Roll on the 20th June

[badassdjbynight]

To Ramset/Chet/others who complain about those of us who ask logical questions in this forum...

This is a public forum and I joined and post because I DO have hope towards FE.  I live in a very hot climate and last year I researched seebeck devices (thermocouples) but found them to be too inefficient to be useful.  I totally believe that free energy is possible but that it comes by using an untapped source like wind, sun, heat, water... maybe even gravity.  (which is also what AQ said)  Hey, a water wheel works because of gravity, so it is possible.  Have an intelligent constructive discussion with me and I will contribute.  And, honestly, the tough questions are a contribution because they make you think through things.

And if the owner of this forum wants to ban those of us who question HOW something will work then he should do it.  Make it an invitation only forum.  Petition him to do it and I'll accept his decision.  But what would be the point?  A bunch of yes-men standing in a circle, telling each other their fantasies will work and they'll get rich and people will like them?  Progress towards an honest solution is not going to come from squelching the discussion.  If AQ's wheel (or anyone else's device) honestly works then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny and these very simple questions.

Look, I'm not MIB or part of an elite group of debunkers who's secret goal is to kill ideas like AQ's.  I'm also not an ass who delights in seeing AQ proven wrong.  Anything said (by me or others) about AQ he has brought on himself with his weird, disjointed parables and his total misunderstanding of physics.  And by physics I mean how physical things move and react on this planet - newtonian or not.  All of us can imagine a wheel that turns all by itself.  But if it exists there has to be a reasonable explanation for it... and the explanation is not some odd one-liner, "...one truth, one gram..." whatever that means.

I don't know if the comments about "we got what we wanted" were directed at me or not.  But I was unhappy when AQ quit and took things down.  Looking back over my posts I mostly just asked honest reasonable questions.  But it seems that you guys just want to follow someone with a great idea.  You want to believe in something.  You guys put a lot of faith in AQ and follow him blindly.. like a cult leader..  and then if anyone says.. "um, wait a minute.. I don't think that's correct" you get all upset (as does he) and want us to go away.  You see, I don't get upset because I'm not emotionally invested in it.  You are letting your emotions take precedence over your brain.  (I've gotten scammed several times and that was present in me each time.)  So, what do you want us to do?  All just agree with things that we know are not correct?  In my last post I was honestly trying to figure out if there was a salvageable truth in there somewhere.  I guess it was seen as sarcasm or something.

The fact is that until I got into this forum I sort of believed (or at least wanted to believe) his claim.  I thought his website was a bit odd and angry and paranoid, but thought maybe he was on to something.  But the longer I read his posts here and put common sense thought into his claims, I started to see a lot of holes - all of which he covers up by calling Newton an ass.  And AQ loves to divert your attention away from the part that doesn't make sense.  Another classic sign of a scam.

I don't know what his deal is.. if he's a scam artist, someone just getting some kicks off of all the hubub, if he honestly believes his own stories, or if he really has the answer.  But the burden of proof is on the guy making the claim, not the people asking questions.  If this ever got to the next step and he had a working wheel, it would be taken apart, rebuilt, examined, tested and it would be proven or disproven by scientists who are much smarter than me.  So my asking "how fast" or whatever should be easy to shake off.   

Oh, and you tell me that I should build it before I claim it doesn't work?  Again that burden is on you.  All he (or you) has to do is have a working device at ANY point in the future - the 20th or whenever.  He didn't have to open it up for discussion.. but he did.  Why?  If it works why talk about it?  Why not just build it and show it to the world?

Come on Chet, even you gotta admit that there's something fishy here.

Well, the 20th is 8 days away and we will see how that unfolds.  I'm sure if it doesn't it will be because badassdjbynight was a Newtonian.

[atlantex]

Well, the 20th is 8 days away and we will see how that unfolds

thought the 20th june is releasing day, we live in may....




cheers,

atlantex

[badassdjbynight]

Oh crap.  You're right. My bad. Well I guess a month and 8 days then.

[zerotensor]

Personally, I don't care if Archer ruffles a few of the Newtonian's feathers, he has afterall not shyed away from saying that he believes Newton is wrong.

He says Newton is wrong, while offering no evidence that he actually understands what he criticizes.  Actually, he demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of classical physics, generally.

He is also correct in citing that the very same mind-set had "proven conclusively" that heavier-than-air flight was impossible, despite the Wright brothers having been routinely disproving this in the only way that really mattered, for years before 'official' recognition.

