Recently we had Hungary?s EBM, now Ukraine

[Omnibus]

@All,

I listened to some kind of amateur internet radio show yesterday. Someone interviewed the guy from Hungary with the EBM machine (http://www.gammamanager.com/). What a sad story on both sides of the interview. Someone, obviously not very competent interviewing someone who plays games to earn money.

Claims for such ?overunity? generators have been around for years, to no avail. Why? Because the ?inventors? simply do not want to follow the strict procedures for verification of their claims science has come up with in its centuries old development. One crucial requirement which science poses for a claim to be legitimate is complete openness so that others can analyze and reproduce the experiment. If that?s not done, forget it. One has every reason to pronounce such claims as a hoax. Isn?t this the sad case with Steorn too ? one more claim in the line of unverifiable (due to misguided secrecy) claims geared not to advance science but to lure investors.

Such ?inventors? hope that the market itself, not Academia with its requirement for scientific rigor, will be the right tool to verify their claims (and to earn money, of course). It should be clear by now, that?s not the case. Here?s one more example of such vain hope, for your entertainment. This time it?s from Ukraine:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7612097685

You can buy it and use it (good luck!) but you can?t see what?s inside. Try to open it and it?ll destroy itself (without a collateral damage, they say). I don?t see the money back guarantee, though.

[Liberty]

Greetings Omnibus,

1.  I wonder if you could expound briefly what it is that "Academia" could do for an inventor (that is without a patent) while investigating an inventor's device? 

2.  How could they guarantee to protect an inventor's device from leaking information about the device to competitors or to the public while the inventor is allowing some openness? 

3.  After keeping the inventor's device secret and testing it out, having found it to be proven true, how could Academia help the inventor? 

4.  Would Academia do this without charge for the inventor for the opportunity of openness to Academia (not openness to the public or competitors)?

Thought that not only myself, but others might be interested in your answers to this topic.

Thanks,

Liberty

 

[Omnibus]

@Liberty,

The only way for an inventor to protect his interests and make an impact is to describe as thoroughly as possible his invention so that others can analyze and reproduce it. If he is so much concerned about his financial interest he should patent it beforehand and the wide dissemination of the details of the patent will contribute to the promotion of his invention rather than harm his interests.

Wide dissemination of viable concepts is especially necessary in the field whereby violation of fundamental laws is claimed. In such a case the resistance is so great that even the full openness won?t do and the inventor has to exert even more effort to convince the community. Being secretive will not help one bit in protecting his interests because there simply will be no interests to protect. Society as whole will deny any of his claims, no matter how viable he thinks his invention is. There are numerous examples to support that observation.

Further, the area of ?overunity? (perpetuum mobile, that is) devices comprises everything that business doesn?t like, no matter how much some are convinced in the opposite. This area will not meet with the genuine support of the governments either. There are deep philosophical and ideological reasons for that. Case in point ? hot fusion research. The powers that be would love to see it go away. But it can?t. Hydrogen bomb has proven the concept is viable. Thus, what they do is sabotage it. Don?t be fooled by these billions governments spend every year for the tokamaks. These are to sustain a structure that would sabotage the self sustaining hot fusion rather than bring it to fruition. In addition, millions around the world involved in this ?research? just love that system ? it provides them with steady salaries which pay the mortgage and ensures middle class living for generations. Who cares if it is otherwise fruitless. This is fraud perpetrated on an incredible scale. I wouldn?t be surprised if it turns out that there have been working perpetuum mobiles decades even centuries ago that have been deliberately suppressed and an impression is vigorously promoted that such devices are impossible to exist.

[Kator01]

Omnibus,

well spoken ! It is really unbelievable : They sell something which does not exist !

Read carefully :

You are bidding for
FREE ENERGY ELECTRO POWER SOURCE GENERATOR
If you will win auction we will conclude contract with you for producing and shipping GENERATOR.

People, you have to learn to read between the lines.

You first have to win the bid, then you pay the full price for a contract of an non existing machine based on an unproven and unknown principle from a country with unknown structure with a language not many of us speak.

I have never seen a customer pay the full price in advance in business which deals with production of machines

It is so obvious.

Kator

[Liberty]

@Liberty,

The only way for an inventor to protect his interests and make an impact is to describe as thoroughly as possible his invention so that others can analyze and reproduce it. If he is so much concerned about his financial interest he should patent it beforehand and the wide dissemination of the details of the patent will contribute to the promotion of his invention rather than harm his interests.

Wide dissemination of viable concepts is especially necessary in the field whereby violation of fundamental laws is claimed. In such a case the resistance is so great that even the full openness won?t do and the inventor has to exert even more effort to convince the community. Being secretive will not help one bit in protecting his interests because there simply will be no interests to protect. Society as whole will deny any of his claims, no matter how viable he thinks his invention is. There are numerous examples to support that observation.

Further, the area of ?overunity? (perpetuum mobile, that is) devices comprises everything that business doesn?t like, no matter how much some are convinced in the opposite. This area will not meet with the genuine support of the governments either. There are deep philosophical and ideological reasons for that. Case in point ? hot fusion research. The powers that be would love to see it go away. But it can?t. Hydrogen bomb has proven the concept is viable. Thus, what they do is sabotage it. Don?t be fooled by these billions governments spend every year for the tokamaks. These are to sustain a structure that would sabotage the self sustaining hot fusion rather than bring it to fruition. In addition, millions around the world involved in this ?research? just love that system ? it provides them with steady salaries which pay the mortgage and ensures middle class living for generations. Who cares if it is otherwise fruitless. This is fraud perpetrated on an incredible scale. I wouldn?t be surprised if it turns out that there have been working perpetuum mobiles decades even centuries ago that have been deliberately suppressed and an impression is vigorously promoted that such devices are impossible to exist.

Quote above from Omnibus:
"The only way for an inventor to protect his interests and make an impact is to describe as thoroughly as possible his invention so that others can analyze and reproduce it."
-------------------

Do you think that if the 'powers that be' decided that the information "described thoroughly" from an invention to a scientist, would constitute 'a national security threat'.  Would that then make the inventor and the scientists involved, "terrorists" under the Patriot Act since "they" are not able to contain and control the invention by the patent process that can be controlled by the Invention Secrecy Act to suppress technology that they view as a national security threat?

That would not be a good option for an inventor or a scientist...  Or those that are openly working on devices on this web site if they decided to extend it that far.