Harry
Wesley Bruce wrote:
Your overlooking the problem of patents. The patent will not be allowed if the theory is disputed and it gets worse if there is no theory at all.Steorm wants the patents on this. Peer reviews wont help the reviewers must have hands on contact. They simply wont believe a paper.
There are several ways to do what needs to be done.
Each has its challenges and it risks.
- Publish a peer review paper and a patent at the same time. The publicize both. That was what Fleischmann and Pons tried and it did not work.
- The Steorm jury, This is the process used in the past with several disputed discoveries. Including the latitude contest, some early discoveries in medicine including immunization and safe blood donations. It is common in classified work where public papers etc would kill the projects secrecy.
- Build a car or boat and dive or sail it past large audiences. The first submarine, the first steam train contests and of cause the Wright brothers.
- Publish the design outside peer review and have hundreds duplicate the work. Paul C.W. Chu and his colleagues, the discoverers of high temperature Yittirium based superconductors followed this path in part. As far as I know they had to forgo the possibility of patents but got major awards and posts which is a compensation. [if I have this bit wrong tell me please.]
A test requires several things:
If placed in an air tight box filled will it still run. This will get submarine designers interested.
- The starting impulse, if required, must be filly controlled and measured. I.e. do you start it with a shove or not?
- It must run a load.
- All wires,etc must be visible labeled and reasonably tamper proof.
If it still runs if it is turned upside down it will get a lot of Nasa attention.
The best test of a scam is to ask the two key questions.
Steorm is not asking for money in any way and I can't see how they could be pulling a scam. Where's the money in it if their not telling the truth?
- How do they intend to make a buck from the scam?
- How do they intend to escape prosecution if it is a scam. Can they run and hide somehow?
There is too much data on the people involved for them to up and run if it is a scam. A good conman never gets his photo all over the web.
These guys seem to be real. There may be an error that they can't see but there does not seem to be scam.
I doubt that the laws of thermodynamics are under any threat. Any demonstration of free energy is in effect simply a demonstration that we have not yet measured and named all of the energy fluxes in the the universe. Once we have a powerplant running in we can measure its out put from place to place,or over time or in proximity to other things. Any slight variations in output will allow us to map and then define the underlying energy flow.
If it is 500 mW / cc [0.5 watts/ litre] then I have about a hundred applications for it.
One key question is whether it generates gyroscopic forces; that could make it hard to use on a vehicle.
William Beaty wrote:
On Sat, 26 Aug 2006, Mark Goldes wrote:
That is great news!
I have not listened to the interview.
All the more likely they have done what they claim.
If they just published detailed plans and construction info on their
website, (and if the device is relatively easy to get working,) there'd be
no need for this "jury" stuff. It looks like a publicity stunt, not a
legit tactic. On the other hand, their device could be like SMOT, and be
extremely difficult to work with. That would be a good reason *not* to
just post the plans and let everyone try building it. (The Pons-Fleichman
problem also involved a large number of failed replications.)
But if secrecy wasn't their philosophy, they could just *say* that they'd
otherwise just release everything ...but that their device is finicky.
Where FE is concerned, secrecy has always been the major evil in the past.
The secrecy keeps onlookers from knowing whether it's a scam. The secrecy
sets up a catch-22 for selling OU products or even finding legit
investors. And I suspect that if any groups want to suppress the
discovery, inventor's secrecy is absolutly critical to successful
suppression.
Watch closely. We'll see if I'm right again.
