Your thoughts on a side but important OU subject. Money

[Dingus Mungus]

I think what ResinRat is trying to say is maybe the best reward for such work is not money, but the dawning of a new age for humanity. While that cost/kWh may not be reached by one of us, if we publish and spread the word in a "open source" manor, some corporation will fill that market once the info is out there in the public. The trick to initiating this energy revolution will be making an exact process known to anyone willing to hear it once the technology is developed. If you can store and distribute the information fast enough there is no way to prevent those with pure intentions and funding from furthering our research.

If the goal is "free" energy one can't expect to turn any profit either...
~Dingus

[Liberty]

My thought on the issue is very simple. I would give it away for everyone to see and use. The fact that people have died over this type of research makes it abundantly clear that such information needs to be released and printed everywhere possible, as quickly as possible.

Somebody like poor Stan Meyers, I look upon as unfortunately a man of greed. Even though his end was justified, he still would not release the truth unless HE earned the CASH. I know he tried to get his process into production, but he still held the details with an iron fist. "Jesus Christ is Lord" may have been on his dune buggy, but now he is dead and mankind is no better for it. He may well as not have lived at all as far as history is concerned. Now somebody else has to discover it all over again.

If you only care about yourself and MONEY, then your research is doomed to disappear. You may or may not survive, but in the end your effort will not benefit mankind.

This only shows me that it is our own human failings that hold mankind to the type of energy slavery we have today. Big Black Oil holds us by the throat, and only by human sacrifice and charity will we overcome its grip. Just let it go, tell everybody, and disappear into obscurity. That is mankind's only hope for freedom.

Thanks for your interest.

If those that are serious about having this type of research and other devices made more openly available, they should be willing to help out and pitch in and make efforts themselves to join together with others of like mind to fund such efforts by inventors so the inventor doesn't have to absorb the entire loss for 'the world' and give it away.

Inventor's would be much more likely to open up without patent protection if there was a way to recover financially their expended efforts and living expenses by a general fund for inventors of free energy devices.  This fund could be funded by the generosity of individuals and companies that desire these devices.

As it stands now, there are people out there that want the technology to be given away for free, (putting the entire financial burden on the inventor) while they themselves do nothing to assist the inventor that has spent funds and much time and effort to discover and develop this technology.  Why don't others do their part to help out by contributing toward the effort to develop "invention funding for inventors" so inventors can feed their families too.  It is not usually so much a matter of greed as so many assume.  It is a matter of survival for the inventor and his/her family. 

[Dingus Mungus]

Everyone is overlooking the obvious...

If the idea works and there is no patent sell kits and give away plans. There will always be people like us willing to spend a few hundred dollars to confirm or replicate anything that looks interesting. I Don't know about everyone else here but in my 3-5 years of research I've probably only invested a grand or two in to prototypes, reseach, and equipment. I think thats a minimal price for the richness this hobby adds to my life.

As for a FE researchers grant... It would never work... Too many people would take advantage, and not enough people would chip in. Plus who would decide who got the money? Sounds like it would become an animal farm analogy quickly. Think about it you're talking about paying a researchers living expenses... Anyone who needs that kind of funding needs to get a job in the field.

For now those who are more fortunate than fellow researchers in any given project can help fund people working on the same project. This ensures a dedicated team and all build information and costs are shared as a group. If all researchers are working on a seperate aspect of the same device this will also ensure ability to confirm results quickly and more rapid development stages.

Treat each project team as its own community and between the active team members you will be able to fund most if not all projects without any grants.

If the goal is "free" energy one can't expect to turn any profit...
~Dingus

[mikestocks2006]

@all
good diverse opinions and numbers so far

It is understandable in an idealistic world free energy should be free. I?m not sure one can summarily equate free energy = free of profit or money, but free energy, from not depleting resources and not harmful to the environment.

On the money side of the equation, how can this be given to the world population without money and profit in the equation.?

Think about this for a minute.
We are here typing on the keyboards, and experimenting on different levels with a variety of funds available to do so.

Most of us, if not all of us are or have been working for some company, a company that makes a product or sells a service at a handsome profit, so that company can afford to pay salaries, so we can afford to have a house and buy a pc to post here, and buy gadgets to experiment. Some of us are for hoby, otheres are much more serious spending more time and  $$$ because we want to and we can.!
The profit, money, is always part of the equation. Would anyone of us work for free?

Would this site be even up without $$$?  BTW thanks Stefan for setting it up and maintaining it.

