- John Robarts Alan has at least TWO machines in his house RIGHT NOW that operate at COP > 1
This article is so full of crap that i hardly know where to begin. "'Free energy devices" and "energy from the vacume" are two completely different things. The energy cabal will do anything, including murder, to keep you confused and thinking they are one and the same. They are not. - Alan Petrillo If you insist. Conspiracy theories are something else I take well salted.
- John Robarts Proof:
(except they can't explain it, because they are still victims of the 34 known flaws in classical EM theory)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_thruster 
en.wikipedia.orgRF resonant cavity thruster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaRF resonant cavity thruster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia- John Robarts Quote: "...the work of Gibbs and Heavyside was the greatest aberration of the scientific mind in the history of the world." Nikola Tesla.
- John Robarts As for murder, I'd have you talk to Eugene Condon. But it would require a seance.
- Alan Petrillo Yeah, I'm familiar with the resonant cavity thruster. The problem with it is that the thrust observed may be an effect of heat in the measurement apparatus. The observed thrust continued even after the thruster was turned off. IMHO, the jury is still out on that one.
- Alan Petrillo As much as I really want to see the resonant chamber thruster work, I have to go with my head over my heart.
- Alan Petrillo Nikola Tesla was a brilliant man, but he was an inventor, not a scientist.
- John Robarts Wrongo... He grasped Maxwell's work when no one else was allowed to.
- Alan Petrillo My mind keeps going back to one point in this. The system achieves Over-Unity by "eliminating back torque". Right. There's a simple way to eliminate back torque on a generator armature: Don't put any electrical load on it. The more load you put on the generator the more "back torque" it will put on the prime mover. Overcoming this dynamic load is how the prime mover turns fuel into electricity. The opposite of this is that if you want to stop a generator in its tracks then short the output. As long as you don't blow up the the wires in the process, this will put so much dynamic load on the armature that it won't move, or at least won't move fast. This is how dynamic braking works. This is also how some large wind turbines brake themselves to a stop in high wind conditions.
- John Robarts Proof of energy from the vacume:
A permanent magnet. - Alan Petrillo <sigh> Thomas Trumpinski you're better equipped than I am to provide education here.
- John Robarts You can twist it all you like. It is still energy from the vacume. 34 flaws.
- Alan Petrillo TT shares the Nobel Prize for being on the team at Fermilab that discovered the Top Quark. I'll defer to him.
http://wearechange.org/india-permits-free-energy-technology-despite-threats-from-uk-us-saudi-arabia/
Ordinarily when I see these articles about “free energy” float across my feed I just have a snicker at people who actually believe this nonsense, and move on, but for some reason this one sticks in my mind.
Let’s take my objections one at a time.
First, “free energy” is a bogus statement on its face. Any claims to something that violates fundamental physical laws must be proven with irrefutable evidence. It’s an extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That people believe this idiocy shows a failure of science education. Anything claiming greater than 100% efficiency is immediately suspect. Anything claiming 300% efficiency is utter nonsense. No matter how much you may like it, and how hard you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.
“It must work because it’s patented.”
Nonsense. A patent protects intellectual property, and nothing more. It is not a guaranty that an idea actually works. If you nail two things together that have never been nailed together before then you can patent it, regardless of whether or not it actually works. You don’t even have to produce a physical product. If you can write a proper legal description of the idea then you can get a patent. If you can generate mathematical equations that make sense then you can patent it, regardless of whether or not the underlying principles are related to reality. “Free Energy” patents are no different.
Here’s one of my favorite bits from the article:
“Obviously, a country cannot implement its own free energy program without considering all possible consequence including a military response from Petrodollar countries, e.g. Saudi Arabia, UK, US. That’s why India has been aligning its own military program with that of Russia which at present is standing up, together with the BRICS countries, against the Nazionist cabal imposing all sorts of sanctions to destroy it.
“The BRICS alliance has in the past promised to release all suppressed technologies, e.g. free energy, for our responsible utilization. It looks like they are keeping their word.”
Oh really? These two statements alone demonstrate that Jeffrey Phillips, the author of the article, is completely ignorant of the geopolitical situations of the BRICS countries. So let’s look at them.
