A sincere gentleman sharing a magnet motor build .[NDA issues??]

[Jimboot]

however I was speaking with Jim Boot today about that very topic and He said Russ G had some fool proof way of keeping Dirtbags Like Teslatronics from harvesting the work of many as their own...
perhaps he will add some comments here.??

however I must add my own experiences here ,recently it became quite obvious that Patenting or business ventures associated with a true free energy devices will never be aloud to fly in this world.

going to the patent office or any government authority to insure your Rights to an over unity invention is like handing a very big man a stick to beat you with

So its open source or nothing at this time..

Just got this from Russ, I haven't looked into it yet but seems promising. http://www.defensivepublications.org
I'll also be publishing his slides from the tesla tech conference as soon as I find them
Here 'tis http://open-source-energy.org/rwg42985/russ/Tesla%20Tech%20ExtraOrdinary%20Technology%20Conference/Russ%20Gries%20Tesla%20Tech%20ExtraOrdinary%20Technology%20Conference%202014.pptx

[Jimboot]

Btw Dave you just won the "top bloke" award.

[tak22]

Absolute Certainty Is Not Scientific

How about a little agnosticism in our scientific assertions—and even, as with Richard Feynman, a little sense of humor so that we can laugh at our errors and move on? We should all remember that Feynman also said, "If you think that science is certain—well that's just an error on your part."

Science attempts to apply some of the following criteria:

1. Skepticism of unsupported claims
2. Combination of an open mind with critical thinking
3. Attempts to repeat experimental results.
4. Requires testability
5. Seeks out falsifying data that would disprove a hypothesis
6. Uses descriptive language
7. Performs controlled experiments
8. Self-correcting
9. Relies on evidence and reason
10. Makes no claim for absolute or certain knowledge
11. Produces useful knowledge

I went to OU-Land for the rides, but all I got was the T-Shirt .....

[TinselKoala]

Dave said,

Personally, I have a REAL problem with folks who come on the sites and claim to have something without showing at MINIMUM a half assed working model, because that usually means they had some wet dream about something and want others to go to the effort and expense of building it, and I have NO USE for those people. None. Zip. Nada. But if someone shows a working model and believes they have something, I believe we owe them the courtesy and respect of at least replicating before we rip it to shreds. And perhaps giving them the chance to show us where the error was in our construction.

But that is exactly the situation here. Or rather on EF, since the "sincere gentleman" hasn't posted his claims here himself.  He has presented not even a "half assed working model", in fact he hasn't really presented anything new or different at all. Just some verbal descriptions.

Dave also said,

NOBODY builds anything anymore. It's a damn shame. People might learn a thing or two that isn't in the textbooks. And it isn't that I believe the textbooks are wrong. I just believe they don't tell the whole story. They do NOT explain some of the things I have seen.

That clearly isn't true. In the first place, lots of people DO build things... even I do, on occasion, build things that people have claimed do this and that, in order that I might see for myself just what they do and why they do it. I even have one or two YouTube videos documenting my builds of these kinds of things.

In the second place, if you do not talk about the "things you have seen" you might miss the "textbook" explanations that somebody else might be aware of. Have you read "all" the textbooks? Do you understand, for instance, everything that appears in Beer&Johnston's Statics and Dynamics textbook? How about Fundamentals of Thermodynamics? Or Circuits, Devices and Systems? Perhaps you simply have noticed certain aspects of an experimental demonstration that _you_ don't understand, but are in fact covered in detail in one or the other of the textbooks you haven't read?

[TinselKoala]

Absolute Certainty Is Not Scientific

Science attempts to apply some of the following criteria:

1. Skepticism of unsupported claims
2. Combination of an open mind with critical thinking
3. Attempts to repeat experimental results.
4. Requires testability
5. Seeks out falsifying data that would disprove a hypothesis
6. Uses descriptive language
7. Performs controlled experiments
8. Self-correcting
9. Relies on evidence and reason
10. Makes no claim for absolute or certain knowledge
11. Produces useful knowledge

I went to OU-Land for the rides, but all I got was the T-Shirt .....

So... I have a hypothesis that if I simply flap my arms hard enough, I can fly, or at least slow my descent enough to survive jumping off the top of a 10 story building. After all, birds do it.

Yet, my knowledge of physics tells me in _certain, and absolute_ terms that this isn't actually true, that the aerodynamics are wrong and the power-to-weight ratio is insufficient and lots of other reasons why it won't work.

What do you think... should I perform the experiment anyway? Based on the claims of someone on a forum who claims to have done it but won't provide any evidence because of his "NDA"?

I'm sure there are lots of people reading this who would like me to perform the experiment... and fail. But my absolute and certain knowledge that it _will_ fail prevents me from wanting to waste my time-- even though I might learn something interesting on the way down. "My goodness, look at how my T-shirt flutters in the wind! That's not explained in any textboo....." SPLAT!!!