At 01:33 pm 21/06/2006 -0400, Terry wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Grimer > >Let's hope he's wrong - but if he isn't then I think >the Finsrud machine is the best bet for proving a >point of principle. The solution is more elegant than >the Sprain in the cunning way it achieves the different >advance and retreat speed in relation to the magnets. >This means that only the smallest input is required to >keep the ball moving. Also, it will show whether or not >the reverse direction pumps energy into the Beta-atmosphere >rather than taking it out. In other words it will show >that the ball is indeed travelling around a Carnot-style >cycle and extracting energy from Beta-atmosphere "heat". > ><><><><><><> > > What amazes me, Grimer, is that I can't seem > to get anyone to even go see it. A few people > will discuss it; but, I have yet to convince > anyone to go with me and help verify the > measurements. > > One engineer used the excuse that he did not > want to sign the non-disclosure agreement; but, > when I said he did not have to sign it, > he still backed out. It reminds me of the > people in sci.physics.fusion who refused to > even read the CF papers and the people who > would not look through Galileo's telescope. > > Terry
I doesn't amaze me. I've had 40 years of it - so I'm quite used to the fact that people avoid cognitive dissonance like the plague. When they challenge the existence of the Beta-atmosphere and ask for the evidence I invite them to go to the Yahoo discussion group, but with a few commendable exceptions, they never turn up. As for the so-called Expert Panel I was dragged before - what a farce - what an absolute farce. The only technical question they tackled they got egregiously wrong - or at least, one of the three did and the other two were to embarrassed or cowardly to admit it and stop the idiot from digging his hole deeper and deeper. Get used to it. It's a sign you're exploring the new millennium frontiers. Frank
