Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

@Philip Hardcastle,

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion in sending the text and I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.

[AquariuZ]

@Philip Hardcastle,

You did not keep the agreement. I did not ask for your opinion in sending the text and I specifically said I don't want to discuss this. Uttering the nonsense you've uttered above is starting a discussion and this is deplorable once you've agreed not to discuss it.

Omnibus can you please PM me this documentation. I would be very interested in reading it and will not comment in public on it.

Contrary to some individuals in here you seem committed with a scientific basis for being so which makes me curious,

Thanks in advance

[AquariuZ]

@omni

Sorry to be blunt, and I know you do not want a debate, but anyone saying that it is proved by that essay is not being rational.

It is not the basis for anything and certainly extracting from it some sense as to support all these efforts is misguided. Mistakes start from the first few paragraphs and are then built upon to form a misdirection of common sense.

A bit like the old story

"A guy is given $10 by each of three ladies to go buy 3 bottles of wine, he buys the wine at $10 a bottle, $30 in all. However the merchant says, sorry I have over charged you, that wine is on special, here is $5 refund.

The guy thinks to himself walking back that splitting $5 is a bit tricky so he decides to give the ladies back a dollar each.

So he gives back each lady a dollar and gives them each a bottle of wine.

So they each paid $9 for a total of $27, and the guy kept $2 so 27 + 2 = $29.

So what happened to the other dollar?"


This is an old nonsense puzzle and so is that CoE violation paper.

I did read the paper twice and started to mark it up but thought, omni is smart enough to see this himself, and if not he maybe sees something I am missing.

I do not believe so, however I respect all your  rights to pursue non scientific ideas and will leave you to do your own thing.

Also I note that despite showing a preparedness to share my ideas they are ignored.

I note that no one comments on RTG or Curled Ballistic.

I guess I do not fit in here, and I do not wish to offend, so I must go and do, instead of talking.

Best wishes to all.


Philip Hardcastle.

Philip, I would seriously doubt that this forum is here to defend the CoE law, wouldn´t you agree?

There cannot be technological evolution without fresh looks at dusty matter, especially if you are not hampered by formal scientific education.

Funny thing is, the first thing any decent professor will teach you is to question everything. That would include the law of CoE.

[eisenficker2000]

Just another interpretation..from a Dutch engineer..Yep roots in the north, I know ter Apel.

[Omnibus]

@AquariuZ,

Can you give me your e-mail address? Thanks.