Was this discussed anywhere:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2991180904043635113&pr=goog-sl
Quote from: Omnibus on September 08, 2007, 05:45:30 PM
Was this discussed anywhere:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2991180904043635113&pr=goog-sl
Quite impressive. Seems this guy has really unlocked PEREGRINUS'S WHEEL...
http://www.geocities.com/ageofmagnetizm/peregrinus
Why do you suppose the video consists of spliced frames? Could it be that it is entirely faked? Or are we to believe that the machine operates in that herky-jerky manner and this is real-time video? The thing is apparently hung from a wire or string which appears to have been pre-twisted or have an off-screen source of rotary motion. You can see many similar videos there, none of which would be at all difficult to fake. You asked for opinions, omnibus. My opinion is this could be easily faked magnetic motion and is therefore unremarkable.
Humbugger
Quote from: Humbugger on September 08, 2007, 08:46:49 PM
Why do you suppose the video consists of spliced frames? Could it be that it is entirely faked? Or are we to believe that the machine operates in that herky-jerky manner and this is real-time video? The thing is apparently hung from a wire or string which appears to have been pre-twisted or have an off-screen source of rotary motion. You can see many similar videos there, none of which would be at all difficult to fake. You asked for opinions, omnibus. My opinion is this is entirely faked magnetic motion and unremarkable.
Humbugger
Your post outlines perfectly, one half of the thought processes of those in the OU field...
There are basically two types of thought processes...
One if of optimism and believing in innocence until proven guilty...
The other is of pessimism and believing in guiltiness until proven innocent...
No offense...
Both are viable, and we live in duality, so it is totally OK...
But, it will more than likely be those of the first thought-process-group that eventually and totally bring forward the OU...
Tao
It is usually through the use of scientific experiments that advances in understanding are achieved in any meaningful way. Antibiotics were not discovered by people who believed in "bad aether" or "bleeding the evil spirits".
Your supposition that wonderful new technologies will more likely come from those who prefer "blind belief systems" of thinking and who persevere endlessly hoping that ideas which have been tried for centuries and found not to work every time will, on some new dawn, suddenly work just fine, as opposed to "critical scientific method" is quite a stretch of optimism in itself and is not at all born out by history.
Sure, it takes some belief in yourself and some optimism to succeed at anything; without it you wouldn't give even the first attempt. But to use that idea to justify staring endlessy down empty wells in hopes that water will eventually appear...or drilling new wells right next to ones known to be dried up and dead...it's a bad idea.
Humbugger
G'day all,
Whilst I reserve my judgement on the Peregrinus wheel I must state though that other experiments by Taras Leskiv have not been replicated. Scott Lang of http://www.leedskalnin.com has tried it with no success. For those of you that don't know Scotty, he is a diligent and thorough researcher that has built some beautiful machines, including a replication of the Steve Kundel motor that works.
Let us see if someone can replicate this one.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: Humbugger on September 08, 2007, 09:59:20 PM
Tao
It is usually through the use of scientific experiments that advances in understanding are achieved in any meaningful way. Antibiotics were not discovered by people who believed in "bad aether" or "bleeding the evil spirits".
Your supposition that wonderful new technologies will more likely come from those who prefer "blind belief systems" of thinking and who persevere endlessly hoping that ideas which have been tried for centuries and found not to work every time will, on some new dawn, suddenly work just fine, as opposed to "critical scientific method" is quite a stretch of optimism in itself and is not at all born out by history.
Sure, it takes some belief in yourself and some optimism to succeed at anything; without it you wouldn't give even the first attempt. But to use that idea to justify staring endlessy down empty wells in hopes that water will eventually appear...or drilling new wells right next to ones known to be dried up and dead...it's a bad idea.
Humbugger
I do agree with you about the stretch in optimism in thinking that those who only follow the 'blind belief systems' will surely come up with that KEY solution on 'some new dawn'.
I don't oppose the scientific method at all, per se. I also think that no one here should. It most certainly IS NEEDED in all of our research and actions here.
This isn't inherently directed at you, but there are many who come into this forum, or elsewhere, and they see to have the Modus Operandi to merely dissuade, question, and deter what could be a virgin solution to extract energy from those many energy storehouses that surround us, both seen and unseen.This is the pessimism I speak of.
But, as with everything, when you look at it enough, it all evens out, and ends up not mattering at all...Case in point, when thought about deeply, all these pessimists and critics, they are in fact helping those 'dreamers' by constantly keeping the 'dreamers' on their toes, pointing out measurement errors, or slightly goofs, or potential follies. So, as with everything, IT'S ALL GOOD IN THE END...
I totally agree with you, Tao. I guess what some perceive as "what could be a virgin solution", others sometimes recognize as the same old theiving prostitute in a new dress with heavy makeup on.
To your point about keeping the optimists on their toes by pointing out flawed measurements and bad logic, I think that's a noble effort that is very thankless around here and I appreciate your acknowledgement of the value.
