Electrogravitics: the REAL Reason It Went Into Black Ops

reply to post by Aim64C

You think war is crazy, now. Just wait until people have the whole of human engineering in their pocket and at their personal disposal.

And They will war over...what, exactly? If We all can choose an elite lifestyle, can do as We wish within the three Laws... What will We war over? When Those who now instigate wars (all modern wars were instigated by Those who profit from war...) have no profit motive, where will the motive lie?

With no money, with only social currency, who will justify a war how?

and time We will all have abundantly.

Hardly. With the increase in human knowledge and capability comes an increase in the potential questions.

True, but then, just because We have questions does not follow that We must immediately have answers. There are questions now that We have had since the beginning of known history. With focus not on struggling to make ends meet, but rather on Betterment, We will have vastly more time than We do now. Would You suggest that We should not be freed from poverty and war and struggle because We may encounter additional questions...?

You're forgetting that, even in a world of infinite energy, we still only have finite resources and time.

I think We have effectively infinite resources, and at present have far less time (and motive) to devote to Betterment than We would with the infinite energy. Presently, profit motive works COUNTER to Betterment in many cases: pharmaceutical companies do NOT seek cures but rather patentable chemicals that create additional issues which require additional patentable chemicals to treat - all to the profit of the pharmaceutical companies, as one example. War is incited to the profit of the war suppliers, as another. Food is degraded because it is cheaper... Do You need more examples of the evils and detriment of the profit motive...?

We only need robots for jobs no One WANTS to do.

We need robots for most of our modern industry.

Only insofar as paying slaves to do the work is less profitable. Where slaves are cheaper, We retain Them... With profit no longer an issue, robots could do all the necessary work no One wants to do.

Most of the machining in the U.S. today is done by computer. They can perform thousands of measurements per second and control the process within, literally, inhuman standards.

Yes, so? What is the point? Slaves are not profitable because They cannot achieve the level of quality needed to make a profit. So We have cast those jobs off to the robots.

The same with diecasting. I remember, "back in the day," sitting in my father's office and watching the printer tick out cycle times and characteristics for the factory floor. Each shot was recorded for temperature, pressure, time, etc - they knew exactly how many shots were fired into each die and knew, statistically, when they would begin to produce casts that were out of tolerance, and where to focus their QA efforts at.

Ain't robotics wonderful? I don't see Your point still, though. Yes, robots do wonderful things and I have yet to say We should rid Ourselves of them. Quite the contrary.

The device you are using, right now, could not be built by humans. The circuitry is too fine and too compact. Billions of MOS gates are etched into a piece of silicon barely the size of your thumb-nail. It is so far beyond human engineering that the schematics for a minor component like the DDR2 memory controller are mostly designed by computer applications with humans working with flow-chart diagrams instead of individual logic gates.

Ain't robotics wonderful? I don't see Your point still, though. Yes, robots do wonderful things and I have yet to say We should rid Ourselves of them. Quite the contrary.

This is one of the things forcing silicon die manufacturing and assembly back into the developed world. While labor costs are cheaper in many parts of developing countries - those countries will, often not let businesses set up shop without using manpower-intensive production lines - which simply cannot, and will not produce products that pass QA.

Ain't robotics wonderful? I don't see Your point still, though. Yes, robots do wonderful things and I have yet to say We should rid Ourselves of them. Quite the contrary.

And with profit no longer an issue, We will roboticize all the more. All to the Betterment of Us.

(see next post)

reply to post by Aim64C

As industry and the gadgets we use as part of our daily lives continue to improve - what we are able to do, directly, as human beings, begins to change, radically.

Can't disagree with this at all. Still, this is an argument against freeing the free energy and eliminating the need for money, removing profit as a motive, how?

Actually, We will have a SOCIAL currency in the form of fame and veneration.

Like Martha Stewart?

She has bettered the planet how? No... More like those who actually contribute to the betterment - Rick Simpson (see Run from the Cure: the Rick Simpson Story) comes to mind...

There will always exist multiple forms of -wealth-. These will always be capable of being expressed through some medium of exchange - be it a fiat currency, a metallurgical standard, exchange of information, etc.

Yes, but measuring it in money (fiat, metal, barter, trade of material thing - material wealth) will fall away with free energy because that's all money is: an accounting tool for meaningful energy expended. Information could easily be "wealth," buying fame and veneration, but only when shared. Secrecy becomes anathema to being "wealthy."

You make it sound as if that isn't so now. So what. It's not going to require any MORE time. Is this really a good argument against releasing Humanity from the control of the slavemasters...? Really?

Could you, possibly, be any more deluded?

If you haven't noticed; time is the most valuable resource out there.

In a profit-driven, "time is money" society, sure. But when time is bliss and Betterment, all the Human energy will be spent towards bliss and Betterment, rather than now where most Human time is spend slaving to enrich the elite. Freeing up Human time to that degree adds and enormous amount of time - virtually infinite...

It is one that no one has a monopoly on or the ability to manipulate.

That is absolutely untrue. Time is manipulated in the energy-scarce, money-driven, profit-motivated world We have now all the time. You want food? Spend Your time slaving for Me because I have the money.

