Being Decent To Each Other

[Earl]

People have been trying to build unbreakable ciphers and perpetual motion machines since many centuries.

In the cipher community it is accepted that every "unbreakable cipher" will be ferociously attacked and that mathematicians will attempt to prove that it is weak or broken.  These ferocious attacks are all done on an intellectual level with no hard feelings. Anyone proposing a new cipher expects this; it is completely normal.  I can assure that this subject is sufficiently complex that when mathematicians talk about cipher algorithms and their resistance to cryptanalysis, you would hardly understand a single word.  The German Telecom had not even finished presenting their algorithm to the AES competition before it had been shown to be flawed.  No bad feelings, no name calling, no haha you are stupid idiots.

On the other hand, during a respectable gathering of scholars and researchers during an International Cold Fusion conference, I have seen scientists excitedly scream at each other because their theory was right and the fellow with the other theory didn't know what he was talking about.

"Mankind's entire knowledge is equal to zero plus delta, where delta approaches zero."
Earl

Once each realizes how utterly and hopelessly stupid one is, one can only be humble.

There is a wise saying:

"There is one and only one word that separates a babbling, insane idiot from a genius."

That one word is success.

So on the fringes of intuition, imagination, and fantasy (do *NOT* use the word science),  you are automatically a babbling, insane idiot, exactly like the Wright brothers in 1902.  Accept this, do not let it bother you.  Accept that you may remain so until you die.  It is up to you with your abstract intelligence (IQ) to cross the line by having provable, scientifically-valid success.  Theories (ideas on forums can not even be called theories), and forum posting can not be equated to success.  Building and measuring correctly while guided by abstract intellect is a necessary, but insufficient condition to achieve success.  If you are smart in some areas, but lacking knowledge in others, do not hesitate to collaborate with peers.  One thing is sure, ego does not help to achieve success.

My 2 cents.

Earl
address any replies to others, since I prefer to build rather than post.

[linda933]

@Tom (nightlife)

Glad to hear there is true redemption still possible in this mean old world.  You are one of the lucky ones to have second (third...fourth?) chances to do what's right in life.  Keep it up, man!

@Earl

Great attitude; good advice! 


Linda

[Omnibus]

Linda, you're looking for hard facts, right? Here's one--Uncles Sam (US Patent Office, that is) has granted a number of patents on perpetuum mobile's. Now, the contradiction is this--either USA is protecting something pronounced by Science as nonsense or it isn't nonsense and Science has to start living with it. What do you think, how is this contradiction to be resolved? We were discussing this in another thread and @shruggedatlas came up with a lot of insight but the conclusion was that the resolution can come up only through the court system--a third party has to initiate motions in these courts to straighten up this ridiculous state of affairs. Does this seem OK to you?

[nightlife]

 I honestly feel that our governments are hiding a lot of inventions and or theory?s from us to keep things the way they are. I cant prove this until I finish building one of my motors to have proof it can be done. If I succeed, then I will have to question our governments involvement in keeping things from us because there is no way that I could be the only one to figure something out "provided I have proof that it does work" then all our well educated scientist and or other well educated people.

One example would be the motor built with using wood screws. There is no way that I beleive that others haven't figured out how to build one in the past before this person has considering all the top well educated scientist that have tried. I just have a hard time believing that motors have not already been built and or at least the concept put in theory and backed with mathematical conclusion.

I guess I should have stayed in school so I would know how to properly come up with a mathematical theory for my own theory's. The other problem I have is not trusting anyone because of my above thoughts. I may just be an idiot but I am having a hard time proving myself wrong. Probably because I may be an idiot and not even know that. I do hope that makes sense. LOL

If it doesn?t make sense, go ahead and beat me up,  just please be gentle. LOL

[Omnibus]

@nightlife,

It?s quite commendable that you were able to start a new life. Now it?s time to start learning a few things. First thing is to restrain from jumping the gun saying things like:

?I honestly feel that our governments are hiding a lot of inventions and or theory?s from us to keep things the way they are. I cant prove this until I finish building one of my motors to have proof it can be done. I succeed, then I will question our governments involvement in keeping things from us because there is no way that I could be the only one to figure something out "provided I have proof that it does work" then all our well educated scientist and or other well educated people.?

even if you honestly feel that way because you actually have no way at this point to prove what you?re saying and because of that you may look like a fool. Next, you should realize that innovations, new theories don?t pop up just like that. They build on earlier discoveries, theories, findings of sage men and women who have done work prior to yours. In order to understand what?s really there in this respect you must learn to learn, systematically at that. Without systematic knowledge you won?t even know exactly what you?re rejecting and what new you?re proposing. Thus, if lacking systematic education, it may only seem to you, you may only have the feeling that ?all our well educated scientists? are wrong but they may not be. You will be in no position to tell. You won?t be able to defend the thing you consider your theory as being more than crappy thoughts on a Sunday morning.

That said, I must add also that the overwhelming number of the well educated scientists will never even consider working on a project such as the one @xpenzif has undertaken. Why? Because it?s dangerous for their careers to question the very fundamentals for what they are getting salaries. There are mortgages to be paid, kids to be put through college, vacations to be had, all kinds of bills to be paid etc., etc. One can?t jeopardize their job security, they think, for something so much shattering their little world. Remember, conservatism pays the most in academia in many much more convenient ways than questioning such fundamental doctrines as CoE. 99.9999% of the trained scientists will not touch claims for violation of CoE with a ten foot pole. Mostly because of dishonesty. There is one word which characterizes contemporary Science?dishonesty. Honesty is a very rare commodity these days in academia. There are honest people there but their number is negligibly small. Turns out dishonesty pays the most?play the game properly and you?ll have a happy little life. These so-called trained scientists everywhere in academia are not to be trusted one bit when it comes to matters of importance of the magnitude we?re discussing here, not because they lack training but because they are dishonest. Therefore, don?t assume that it had occurred to top well educated scientists to have given even a minute?s thought on a machine @xpenzif is showing us here.

However, I do agree that we have absolutely no evidence that such machines haven?t existed in the past. On the contrary, more and more evidence is coming about, indicating that they in fact may have but have been deliberately neglected (putting it mildly, rather than saying ?suppressed?). The great heroes of Science have appeared not because somehow they discovered something which automatically brought them fame. Nothing farther from the truth. The great heroes of Science we know of are in the textbooks because what they did was to the liking of the powers that be who promoted them. No matter how bright or how stupid, incorrect or ridiculous that thing may be. Power (linked to money, of course) in the world determines what is true and what is not. Never mind all the talk of scientific method. This is for the consolation of the na?ve. Of course, the powers that be cannot allow themselves to promote always dummy things. England has to prevail over France, therefore, it cannot afford to entertain illusions in the practical matters of war, for instance. This is why the Royal Society (the local Academy of Sciences) appeared, to filter up to a point the nonsense that may weaken the country. However, the county may be weakened even more by allowing some inconvenient truths to prevail. Therefore, that society takes proper care of that too. That?s in a few words the scheme we are all victims of. It is only said when you?re taught in colleges that Science is about search for the truth. They only say it but they don?t really mean it. In addition, most of the instructors there are so overwhelmed with other stuff that search for the truth doesn?t even come up in their to do lists for the day, the year or even their entire career. This is enough, keeping with the topic of this thread, to treat these people with disrespect. One of the things these people really deserve is not to be polite with them because they only pretend to be scientists, violating the main tenet of what they have undertaken to do.

Now, back to you?if you have something you think is interesting just show it, otherwise it?ll be prudent not to express opinions you cannot back up with facts.