My question for detractors of overunity

[Bessler007]

PolyPoint,


What ever works for you but I'd guess this approach isn't working well.  If it were  you'd recognize that when you perceive contradiction in reality, the contradiction is really in your perception; not reality.  You could get beyond your misconceptions and actually build something viable.

Put in other words your perceptions can accommodate contradictions of reality but what ever they are, reality isn't a contradiction.  It's more productive to change your view than it is to insist reality accommodate it.

Put further into other words the skeptic isn't going to exchange their perception of reality based on actual measurements and experiments over hundreds of years until you can actually produce some real proof of your theory(ies) what ever they are.

You act as if  you're presenting some original idea when  you talk about the expansion of the universe as being OU.  Physicists recognize it is.  That isn't the question.  The question is ?can that expansion be used to cause OU in our laps??  There are thought experiments that explain how it might happen but they have no practical use.  They're impossible to construct.

If you have any original idea to present by all means do.  When you present the ideas of others and expect that to be evidence of your argument all you're doing is further substantiating your point, ?by my way of thinkin' I really don't know nothin' ?.  I've already agreed with that point.

Bessler007
mib HQ

. . .
Yes I grok exactly all that you say in a psychological, semantic, Null-A,
. . .


edit:  some of your misconception might be an understanding the skeptical physicist denies over unity.  They don't.  What they do say is any practical example of that in the real world is not economically feasible.  That's where you come in, Oh great one.  Prove them wrong.  The energy of all this talk should be able to be harnessed some how....

[PolyMatrix]

Professor Sophistry,

You wouldn't know a cogent argument comprised of salient facts if it bit you on the arse.  lol

hummm.   lol.


Bessler007
mib, HQ

{Deep sigh} ^^^ True as I know nothing!

However this answers my questions how? Is it useful in showing how the delightful concepts that have been considered here accurate or incorrect in what way exactly?

Is pointing out someone?s deficiencies and using childish words like ?arse? helpful to your cause or do they just make you feel superior?

Is this post an indication of the same arrogance that I was accused of?

This is the only coherent responsible caring adult scientific reply you can be bothered to come up with?

What would we do without such beautiful and comprehensive methods of expression?

What would the world be like without this brilliance?

Oh well, it seems to be true, but I cannot be truly sure, that courtesy and respect of another?s opinions mean nothing to the person who has been given that courtesy.

[Bessler007]

You have your answer but you want to dismiss it.  Take  your brilliant understanding of measurements of reality and what actually is in this reality and produce something that works according to your theory.

Until you do (although the physicists recognizes OU is a fact) all you have are idle meaningless words strewn together like some wisdom you've extracted from your arse.  You might say they look at it as asshattery.  I don't disagree with the skeptic.

Again, your question has been answered.  You will persuade the skeptic that you know what  you're talking about the day  you can present a practical application of it.

. . .
However this answers my questions how? Is it useful in showing how the delightful concepts that have been considered here accurate or incorrect in what way exactly?

Is pointing out someone?s deficiencies and using childish words like ?arse? helpful to your cause or do they just make you feel superior?
. . .

[PolyMatrix]

This has been a wonderful conversation and many thanks for participating and making this thread possible goes to Bessler007 and lets not forget the useful and helpful teaching comments from 'The Eskimo Quinn'. A special mention goes to 'hansvonlieven' for his guest appearance, timely comment and good sense.

It is possible that this thread has shown in a microcosmic way all the problems that the people who attempt to show a paradigm in possibilities. Hopefully physics will never have to face the problem of a proof only working if someone believes that proof is present as it would never be proved in front of a skeptic. (The observer affecting the observed)

Terminology
grok: Used in Robert Heinlein's first book of the 1960s 'Stranger in a Strange land' and is mostly used to mean the drinking of environment and ideas to achieve full comprehension through meditative contemplation.

Null-A: From A whimsical series of 3 books written by A.E Van Vogt with the meaning of non-Aristotelian and is loosely based on the ideas proposed in General Semantics. created by Alfred Korzybski

Any offence anger or other concomitant emotions felt at any of the opinions expressed in this thread are entirely your own responsibility as none of the contributors have any knowledge of the belief system that maintains the readers personal ego.

May you all have many hours of happy hunting and playing within your lifetime(s?)

[RunningBare]

I will give you all the energy in action you need from the universe to start your hypothetical experiment.

A stick/pole facing vertical
two ring magnets

place the two magnets on the pole north facing north.

you can now sit and watch the gravity of the planet try to pull the top ring down, whilst the magnetic field of the lower repells against the planet itself and wins.

There is an exchange of energy that is constant and free, Sit and watch until either the magnet or planet dies, or until you work out how to harness that simple energy right in front of you.

Call us when your done.

Your kidding right?, you do know what relativistic forces are right?
Both gravity and magnetism are relativistic forces, the top magnet is repulsed until an equilibrium is reached with the force of gravity, once that equilibrium is reached no work is being done.
Now if you want to go to the atomic level and say things are moving, then yes I would agree, but since all materials exhibit this trait at the atomic level with temperatures above absolute zero, then you might as well say a piece of wood is doing work.