I have been following ONEGIFT4POWER since February and although he will not release any drawings or secrets I have yet to find any reason why what he claims cannot be done. Richard Olenick, the author of your high school physics textbook and proffessor at U Dallas , and Ted carnes M.E., who previously invalidated to other devices, have both validated his discoveries.
Here is a statement from Ted Carnes...http://www.onegift4power.org/TedCarnes.html (http://www.onegift4power.org/TedCarnes.html)
The Physics law of energy conservation states energy cannot be created, but it doesn't say anything about developing mechanical energy or harnessing kinetic energy.
What do you think?
Nice way to keep a secret.
But, too bad, it's a scam.
Money. Money. Money....
And gone with a bam.
Have you read the reports done by Mr. Ted Carnes P.H.D., PE, MD - And, Dr. Richard Olenick (University of Dallas) on the www.OneGift4Power.org website? If you did, you would know that Mr. Ted Carnes was initially sought after to DISPROOVE what Mr. Donatelli has as he has already DISPROOVED 2 other men?s devices. To date, Mr. Ted Carnes cannot disprove Mr. Donatellis technology - In fact, he has VALIDATED many key parts in his technology. Do you really think they would risk their reputations by signing off on a scam?
Do you think that the I.R.S. gives away charitable entities? OneGift4Power is a legitimate charitable entity authorized by the I.R.S. - No one earns one-penny in salary or compensation in this organization.
Do you think that a person with "True Means" would just click a paypal donation button to give 3.2 million dollars? Or, do you think that a person with "True Means" will get their PhD?s and meet face-to-face with Mr. Donatelli and his PhD?s and see for themselves before investing millions?
What do you propose, that they put the "Blueprints" online just so YOU, and "armchair quarterback" can say "Ohhhhh, that's how they do it.....". Does Pepsi give their formula online? Xerox also first leased their machines because no one knew the technology existed and they didn't want it reverse engineered.
Let's put yourself in their shoes - What if you knew you had a new technology that was never stumbled upon and, you had PhD?s that stayed with you for over a decade who validated the key parts of your technology. What if some of this technology was so simple - That science will actually kick themselves when it is revealed. And, what if you were old enough not to care about material items - And, drewno salary or compensation - All the while trying to find that one or two people with "Means" who could fund this technology - But, also knowing that your technology could be stolen if you divulge to much. How would you do it?
Another question: Why would Mr. Donatelli choose one of the most heated and controversial and unbelievable subjects if it was a scam? Don't you think it would be easier - And, draw less attention to create a scam around disaster relief, or giving in the name of starving children? Do you think OneGift4Power is so stupid as to create a scam around a subject that is so controversial?
If one is so charitable and full of man's best.
Why stick out your hand and ask for Golds chest.
When simply divulging will be the great gift.
Instead of hiding behind stories adrift.
Since open source is the most altruistic way.
Let the world know about it and test it today.
Then all the kings horses and all the kings men.
Will not stop this revolution from happening again.
@nav
There are fools in every corner of this Earth and there are other fools ready to follow them.
If you want to make it right, just disclose it open source. That's altruism to its upper level. Straight and low cost. If the inventor does not want money, then people around him do and are doing a good job of pumping the money grab.
Beware of he who sticks out his hand while claiming to want to save you. Gullable people happen every day. You just have to count the money coming into the God industry to pay for the lavish lifestyles of the few chosen. Oh but they do not take a salary. But you should see their expenses.
Charitable organisations are a dime a dozen. And so are the nice little stories they hatch. So please if you want credibility here, I suggest you wake up and smell the real roses around you and not waste both your time or money on such things.
Comparing their device to the Hoover Dam, what a joke. Before the Hoover Dam was built, hydro power generators made their claim and proven their worth in thousands of places.
Hey, I have an idea of building a hydro dam and the water will flow upwards producing 5 times the torque on the generators then anything seen on Earth. All I need is 3.2 million to put it together. Are you game?
All these guys are doing is promising the big build, without even showing a mouse trap, and all the while, you are supposed to believe them. Yes just believe it all right. Until the hammer of reality falls on their heads.
If their invention is true and they are not divulging it freely to the world, then they will reap all the problems they have chosen to battle. You can do it the hard way, the easy way, or the money money way. It's a choice. But I think you are in the wrong place to push this. Maybe try Ripley's Believe it or Not Forum.
Better donate to our OverUnity Prize over here !
Quote from: hartiberlin on August 11, 2007, 10:36:52 AM
Better donate to our OverUnity Prize over here !
Donating to your overunity prize will not give me a tax deduction nor first right of refusal to licence a generator once production begins.
Onegift4power offers both.
But you will get free plans to build yourself a unit cheaply.
Also you can still hold the money to yourself, until the Prize is announced.
I wonder, if I should remove this thread as it sounds like free advertising for a scam...
or at least like a pretty strange and risky money investment...
Quote from: hartiberlin on August 11, 2007, 12:16:27 PM
But you will get free plans to build yourself a unit cheaply.
Also you can still hold the money to yourself, until the Prize is announced.
I was unaware of this, but it seems like a a free energy developing device would be worth a hundred times what you offer. ???
Quote from: hartiberlin on August 11, 2007, 12:16:27 PM
I wonder, if I should remove this thread as it sounds like free advertising for a scam...
or at least like a pretty strange and risky money investment...
Have you read enough of the information on the sight, with an open mind, to honestly say it is a scam?
I look at it as a tax write-off, if it turns out to be real well then thats just a bonus. No other charity offers what this one does. None even come close!
Can you tell me why two respected PHD's would risk their lively hood in validating something like this unless it were true?
By posting it here I was hoping to get some reasonable opinions as to why his ideas cannot work, as I am sure there are some here more educated than I.