It cannot be collected, hoarded, or traded.

Not per se, but effectively, time is collected through wages paid to slaves, hoarded through the meaningful energy expended by the slaves over time (money), and traded through the money as well.

Inventions that reduced the amount of time necessary for something to be done have served to be the greatest wealth-generators, as they allow time to be diverted and used for other things.

Yes. And this is an argument against freeing EVERYBODY'S time for bliss and Betterment why?

People are no more slaves to another individual than they are slaves to their own inhibitions.

People are slaves when They must offer Their Human energy to the profit of anOther doing things They do not enjoy just so that They can survive. Whether They have to manage Their own food and housing with Their paycheck, or whether the "employer" does that for Them (as in outright slavery), They are still slaves. So I believe You are very wrong with this statement.

I can go on and on about my abilities. Then I can go on and on about how I'm not utilizing them and how I'm a perfect example of wasted potential.

My problems are not to be blamed on some shadowy figure of my paranoid schizophrenia. I have simply chosen to dream the dream as opposed to work toward it. That choice is mine to break or continue.

And what if You try REALLY hard to apply Yourself to Your full potential and are unlucky? No One hires You, You cannot get a loan to start up a business, You lose all You own, You are out on the street...

Seems to Me that the energy-scarce, money-driven, profit-motivated world We have now could easily be anathema to the application of Your potential outside of Your personal control. Adding energy only opens up opportunities to fully blossom which are severely lacking in this society. So... Why are You arguing against free energy?

Originally posted by mwuhi
If electrogravitics is a solution to energy concerns then its no surprise its covered up.
There are relativity cheap and effective solutions to all our problems but they wont implement them.
For example that guy in New Zealand who made that plasma machine that turns garbage from a land fill into electricity, garbage in and nothing but electricity out. That should be used all over by now, but they wont implement it.

The main reason they wont let electrogravitics out is because its the propulsion for the secret space program involving flying triangles, stealth planes and so called alien craft.

The only science they are implementing is that which they can use to surveil us or destroy us.

Although I agree that they wont let electrogravitics out because its the propulsion for the secret space program involving flying triangles, stealth planes and so called alien craft, it is not the MAIN reason. The main reason has everything to do with the elimination of the need for money that free energy offers. Without money/energy scarcity, They have no control over Humanity.

Indeed, the whole reason set is a complex one, but the removal of Their control over Us is the most important element.

And the only science they are implementing is that which they can make a profit on or use to surveil us or destroy us.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Rather than make this claim...

Have you not been paying attention?

First, Humans have proven that, with enough energy, We can transmute elements. We turned lead into gold in the 1970's but, because of the cost of the energy, the gold We produced would have cost a million dollars an ounce. Luckily, We have free energy from electrogravitics, making the cost of energy moot.

*sigh*

Child. What do you not understand about physics?

We can, easily, go a step beyond mere transmutation and go for direct energy-to-matter conversion. The problem is that it requires absolutely ridiculous amounts of energy to accomplish this. Even with facilities on -my- scale of construction, you would still be looking at a maximum output of kilograms of matter per minute. And my scale is absolutely ridiculous - stellar scale constructions that are a nightmare to engineer.

Any facility you could place here on the earth would have a maximum output of milligrams per hour.

In a world of free energy - material resources will still be very valuable. In fact - they will become even more valuable, as the number of people and industries able to utilize those resources increases exponentially.

No. I mean the BETTERMENT Ethic. Rather than focus on being slaves with a work "ethic," (a "business" ethic whereby Human energy is reaped to the profit of others), We should focus on a BETTERMENT Ethic, as Human energy and money is no longer needed with robotics and the work "ethic" is moot. Humanity would be served well with the Betterment Ethic.

.... You said a whole hell of a lot of nothing.

"No - business ethics are rape! We should use a betterment ethic, which is not!"

It's quite apparent that you do not understand business ethics (which are not predicated on employment. Employment is a contract labor agreement; you are contracting your labor, experience, knowledge, etc to another person who has the capital and need of assistance. Your labeling it as slavery only highlights the fact that you have allowed yourself to be deluded by the conspiracy in education that squelches the entrepreneurial mindset).

Except... With the Betterment Ethic and the lack of need for exchanging something material, it is a social currency that is given: You create a solution to a problem and Your name is venerated. People recognize You, thanking You, and You go down in history as the solver of the problem, as the One that bettered the planet for Your efforts.

And maybe a unicorn will fart a rainbow in your honor.

All hail You! You will be paid in fame and collaboration if Your goals are for the betterment. Others may not be so ambitious - so what? We don't need EVERYBODY creating betterment and monumental works - just a very few. And believe Me, there will be the resources necessary, one way or another.

If there are plenty of resources available... why should there not be a reason for anyone to pursue their "bliss?" People should be able to build a mansion out of transmuted rocks on their property, right?

You're already starting to probe the boundaries this house of cards you've constructed. "We don't need -everyone- going crazy in their pursuit of "bliss" ... just a few."

