Quote from: Paul-R on April 24, 2005, 10:10:16 AM

Quote from: erickrieg on April 09, 2005, 10:36:59 PM
I would like to believe your Bearden device works.   To the best of my knowledge, the Naudin site is censored to erase information from people who find error's in Bearden's claims........

What is your evidence for this statement?

I glanced at your site:
http://www.phact.org/e/z/bearden.htm
and it appears to me to be a strange patchwork of remarks from
people here and people there whose reputations and track record
are not made clear.

I agree that the heat energy all around us is real energy - but it is not generally viable to harness due to the 2nd law of thermo (many claim it can be violated, but I seriously doubt that).   I understand the claim of ZPE - maybe it is energy that holds stuff together, but I see mater as being very stable.   I would expect that there would be a good way to harness fusion power before one could really harness ZPE.   
     I honestly feel that people going to Bearden conferences are just all deluding themselves.   I've studied pretty advanced math and can't follow his math - so I feel quite sure people saying they follow it are deluding themselves.  It's like the emporor's new physics.  I know a fellow who says the MEG design was stolen.  Bearden has faked credentials and vouched for kooks like Newman.  To the best of my knowledge, the MEG builder effort has not had any positive results and some of the discussion forums kick out people who ask too many questions.  One thing people have to ask about Bearden and free energy is"if Bearden published a book called, 'the final secret of free energy' 10 years ago, then why has no one actually done it?".     If you can find anyone who really understands the newman theory (that I think is just jibberish) enough to explain it to me over the phone, let me know.

Quote from: erickrieg on April 29, 2005, 09:12:30 PM

Quote from: Paul-R on April 24, 2005, 10:10:16 AM

Quote from: erickrieg on April 09, 2005, 10:36:59 PM
I would like to believe your Bearden device works.   To the best of my knowledge, the Naudin site is censored to erase information from people who find error's in Bearden's claims........

What is your evidence for this statement?

I glanced at your site:
http://www.phact.org/e/z/bearden.htm
and it appears to me to be a strange patchwork of remarks from
people here and people there whose reputations and track record
are not made clear.

I agree that the heat energy all around us is real energy - but it is not generally viable to harness due to the 2nd law of thermo (many claim it can be violated, but I seriously doubt that).   I understand the claim of ZPE - maybe it is energy that holds stuff together, but I see mater as being very stable.   I would expect that there would be a good way to harness fusion power before one could really harness ZPE.   
     I honestly feel that people going to Bearden conferences are just all deluding themselves.   I've studied pretty advanced math and can't follow his math - so I feel quite sure people saying they follow it are deluding themselves.  It's like the emporor's new physics.  I know a fellow who says the MEG design was stolen.  Bearden has faked credentials and vouched for kooks like Newman.  To the best of my knowledge, the MEG builder effort has not had any positive results and some of the discussion forums kick out people who ask too many questions.  One thing people have to ask about Bearden and free energy is"if Bearden published a book called, 'the final secret of free energy' 10 years ago, then why has no one actually done it?".     If you can find anyone who really understands the newman theory (that I think is just jibberish) enough to explain it to me over the phone, let me know.

You haven't answered my question. What is the basis for your
view that JLN censors?

Paul.

"to think to give a serious statement/testat":
there is a cafe,with an esplanade and ten tables and fourty chairs.
there are sitting thirty people,in a calm atmosphere.
suddenly,an accident with two cars in front off them.
how many different color-definitions of the two cars,carmodels,people-inside and other indizes you will find later in the official accident-protocoll? 
"in dubio pro reo !"

Quote from: lanca on May 31, 2005, 09:42:22 PM
"to think to give a serious statement/testat":
there is a cafe,with an esplanade and ten tables and fourty chairs.
there are sitting thirty people,in a calm atmosphere.
suddenly,an accident with two cars in front off them.
how many different color-definitions of the two cars,carmodels,people-inside and other indizes you will find later in the official accident-protocoll??
"in dubio pro reo !"

To claim something functions that never works............
To claim to have something that everyone wants, but noone ever wants it..........
To claim to be able to do something that never gets done...........
To endlessly pontificate in pseudo-aura of grandeur............

*Res Ipsa Loquitor*

Just to set the record straight... my TEP replication attempt did NOT achieve over-unity. I've just realised I had made a mistake in the math as I processed the readings obtained. ZPE is looking more distant now than it ever was. I must concede, Eric, you were right after all.? I now think that the best way to try to achive over-unity is to utilise ambient thermal energy.

Regards
Joseph.