How many proposed free energy inventions are on the Kelly net site? Or the internet as a whole? Thousands? Tens of thousands? Then what? Who?s building them. Who?s even looking at them?

So let?s get back to the first post. A device is designed and built that can do it.

How do 1 billion families on the planet get this device? Surely only an infinitesimal fraction of people around the globe has access and ability to read and understand the technology on the net let alone built it. Print brochures and sent to every address on the planet? For free? What company will run the presses and who is going to work there for free?

I?m talking realism here. Someone, some company will need to manufacture the device.
Do you think that company (s) will do it for free? To the ones amongst us that work for a living, would you take a 100% pay cut and work for free in such a company?
Who?s going to pay your bills, your family?s needs? Would you sell your house? Live in tent set up a small manufacturing plant (use the house sale as down payment) and built these devices for free? You can?t get a loan from any bank unless you have net income (net profit) to support interest payments for such a plant. Do you think your employees will work there for free?


It would appear for better or worst, that the money/profit must be a part of the equation.

And that brings me back to the first post.
Once you have the profit/money in the equation, the next to be answered is how much?
How much profit the company(s) would make and what of the inventor?

I?m just stating some thoughts as they relate to present day reality of our global system, seeking the reader?s opinions.

[wattsup]

There is no one answer as a yes or a no.

It depends on the level of complexity of the device, does it require proprietary physical attributes that only a few companies can make, its size, if its 2 tons and produces 400 watts or if its hand size and produces 5000 watts. Do you need a degree in physics to understand it or can anyone apply it with standard peripherals. Eventually, you will have a myriad of methods to obtain free energy and one will suit your particular needs.

Also, the inventors story, years of work, level of debt, marital stress and emotional attitude, phobias, paranoias, I am god syndrome, gold digger entourages who have some financial vested interests, paranoia from getting your idea stolen, building prototypes, paying for patenting, paranoia again, doing demos for investors to take the next step always afraid that you will be either ridiculed or taken advantage of. These are all reality day to day struggles that inventors live with.

Also the age of the inventors. When you are in your late 60 or 70's, your outlook and urgency on the world will be different than the 20-30 year old inventor.

Ideally, this invention will be complex in its most intricate level, but simple to apply in its most outer level. So simple, that regular industry will understand it and be able to apply it in their machinations. The simpler the better.

I would speculate that such inventions will occur in varying levels.

If a TPU was advertised today, I am sure the governments will do all they can to eradicate it, because a hand held TPU would be considered a level 3 OU device, because of its compact size, power generating potential and a potential threat citing national security.

If the invention was a mechanical betterment of a physical motion producing OU that is then translated from motion to energy generation in a loop type formation, using most components already available on the market, regardless of 50-60hz and/or ac/dc current, such an invention is the ideal level 1 for an OU device. It will enable people to gradually enter this new potential without undertaking a peak learning curve. Such a device wll not be considered a potential threat givem its major design. If a device was using fusion, chemical reactions or other unstable reactions, this would be considered a level two device and again could go either way in its acceptance.

This is what will make everything else fly. Cars will start to move without oil, homes will function with the grid as backup, etc. So the ideal invention will not turn the world upside down, it will enable the world to keep turning but at a gradually shifting rate.

If the inventor is smart, he will patent it not as an OU device but as a general apparatus with some other logical excuse for its existence. Such a device patented will then open the door for usage of the device under its many disguises, until such time as enough people have latched on and the device is beginning to be used out in the open. By then it will be too late to try and puff it out. You have to realize that given the information age works both ways. OU proponents are quickly informed but so are the inhibitors. So playing dumb may be a blessing.

But all must understand that although the inventor will have devised one of the worlds most remarkable inventions, this does not mean that the person himself is remarkable. People are people, not gods. They have theirs faults, fears, skeletons in closets, regrets as well as aspirations, wants, needs and all sorts of obligations. Some inventors are extremely smart, but in  human terms can be the most hated character around, being hard to work with, reason with and deal with. So expecting altruism from a prick, regardless of his brain power is a no go. Some inventors have spent so much energy on developing their designs, that the though of all those years of surmounting so many obstacles does play its toll on a persons continued will to bring it too market. All those years, finally patented, finally a warehouse of product and this equals 15% of the work required to bring it to market. It's one damn big job, and once you have publicly committed to it, turning back the clock is impossible.

I only wish that the inventor in question has at least one person in his entourage who is honest enough to help him work these things out.