THE RANT ROOM

[SolarLab]

Attached a little piece by Gene Brown, Lead Engineer at Holcomb Energy Systems re:
"Straight Off the Power Company Website, Florida Power and Light (FPL)"
Dated, Jun 21 (2022 ?) A 3 min read - attached pdf:

Ahhh, the plot thickens!

[onepower]

Holcomb makes the claim. An extraordinary claim. Burden of proof is on him.
What he, or others, have offered for proof, or evidence, falls way short.
Facts support critics being believable way more than supporters.

I agree conceptually but it begs the question... extraordinary or unbelievable to whom?.

Having done decades of research on FE and seen many working devices first hand I don't find this technology extraordinary in any sense of the word. I think it's problematic because logically the least educated who understand almost nothing find everything extraordinary, do they count?. I mean, if a flat Earther who rejects all conventional proof thinks your nuts because you think the Earth is round are both your opinions equal?. So if you objected to the flat Earther's opinion why couldn't I object to yours using the same reasoning?.

What defines extraordinary?, well it explains itself, extra(beyond, above) ordinary(common, average). Any concept beyond an ordinary persons understanding with an average high school education who doesn't understand 99% of science. Ergo, the lowest common denominator, ie. something of small intellectual content designed to appeal to people who understand very little.

It took a while but I think I found the reason I succeeded where you obviously didn't. I think like a programmer and everything relates to logic, reason and factual information. The better and more accurate the information the better the odds of success. Thus, I always look to the highest common denominator not the lowest average and popular opinion... this is not a popularity contest.

AC

[onepower]

Best way to achieve success is to experiment and diy

I thought this was true but found it's not...

I did literally hundreds and hundreds of experiments which led nowhere. Experiments mean little unless they have some kind of systematic direction based on facts leading towards our goal.

Think of it this way, we sit down at the bench and we build something, what are we trying to prove?. I think most, like myself, are trying to prove there thoughts are right about something which is the wrong attitude. Logically the outcome is usually binary and true or false, win or lose. However if we go into it and our goal is only to learn something new the outcome is different. We tend to pay much more attention to all the little details and our thoughts about what we think were seeing are fluid.

In effect, the moment I stopped trying to prove something to myself and just wanted to learn everything changed. The pressure and stress disappeared, it became fun and a challenge and I have nothing but options. No right or wrong just trying anything different and seeing where it led.

It's as Nikola Tesla implied, we can learn just as much about a given problem by thinking about it or doing thought experiments and going through all the different variations as we can by doing an experiment. In effect, trying to prove our opinion is not learning it is confirmation. Confirmation, more so to uphold popular opinion is very slow but learning can happen very fast. It always starts with a "what if", what if this happened versus that?. The only way to learn is to keep asking questions and the moment the questions stop so does the learning.

AC

[bistander]

AC,
I think our definition of success differs. Show what you mean by "I succeeded" referring to a free energy device. Specifically, prove it. I see a lot of 'talk' from you but never clear proof or solid examples. I say there is no such thing as a free energy inventor because there are no free energy inventions. Context does not include the likes of solar, wind or heat pumps.

And "to whom is it extraordinary or unbelievable?" To the scientific community. And must have been extraordinary enough to the plaintiff for him to shell out 5mil for rights in 4 states. Now it's unbelievable to him. Maybe we'll find out if it is extraordinary/unbelievable to a judge and jury.
bi

[rakarskiy]

Performance and consumption can only be measured quantitatively. No amount of measured power moments on circuit sections can indicate the performance and efficiency of a system. Energy companies evaluate energy for billing purposes in terms of quantity.

In order to achieve a self-powered system, the quantification must be 3/1 (generation/self-powering cost), and if the input/output is AC, it is very difficult to make this connection without buffer storage/source.  Can it operate in self-propulsion mode. Judging by the power torque measurements by the engineer of the company where СOP-7.0, divide this value in half 0.5*7 =3.5 we get the original value (the system cannot operate at maximum capacity all the time). Thus by external signs the system may well be self-propelled.

According to Holcomb, the system can only be evaluated quantitatively. What actually they do and it is better from the company, which loses less by selling its quantitative indicator. I think soon sellers will start "chemistry" to pervert this data or close the general access.