Sadly, there are many optimistic professional free energy promoters here whose feet and toes are so far in the skies of delusion already that there is no hope of retrieving them toward Earth.
I particularly pity and despise the false claims of those who claim to know how to build machines that produce vast quantities of free energy but state that the energy their inventions provide is so special that they have not quite mastered how to "load" or "tap" it just yet.
They always rely on the insane argument that if the skeptic cannot disprove their claims by building their undisclosed, undemonstrated machine and proving it doesn't work, then the skeptic must be wrong and therefore the machine must truly exist and work as claimed. It sounds totally nuts, but I've had that very argument thrown at me just in the last few days by Ashtweth Nihilisti.
These guys seem to always offer many reports of others doing marvelous things in the back rooms of hidden laboratories or in front of five high government officials. Then, after ten or twenty years of nothing, the "oil men" or MIB are credited for suppressing these great machines. There are those here who are building successful careers based purely on that very modus operandus.
Humbugger
Violation of CoE has been proven beyond doubt. Energy can be produced out of nothing, out of no source. There's no question about that. What remains is to harness this violation by a skillful engineering effort in a convenient straightforward practical device (the device proving violation of CoE can also be applied in practice but that isn't straightforward). Unfortunately, there are many who because of incompetence and/or many different ill-conceived motives falsely lead one to believe they have achieved something. We know of not one such example. Some even use it as a tool in their what they perceive as just fight against the quasi-science, trying in this way to ridicule the confused mavericks and "enemies" of Science. All these are sad people who are more annoying than anything else. Hope this isn't the case here.
G'day all,
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 01:27:25 AM
Violation of CoE has been proven beyond doubt. Energy can be produced out of nothing, out of no source. There's no question about that.
Where the hell did you get that idea from. How come the rest of the world is not aware of such a revolution in science. Or is this knowledge restricted to a privileged few like you and Lawrence Tseung?
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: hansvonlieven on September 09, 2007, 01:37:10 AM
G'day all,
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 01:27:25 AM
Violation of CoE has been proven beyond doubt. Energy can be produced out of nothing, out of no source. There's no question about that.
Where the hell did you get that idea from. How come the rest of the world is not aware of such a revolution in science. Or is this knowledge restricted to a privileged few like you and Lawrence Tseung?
Hans von Lieven
This I'm not going to discuss here since it has been discussed extensively elsewhere, this forum including. That CoE can be violated is proven beyond any doubt and isn't under discussion in this thread.
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 01:27:25 AM
... Unfortunately, there are many who because of incompetence and/or many different ill-conceived motives falsely lead one to believe they have achieved something. We know of not one such example. ...
Excellent! While I'm still a confused non-physicist layman and "ignorant incompetent" when it comes to your mathematical proof of CoE violations by the SMOT device, I am very relieved that you acknowledge the utter failure to date to demonstrate any violation of CoE in a working physical and practical energy-producing machine despite the many false claims to the contrary.
Maybe it is because of the sheer number and utter failure of these miserable claims that I have become so cynical and skeptical. They are the reason I am so vocal when I hear false claims being reported and especially when they are used in any effort to garner research grants or investment money.
All theoretical claims are fine with me (as if that really mattered); that's what drives the science. It's these jokers asking people to donate or invest money and making wild claims, anecdotes, murky reports and faked demonstrations, the snake oil sellers, that drive me up the wall and cause me to attack with full skeptical zeal.
May the Force be with You
Humbugger
Violation of CoE has been demonstrated experimentally beyond any doubt in a physical energy-producing machine.
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 02:14:51 AM
Violation of CoE has been demonstrated experimentally beyond any doubt in a physical energy-producing machine.
"What remains is to harness this violation by a skillful engineering effort in a convenient straightforward practical device (the device proving violation of CoE can also be applied in practice but that isn't straightforward)."
I assume you are referring to the SMOT shown in this video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847)
Is this the device that can be applied in practice but isn't straightforward? Or is there another device I've missed? If so, please describe any (even non-straightforward) practical application for us.
Humbugger
Quote from: Humbugger on September 09, 2007, 03:16:34 AM
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 02:14:51 AM
Violation of CoE has been demonstrated experimentally beyond any doubt in a physical energy-producing machine.
"What remains is to harness this violation by a skillful engineering effort in a convenient straightforward practical device (the device proving violation of CoE can also be applied in practice but that isn't straightforward)."
I assume you are referring to the SMOT shown in this video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847)
Is this the device that can be applied in practice but isn't straightforward? Or is there another device I've missed? If so, please describe any (even non-straightforward) practical application for us.
Humbugger
Why? This thread is about Peregrinus' device.
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 03:26:28 AM
Quote from: Humbugger on September 09, 2007, 03:16:34 AM
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 02:14:51 AM
Violation of CoE has been demonstrated experimentally beyond any doubt in a physical energy-producing machine.
"What remains is to harness this violation by a skillful engineering effort in a convenient straightforward practical device (the device proving violation of CoE can also be applied in practice but that isn't straightforward)."
