Free Energy prize money

[sarkeizen]

If there's a possibility that begging the question

You are begging the question.  You appear to claim that you can determine that X implies Y when X possesses attribute Z.  When asked how you know that X possessing Z -> Y your only answer so far is that you have assumed that some X possessing Z implies Y.

So in other words you really don't have an argument.

[profitis]

Yes I do let's use logic.yesteryear there were suchnsuch numbers of molecules available for treatment of x.this year there are suchnsuch+y numbers of molecules available for x.this trend predicts that next year there will be suchnsuch+y+z molecules available for x.these new molecules are highly likely to include re-arrangements(eg we want the prozac vibe but we also want our own novelty so let's 'borrow,re-arrange') amongst new variety.all of them will be totaly non-natural and completely manmade,a requirement of patent law.all of them will have different side-effects,no two different molecules have same.each side-effect is like a trajectory of a dart thrown by a barfly,most will hit in a sort-of predictable way whilst some land stuck in the waiters head or the wall.now put every single molecule on the market used for x's side-effect  trajectories in a row and you will see the kind of dispersal and chaos that you see when a laser-beam of photons bounces on a pile of broken beer-bottles.an ever-increasing unpredictability of side-effects from one person to the next,all from treatment of x,due to requirement to patent novel material(pressure),fueled by desire to novelize already patented molecules and borrow their success(re-arrangement),driven by need to stay ahead of competitors or to just to be a competitor(motivation)   

[profitis]

Bottom line= one hundred thousand potential side-effects in total next year vs 90000 this year just for x-treatment

[sarkeizen]

Yes I do let's use logic.

Nothing that followed there appeared to be logic.   Wayyy too many poorly defined terms.

As I've stated before you can't rationally hold your belief that OU is easy to validate to just about anyone who wants to.  Postulating big, well-funded free-energy labs which produce nothing reduces the likelihood of either the labs existing or increases the difficulty in OU validation.

[profitis]

OU is exceptionally easy for scientists and for children to validate as I've shown elsewhere on this website.OU is not easy to shove into public domains as it incurs loss of valuable I.P.