Electricity

[stateman]

Would any technically-minded person endeavor to read this thru, digest and ponder about it?

http://www.cheniere.org/articles/clean%20electrical.htm

[stateman]

subsequent reading on related subjects are:

http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Reducing%...il%20Fuels2.doc

http://www.cheniere.org/articles/2ndLaw.htm

[Crossy]

Not particularly Thailand related, unless Taksin wants to start up the hub of overunity (perpetual motion) machines. Now that ranks alongside the man in space statement.

If this is true why are we all not whizzing around in vehicles with anti-gravity drives that use no fuel, particularly, as apparently the device to extract this free energy costs about $1!!

I can find no record of anyone repeating Bearden's anti-gravity experiments (90% reduction in weight).

I suggest that all this is related to exhaust emissions from my avatar. Sorry.

I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO BE PROVED WRONG! SHOW ME!!!

[chownah]

I read the first three paragraphs at the link and the first two are wrong and the third one is science fiction.

Scientist do in fact know what causes electrical current and electrical power.

The power of the "seething vacuum" is some kind of science fiction thing I guess because this is not a scientific concept...at least that I have ever heard of...and I've read alot of stuff both in uni and on my own....of course, if someone can find a good reference about a "seething vacuum"...other than the one already presented...I'd love to be proven wrong.

[Tywais]

I read the first three paragraphs at the link and the first two are wrong and the third one is science fiction.

Scientist do in fact know what causes electrical current and electrical power.

The power of the "seething vacuum" is some kind of science fiction thing I guess because this is not a scientific concept...at least that I have ever heard of...and I've read alot of stuff both in uni and on my own....of course, if someone can find a good reference about a "seething vacuum"...other than the one already presented...I'd love to be proven wrong.

Actually "string theory" vis a vis, "the unified theory" does imply this is valid and doesn't detract from Einsteins theory. Because Einstein couldn't account for all the mass and energy of the universe, he applied a correction factor to his equations. He felt it was the biggest error he had ever made but now scientists are finding that he may indeed have been correct in this unknown variable.

[chownah]

I read the first three paragraphs at the link and the first two are wrong and the third one is science fiction.

Scientist do in fact know what causes electrical current and electrical power.

The power of the "seething vacuum" is some kind of science fiction thing I guess because this is not a scientific concept...at least that I have ever heard of...and I've read alot of stuff both in uni and on my own....of course, if someone can find a good reference about a "seething vacuum"...other than the one already presented...I'd love to be proven wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually "string theory" vis a vis, "the unified theory" does imply this is valid and doesn't detract from Einsteins theory. Because Einstein couldn't account for all the mass and energy of the universe, he applied a correction factor to his equations. He felt it was the biggest error he had ever made but now scientists are finding that he may indeed have been correct in this unknown variable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

String theory implies that what is valid?

[Tywais]

I read the first three paragraphs at the link and the first two are wrong and the third one is science fiction.

Scientist do in fact know what causes electrical current and electrical power.

The power of the "seething vacuum" is some kind of science fiction thing I guess because this is not a scientific concept...at least that I have ever heard of...and I've read alot of stuff both in uni and on my own....of course, if someone can find a good reference about a "seething vacuum"...other than the one already presented...I'd love to be proven wrong.

Actually "string theory" vis a vis, "the unified theory" does imply this is valid and doesn't detract from Einsteins theory. Because Einstein couldn't account for all the mass and energy of the universe, he applied a correction factor to his equations. He felt it was the biggest error he had ever made but now scientists are finding that he may indeed have been correct in this unknown variable.

String theory implies that what is valid?

That there is a significant amount of additional 'free' energy out there called dark energy + dark matter that accounts for the difference between the measured (calculated) energy & mass and the theoretical amounts. This would be the reference to "seething vacuum" in that it is not truly empty.

Edited November 1, 2005 by tywais

[stateman]

Actually "string theory" vis a vis, "the unified theory" does imply this is valid and doesn't detract from Einsteins theory.  Because Einstein couldn't account for all the mass and energy of the universe, he applied a correction factor to his equations. He felt it was the biggest error he had ever made but now scientists are finding that he may indeed have been correct in this unknown variable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

totally agree with every word you said above.

[chownah]

I read the first three paragraphs at the link and the first two are wrong and the third one is science fiction.

Scientist do in fact know what causes electrical current and electrical power.