Regardless whether or not you remove this thread, the name Dante Donatelli will go down in history as an inventor
who revolutionized energy technology as we know it.
I don?t know about Dante A. Donatelli but I?ve tried to read Onegift4power. Such a waste of time!
?By posting it here I was hoping to get some reasonable opinions as to why his ideas cannot work, as I am sure there are some here more educated than I.?
What ideas?!!!
Educated or not, I hope one doesn?t take much time to see they have nothing but crap there.
There is not a single clear statement or idea I could find about the so called ?invention? and the ?third application of Bernoulli principle?. So, what ideas, Navigator? (Other that they badly want to receive <<big>> donations and that you look like being one of them?)
Well, I guess it?s a fraud. A clumsy one.
I fully agree with Navigator about one point : ?the name Dante Donatelli will go down in history?. So, let it go down asap. ;D
Harti, I vote to take them out.
Tinu
QuoteRichard Olenick:6/6/94
"Dante has discovered how to put solid objects in continous motion and to achieve more horsepower on the down work path than on the up return path due to the difference in travel time. The gained horsepower is converted into electricity and used for the return trip up and have an amount left over for a storage device."
I will try to describe my idea, and I am not an engineer so go easy on me...
Take two axles, and label 4 ponits of reference on each w,x,y,z. Arrange the axles so y is aligned on both and x,z intersect see below.
Axle a w__x__y__z
Axle b z__y__x__w
Connect them by gearing at points x,z so axle "a" rpm is exactly 2x axle "b" rpm. One end of axle "a", w is connected to a generator and one end of axle "b",w is connected to a electric motor. The opposite ends of each axle, y, are connected in the middle by three objects that rotate around both axles. Somehow, a transmission maybe, the force of the object on its downward path would be connected to axle "a", once an object starts on the upward path the object is switched to axle "b",(the electric motor) pushes it back up using less force than it developed on its way down due to a difference in velocity, then on its way down it switches to axle "a" and the cycle repeats agian. Also in each RPM 2 objects are dropping while only one is rising.
This is pretty simple and crude but if Dante has figured out the mechanics of how to correctly assemble and then control the objects I don't see why something like this would not work. Dante claims he can connect seven different devices, device #1 being an electric motor, # 2,3,4,5,6 develope mechanical energy using common laws of nature as in my example, and #7 converts the mechanical energy to electricity, a generator.
The gift is an 4 ton device, the size of a ~8 x 16 rv camper, developes ~495 ft. lbs. of torque, after taking into account friction, and uses ~75 ft. lbs of torque to continue running.
BTW, the third application of the bernoulli principle is solid objects in motion, we already use the first two air/gas, liquid/water. It only makes sense that we should be able to figure out how to use solid objects by using the forces of nature to develope mechanical energy.
Hi All,
I wonder if the idea in this patent (if there is any merit in it...) has some familiarities with Dante's idea, see this link:
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2004019476&F=0
Contact info: http://www.1000inventions.com/detail2.php?id=651
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on August 12, 2007, 06:08:20 AM
Hi All,
I wonder if the idea in this patent (if there is any merit in it...) has some familiarities with Dante's idea, see this link:
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO2004019476&F=0
Contact info: http://www.1000inventions.com/detail2.php?id=651
Gyula
I didn't read all of it, but your right it is similar. From your link...
QuoteIn Patent No.GR1003255, a motor is installed in a box that drives shafts bearing gears. Thus the force produced is claimed to be multiplied many times and is propagated to the eight corners of the box. Placing self-activating dynamos that are driven by the gears at its comers, the original energy is claimed to be multiplied16-fold, recycling a dynamo so as to supply the engine, thus claiming a perpetual motion.
Patent No. GR 1002977, also claims to be a perpetual motion machine consisting of two similar, metal wheels which have gears; these gears are parallelepiped and form (camber) angles of 45 and135 degrees with the plane defined from the corresponding contact of the edge of the wheel to which they are connected. It is essentially a weight-gear arrangement.
Patent No. JP8042442, also claims to multiply electric power by electric power and obtain clean electric power by constituting in such a manner that power generator resistance force resists so as to assist with the rotation of an idler wheel and changing the resistance force into inertia force and the idler wheel weight controls. An idler wheel is fixed on an attachment at the center of a small gear. A large gear having a diameter double that of the small gear, an angle wheel, and an idler wheel gear are attached to both ends.
With mechanical gears and/or fly-wheel type arrangement, mechanical advantages may be accomplished and/or inertia may be overcome, but with no energy multiplication.
Here is another report from Ted Carnes dated:May 27, 1993
http://www.onegift4power.org/Reports05.html (http://www.onegift4power.org/Reports05.html)
It is somewhat long but it gives some details about the mechanics of Dantes invention.
McGraw-Hill states: Physical Law:
?A physical phenomenon is said to be controlled or governed by a physical law when the phenomenon is one of a broad class of phenomenon such that it is possible to formulate some regularity which applies to all members of the class.?
Then it continues on a little further on:
?It is implicit in the notion of physical law that there are no exceptions, and unlike law made by humans, it may not be ?violated?. For example, by redefining the limits of it?s application, or by recasting it to encompass the phenomena?
Does this sound like, when anyone tries to break their unbreakable laws, that science simply changes the law? Or as Dr. Richard Olenick stated, in part: ?Dante found gaps in our understanding of mechanics."
Galileo was hung for his beliefs later realised as fact.
Cannot anyone find gaps in the present understanding of mechanics? Is mechanics so absolute that no one can find gaps in them? Does Newton?s ?Mechanica?, written three centuries ago, hold up that well?
Dante was validated by two experts of science, one in physics and one in ME , why do people who have never seen his work think he is a fraud?