And who will those lucky few be? Who decides what "bliss" is to be prioritized?

With no money, with only social currency, who will justify a war how?

Why should someone else be allowed access to resources over you?

We only need a select few doing these monumental things. While you have some good ideas.... well - there's just really no need for it.

Yes, but measuring it in money (fiat, metal, barter, trade of material thing - material wealth) will fall away with free energy because that's all money is: an accounting tool for meaningful energy expended. Information could easily be "wealth," buying fame and veneration, but only when shared. Secrecy becomes anathema to being "wealthy."

Real world examples of this beg to differ.

"Aim, we don't have a world run by free energy."

But we do. Several hundred, in fact. They are known as MMOs. Energy doesn't exist in them - only the time invested into playing. Resources, also, are unlimited - only limited to one's "pursuit of bliss" and ambitions.

Still - there is a sort of caste system. There is an economy. Resources have a literal value, power-blocks form, the list goes on.

There are even employment systems. "Grinders" often spend hours a day collecting materials for other players (in return for a medium of exchange); others place it up for auction with, literal, stock-brokers buying it up and placing it back on the auction block.

If anything, free-energy makes command economies the modus operandi. A single server can have its entire economy controlled by a block of three players.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Hi Amaterasu. I just read your free book, and it's awesome...
I can see it... ... It would be the altimate Freedom one could ever attain...
just

I hope you don't mind but book marking this to read a bit later it looks
very interesting, thanks OP
s & f

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Rather than make this claim...

Have you not been paying attention?

I have. You have made claims and comments like this one with no specific support. And You continue here...

First, Humans have proven that, with enough energy, We can transmute elements. We turned lead into gold in the 1970's but, because of the cost of the energy, the gold We produced would have cost a million dollars an ounce. Luckily, We have free energy from electrogravitics, making the cost of energy moot.

*sigh*

Child. What do you not understand about physics?

We can, easily, go a step beyond mere transmutation and go for direct energy-to-matter conversion. The problem is that it requires absolutely ridiculous amounts of energy to accomplish this. Even with facilities on -my- scale of construction, you would still be looking at a maximum output of kilograms of matter per minute. And my scale is absolutely ridiculous - stellar scale constructions that are a nightmare to engineer.

We don't NEED huge quantities of the rare elements and compounds You brought up. And what We do need can be created in large enough quantities.

Any facility you could place here on the earth would have a maximum output of milligrams per hour.

Based on present solutions, perhaps. But I am sure We are creative enough - especially with all those interested in solving these problems released from slavery to consideration - to solve this issue.

In a world of free energy - material resources will still be very valuable. In fact - they will become even more valuable, as the number of people and industries able to utilize those resources increases exponentially.

And I say that when energy costs are removed, what is left will be free, based on the deepest grasp of economics. The ONLY cost, in the final analysis, is energy. Maybe You should read My piece, The End of Entropy, linked in My sig...

No. I mean the BETTERMENT Ethic. Rather than focus on being slaves with a work "ethic," (a "business" ethic whereby Human energy is reaped to the profit of others), We should focus on a BETTERMENT Ethic, as Human energy and money is no longer needed with robotics and the work "ethic" is moot. Humanity would be served well with the Betterment Ethic.

.... You said a whole hell of a lot of nothing.

I'm sorry You fail to understand. [shrug]

"No - business ethics are rape! We should use a betterment ethic, which is not!"

Well, this is a true statement.

It's quite apparent that you do not understand business ethics (which are not predicated on employment. Employment is a contract labor agreement; you are contracting your labor, experience, knowledge, etc to another person who has the capital and need of assistance. Your labeling it as slavery only highlights the fact that you have allowed yourself to be deluded by the conspiracy in education that squelches the entrepreneurial mindset).

It is wage slavery. Your failure to see this shows that You have no grasp of how the elite control Us. And... Business "ethics" are all about profit - NOT true ethics. (A corporation's #1 mandate legally is to make the highest profit possible.) Also... Contracts are used to define the wage slavery. That is all.

Except... With the Betterment Ethic and the lack of need for exchanging something material, it is a social currency that is given: You create a solution to a problem and Your name is venerated. People recognize You, thanking You, and You go down in history as the solver of the problem, as the One that bettered the planet for Your efforts.

And maybe a unicorn will fart a rainbow in your honor.

Oh. THERE's an intelligent and well thought out response. It illustrates so well what is wrong with My statement. If this is what gets You stars on Your posts...maybe *I* should be so elloquent...

(see next post)

reply to post by Aim64C

All hail You! You will be paid in fame and collaboration if Your goals are for the betterment. Others may not be so ambitious - so what? We don't need EVERYBODY creating betterment and monumental works - just a very few. And believe Me, there will be the resources necessary, one way or another.

If there are plenty of resources available... why should there not be a reason for anyone to pursue their "bliss?" People should be able to build a mansion out of transmuted rocks on their property, right?

In energy abundance, why not? Though I don't see the need for transmuting... That would be reserved for those rare things We haven't found a work-around for.

