Curled Ballisitic Thermionics

[retroworm]

@Phil

Being consistently neglected by the main stream is frustrating for sure, but I greatly urge you to keep level head with this. It's already a common trend that inventors come front with lots of noise and boasting, then slowly fade away for whatever reason (most probably due the fact that these devices generally just won't work).

That is not to say that you shouldn't pursue acceptance in the future, but I would suggest you to come up with as solid proof of concept as you possibly can. Experiments by Fu and D’Abramo seem good enough to me, but if you regard the laws as unshakeable scripture, you will be prone to explain it away by other means like measurement error or radiation effect etc. It leads to a point where one uses the second law to prove the second law and will never investigate properly.

I probably have fairly high confirmation bias in my thinking, but even I want to see a functional device before I can fully belive it . You already said a small device is on its way, which is an excellent first step. Presenting it is the hard part, because people will try to explain it away. Probably the most convincing experiment would be to produce visible rotary motion and measurable drop in temperature inside a sealed calorimeter; isolated from all heat and radiation sources.

Getting it published in a journal will be difficult since controversy is ensured. Non peer reviewed publications might be a safer bet for initial publicity after you have a solid proof of concept. Not saying you should avoid scientific method, but it's better if people see this before it gets shot down unjustly. Maybe it's even worth it to rather convince an engineer or small manufacture shop before doing any real science, and let the scientists follow when they just absolutely can't deny it.

[Philip Hardcastle]

@retroworm,

I hear you but I am hear to test physics or to get others to notice the challenge to physics so that we all can advance. It would be good to get top level support so that important work can be done quickly.

I have a track record of creating technology and building it.

I am not looking for fame or for donations. I do however seek debate from the experts around the World so that I can prove that we do have a way of saving the World.

The thing is if you take a simple invention done by sony, it takes man years to get it to market.

I know first hand about getting inventions to market as I have done it before.

So I could do all this silently, as I did before, but I feel that if professors and experts were forced to admit that my theory is correct (meaning that they have to concede at least the possibility that the 2nd is flawed) then the roadblock in physics would be removed.

Then the govts around the world would have the courage to fund research into, not just my ideas, but all deserving ideas.

If I am right but only produce a little torque who will say it is a revolution?

Professor Fu has been ignored and no doubt others.

Maybe with the help of 10 physicists and manufacturing facilities I can make a device to power a car, maybe it takes 2 more steps than what I have disclosed.

Is it proper for ideas to be unsupported when they are there to help.

I have my feet on the ground. If no one wants to think, I will still do what I need to do, but if you want a solution to Global warming, I suspect it should be soon.

All the so called physics experts in the World should hang their heads in shame if they cannot find fault with curled ballistic thermionics but refuse to say so.

If it is right it means that we should stop govts and experts from saying "the only solution is ...Nuclear.......clean coal........carbon taxes........carbon licences.......

All cards need to be on the table and experts who are parrots simply regurgitating science chants.....though shalt not challenge thy professors....... though shalt hold unproved laws that we were taught as being absolute........all that challenge conventional thinking shall be cast out.

There are countless cases of science attacking science thinkers only to find out years later that they attacked the bringer of new truth.

This site is an opportunity for experts to come here and debate, if they have the courage.

I will shortly reveal debates with World experts that the press should reprint (but probably wont)

So retroworm, forgive me for getting frustrated but as they say evil (apathy, vanity and arrogance of the science establishment) flourishes if good persons do nothing.

Professor Shakouri........shame on you
Professor Nemanich.......ditto
more to come

I do hear you and thank you for your well intentioned and wise advice.

Regards

Phil

[Philip Hardcastle]

I hear you but I am here to test physics or to get others to notice the challenge to physics so that we all can advance. It would be good to get top level support so that important work can be done quickly.

[Philip Hardcastle]

Another professor has given the theory the thumbs up.

Wow I might actually get broad support yet.

I think i posted that I wrote to Professor Stephen Hawking.

Well no reply as yet.

Overly optimistically check the post each morning for a letter from Santa, sorry Stephen H.

Phil

[Philip Hardcastle]

Dear Overunity Friends

I have posted the following to about 1000 scientists around the world today.



Dear Professors and People who care about the Earth,

Attached is a document setting out the basics for Curled Ballistic thermionics.

"overunity pls email me at pjhardcastle@gmail.com for a copy"

Anyone wishing to develop, manufacture and sell devices based upon
this theory are free to do so providing that they do not seek to
patent anything in their own name, or in any third parties name, that
comes from the information so disclosed.

In the spirit of open sourcing it is my wish that the technology be
tested and advanced as soon as possible for the benefit of mankind.

4 prominent professors now say that the theory is correct despite the
implication re the 2nd Law of thermodynamics. However should any
person make any investment in money, time or effort, they do so at
their own risk.

Obvious issues arise technically and I am only too happy to assist and
to keep everyone advised as progress is made regarding materials and
techniques.

Any good ideas are welcomed and will be shared.

I also ask that you convey this knowledge to interested parties if
only for debate.

If perchance a Nobel prize is ever offered for this theory, it is mine!

Best Wishes to all,

Phil H