insane_alien

not seeing any evidence here.

oh i read plenty of sci-fi, i just know how to keep it seperate from reality. his theory is just handwavium. there's no maths there's no evidence and experiments on exactly this sort of thing have never shown anything like this. he's talking out of an orifice that clearly isn't his mouth.

stop reading sci-fi, the guys is a fraud. let it go.

yes, they are frauds. although i wouldn't put tesla in the same list. he did a lot of great work but he did have a fairly heft dose of mental instability and a lot of his work was proven to be pretty crap. its not a matter of lacking an open mind. i'm perfectly capable of accepting that there could be a free energy device. but for that to happen i will require EVIDENCE and not just handwavium. ALL 'free energy' devices that have ever been analysed have not provided free energy and have required an external power source and then they output less than what they put in. it would also violate the laws of conservation which have never been observed to have been broken despite many many attempts to do so. show me where energy conservation laws fail and then i'll accept free energy devices. you seem to be confusing open-mindedness with 'accepts anything and everything without question' if i told you that 1+1=1 under ALL circumstances would you accept that? no probably(and rightfully) not. this would not make you close minded though. try being open-minded enough to accept the probability that free-energy devices are utter bunk.

many animals are tool users. and however you look at it tools are technology. some birds even MAKE the tools they use by stripping bits off the stick they are using to get at insects inside a tree. this is an obvious display of intelligence and technology while not having hands (and hence no hand-eye coordination, which humans are actually quite bad at anyway) or opposable thumbs.

yes, but you'll notice that no money was created in that scenario. you can't get free energy.

it won't though, you'd still need another source of electrons. they don't just spontaneously appear. i assume you are using the power plant as a signal generator, you would need another power plant to provide the power (and electron) source for the amplifier. i still don't see the free energy bit. just adding more complexity and losses to a system.

1/ still isn't going to work for the same reasons 2/ i fail to see where there is any free energy coming from this. amplifiers need a power source. (and no, feeding their output into themselves doesn't work at all.)

you still aren't going to get high amps at high voltage. you'll have high amps at low voltage with intermittent bursts of high voltage with low amps

you're not very good at thinking things through are you? the current amplifier would be over powered by the voltage amplifier as the voltage is greater from the voltage amplifier(surprise surprise). really, go learn some physics.

thought experiments cannot be used to prove anything though. only experimentation in reality can.

fusion reactions can produce that much energy. there's no need to bring large quantities of antimatter out of nowhere to explain it.

there are tidal forces between the earth and the sun just as there are between the earth and the moon.

frictiontastic is my opinion of it. really, who cares id the rollers are faster on the outside. you know what else can do the same thing. gears. the transmission on your car is not a free energy device and neither is this thing.

well, the earth is in an eliptical orbit, for 6 months it gets closer and for six months it gets further away. whether there is any measurable drift towards or away from the sun i don't know.

you can subscribe to a thread and it'll send you an email everytime there is a post in the thread. if you don't want emails then use RSS

he can't work out the meaning of the sentence even though the words are understandable. example: fish the butter with nightly preserves ahoy nightingale. the words individually have meaning but the combination of them has absolutely none whatsoever even though there seems to be some order in some places.

can you show us this on a star chart?

nobody said you did. but this is about as remarkable as seeing bow waves from a boat hitting the shore.

well, you didn't see the shockwave directly. you only seen the disruption it caused in the cloud layer. and it wouldn't have stopped at the cloud layer. you can view them directly by using schlerrin(sp?) photography. is there any discussion you wanted to bring up here?

you want FoIP(Fist over Internet Protocol) then. only down side is that the other persons browser must support it too.

well you can't do that in a thought experiment. you really need to go out and do an experiment to show that. and we have. however accuracy issues mean we can only put it at between 0.8c and 1.5c theory predicts c

so are you going to add anything new to the discussion or did you just reopen a two week stale thread to repeat what other members have said?

so... in reality and scenario in which the objects can see each other via light then they can interact gravitationally too. nothing new and/or interesting here. lets move on.

it'll probably get disbanded(again) when the trolls abuse it.