You're already starting to probe the boundaries this house of cards you've constructed. "We don't need -everyone- going crazy in their pursuit of "bliss" ... just a few."

HUH!?! Who said anything about needing People to go "crazy in their pursuit of "bliss" ... just a few???" I said We don't need EVERYBODY creating betterment and monumental works - just a very few. Man, if You are going to twist My words into idiotic pretzels, I'm going to start Bonchizing You - as in rolling My eyes and telling You You're right. You can't argue with someone who is agreeing with You, eh?

And who will those lucky few be? Who decides what "bliss" is to be prioritized?

There is no prioritizing of bliss. Those "lucky few" will be the few (or many) whose bliss it is to create the Betterment and monumental works. Those who adore solving problems. Those who look for better ways of doing things, no longer constrained by profit motive. Those who want fame and veneration for Their works... Those who step up to the plate, as it were.

With no money, with only social currency, who will justify a war how?

Why should someone else be allowed access to resources over you?

When all resources are free and can be created if in short supply, if You need a resource, it is Yours. No One will have access to things Others cannot access. This is a non-issue.

We only need a select few doing these monumental things. While you have some good ideas.... well - there's just really no need for it.

I see. Poverty and war are not needed to be eliminated in this world. Mmmkay. Heh. You're right.

Yes, but measuring it in money (fiat, metal, barter, trade of material thing - material wealth) will fall away with free energy because that's all money is: an accounting tool for meaningful energy expended. Information could easily be "wealth," buying fame and veneration, but only when shared. Secrecy becomes anathema to being "wealthy."

Real world examples of this beg to differ.

The "real world examples" You speak of are examples from an energy-scarce society. We're talking a paradigm shift that has not been available to Us on this planet ever before in history. You seem unable to make that shift.

"Aim, we don't have a world run by free energy."

But we do. Several hundred, in fact. They are known as MMOs. Energy doesn't exist in them - only the time invested into playing. Resources, also, are unlimited - only limited to one's "pursuit of bliss" and ambitions.

Even in MMO's, things are not (virtually) free. The economy is still based on the scarcity paradigm.

Still - there is a sort of caste system. There is an economy. Resources have a literal value, power-blocks form, the list goes on.

As I said. It's based on the scarcity paradigm, where One is expected to "earn" credits, one way or another. Set one up where One can have things as One wants them and then discuss this.

There are even employment systems. "Grinders" often spend hours a day collecting materials for other players (in return for a medium of exchange); others place it up for auction with, literal, stock-brokers buying it up and placing it back on the auction block.

Yup. Scarcity paradigm.

If anything, free-energy makes command economies the modus operandi. A single server can have its entire economy controlled by a block of three players.

You still don't understand the very intimate link between money and energy - money accounts for the meaningful energy expended. Add abundant free energy and money becomes moot and removes the power over others it allows. Again, money/power/energy are three forms of the same thing, like ice/water/steam.

Originally posted by maryjo44
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Hi Amaterasu. I just read your free book, and it's awesome...
I can see it...

... It would be the altimate Freedom one could ever attain...

just

Thank You, maryjo. I'm glad some here are actually reading the book, and appreciate Your time in doing so!

Indeed, We have had what it would take to be free Humans, glorious and beautiful, for over 50 years. My anger stems entirely from the fact that We have been denied Our true birthright and maintained in slavery to the enrichment of the elite.

Originally posted by AussieAmandaC
I hope you don't mind but book marking this to read a bit later it looks
very interesting, thanks OP
s & f

Take Your time, AAC. [smile] Please contribute when You have had the time to peruse.

reply to post by Amaterasu

I have. You have made claims and comments like this one with no specific support. And You continue here...

*perks eyebrow*

Do you not think I have your number? You have made countless unsubstantiated claims and used nothing but circular logic in an attempt to reinforce the claim that free energy will result in a utopian society.

I have pointed out the obvious flaws in your logic, and countered with real-world and historic examples that demonstrate the fallacious nature of your argument.

Then you want to try and insist I am not making substantiated claims.

Then I insist I do.

You insist I don't.

The cycle continues until one or the other of us grows tired and leaves.

The reason for this is because you are either delusional and believe your own standpoint; or you are using the debate as a front to advertise a book (to whatever ends). Which really seems to be your only purpose in starting threads these days.

We don't NEED huge quantities of the rare elements and compounds You brought up. And what We do need can be created in large enough quantities.

You don't really understand the whole concept of "bliss" - do you? Rare earth elements are often valued for their properties - particularly in energy storage and computing applications (two of the areas that are going to grow immensely under any energy paradigm).

When everyone on the planet wants a new computer made by a small group of individuals operating under this "betterment ethic" - they will be restricted by the number of computers that can be made in any given day, and by that group's access to the materials necessary - which will likely include a host of resources currently in use by other parties currently enjoying the benefits of boundless free energy.

And let me re-iterate: transmutation will have to be done at specialized facilities that will only be able to apply so much energy to a given element over any given unit of time. So will energy-to-matter conversion. Transmutation on terrestrial facilities will never be able to exceed grams per hour, and energy-to-matter will never be able to create more than a few milligrams per hour. See the formula E=MC^2 if you don't understand why this is. We can only have so many facilities channeling the power of city-destroying weapons into massive particles.