Brazil:
Their second most important export is crude oil. They aren’t standing against “petrodollar countries”, they ARE a petrodollar country. The state oil company, Petrobras, makes up a huge sector of Brazil’s economy. If Phillips thinks Brazil would intentionally reduce the value of their second most important export then he’s dreaming.
Russia:
4 of Russia’s top 5 exports are fossil fuels. Collectively, fossil fuels make up 2/3 of Russia’s exports. Again, they don’t stand against petrodollar countries, they ARE a petrodollar country. Their economy is so dependent on fossil fuel exports that they would do nothing to reduce that value and everything to prop it up. On top of that, Russia has long used its exports of fossil fuels as a geopolitical tool with which to exert leverage on not only their vassal states, but on as many countries as they can. If Phillips thinks that Russia would intentionally reduce either the value of their energy exports or their geopolitical leverage then he’s an even bigger fool than his writing suggests.
The idea that Russia is supporting “Free Energy” out of the goodness of their national heart is laughable. If you look at Russia’s history then what you’ll find is that Russia is friend to nobody except Russia. They make alliances when it suits them, and they are more than willing to break those alliances when it suits them. If Russia is supporting the release of Over-Unity Generator Technology then you can bet there’s something in it for them, and they are not doing it out of the goodness of their national heart.
In a way, this reminds me of an intelligence scam the United States pulled on the USSR in the 1970’s. Take a few obscure electrical effects, put them together on a circuit board, make it look like part of a larger device, and arrange for it to fall into your enemy’s hands. Your enemy will then spend years of scientists’ time, and silly amounts of wealth, trying to reverse engineer the device only to find out they’ve been fooled. I can’t help the feeling that this is what Russia is doing to the alternative energy field by supporting “Free Energy”.
India:
India is more of a mixed bag. Yes, they import a lot of fossil fuels, but they also export a lot of refined petroleum. Almost a fifth of their exports are refined petroleum. They have large coal reserves, and are the third largest coal producer in the world, behind the US and China. While I’m sure their needs for motive power would benefit from something like the Over-Unity Generator, I doubt they would put it into use on a worldwide basis if it lowered the value of their refined petroleum exports.
China:
Again, a mixed bag. China produces much of their own fossil fuels internally. They’re the world’s largest producer of coal, and they have huge coal reserves. They also produce much of the oil and natural gas that they use. That said, their single largest import is crude oil. Their economy is superheated, and they’re growing so fast that they’re outgrowing their own reserves and have to buy petroleum on the world market. China is building coal fired power plants as fast as they can get them on the grid. China would seem to have little reason to either support or suppress Free Energy technology. While reducing their dependence on imported petroleum would be in their favor, if they really wanted free energy devices then they’d develop them themselves.
South Africa:
South Africa has an incredible mineral wealth, but relatively small reserves of fossil fuels. They do have a petroleum industry domestically, but they are a net importer of crude oil and refined petroleum products. Their electricity industry is overwhelmingly dependent on coal, and they have sufficient excess production of coal that they export it in the amount of 7% of their total exports. They are also a net exporter of electricity produced from that coal. Again, I seriously doubt that South Africa would intentionally promote a technology that would reduce the value of their energy exports. I suppose it is possible, considering their own domestic needs, but extremely unlikely.
I
n summary, the BRICS countries have little if any economic incentive to promote Free Energy technology, and as much incentive as anyone to block it, or at the very least let it languish in obscurity. If there is some kind of broad based conspiracy blocking Free Energy technology then the BRICS countries are as likely to be part of the conspiracy as anyone else.
If there is such a thing as “Free Energy” then it isn’t going to come from an innovative method of winding good old fashioned copper wire in a stator and armature configuration. Any Over-Unity generator that actually works, and pulls free energy from the ether, is probably going to involve superconductors and likely strange matter as well. If it is developed and proven then there will certainly be at least one Nobel Prize involved. And, yes, as its proponents claim, it will completely revolutionize industries, not the least of which will be the fossil fuels industry. Nicola Tesla may yet be proven right. But I’m not going to hold my breath waiting.
These projects always seem to be “just another million dollars” from completion. Every one of them so far has proven to be little more than a way to separate scientifically illiterate people from their money. I may yet be proven wrong, but until then I strongly recommend not investing anything you can’t afford to lose, because you almost certainly will.
No comments:
Post a Comment