You should check your history before parroting this nonsense.  The possibility of heavier-than-air flight was well established long before the brothers came on the scene.  What people were arguing about was the validity of their claim to have achieved controlled flight.  The Wright brothers' designs were informed by theory and experiment.  They used the scientific method, keeping careful notes, and building on the work of others in the field.

From Wikipedia:

The poor lift of the gliders led the Wrights to question the accuracy of Lilienthal's data, as well as the "Smeaton coefficient" of air pressure, which had been used for over 100 years and was part of the accepted equation for lift.
The Lift Equation L = k\;S\;V^2\;C_L

L = lift in pounds
k = coefficient of air pressure (Smeaton coefficient)
S = total area of lifting surface in square feet
V = velocity (headwind plus ground speed) in miles per hour
CL = coefficient of lift (varies with wing shape)

The Wrights?and Lilienthal?used the equation to calculate the amount of lift that wings of various sizes would produce. Based on measurements of lift and wind during the 1901 glider's kite and free flights, Wilbur believed (correctly, as tests later showed) that the Smeaton number was very close to 0.0033, not the traditionally used 60% larger 0.0054, which would exaggerate predicted lift.

Mr. Quinn displays no such method.

So if Archer does indeed manage to pull this off, and prove it in the only way that really matters, then all of the Newtonian rhetoric is as worthless as the 'heavier-than-air' proof was...

The people denying the possibility of the brothers' controlled flights were like Archer-- making arrogant claims based on pride and prejudice--, and Orville and Wilbur were more like the 'Newtonians' you attempt to discredit.
If he does "pull it off", that won't make his erroneous statements about the predictions of Newtonian theory any less wrong.

What really is perplexing is the number of raw-Newtonians that post in OU - they supposedly already 'know' that OU is impossible, yet expend huge amounts time and energy here, 'educating' the rest of us - why is that?  But it's when they start raising grammar/spelling issues (probably 'cos they can't reasonably claim AQ is doing it for the money) that they start to look increasingly desperate...

I am not a 'raw-Newtonian', I am a scientist.  I know that any theory has its limitations.  Good theories agree with experiment and make predictions.  The simple fact is that Newtonian physics does a very good job of describing the behavior of mechanical systems.  If you want to criticize it, that's fine-- but you should have at least a rudimentary understanding of the thing you're criticizing.  I use the distinctly non-Newtonian equations of general relativity and quantum mechanics all the time.  That doesn't mean I can't use the theory of Newton when it applies.

What could be wrong with "educating" people about a theory?

<edit>:  P.S.  For the record, I believe that there is a vast amount of energy everywhere in the universe, and that it can be tapped -- so don't lump me in with people who believe OU to be "impossible",  just because I sometimes use the equations of classical mechanics.

[The Eskimo Quinn]

A scientist??? wow i am impressed, so if your logic is science logic you can keep it, you just said if i don't understand it, that makes it correct?

I don't understand the theory that i am stealing gravity from the earth and it may make the planet unstable, that does not make it correct.

Just for the record, i was so pissed at all of the bullshit, i reproduced the egyptian fulcrum this afternoon, and got one to one on the roughest machine i have ever built.

but that's also impossible right??, because one to one with coils on the sides of the fulcrum and a north south magnetic plate beside it would have produced free energy correct.

one to one means the light weight that was used to raise the heavy weight on the offset fulcrum was, raise at the heavy end when the heavy weight fell. So much for newtonian physics.

In fact this will now be my primary machine as it just worked, so i will be building this on a huge scale before the date even if i have to sell my car and quit my job to do it.

you know why you drop kick? because the weight it lifted was dragged over a rod by a string, no pulley at all, that's how much friction there was and it still worked.

Now would be a great time gentlemen to collect all the names of the clever "scientists" who i am not out to ridicule, i am out to show them to the world as the primary reason our planet came under the control of the oil barons. Ther should be a list of those who spread flase physics.

You stick with your math champ, and i'll stick with the real world.

Lets me see, the first person in 12000 years to come up with a genuine reproducable way to move the stones of the great pyramids without hundreds of thousands of people, and you are smarter than i ??

History has already judged that answer the day i published it, and there was no perpetual motion there, but i never saw any newtonians throughout history even have a clue??

No i don't understand newton theory, i never understood bullshit stories.