Based on present solutions, perhaps. But I am sure We are creative enough - especially with all those interested in solving these problems released from slavery to consideration - to solve this issue.

No.

One gram equates to 25.0 million kilowatt-hours. That is how much energy you would need to create one gram of matter - presuming 100% efficiency.

Are you starting to gain an appreciation for the audacity of your statements, yet?

And I say that when energy costs are removed, what is left will be free, based on the deepest grasp of economics. The ONLY cost, in the final analysis, is energy. Maybe You should read My piece, The End of Entropy, linked in My sig...

Maybe you should use your head.

Energy is but one factor in the equation. It takes energy to access resources. When you remove the cost of energy - you remove the cost of accessing resources.

This, however, does not equate to infinite resources. It only means that any and all potential sources and any and all desiring to access those resources now have no restrictions on the basis of energy.

However, some methods are still more efficient than others. A vein of silver is far more efficient to smelt and purify silver from than it is for me to process thousands of tons of loose soil to pick up trace amounts. Time is still a factor, and I don't suddenly have infinite amounts of energy at my disposal - I have a never-ending supply of energy. I am still bound by the limitations of my supply - which are going to be bound by the upper limits of the device's ability to draw energy from whatever source it uses.

It is wage slavery. Your failure to see this shows that You have no grasp of how the elite control Us. And... Business "ethics" are all about profit - NOT true ethics. (A corporation's #1 mandate legally is to make the highest profit possible.) Also... Contracts are used to define the wage slavery. That is all.

You're deluded.

Who controls your life? You do. YOU set the terms of your employment. YOU have the right to refuse a contract. YOU have the RIGHT to market your own services how you see fit.

You are just another sad, decrepit individual playing the victim and waiting for your messiah.

The sad thing is, you've got such a closed view of the world that you wouldn't recognize your salvation if it was speaking to your face. Case in point, this little debate we have going on, right here.

reply to post by Aim64C

The reason for this is because you are either delusional and believe your own standpoint; or you are using the debate as a front to advertise a book (to whatever ends). Which really seems to be your only purpose in starting threads these days.

Bingo.

Yes exactly. There's no such thing as "Free" energy (and I doubt there is anything to "electrogravitics"---I sure wish there were but I have no evidence for it).

Relative to horse-bound society, petroleum-based combustion engines offered nearly free "horsepower", compared to what actual horses could do.

That changed the world, and it didn't change the world.

I'm also pretty concerned about any super-powerful 'free' energy---highly concentrated energy is easier to use as a destructive weapon than a constructive technology. I'm personally glad that uranium fission requires difficult technology and expensive isotopic separation. If it didn't we could all have Mr Fission in our house, and half the cities on the planet would be cinders.

reply to post by Amaterasu

HUH!?! Who said anything about needing People to go "crazy in their pursuit of "bliss" ... just a few???" I said We don't need EVERYBODY creating betterment and monumental works - just a very few.

Who decides?

I want to build a "betterment monument" in the form of a massive communal housing system complete with massive green-houses and science/manufacturing educational facilities. It will only require 40% of the steel processing capacity of the planet for the next ten years, and millions of "robot-hours" of labor.

How do I go about doing this in this... "betterment ethics" system?

Man, if You are going to twist My words into idiotic pretzels, I'm going to start Bonchizing You - as in rolling My eyes and telling You You're right. You can't argue with someone who is agreeing with You, eh?

You've never had to deal with my personality type, I see. I argue with myself out of a lack of someone to argue with. You're not going to spoof me - I will argue with you over what color the sky is, and continue to argue even as I bleed to death after you've slit my throat in frustration.

There is no prioritizing of bliss. Those "lucky few" will be the few (or many) whose bliss it is to create the Betterment and monumental works. Those who adore solving problems. Those who look for better ways of doing things, no longer constrained by profit motive. Those who want fame and veneration for Their works... Those who step up to the plate, as it were.

Since we are on that topic, I also want to create a series of UCAVs that serve as my own bodyguards (along with scale-models of popular Battle-Mech designs). That is my bliss - to create stuff like that (stuff that, perhaps, few others will appreciate). Where does that fall in your little system?

When all resources are free and can be created if in short supply, if You need a resource, it is Yours. No One will have access to things Others cannot access. This is a non-issue.

I believe it has been fairly well demonstrated how this crux of your argument is horribly naive and in ignorance of the reality.

You still don't understand the very intimate link between money and energy - money accounts for the meaningful energy expended. Add abundant free energy and money becomes moot and removes the power over others it allows. Again, money/power/energy are three forms of the same thing, like ice/water/steam.

Money accounts for meaningful time expended. Energy must be expended to accomplish anything. Having access to more energy reduces the time necessary to accomplish a given task (within some restrictions dependent upon the task). However - sources of energy (fuel) all require time invested to extract, refine, and transport them to the sites they will be used.

