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 <janap...@gmail.com> 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 <aethe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> correction:  Ideally film the construction
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 12:13 PM, John Berry <aethe...@gmail.com> 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 ! <mrvibrat...@gmail.com>
>>> 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?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to