The Bob Boyce challenge

[Paul-R]

i am a tool maker/engineer and have cnc equipment at my disposal to create the tolerances required, tolerances better than a thou as mentioned before.

100 insulated cells with all plates flat to a thou and located with respect to
eachother to a thou? Maybe you work for CERN or a firm that makes satellites
for the military. Its a colossal achievement.

You must get the plates at the null points of the standing wave. Otherwise you have nothing.

Paul.

[TheNOP]

100 insulated cells with all plates flat to a thou and located with respect to
eachother to a thou? Maybe you work for CERN or a firm that makes satellites
for the military. Its a colossal achievement.

You must get the plates at the null points of the standing wave. Otherwise you have nothing.

Paul.

did Bob B has access to such firm(s) ?
yet he is experiencing more gas production...

hho or water steam ?
water steam seem as much possible, if not more, then hho production.
it could be a mix of the 2, to know for shure, one have to see for himself.

[newbie123]

I don't mean to knitpick too severely but some of your statements seem way off base.
Quote:
--"it's pseudoscience until people start to actually replicate the device"

No, science is the pursuit of fact and you do not need a degree nor public opinion to substantiate it, if only one person can prove for themselves something is fact then that is science. You seem to insinuate that if the wright brother's did not show their airplane to anyone or that if other's did not have the expertise to successfully replicate it then it would fall into the realm of pseudoscience and this is simply not the case.
Definition--Science:
"The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena."

I think you are missing my point.  Maybe I should have used "wild speculation" instead of "pseudoscience".   

Let me give you  an example...   

If you have a interesting device that nobody has replicated and shown to the public,  before the inventor starts speculating on what is actually happening in the device... Wouldn't it be logical for the inventor to have working replications out in the public?  I mean... Is the inventor absolutely perfect??   Is there no room for error in his design and theories?? 

if only one person can prove for themselves something is fact then that is science

...  This isn't how science works!  The device would need to be replicated by someone else before the inventor even KNOWS (or PROVES to himself) the device is producing abnormal results, etc..    As I said error is always possible (nobody is perfect), and the best way to check this is through independent replication and verification.

Some of the best known physics/scientists are almost always very, very, overly skeptical about their results..  Max Planck didn't even believe his own work at first.

You seem to insinuate that if the wright brother's did not show their airplane to anyone or that if other's did not have the expertise to successfully replicate it then it would fall into the realm of pseudoscience and this is simply not the case.

C'mon now...   Observing a  large  object flying in the air,  doesn't even compare to the difficulty of measuring/observing  gas,   OU, etc..


Here's another example of wild speculation... Check out this Bob Boyce video.. http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=bob+boyce&emb=0&aq=f#    About 3:45 into the video..     He's claiming "longitudinal energy from human tissue" is causing the little spikes on the scope..      Nonsense!  This is pure crackpot speculation..   Nobody has even replicated the device yet, or proven to the public that it actually does something special.

--"If a device can't be replicated after multiple valid attempts, scientists assume the original experiment/design is flawed and the device doesn't work"

I believe the key phrase here is "scientists assume", if a scientist declares their assumtion's as fact then he/she is not a competent scientist.

After  100+ replications fail  ...  then "assume" probably becomes "know", and "fact"      ....  Is it that hard to realize  if something can't be replicated after 100s of attempts  there is a 99+ percent chance that the device doesn't work, or a scam?      There is alway a chance that the original device really worked, but you need to play the odds...

Btw, I'm not trying to discourage any replication attempts  of "new" devices..  But, I feel it is  time people come to the conclusion that Bob Boyce and Stan Meyer were full of it....   The are  either scammers, have mental problems, or enjoy the attention, whatever the case....    They haven't proved to the public that their devices work after many years.

Some might say ... "They don't owe the public anything, they don't need to prove their devices work"  ..  I say ...  BS, they need to prove their  devices work or be considered crackpots to the public/ FE community.

[Farrah Day]

Good post again Newbie - I just wish there were a few more well-grounded people on this forum.

'Wild Speculation', yes there's a good phrase. And it probably gets used far too little around here.

Too many people make these 'wild speculations', and too often these wild speculations are taken as gospel by the gulible, without any thought or consideration being given to what is actually being said.

Particularly vunerable to wild speculation - and psuedoscience - are the ignorant or uneducated who lack the basic scientific background knowledge on which to call upon or be guided by. 

It seems that time after time the gulible will buy into whatever nonsense is posted irrelevant of the issues it poses in terms of real science. They will then become fanatical about it defending the post and poster tooth and nail, even when they have no comprehension at all about what is being suggested.

All very strange... and rather sad really.

[allcanadian]

@newbie123
I understand your point and agree there is much speculation and confusion but I see this in mainstream science as well.These silly black holes, worm holes, multiple dimensions and fantasy particles ect... is nothing more than wild speculation and as you say the gullible public as well as scientists believe it is fact. The fact of the matter is than none of these things have one shred of tangible proof to substantiate them, they have never been observed and any random measurements give no insight into what in fact it is in reality----again,wild speculation, is this what you consider "real science?",LOL. Here's a neat trick, the next time you meet a person or person's who considers themselves very knowledgeable ask them this simple question----"what is electricity,magnetism and gravity?", I think you will be very surprised at the lack of credible answers. But if by chance you get an answer, most likely wild speculation, then ask them this---"you propose to understand these primary forces so maybe you can explain how one would go about manipulating each of them for mankind's benefit", the question you should ask yourself is how much credibility can a person have when they have little or no control over something they proclaim to understand completely?--- little if any is my answer. In any case I agree with you that there is too much guessing happening in this forum and in what we call science.