The only paradigm shift you accomplish is that time no longer needs to be expended to produce energy (though it does still need to be expended in order to build the devices you seem to think have been moved to shadow-ops). Energy and time must still be expended for everything else. The difference is that the energy is "free."

The time to gather, refine, and utilize resources is still there. Food must still be produced as a proportion of our biomass in a timely interval. It must still be transported, and it must still be consumed. The same with water (which must be extracted and/or filtered, transported, and consumed). Even if we eliminate aging - our bodies still require sustenance to be produced in a timely manner. Further, we still have to take time out of our day to sleep.

Everything will be, at the very minimum, weighted against the time necessary for us to eat and sleep. What we can accomplish in the time we are not eating and the time we are not sleeping will always hold a value that can be equated to a material medium of exchange.

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

I have. You have made claims and comments like this one with no specific support. And You continue here...

*perks eyebrow*

Do you not think I have your number? You have made countless unsubstantiated claims and used nothing but circular logic in an attempt to reinforce the claim that free energy will result in a utopian society.

I have pointed out where YOU have made claims with nothing to support it. (Something about rainbow unicorn farts...) You CLAIM I use "circular logic" yet You do nothing to show that. I think *I* have *Your* number, dear.

I have pointed out the obvious flaws in your logic, and countered with real-world and historic examples that demonstrate the fallacious nature of your argument.

No... You have pointed out that the function of an energy-scarce society does not look like an energy-abundant one. I agree. It doesn't. Your "real-world" examples are ALL taken from an energy-scarce society. How does pointing to an orange and saying it's not red prove that apples cannot be red?

Then you want to try and insist I am not making substantiated claims.

Lessee... You said, "Curious reasoning." (That was the whole paragraph.) I asked how so. You did not answer.

You said, "I contend, however, that the elite are not suppressing electrogravitics." I offer the book which shows many examples. Have You actually read it?

In response to My suggestion that You read the book, You said, "No, no... I really don't understand how electromagnetic fields are related to mass attraction ("gravity").

"Nor does anyone else who claims to have worked on it, apparently."

Yet the book shows this is wrong. I have substantiation and You do not.

You said, "Your claim is as absurd as the claims that layman literacy would destroy the Catholic Church, or that the internet would bring about the end of school... because it's founded on the same fundamentally flawed reasoning." I asked for substantiation of this claim - and You skipped over it in Your next response.

You said, "You, really, are in over your head in this conversation." I asked for an effort to show HOW this is so, and You left THAT unanswered. (You said, "Have you not been paying attention?" That is no answer and led to this list.)

You said, "You think war is crazy, now. Just wait until people have the whole of human engineering in their pocket and at their personal disposal." I responded with, "And They will war over...what, exactly?" You never responded.

Then I insist I do.

With no examples.

You insist I don't.

With a number of selected examples above.

The cycle continues until one or the other of us grows tired and leaves.

The cycle of You making claims, Me asking for support of those claims and You ignoring Me? I hope You get tired and leave.

The reason for this is because you are either delusional and believe your own standpoint; or you are using the debate as a front to advertise a book (to whatever ends). Which really seems to be your only purpose in starting threads these days.

What would My reason be to "advertize" a free PDF? The better thought is that I use it to substantiate My claims. Clearly You have been ignoring Me again. I have said, over and over, that a) I KNOW this tech exists and functions, and b) My motive is to free Humanity from slavery and poverty through the release of the tech.

We don't NEED huge quantities of the rare elements and compounds You brought up. And what We do need can be created in large enough quantities.

You don't really understand the whole concept of "bliss" - do you? Rare earth elements are often valued for their properties - particularly in energy storage and computing applications (two of the areas that are going to grow immensely under any energy paradigm).

What has bliss got to do with this? (20-1 You ignore THAT question.) And You are saying that We cannot create what is needed or find better approaches? (2-1 this will be ignored...) But all this is really smoke and mirrors. Scarcity of a few elements is irrelevant to feeding and housing Humanity and ending war. Would You suggest that We NOT release the tech and end poverty, hunger and war? (15-1 that will go unanswered.)

(see next post)

reply to post by Aim64C

When everyone on the planet wants a new computer made by a small group of individuals operating under this "betterment ethic" - they will be restricted by the number of computers that can be made in any given day, and by that group's access to the materials necessary - which will likely include a host of resources currently in use by other parties currently enjoying the benefits of boundless free energy.

Small group of individuals with vast armies of robots... And I did not say that everyOne will have all They want instantly, just that in 5-15 years, everyOne will have all they need and virtually all They want. Why are You arguing against abundant energy??? (100-1 You'll ignore THIS question...)

And let me re-iterate: transmutation will have to be done at specialized facilities that will only be able to apply so much energy to a given element over any given unit of time. So will energy-to-matter conversion. Transmutation on terrestrial facilities will never be able to exceed grams per hour, and energy-to-matter will never be able to create more than a few milligrams per hour. See the formula E=MC^2 if you don't understand why this is. We can only have so many facilities channeling the power of city-destroying weapons into massive particles.

And this is an argument to keep electrogravitics secret why? (Einstein is wrong about many things - see subquantum kinetics.)

