The Mylow story: what can be learned!

[Bobbotov]

The Law of Conservation of Energy means nothing if your equation does not include ALL forms of energy, including those that we do not know about or do not understand.

All laws are based on what we do know and not what we don't. For example when cars were first introduced in the late nineteenth century they couldn't pass a law banning cell phone use or text messaging.

And in science all laws are subject to falsification and are modified accordingly as required. Science is not monolithic immutability otherwise nothing would have progressed beyond the wheel.

[Psyclone]

Thinking outside the box is fine, but believing in a world full of Vampires, Trolls, Goblins, Wizards and so forth, while amusing, is absolute idiocy.

Water does not flow uphill in our part of the universe and wishing so because it would be soooooo convenient is sheer lunacy.

There is a point where we must accept certain realities. Denying them is of no value.

I am the first one to admit that there are large holes in our understanding of the world but we will never find them if we deny the things we already know to be facts.

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,

For whatever it's worth (ie. rambling to follow - not necessarily/only directed at you or this post), my personal 'perspective' on the subject differs from yours, at least to the degree that I take almost the exact opposite approach to life and the quest for knowledge - I am willing / open to believe that anything is possible and (once enough people puzzle over some observed phenomena long enough) our percieved reality is explained and/or updated with 'convienient', 'new' truths.

I think we agree to the extent that we (the human race) certainly don't know everything.  The problem I have with your statement(s) above (a position I think many scientists would agree with, btw) centers around:

...we will never find them if we deny the things we already know to be facts ...

...I understand the point you're trying to make and actually agree with it to a certain extent, but at the same time, I completely disagree .  Here's just a single example 'fact':

- Life exists on Earth and nowhere else - anywhere, in our entire understanding or perception of reality.

...if we simply accept this as 'fact' (and therefore not worthy of challenging), we're certainly less likely to find life elsewhere than if we 'deny' that fact... right?

What are facts anyway?  Does the Eifle Tower exist?  To whom?  Since I have never touched it myself, do I just accept that it exists based on 'photos' I've seen?  Should I take others word for it?

I have personally experienced 'precognition' on more than one occasion in my life, but science (as yet) has no explaination for it's existance (although Quantum Physics are starting to shed more light on many of these subjects).  So is it a fact yet, or not?  It is to me, because I've experienced it.

Imagine - people once accepted the 'fact' that the earth was flat and that the heavens revolved around Earth - until someone was willing to deny the known facts and be open to other possibilities.

People (largely) still believe in solid/physical particles and atoms as facts.  Are they?  Or is it just a 'convienient' way of expressing and talking about reality (that might better be explained by a state of vibration of energy) ?



Sorry, I tend to get OT and ramble on... my point is that I agree that 'facts' are usefull to the extent that they give us some common ground and convienient means of expressing / discussing our (current) understanding of reality, but they are only 'valid' facts until usurpted  (sp) with new ones that better explain the things we didn't previously fully understand.

So, do I believe in OU?  Not in the strict definition of the phrase, no (and it's probably a shame that the phrase was ever coined to begin with, as well as then used as the site name).  But do I believe that there may be ways to tap into and utilize the abundant energy that exists all around us in ways that will revolutionize the world?  Absolutely.

Cheers.

[Psyclone]

...BTW, I don't mean to paint with such a wide brush above.... in fact (if I can use that term ), with perhaps a few exceptions, people who visit this site in the first place are obviously willing to be open to new ideas and Bobbotov basically says the same thing - though much less verbosely - in his post above.

[lostcauses10x]

Lets see the point made.
science and the rules of such.

I see them as some thing that exist with good reason. So far i have yet to see anything in violation, other than they can not come up with a unified field theory.

The ideas of science hold until shown to be other wise.

Next point seems to be the trying to get full disclose and the information to replicate.
Again a good point up to the fact that such will most likely never happen even if it is real.

Why of this is simple. If not as claimed, information will be such it will be misleading, and or just plain not given out for some reason. It broke. Some one tore it up. MIB is taking it away, etc. All them things that tend to make folks believe; are the excuses for the device never being independently verified.

Of course the point folks (due to a post on a form) also are to blame for non disclose). ROTFLMAO. Again just a different excuse to keep from having real and factual verification.

Stop blaming the people, and blaim the claimant. It is were this crap is happening. They use such as an excuse to keep the magic as magic and not reality and the trick behind it.

So again here is were it is simply a claim until such can be verified. Such would have to be done through peer review and peer reviewed replication and so on.

Sorry the idea that these folks are not disclosing information due to they are angry at some one on a board is just plain BS.  It is nothing more than an excuse to keep the reality away from them being fooled.

MIB, big oil, goverment cover up: and so on is they way to divert the attention to hide old mister slide of hand. Keep the magic as magic. Do not let folks see the movement.

As for OU as most folks belive. LOL  Look at our world, and the universe it is in.

Hell even life seems to be based on the act of trying for CoE and CoM.

The planets will still be spinning around, Suns will still be going: long after I am gone.

OU and Free energy is still a thing that will be looked at and looked for. Just watch out for them magicians. Most will if they can take your money and time if you let them.

  The Mylow thing. He has been given a great amount of  tolerance by the community.
He has been given a great many chances to have his device validated. Yet he just runs and hides when it comes to validation. Information for replication has been given, yet so far no valid replication has shown what he claims.

It is time to stop being tolerant of this guy. If it is real, he would allow verification. If it was real replication would have been done already. How many configurations has he shown now??

Validity of this device becomes zero.

The whole point in this thread is where do you draw the line of feasibility and validity of a claim and of a claimant.

Were does such a claim go from magician to being real folks???
Were do you draw the line saying it may be real, to it is just a magic show???

 

[lostcauses10x]

A Magic show, and magician doing its job.

Best example found to day.
http://pesn.com/2009/05/21/9501543_Mylow-fakery-forced/

"Did the MIB force Mylow to fake his later all-magnet motors?"

Hmm always always leave doubt of if fake or real: in the minds of the viewer.