I assume you are referring to the SMOT shown in this video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847)
Is this the device that can be applied in practice but isn't straightforward? Or is there another device I've missed? If so, please describe any (even non-straightforward) practical application for us.
Humbugger
Why? This thread is about Peregrinus' device.
Well, I guess because you brought it up. If you'd rather not tell us the secret practical application because it's not straightforward and takes too much time to describe then okay. How about a terse yes or no answer to the question "Is this a video of the device you are referring to?"
It's only two or three characters...YES or NO...probably would be okay to sneak in here...it doesn't seem like this is too much to ask or too busy a thread. Or maybe you could suggest an appropriate alternative thread where you could post your terse or more elaborate answer.
Humbugger
Like I said, this is a discussion of Peregrinus' device, therefore, I'm not going to discuss other issues. Violation of CoE has been demonstrated conclusively also in this forum and if you're interested how this was done browse around and you'll learn. Your confusion isn't an issue worth discussing so don't clutter the thread with it.
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 04:00:24 AM
Like I said, this is a discussion of Peregrinus' device, therefore, I'm not going to discuss other issues. Violation of CoE has been demonstrated conclusively also in this forum and if you're interested how this was done browse around and you'll learn. Your confusion isn't an issue worth discussing so don't clutter the thread with it.
You remind me of an ex girlfriend I once had who called me a dozen times after our breakup. Each time, all she told me was, very emphatically, that she was never going to speak to me again!
I don't keep track of the count, but I've seen you do this at least a dozen times. You boldly insert your absolute statement of CoE being disproven into any unrelated thread and when anyone questions it or asks for more details, you delight in insulting their intelligence and then curtly say you are not going to go into it. Sounds like a repetitive clinical pathology to me!
Humbugger
Quote from: Humbugger on September 09, 2007, 05:17:36 AM
Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2007, 04:00:24 AM
Like I said, this is a discussion of Peregrinus' device, therefore, I'm not going to discuss other issues. Violation of CoE has been demonstrated conclusively also in this forum and if you're interested how this was done browse around and you'll learn. Your confusion isn't an issue worth discussing so don't clutter the thread with it.
You remind me of an ex girlfriend I once had who called me a dozen times after our breakup. Each time, all she told me was, very emphatically, that she was never going to speak to me again!
I don't keep track of the count, but I've seen you do this at least a dozen times. You boldly insert your absolute statement of CoE being disproven into any unrelated thread and when anyone questions it or asks for more details, you delight in insulting their intelligence and then curtly say you are not going to go into it. Sounds like a repetitive clinical pathology to me!
Humbugger
Please keep you personal stories to yourself and understand that this is a theread discussing a concrete device. The definitively proven fact that CoE can be violated is discussed elsewhere.
Humbugger, please stay ontopic and stop your annoying skeptiszm.
The guy has also some other incrediable videos online, where the framerate
is faster and you can see it selfturning !
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 09, 2007, 07:19:31 AM
Humbugger, please stay ontopic and stop your annoying skeptiszm.
The guy has also some other incrediable videos online, where the framerate
is faster and you can see it selfturning !
Sorry if my skepticism is annoying. I looked at all those videos and they all seem like they could be easily faked. I did not say there are faked, just that they don't really prove much.
Speaking of other threads, would you do me the honor of replying to my last post over on the Chas thread? It's about where we left off regarding adding up the torque arms on the wheel.
Thanks,
Humbugger
G'day all,
As I said earlier in this thread Scott Lang of leedskalnin.com has replicated some of Taras Levski's work.
In all his demonstrations Taras suspends the moving part of his device on a thread hanging from the ceiling or whatever. The only movement that Scotty noticed was the rotation caused by the thread unwinding. Thereafter nothing.
Make of it what you will.
Hans von Lieven
The thread unwinding? Why did he wind it to begin with?
G'day Omnibus
In case you don't know, most yarns are twisted to hold the filaments together.
Hans von Lieven
Yarns? What yarns? Why would he use yarns to begin with?
yarn, sewing cotton, whatever, common enough and cheap.
Monofilament such as fishing line is not much good for these kind of experiments. No matter, what is important is that Scotty could not get the magnet arrangement to work and he used the right kind of materials as specified and the right shape, which incidentally is illustrated on Ed Leedskalnin's booklet on magnetism.
Hans von Lieven
OK. Now I get it. He's cheap and that's why couldn't manage. Understand, it's his problem, he is incapable. His inability to carry out experiments properly is only his problem and cannot serve as a proof for anything connected with the claimed phenomenon. Try something else.
@All,
Please, take a look here:
http://www.geocities.com/ageofmagnetizm/rods
and
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4238807952412269373&pr=goog-sl
Has somebody already emailed with this guy and asked him
to post higher resolution videos with higher framerate ?
Looks pretty easy to setup.
Can please somebody try to replicate his experiments
and post videos of the replication effort ?
Thanks.