Based on present solutions, perhaps. But I am sure We are creative enough - especially with all those interested in solving these problems released from slavery to consideration - to solve this issue.

No.

Wow.

One gram equates to 25.0 million kilowatt-hours. That is how much energy you would need to create one gram of matter - presuming 100% efficiency.

That is assuming We will not find better ways, and better locations (space is vast and easy to get to with electrogravitics - You would know that if You read the book...) - not to mention that the power needs to transmute are far lower than to create outright.

Are you starting to gain an appreciation for the audacity of your statements, yet?

Are You beginning to see Your assumptions that We cannot find better ways, Your disingenuous illustration of matter creation over transmutation, and heels-dug-in, anti free energy stance show that You have no faith in Humanity and do not understand how vastly better for ALL of Us it would be? "Audacity?" Pffft.

And I say that when energy costs are removed, what is left will be free, based on the deepest grasp of economics. The ONLY cost, in the final analysis, is energy. Maybe You should read My piece, The End of Entropy, linked in My sig...

Maybe you should use your head.

I have used nothing but, My dear.

Energy is but one factor in the equation.

Not when it comes to the need for money. Money represents energy meaninfully expended. Period.

It takes energy to access resources. When you remove the cost of energy - you remove the cost of accessing resources.

Very true.

This, however, does not equate to infinite resources.

Here We go again. We have agreed that with enough energy (and the plenum energy is virtually infinite...) We can both transmute matter and create it out of the plenum. So... Yes, it rather does - at least effectively.

It only means that any and all potential sources and any and all desiring to access those resources now have no restrictions on the basis of energy.

And ingenuity. And concerted efforts. And noble goals. And work-arounds... And a wee bit of patience (no computer, maybe for a decade, but at least hunger and poverty will be solved. Or don't You think hunger and poverty are worthy things to eliminate on this planet? (50-1 this question is ignored...))

However, some methods are still more efficient than others. A vein of silver is far more efficient to smelt and purify silver from than it is for me to process thousands of tons of loose soil to pick up trace amounts. Time is still a factor, and I don't suddenly have infinite amounts of energy at my disposal - I have a never-ending supply of energy. I am still bound by the limitations of my supply - which are going to be bound by the upper limits of the device's ability to draw energy from whatever source it uses.

All this is irrelevant to eliminating poverty and hunger...


(see next post)

reply to post by Aim64C

It is wage slavery. Your failure to see this shows that You have no grasp of how the elite control Us. And... Business "ethics" are all about profit - NOT true ethics. (A corporation's #1 mandate legally is to make the highest profit possible.) Also... Contracts are used to define the wage slavery. That is all.

You're deluded.

Own that, sir. YOU THINK I am deluded.

Who controls your life? You do. YOU set the terms of your employment.

No I accept the terms offered. I may try to negotiate, but in this poverty-ridden, hunger-filled world, They'll find someOne else who WILL take Their terms and slave to Their enrichment. Hardly ME in control.

YOU have the right to refuse a contract.

Yeah, if I don't want to eat and have a place to live...

YOU have the RIGHT to market your own services how you see fit.

True, but that does not equate to buyers unless I sell Myself very short in this economy. Did You know that if the 1964 minimum wage was HONESTLY adjusted for inflation (one of the slavemasters' tools), minimum wage would be about $18 an hour? They have severely devalued the worth of every Human's energy.

You are just another sad, decrepit individual playing the victim and waiting for your messiah.

Own that, and show HOW. (70-1 You will ignore this question.)

The sad thing is, you've got such a closed view of the world that you wouldn't recognize your salvation if it was speaking to your face. Case in point, this little debate we have going on, right here.

Own that, and show HOW. (70-1 You will ignore this question.)

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Would You suggest that We NOT release the tech and end poverty, hunger and war? (15-1 that will go unanswered.)

(see next post)

I think it woudl be a good idea to release that technology. Even if it is all it is cracked up to be, it would not end poverty, hunger and war. A petroleum-based economy of 2000 has immensely more free energy available than an animal based economy of 1 CE, but there's still alot of poverty, some hunger, and plenty of war hanging around. And guess what, we still have money just like then!

I just don't believe there is any such technology there, though I wish there were. And even if there were some hidden electrogravitic coupling, what does that have to do with "free energy"? Why wouldn't the normal conservation laws apply to this physics as it does to all other known physics?

The pdf on 'subquantum kinetics' is a whole load of BS. Let's start really really simple. Can 'subquantum kinetics' explain, quantitatively the spectrum of the hydrogen atom? As in give real numbers.
Actual quantum mechanics can. And just for lulz, how does subquantum kinetics explain the Compton effect?

Where does this "subquantum kinetics" give same answers as quantum mechanics (with derivations, please) and where does it differ and what does the experimental evidence say.

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

HUH!?! Who said anything about needing People to go "crazy in their pursuit of "bliss" ... just a few???" I said We don't need EVERYBODY creating betterment and monumental works - just a very few.

Who decides?