The power of the "seething vacuum" is some kind of science fiction thing I guess because this is not a scientific concept...at least that I have ever heard of...and I've read alot of stuff both in uni and on my own....of course, if someone can find a good reference about a "seething vacuum"...other than the one already presented...I'd love to be proven wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually "string theory" vis a vis, "the unified theory" does imply this is valid and doesn't detract from Einsteins theory. Because Einstein couldn't account for all the mass and energy of the universe, he applied a correction factor to his equations. He felt it was the biggest error he had ever made but now scientists are finding that he may indeed have been correct in this unknown variable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

String theory implies that what is valid?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That there is a significant amount of additional 'free' energy out there called dark energy + dark matter that accounts for the difference between the measured (calculated) energy & mass and the theoretical amounts. This would be the reference to "seething vacuum" in that it is not truly empty.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, is the link in the original post talking about string theory? I didn't look past the first four paragraphs since what was written there made me think that it was going to be just one more off the wall and uninforming articles like exist so many on the internet.

Edit: I just looked again briefly and I looked down through the introduction and got to the part where they are giving a brief history of electrodynamics and decided to stop. The entire introduction has no mention of string theory and seems to be written with the purpose of creating controversy. There is alot of stuff like this on the internet. I consider it a waste of time to go through their arguements and discover their errors...and I certainly wouldn't look forward to the task of trying to discuss it with someone who is not well grounded in the underlying science. It would be fun if there was an expert in this field who would take the time and analyze the article or at least parts of it to show what it means and where (or if) it is flawed.....but I'm not that person. I've known people with the ability to do this and they seem to have the same attitude as me....waste of time. If these people know something then they should do some experiments and show us what they can do with all this free energy available for one dollar.

Edit again: I just went out and googled "free energy"....give it a try...you'll find that there are literally dozens of ways to extract free energy from the environment that are all being supressed by the existing scientific establishment.....and I imagine that if you googled "I am Napolean" you would probably fined dozens of Napoleans who are not being recognized or appreciated for their true place in history.

Edited November 1, 2005 by chownah

[Tywais]

So, is the link in the original post talking about string theory?  I didn't look past the first four paragraphs since what was written there made me think that it was going to be just one more off the wall and uninforming articles like exist so many on the internet.

Edit:  I just looked again briefly and I looked down through the introduction and got to the part where they are giving a brief history of electrodynamics and decided to stop.  The entire introduction has no mention of string theory and seems to be written with the purpose of creating controversy.  There is alot of stuff like this on the internet.  I consider it a waste of time to go through their arguements and discover their errors...and I certainly wouldn't look forward to the task of trying to discuss it with someone who is not well grounded in the underlying science.  It would be fun if there was an expert in this field who would take the time and analyze the article or at least parts of it to show what it means and where (or if) it is flawed.....but I'm not that person.  I've known people with the ability to do this and they seem to have the same attitude as me....waste of time.  If these people know something then they should do some experiments and show us what they can do with all this free energy available for one dollar.

Edit again:  I just went out and googled "free energy"....give it a try...you'll find that there are literally dozens of ways to extract free energy from the environment that are all being supressed by the existing scientific establishment.....and I imagine that if you googled "I am Napolean" you would probably fined dozens of Napoleans who are not being recognized or appreciated for their true place in history.

I have the background to discuss it, just don't have the energy. For me it is a fascinating subject and sometimes I get together with one of my physics ajarn friends to get his feel on the matter (too many puns).

Edited November 1, 2005 by tywais

[Gary A]

This is similar to the 150 mile per gallon cars in the 70's. How much do you think General Motors would give for that 150 mile per gallon secret today? The could just keep right on building those massive SUV's.

There just may be something to this anti gravity thing. How else do the aliens get to earth from wherever they come from?

[kidtongue]

This is similar to the 150 mile per gallon cars in the 70's. How much do you think General Motors would give for that 150 mile per gallon secret today? They could just keep right on building those massive SUV's.

There just may be something to this anti gravity thing. How else do the aliens get to earth from wherever they come from? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. They have frequent flyer miles from Thai International?

2. They land at the new airport by special arrangement.

Additionally:

They're here without a proper visa and we're not going to give them one unless they produce their intergalatic passports *and* sign up for the priviledge card.

They're here to collect their patent royalties and threaten to annihilate Earth for infringement.

Their English is marginal and think LoS is the same as Lost.