Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83535
  • *Latest: Fritzman

  • *Total Posts: 514370
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 12

Author Topic: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator  (Read 97035 times)

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #105 on: November 22, 2014, 01:32:34 AM »
Hello everybody.  :)

Completed some more G1 assembly work today.

Pretty straightforward although a little challenging.
I did discover that the through bolts for the primary rotor hubs didn't have quite enough threads for some reason so that the bolts were bottoming out on their threads instead of the washers and hub.
Don't know why and haven't run into this issue on the previous Q3 build which, presumably, is the same rotor, bolts, washers and hubs.
Possible that hubs are slightly thinner or bolts just have a longer shoulder than previously supplied bolts.

Solution is simply to add more washers or dye cut a few more threads in the bolts.
Decided not to bother with cutting more threads, didn't have any stainless steel washers in this size, and I merely used some nylon washers from inventory.

The challenge is that it all has to be assembled as a complete, layered, unit with end bracket, rotor, stator, another rotor, another stator then another rotor and all bolted together as a single unit while still making sure shaft is still free enough (for final adjustments) within four disks and two hubs with eight spacers in two different locations and eight hub bolts doing two different things.....  :P

That is all for now.

Kindest regards;

}:>

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #105 on: November 22, 2014, 01:32:34 AM »

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #106 on: November 22, 2014, 01:34:47 AM »
Well, at least, that would still be an alternative energy system because hamsters are solar powered.  ;)

Tinsel(Mythbuster)Koala apparently found the hamster in Mike Kantz's motor alternator!

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #107 on: November 22, 2014, 01:53:12 AM »
Thank you for the information, I have watched the video in it's entirety and is very interesting, but appears to be out of context. Or, otherwise, not quite what I might care about in terms of usefulness and the fact this experiment is not even in the same class, requires a powered transmitter, and appears to only be a demonstration of the wireless transmission of energy that is NOT demonstrating how much potential is consumed by transmitter versus how much potential back out from the receiver or anything beyond typical characteristics of electrolytic recovery which is similar to that of a battery electrolyte that also recovers some voltage after load removed. Nothing new here. . . .  :P

Please show me a joule thief that does not require a powered transmitter and is charging my 12 volt car battery... then I might care about that!  :D

For clarification regarding said hypothetical "what if" scenario; this scenario is in regards to a system that appears to be operating in an electrical-mechanical resonance providing well over 13 volts to power a bank of sixty LEDs or charge a common 12 volt battery or a bank of nine 350 farad ultra capacitors.

The video of the $5 experiment, producing 1-2 volts, does not appear to be anywhere near the useful 13+ volt lighting-charging output I might care about and is not an electro-mechanical system also providing a rotational 'shaft output'.

Please forgive me; but I do love mechanical, spinning, devices operating within, or even in conjunction with, this solar system and my Mother earth.  :)
But, of course, if there is a solid state device producing more useful output, such as a 'giant' joule thief that doesn't require a transmitter, then I might care about that as well.  ;)

Kindest regards;

}:>

Ah, so that is not all you care about after all. I thought not. But did you not notice that the wireless transmitter was turned OFF early in the video, remained OFF for the rest of the video and was OFF during the voltage rise demonstration? The initial power could have come from, say... a battery directly wired to the apparatus, just like your Quanta system will have when it's running.  But never mind that; nobody need be impressed by a big capacitor regaining some voltage while it's running a small load.  And if you want to light 60 LEDs and/or charge a battery, why did you say, or rather ask "if" "possibly lighting an LED" was all you cared about? But certainly I or any other JT builder here (except maybe LTseung) can light 60 or even 100 LEDs or more, brilliantly, from very low voltage inputs. I use a 24-LED bank, lit by one depleted AAA battery, regularly as a flashlight around the house and in my observatory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM1qdATaiks

But you want a spinny thing. I can respect that, of course, spinny things are cool and it is true that the Quanta kit is nicely arranged and you can be proud of it when you are finished. But you will get better performance as a battery charger or LED-lighter-upper, I guarantee it, if you don't waste your input power rotating a rotor. Everything that the spinny thing can do as far as battery charging or lighting lights can be done better, and more efficiently, and for lower cost, with a solid-state system with no moving parts. The only real justification for wanting a spinny thing is... that you want a spinny thing.
 ;)

I like spinny things myself and have built many of them. Here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emj8kSREv7c

ETA: I must say that I'm a little surprised that the Quanta kit has parts that don't fit properly. That seems rather incongruous considering the nice look and finish of the CNC-tooled big parts. You should complain to your supplier.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #107 on: November 22, 2014, 01:53:12 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #108 on: November 22, 2014, 02:27:48 AM »
Scorch:

From the picture it looks like the wire pairs from the far pick-up coils are not twisted.  It's a minor thing but if they were twisted it would reduce any pick-up of EMF that is extraneous to the the main signal from the pick-up coil itself.  Just like networking cable.

