FIRST FREE ENERGY DEVICE REACHES MARKET IN OCTOBER -- The Game Changer is Here

[PS123]

 To all Don Quixotes,

To understand, to believe, to practice FE we need a paradigm change.
Change that could happen after a generation.
The young practice what the old have thought.

Please compare:

Homeopathy is 100 years old.
(4 generations !!!)

The medicine is cheap: you could even make it yourself for 0 cost.
The theory is simple: a small booklet called Organon. 
    (easy to read, difficult to grasp)

100 years after:

Only 2 to 3% over the whole world believe in homeopathie.
Even less practice it.
They prefer sell their houses tot buy medicine
(comp. Cancer-treatment)
Big pharma ALLWAYS grows bigger and bigger.

Why is that

Because you cannot impose consciousness.
Homeopathy not in a 100 years.
FE not in xxx years.
Try to talk to your family, your neighbors, your friends.
You will notice. It’s like chasing windmills.

Vision:

We will practice FE in our garages.
With Quentron, E-Cat, Defcalion and Others.
We ? 2 to 3% off the world-people. For a 100 years to come.

Servantes (Peter)

[chessnyt]

@Everyone:
How is it that imperfect men could have ever created ANYTHING perfect and flawless?  This notion of a perfect man is the true heresy.

The following is a quote I found to be profoundly true:

"Cold Fusion" has sometimes been referred to as an example of bad science. We agree. It was bad science when Galileo agreed with Copernicus that the Earth orbited the sun and he was charged with heresy and placed under house arrest.  It was bad science when Roemer announced that contrary to the prevailing belief, the speed of light was not infinite but was actually 186,000 miles per second. He was ridiculed by the scientific establishment and driven out of a scientific career. It was bad science when doctors continued to go from patient to patient without washing their hands, leading to childbirth mortality rates as high as 28% even after clinical studies had shown that washing between patients could significantly reduce mortality. It wasn’t until many years later after Pasteur had identified bacteria that could be transmitted from patient to patient that hand-washing was widely adopted. These are just three examples of a long list of "bad science."

In each of these cases.it took in excess of 20 years after the initial announcement and compelling experimental evidence before the mainstream scientific establishment accepted the change. In this light, "cold fusion" is another example of bad science. And as with the examples listed above, after more than 20 years it is getting harder to deny the experimental evidence of "cold fusion." We believe "cold fusion" is well on its way to becoming an accepted scientific fact and that ICCF-17 will be a pivotal event in answering the question of whether "cold fusion" can become the safe, low-cost nuclear energy source to meet the world’s growing energy demand.

I would just like to add one more "bad science" example that modern mainstream science is still red faced over.  How about the rings of Saturn that were ALWAYS documented as being perfectly concentric in modern science books until the recent discovery by NASA which proved them to be otherwise with photographic evidence to the contrary?  Mainstream science has never been the absolute authority on science and they never shall be.  Not when it is controlled and built by mere mortal men with inherent imperfections. 


Best Regards,

Chess

[MileHigh]

Chess:

I'm sure that I made some mistakes earlier in the thread and I admit that.  That's just normal, I am only human.  I also was not fully informed about certain things.  I am not too passionate about this whole affair like you are and sometimes I didn't have the energy or drive to argue things out.

But that's just a minor bump on the road.  In the overall thread, I have shared my thoughts about Rossi and LENR in an honest way and I am not a paid disinformation agent.

Gwandau:

Even an ordinary electrical generator is far above COP>1, with excess energy dissipating at the dipoles, and the sum energy created far exceeding the input shaft torque.

The idea of the torque behind the generator shaft being the actual energy source for the electricity generated are one of the greatest misconceptions of contemporary science.
The rotation of the shaft just created the correct electromagnetic differential to tap the void of electricity, a void that is abundant with energy.
This is why mankind has to redefine the second law of thermodynamics, since the concept of a closed system is an illusion.

That's a pure Tom Bearden inspired fantasy.

Have you done the experiments?  I have, and they refute what you are saying.  All that a generator is doing is pumping electrons up to a higher potential so they can flow through a load.  It's no different that you going to a hand-pump and turning a wheel and lifting water up one meter and putting it into a storage tank.  This idea you have is an example of a reality disconnect.  Tom Bearden generates a bunch of text to create "Tom Bearden's Imaginary Universe." 

The universe is real, and when you turn a generator by hand and it starts to drive a load you can feel the mechanical resistance increase.  Torque and angular velocity are essentially the same as current and voltage.  There is literally almost no difference between the two things from an energy perspective.  This is an example of where you want to try to "see" what's going on.

The whole "closed system" vs. "open system" stuff is more of the tall tale spun by Tom and his friends.  You can evaluate every individual experiment on its own merits without ever using that terminology.

It's all much simpler than you think.

So anything with a COP>1 is free energy in action. Even simple sources like wind power and solar power is are good examples of free energy.

This is an incorrect idea if you want to follow the energy trail all the way back to the source.  If I recall correctly, the sun converts about 67 million tons of hydrogen into helium per second.  That's the source of your wind and solar power.  The COP == 1.  That's the real deal.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Chess:

I am Rossi's worst nightmare.  I am working on a technology, that if proven successful, will completely and utterly ruin Andrea Rossi and leave his E-Cat in a sad state of obscurity. 

Why would I say something as bold as this?  Because even though my technology requires a fuel source as well, the fuel is by far less expensive than nickel and there is no need for lead shielding or even a 1 hour "warm up" period.  It also adapts to existing infrastructure much more easily than does the E-Cat.

So you have the genie in the bottle!  So when are you going to launch?

MileHigh

[Gwandau]

MileHigh,

I regard solar and wind power to be COP>1 systems seen from the perspective of the user, which is the only perspective of interest.

Wonder who is the one losing contact with reality here?


Gwandau