I was just replying to what you said. You brought up physical laws.

Really? Isn't he going to ask you to describe the process first, before
he decides whether to provide you with the $330,000 in equipment
required for the process?

Does he believe the beautiful theory before he provides the equipment
for you or after you have demonstrated the process?

I have a theory about the Big Bang. Want me to demonstrate it?

There has been no discussion about ghosts. I have been ranting
about what constitutes evidence.

So there!

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

__________________
http://www.FreeMars.org/jeff/

"I find astronomy very interesting, but I wouldn't if I thought we
were just going to sit here and look." -- "Van Rijn"

"The other planets? Well, they just happen to be there, but the
point of rockets is to explore them!" -- Kai Yeves

So, where is this scientific evidence (not anecdotes) that ghosts exist?

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

"...because the logic of the lines traced from reality is as poor of aesthetic value as it is strict in consistency. " - Paolo Bozzi (Naive Physics - free translation)

If we could capture angular momentum "at a distance", then the rotation of Jupiter would provide a virtually inexaustible source, and would conserve everything that physics says must be conserved.

Of course we can't capture angular momentum "at a distance", and I'm sure there are easy demonstrations of exactly the ways in which angular momentum can be transferred.

I enjoyed reading this thread. I'd like to disclose the fact I'm a crank but not on par with Mr. Collins.


John Collins isn't just a crank. He's a moderator at Bessler Wheel. He is crank leadership and how ever meager, he makes a living off the uneducated by selling books. Right before he bid everyone good buy he mentioned:

It is kind of hard reading comments like:

from an author who's selling a book titled PERPETUAL MOTION - AN ANCIENT MYSTERY SOLVED? Although there is the question mark, the title is as misleading as the new release in the works The Orffyreus Code, A Blueprint for Free Energy. I've read and have drawn blueprints. I don't expect to see anything like a blueprint in that installment anymore than you would find an ancient mystery solved in the first one. Honesty, yea.

Jeff Root has an equally plausible solution to the Bessler mystery with:
Short and to the point. Much cheaper than Mr. Collins' version also.

Mr. Collins began his dissertation on physics knowing he was going to be flamed. I think the facts flamed him. Anyone visiting his site should remember his explanation:

That's a hard fact to buy coming from one professing to be an engineer but it is a common attitude among the born again cranks seeking perpetual motion. Simple logic replaces an accurate accounting of mass in motion. Pesky numbers. If you look at reality it's hard to prove 2 and 2 equals 5 but if you only believe...

I don't think Mr. Collins is a born again crank any more than the owner of the forum he moderates at. They know better. I'll interject here that I don't know any better but I know better than when I first began looking at the subject. Also I'm not panhandling for donations to help support my addiction. I've learned a lot. The forum Mr. Collins preaches at will accept donations from its flock by way of paypal. Is that honest cash flow? Who knows.

One last comment. The perpetual motion flock must not be generating a good cash flow so the owner of Bessler Wheel has been running political ads for a sure loser in the upcoming presidential election. They're in fund raising mode. He recently posted a thread about the money raised so far and implored, 'won't you join us?' It cracks me up. The libertarian he's backing has said he won't take matching federal funds but there's still time for him to change his mind and bilk the us taxpayer.

The shenanigans never end.

Sorry for the long post.

Well, physics fraud isn't guaranteed to pay despite the efforts of Joe Newman and his ilk.

No problem. Although I've always favored Wolfgang's judgement as a one line response to such drek.

P.S. Welcome Aboard.

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

Sorry for the long post.



Hey! this is BAUT you should fit in quite well, welcome.

__________________
But you're sure the astronauts are lying; you just don't seem to know what they're lying about: Jayutah


I are Learnding.

Well,well, so bessler007 has turned up here! Just to correct some false information, I am not and have never been a moderator on besslerwheel.com nor any othe forum and neither do I wish to be - too much hassle in my opinion.

As for the title of my book, it seemed like a good idea in 1997 when I wrote it, but I never thought that it would be thought as misleading. A simple question, that's all it was ever meant to be.

Yes I am a retired engineer and I don't think inserting pages of mathematical symbols in a short article is either necessary or helpful - just a decision I took and it seems to me to be neither right nor wrong.

The implication that I am involved in a fraud is offensive to me and I'm sure would be equally offensive to other members here if they were subjected to such innuendo. I may be guilty of being a 'crank' in many people's eyes but I am not scamming anyone. I have spent years researching this subject and have formed views which diverge from the mainstream and I have published the best evidence I can find to support those views. People are either open to the ideas or they are not, but I have never forced anyone to buy the books and I have never knowingly cheated them.

Interesting that this self-confessed crank posts here just after I commented on this forum at besslerwheel forum. Of course it can't have anything to do with the fact that he has just been banned from besslerwheel forum - twice I understand, each time under a differen pseudonym.

John Collins (my real name - note bessler007)

Well, lets all look into that shall we.

That's great. Why not share this knowledge freely with the Whole World? You can post whatever you want for virtually no money on the internet, (let's say a blog), so why not utilize that avenue to share your work??

Openmindeness is very good, but is useless without credible evidence.

But you do sell them. I see no need for that.

Cheat's an interesting word. When I feel cheated, I fell like I have received something worth little or nothing. Can you show the "worth" of your work/book?

