Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[aether22]

Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet .

SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?

Thane

Sorry, meant that for JustMe, she has an interesting body of research, in vibrating motors.

[aether22]

Sounds like I might have a chance of convincing you to upload a video of your 'work' yet .

SORRY - WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO UPLOAD AGAIN?

Thane

Sorry, meant that for JustMe, she has an interesting body of research, in vibrating motors.

Whoops, double Tripple post, can't delete it.

Hey, JustMe, can you compete with that!  Can you do 3 in a row? I bet you can't, but I wanna see you try!

Ok, no more dirty jokes I promise.

[Heinstein]

He was directing that at me, referencing the fact that my sole contribution to this discussion has been lame naughty jokes about running DC motors on AC.

COULD IT BE BECAUSE YOU ARE SO CRAZY BUSY OVER AT THE SKEPTIC FRIENDS NETWORK? http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9484&whichpage=7

I THINK YOU OUGHT TO ASK SOME OF THESE CHAPS TO HELP YOU OUT OVER THERE?

Thane

"You know, technically, he never said either that he wouldn't do them or hadn't done some form of them already. He implied...something...with "I can do a lot in 30 seconds". He hasn't, directly, said any one device was overunity. I don't think? It's rather muddy.

He stated unequivocally that he feels the effect violates Conservation of Energy principles via Lenz, but has skirted saying the current applications of it produce free energy. So given that, I don't think he needs to produce eureka numbers anyway. Just a sense that he is acting appropriately science-y. Like my son! Who won third place at his school science fair today. Perpetual bread mold.

Now I have no excuse not to finish what I started. Since Mr. Heins has now commenced shooting himself in the foot, I think I'll wait for a few more toes to fly, making the whole argument that much more difficult, and therefore, fun.

This Perepetia stuff is all superfluous anyway. Some guy from Toronto invented the paint roller in 1940, and the world is owed nothing more from Canada.

I can't hit the forum right now either, but I think what he said was "unquantified opinion". Either way, it's not the right response given the circumstances. He does indeed seem to be showing the strain of all this, and while his emotional commitment is understandable from a human perspective, it ain't good science.

Heins' response to Dr. Zahn's email can be found at http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.315.html for anybody who may be interested. I posted the URL (which I hope is pithy enough for all) rather than the text because there are some other comments there that were interesting (to me) as well, and the dialog may be ongoing for a bit.

I've thought for a few days that his lack of discretion with all the posting of the private email and conversations and such is probably going to cost him. I wouldn't be surprised if the NASA invitation, if it had been confirmed at all, evaporates.

I didn't in any way imply it was bad sharp, or innapropriately sharp, just that it was sharp. Which on the matter of Mr. Heins' beliefs that he has something that breaks the laws of physics, it is. It's the first feedback of sorts we have from Dr. Zahn, and I thought it good information. *Of course* any specific tests and measurements he can recommend are important, and a positive step towards understanding the effect.

Are people on here going to misunderstand me forever, or just until we stop talking about this?

The behaviour of his device remains unexplained at this time, so this is still a puzzle that is to me worthy of exploration and explanation. When and if that puzzle is solved it will add to human knowledge on some level, so for me there is very broad definition of success. Anything from a mundane "Oh THAT'S what was happening" to something useful and applicable to a world slowly choking on it's own exhaust will contribute something to the pool.

Do I think Mr. Heins' device throws over centuries of careful observations in phsyics and mathematics? Unlikely. Do I think that as of today we've discovered and mastered every method and every source of energy we ever will? Equally unlikely. As unintuitive as it may feel, his observations do justify his hypothesis as it relates to Lenz's law. Note I said 'justify' which is nothing close to 'prove'. There have been other hypotheses presented as well, and they all require vigourous proofs or disproofs equally, no matter their source.

You think he is scripted, and I think YOU are scripted. I am just not perceiving the objectivity and analytic processes I expected here, but maybe I just don't understand the percieved role of a capital "S" skeptic. I am also not perceiving what he has done to warrant the very personal derision. Attack the methods when appropriate, but what has given you license to attack the man? I find it thoughtless, as in both without adequate thought and without adequate consideration. Maybe this is just not of sufficient interest to people who have been there done that too many times, and therefore it doesn't warrant a serious look.

So maybe it *is* me, but I can assure you it's not because I'm not thinking critically and you are.

Thanks for illustrating my point so nicely. And so quickly!

Here are the facts:

-Heins' generator is sitting in a lab at the University of Ottawa, and has been for some time. So you're right, it wouldn't be hard for them to run some tests. Which might explain why they have, and continue to do so. They have been unable to establish a cause for the behaviour of the device, and thus asked MIT to get involved.

-According to Heins, Marcus Zahn of MIT was offered $20,000 to study the device and document and report his findings, but has declined. There is a follow up article forthcoming in the Toronto Star tomorrow according to Heins, and I am hoping that may provide further information as to why Zahn will not be further involved.

-Heins has been handing out tips, tricks and traps for replicating his device on overunity.com for days. There is certainly the appearance of him supporting and facilitating replication at this time. The proof of that will have to wait for a successful replication.

So, Dude. Help ME understand why you felt justified in implying that the default assumption on Mr. Heins should be retard and/or scam artist based on a bunch of clearly unresearched nonsense. My point is, and always has been, that there is a legitimate process going on here that does not deserve the mindless snark. Even if it all turns to nothing."
JustMe

[cgeier]

I believe this is a serious discussion of a real scientific/marketing opportunity -- so why all the interpersonal crap at the end of this discussion?

[Heinstein]

"I believe this is a serious discussion of a real scientific/marketing opportunity -- so why all the interpersonal crap at the end of this discussion?"

ANONYMITY NEGATES RESPONSIBILITY.

HERE CHECK OUT OUR NASA ABSTRACT.
Cheers
Thane