I want to build a "betterment monument" in the form of a massive communal housing system complete with massive green-houses and science/manufacturing educational facilities. It will only require 40% of the steel processing capacity of the planet for the next ten years, and millions of "robot-hours" of labor.

By Yourself? You're going to do this alone? Methinks You would need enough of Others to help... And if no One else thinks this is noble or good for the planet, I wish You luck in doing it alone.

How do I go about doing this in this... "betterment ethics" system?

Find enough Others who support and will help You in this project. But most People don't want "communal" housing. They want houses of Their own. I'm guessing You would NOT get enough People to support and help with Your efforts.

Man, if You are going to twist My words into idiotic pretzels, I'm going to start Bonchizing You - as in rolling My eyes and telling You You're right. You can't argue with someone who is agreeing with You, eh?

You've never had to deal with my personality type, I see.

Bwahahahahahahaha! Um Yeah, You're right.

I argue with myself out of a lack of someone to argue with. You're not going to spoof me - I will argue with you over what color the sky is, and continue to argue even as I bleed to death after you've slit my throat in frustration.

Enjoy that, then. But it seems to Me to refuse education (won't read a book) and arguing against something that will relieve Humanity of poverty and hunger and war puts You in a very unfavorable light. Your choice, I suppose.

There is no prioritizing of bliss. Those "lucky few" will be the few (or many) whose bliss it is to create the Betterment and monumental works. Those who adore solving problems. Those who look for better ways of doing things, no longer constrained by profit motive. Those who want fame and veneration for Their works... Those who step up to the plate, as it were.

Since we are on that topic, I also want to create a series of UCAVs that serve as my own bodyguards (along with scale-models of popular Battle-Mech designs). That is my bliss - to create stuff like that (stuff that, perhaps, few others will appreciate). Where does that fall in your little system?

If You can accomplish that alone, knock Yourself out! If You need others to help, good luck with that. As long as You do not break the three Laws (I will reitterate if You need it), through You willful actions (directing robots to hurt/kill/take or damage Others' property/defraud counts on You...), do as You wilt/can.

When all resources are free and can be created if in short supply, if You need a resource, it is Yours. No One will have access to things Others cannot access. This is a non-issue.

I believe it has been fairly well demonstrated how this crux of your argument is horribly naive and in ignorance of the reality.

Hey, You owned that! Something new! But, in fact, I think a recap would be nice because, though I respond to every comment of Yours, You pick and choose and have ignored a vast number of questions I have asked and so... No, I don't think You have succeeded in showing much of anything in that regard.

You still don't understand the very intimate link between money and energy - money accounts for the meaningful energy expended. Add abundant free energy and money becomes moot and removes the power over others it allows. Again, money/power/energy are three forms of the same thing, like ice/water/steam.

Money accounts for meaningful time expended.

No. It is the enregy. The time is merely the fabric in which the energy is expended. Without energy-scarcity, We would have no use for money, whatever the timeframe is.

Energy must be expended to accomplish anything. Having access to more energy reduces the time necessary to accomplish a given task (within some restrictions dependent upon the task).

This is incidental to the fact that money accounts for meaningful energy expended.

However - sources of energy (fuel) all require time invested to extract, refine, and transport them to the sites they will be used.

No dispute there. Yes, We have to move through time to merely exist, but again, this is incidental to the fact that money and energy are the same and time is the fabric in which meaningful energy is expended.

(see next post)

reply to post by Aim64C

The only paradigm shift you accomplish is that time no longer needs to be expended to produce energy (though it does still need to be expended in order to build the devices you seem to think have been moved to shadow-ops). Energy and time must still be expended for everything else. The difference is that the energy is "free."

Time is not "expended," per se. We move within it, yes, but when it comes to money, it is an accounting mechanism for money only. The paradigm shift involves a world with abundant energy (which We heretofore have never had), no money, and everyOne freed to follow Their bliss within the three Laws.

The time to gather, refine, and utilize resources is still there.

Yeah, whether We get rid of poverty, hunger and war or not. Why not continue to move through time and ALSO add the abundant energy so that We don't need money and distribute Our food by need, not profit, thereby eliminating the vast majority of food waste? (40-1 You will not answer this.)

Food must still be produced as a proportion of our biomass in a timely interval. It must still be transported, and it must still be consumed. The same with water (which must be extracted and/or filtered, transported, and consumed). Even if we eliminate aging - our bodies still require sustenance to be produced in a timely manner. Further, we still have to take time out of our day to sleep.

Yeah, but it will be free when all the cost of energy is removed in producing it and transporting it. And We then will not have supermarkets throwing out HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of TONS of food a MONTH. I guess I don't see why this is an argument against the release of free energy/electrogravitics. It's true either way and is FAR more efficient to distribute by need.

Everything will be, at the very minimum, weighted against the time necessary for us to eat and sleep. What we can accomplish in the time we are not eating and the time we are not sleeping will always hold a value that can be equated to a material medium of exchange.

You make it sound as if this is a change from now - as if the fabric We exist in only comes into being if We make money moot and get rid of poverty and hunger and war. This really is no argument at all against freeing Humanity.