Yes, but that is hard to do. And scammers have sold stuff in the past...
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > The best way to sell an idea is to produce a product based on the idea > that can make money and lots of it. > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 8:15 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > >> correction: Ideally film the construction >> >> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:13 PM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi vibrator. The "right" people are hard to fine. >>> >>> Very few people will consider that the CoM or the CoE could possibly be >>> violated and won't even humor you. >>> >>> Actually, that's not true, a lot of people who don't know what that even >>> means will happily believe you, but they will not be of any use either. >>> >>> I will entertain the idea you could be on to something. >>> >>> But, I'm not good with equations, and no one would listen to me either. >>> >>> IMO the only option you have is of building it, either in reality, or >>> possibly in some suitable trusted simulation software. >>> >>> You have to prove what you are claiming, there are basically 4 ways of >>> doing that. >>> >>> 1: Argue the case in English. >>> 2: Argue the case in Math. >>> 3: Argue the case in a simulation. >>> 4: Demonstrate it by building it in as open and transparent a means >>> possible, ideally fil the construction, use actualy transparrent materials >>> everywhere possible. >>> >>> Actually, there is a 5th possibility and you should consider if this is >>> possible carefully... >>> >>> 5: Make a 3D printable working model of your discovery. >>> >>> As for IP, f*ck it, the world needs what you have, you will never be >>> able to profit from this in the way you deserve, but trying to will lead to >>> the inventions suppression and maybe your death. >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Vibrator ! <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I've found Bessler's gain principle. The energy density's obviously >>>> 'infinite', and power density's limited only by material constraints. >>>> >>>> A propulsion application is also implied, but not yet tested. >>>> >>>> I've put together some WM2D sims, independently metering all component >>>> variables of the input / output energy, for cross-referencing consistency - >>>> no stone is left unturned, and there are no gaps. All values have also >>>> been checked with manual calcs. The results are incontrovertible - this is >>>> neither mistake, nor psychosis. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It's been a week since achieving certainty, yet all i've done in that >>>> time is stare in disbelief at the results. >>>> >>>> Yet it's no 'happy accident' either - i worked out the solution from >>>> first principles, then put together a mechanism that does what the maths >>>> do, confirming the theory. >>>> >>>> I'm understandably even more incredulous at the implications of the CoM >>>> violation than the CoE one, yet the latter's entirely dependent upon the >>>> former. Both are being empirically measured, in a direct causal >>>> relationship. >>>> >>>> >>>> This absolutely demands immediate wider attention. >>>> >>>> >>>> But who in their right mind would even look at it? How do i bring it >>>> to the attentions of the 'right' people - the ones that need to know about >>>> it, and who can join in the R&D - without resorting to futile crank-emails >>>> to universities and govt. departments etc.? >>>> >>>> I've wasted a week, so far. Too long, already. >>>> >>>> >>>> Pretty much blinded in the headlights here.. i could sorely do with >>>> making a few bob off it, but at the same time it's too important to sit on >>>> - so how to reconcile these conflicting priorities? >>>> >>>> I'd like to post up the sims here, or at least provide a link to them, >>>> just to share the findings with ANYONE able to comprehend them... it's >>>> just classical mechanics (or at least, the parts that can actually be >>>> measured) - force, mass and motion. The absolute basics. Simply no room >>>> for error or ambiguity. Unequivocal 'free' energy; currently around 190% >>>> of unity. You definitely want to see this, and i desperately want to share >>>> it. >>>> >>>> What should i do though? How does one proceed, in this kind of >>>> situation? >>>> >>> >>> >> >