There is also the "fooling yourself" aspect to consider. If you sincerely believe in your work, then you are not (as you said, knowingly) cheating people, however, if your work is worthless...if there is no credible evidence confirming your work, then it doesn't matter what you believe, because you are cheating people.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

R.A.F. - As I said earlier, I self-published the book in 1997, a time if you recall when blogs were not around. In any case the book contains far more information than would ever fit on to a web site - 240 pages - and I do share this knowledge with the world via my book.

The evidence is credible only some people such as yourselves are determined not to look. Why? Perhaps you are afraid your house of carefully constructed cards will collapse if Bessler's wheel is duplicated.

Of course I sell the books, I'm can't afford to give them away. The books travel all over the world taking the information which you experts refuse to look at.

Your convoluted argument about the word cheat is circular and does you no credit. 'Can I show the "worth" of my work/book? ' you ask; I have certainly tried to show you but you refuse to look. The evidence is convincing despite your dermined attempts to deny it. At an earlier time I offered the book free of charge to any of you so you could evaluate the evidence for yourselves. None of you took me up on my offer, so I withdraw it now.

It is obvious that your minds are made up and you will not review the evidence. I am disappointed to discover such a closed mind attitude among such as yourselves.

I note in your 'about us thread the following comment on your rules,

"Most of these are either common sense or common courtesy, but as a family-friendly forum with a strong emphasis on maintaining a positive environment, we are sometimes stricter than other online forums. Messages that would be no big deal elsewhere can get you banned here."

I find little of common courtesy, nor signs of a family-friendly forum and least of all a positive environment.

Enjoy your new poster, Bessler007, I may call back from time to time to see how long it takes you to ban him.

John Collins

You come to this board and tell everyone who doesn't agree with your unproven, untestable, in-credible claims that they are closed minded.

Exactly what response would you expect from posters to a science board when you tell them that??

So you won't be hanging around to present your evidence? Then perhaps this thread should be locked unless/until such time as you are ready to do that.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

If you go to Bessler wheel you can see John shows up with a green name. That is a moderator's designation. If you search the forum you will find John is a moderator of a private sub-forum with only two members. One is the owner of the forum.

These facts don't line up with John's assertion.

If I could figure out how to post a picture I would include some screen shots. They are reports from the data base of the forum but stating the obvious if the data changes so do the indications or reports. I've seen that happen at bessler wheel before. That's why I took the time to get some screen shots.

An engineer? Considering some of your comments about wind energy, and how you persist with an idea that lacks physical evidence, I'm frankly surprised.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I'd be quite happy to look. Where is this evidence? Evidence, of course, would be actual experiments under controlled conditions, not old stories.

"If" it is duplicated? I thought you said you had credible evidence. And, you're wrong in my case. I'd be thrilled if new physical principles were demonstrated.

But nobody has a working wheel, correct?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

I'm not a mod, but I would suggest that we avoid words like "fraud" and "crank" or what happened on other boards. The real issue here is evidence. I think it is pretty clear to everyone here but Orffyreus that stories aren't physical evidence.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Hello Van Rijn,

You might be right. When John questioned the honesty of people who have posted here I responded with facts that if looked at kindly would be like the pot calling the kettle black. An honest look at those facts are more like the pot calling anything it sees a kettle.

No one has called John a fraud. Those are his words. Might be a tinge of conscience; who knows. As he's stating his case and challenging other facts I've posted, from what I can see he's loosing even more credibility.

There's no point in denying what can obviously be proven.

I wonder why you appeared on this forum bessler007. Was it spite for being thrown of another forum? Did you think I had anything to do with it? I didn't, but I don't expect you to believe me.

Don't keep the thread open on my account.

Hello John,

You can't seem to leave well enough alone. At a time when you should have bent slightly at the knees and grasped your tail pulling it between your legs carting your bloody behind home where you're appreciated, you had to ask a second question. The first question was in the 'are you optimistic thread' that you feared to ask.

Well, I'm going to take the time to give you both answers but not in this thread. If you don't intend to give some honest answers to the questions the forum has asked that's your prerogative.

I've answered their questions. They don't accept my evidence and that's their prerogative.

I have ignored your disingenuous comment about my being a moderator as it is obviously meant as part of your personal attack on me. Equally your other remarks about honesty are also part of your campaign to vilify me. I don't know why - I have done nothing to you.

Go away and annoy somebody else.

John Collins

So what you're saying is that you presented evidence that wasn't persuasive...wasn't convincing, otherwise why didn't they accept your ideas?

Someone is going to have to explain to me why being "accused" of being a mod on another board would be considered a personal attack.


Be nice is a basic rule of this board and telling another poster to go away is um, just not nice...so it might be a good idea to familiarize yourself with the rules of this board before continuing.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

Orffyreus and Bessler007 are clearly taking a disagreement from a tiny mostly unknown forum and bringing it here. Are they bickering with each other here because they can't do it there, or is it an orchestrated effort to bring attention to their forum? I really don't know, but I am finding their accusational dialog a little irritating, and not really illuminating about their own original topic.

I urge you both to let any further barbs from the other simply roll off your back. If you have nothing new to add here as far as information goes, then please stop posting.

Let me be clear, you are both welcome to stick around and talk astronomy or spaceflight, or even add new revelations about the Bessler Wheel.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak