologram or thoughts effecting the zero point field.



Which should go in the Science forum under ideas and theories. There is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with new ideas and new Science. There is something wrong with touting free energy as a bonafide process. There is too much misinformation in the field of cheap and alternative energy which is keeping scientists from looking at it critically. There is no reason to perpetuate false claims or claims that have no backing because overall it will limit the number of people that work in that field. Google "zero point energy pen" and you will see why no physicist would want to work towards anything with ZPE as the focus.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Possible. But then, I have read his work and give the probability of that as much lower than that he was "talked to."


If you read his work and he built free energy than why don't you replicate it yourself?


Because I have not read ALL his work, I have no money (you know that already), and I am not an engineer. I do understand, however that a great deal of what he has to offer has everything to do with the fact that Heaviside and Briggs truncated Maxwell's quaternions, eliminating half of what Maxwell described. This is so typical of disinfo, love. "Why don't YOU do it?" C'mon. You can be more creative than that, I think.




ike, "That's BUNK!" is disinfo tactic


Perpetuating false and misleading information and/or information not based on fact is disinformation.


I like how you removed the comparison phrase (disinfo flag, that). Just claiming bunk without a foundation of information is a disinfo tactic. Claiming bunk with data, well thought out reasoning, illustration, or other supporting element is a questioner behavior. Also, so is the insinuation (without the supporting element(s)) that a "perpetuat[ion] [of] false and misleading information" is taking place here is a disinfo tactic.




With my knowledge from my father, I can say that evidence is difficult to impossible to come by about things in black ops, and that electrogravitics is in there. Lucky me to have that knowledge.


What knowledge? That isn't knowledge. If you have knowledge on 'electrogravitics' than go build something. Otherwise you have hearsay. And just because the Gov researches something it does not make every fantasy in your head about the technology real.


I have knowledge of the EXISTENCE of EG in black ops. This is more disinfo tactic. Again, the "go do it yourself" line. And again, the "attack the person" tactic from the disinfo manual: suggest memories and awareness are "fantasy in [my] head." Tsk, tsk.


Perhaps your father did lie to you? I would be critical of someone who told me magnificent claims. I'm not trying to be a dick, I'm just saying one person telling you something isn't proof there is working technology of said idea.


Geez. Bring it up again. We have been over this, but disinfo works, in part, by reiterating claims that already have been addressed. But I'll bite. Tell me why my father, who was an electrical engineer working for one of the top aerospace companies in the 1950's would come home from work often, glowing with excitement at being able to share his work with me, try to explain how EG works, describe what the future would hold for Humanity because of it, and then come home one night and tell me it was secret - with evidence that every aerospace company was studying EG, and that it went into black ops exactly at the time my dad said it was secret. Yeah. He must have been making it up. Give this one up, dude.




("In your head" is a disinfo phrase tucked into the line - it is unnecessary other than to subtly disparage me...)


Because every time there is something you can't explain "TPTB" show up and there is a conspiracy behind it. No facts, no decent evidence that would imply something, just claims that seem to cover any holes that develop in the story you are trying to weave. -hence, in your head. As in, "I made it up to cover my claims."


Every time? Really? EVERY time? LOLOL! There's another disinfo tactic. You also are suggesting that there is no PTB, no conspiracy, no evidence, and just claims. (Plenty of evidence that there is a PTB, that there is a conspiracy - in the form of black ops, evidence - again, read Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion, and while it's true I have claimed what I remember, I have been consistent - enough to suggest a good probability that I am NOT making it up.) Again, reiteration of things that have been addressed here. Holes in my story? Disinfo tactic. Story I'm trying to weave? Disinfo tactic. Stating that I made it up? Disinfo tactic. Why are these disinfo tactics? Because nowhere do you offer any reasoning or evidence as to WHY you think this way. You just make these claims.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 





Because I have not read ALL his work, I have no money (you know that already), and I am not an engineer. I do understand, however that a great deal of what he has to offer has everything to do with the fact that Heaviside and Briggs truncated Maxwell's quaternions, eliminating half of what Maxwell described. This is so typical of disinfo, love. "Why don't YOU do it?" C'mon. You can be more creative than that, I think.


Okay, so send me a working blueprint for his model. I don't think you understand that unless his miracle invention works than all the Science he made up behind it is worthless.



Tell me why my father, who was an electrical engineer working for one of the top aerospace companies in the 1950's would come home from work often, glowing with excitement at being able to share his work with me, try to explain how EG works, describe what the future would hold for Humanity because of it, and then come home one night and tell me it was secret


That doesn't prove anything was produced from it. That is research. They are researching how to make black holes right now. That doesn't mean they know how to make black holes.

His research could have failed, you have no idea to the contrary, apparently.



Disinfo tactic.


Yes, I'm secret agent boncho with the bureau of dis-info.



new topics




 
31
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join