MileHigh

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #109 on: November 22, 2014, 04:44:39 AM »
Please forgive my failure to discover any indication of how long the transmitter had to be on to charge the system or how much power was used.
Thank you for the additional videos. Some very interesting stuff there.  :)
Appears you are into some pretty complicated systems.

I hope to do more with less as in; "keep it simple".
And, BTW, unlikely anybody actually knows what I think or care about.  8)

Why the surprise? Parts is parts is parts and, after all, it IS a prototype, experimental, kit.   ;D

Haven't you ever had that experience with parts discrepancies?
Such as the same manufacture sending the same part under the same specification but not being quite the same such as slightly different color, new assembly process, different plastic, a couple less threads on the bolts, wood screws not stamped properly, brand name battery charger with specific part number actually completely different design depending on which vender manufactured it, and etcetera.

These experimental things have to be fitted.

For example the machined holes in the disks might be a very close tolerance and very tight just BECAUSE there can be slight differences therefore better to be a slightly tight fit that can be sanded out versus risk of to loose and unusable disk that will cause vibration.

It has been my experience there have been many improvements with these kits since I built the original Q2.
This is a constructive, developmental, educational kit that continues to advance and evolve from where it initially started and likely the G1 will eventually be surpassed by something even better.

Complain? Why?!?  :o

To complain is to make conscious choice to have a problem with some thing.

Why would I, the solution seeker, decide to have a problem versus my proactive, positive attitude choice to NOT have a problem and merely implement a solution per my technical and electronic training and experience duty to replicate the experiment regardless of these minor fitment challenges.

The manufacturer is well aware of this thread and does make quality control checks and balances as needed.
This is how we learn, improve, and evolve. No reason to complain about it.  :)

Especially in the revealing light of quantum physics in which the experimenter, himself, is part of the experiment and any initial choice or decision to have a problem or the system "won't work" will surely have an effect on the outcome of the experiment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_%28physics%29
http://noosphere.princeton.edu/

Kindest regards;

}:>

Ah, so that is not all you care about after all. I thought not. But did you not notice that the wireless transmitter was turned OFF early in the video, remained OFF for the rest of the video and was OFF during the voltage rise demonstration? The initial power could have come from, say... a battery directly wired to the apparatus, just like your Quanta system will have when it's running.  But never mind that; nobody need be impressed by a big capacitor regaining some voltage while it's running a small load.  And if you want to light 60 LEDs and/or charge a battery, why did you say, or rather ask "if" "possibly lighting an LED" was all you cared about? But certainly I or any other JT builder here (except maybe LTseung) can light 60 or even 100 LEDs or more, brilliantly, from very low voltage inputs. I use a 24-LED bank, lit by one depleted AAA battery, regularly as a flashlight around the house and in my observatory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zM1qdATaiks

But you want a spinny thing. I can respect that, of course, spinny things are cool and it is true that the Quanta kit is nicely arranged and you can be proud of it when you are finished. But you will get better performance as a battery charger or LED-lighter-upper, I guarantee it, if you don't waste your input power rotating a rotor. Everything that the spinny thing can do as far as battery charging or lighting lights can be done better, and more efficiently, and for lower cost, with a solid-state system with no moving parts. The only real justification for wanting a spinny thing is... that you want a spinny thing.
 ;)

I like spinny things myself and have built many of them. Here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emj8kSREv7c

ETA: I must say that I'm a little surprised that the Quanta kit has parts that don't fit properly. That seems rather incongruous considering the nice look and finish of the CNC-tooled big parts. You should complain to your supplier.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #109 on: November 22, 2014, 04:44:39 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #110 on: November 22, 2014, 05:18:04 AM »
None of the coil pairs are actually supposed to be twisted. If they appear twisted; it might just be the small, low resolution, photograph.
Or merely some twisting of the last two inches of all the pairs from each set just because that's how I tied them all together and soldered the final connections but do not know if this a good or a bad thing to have the last two inches of these leads twisted.  ???

The instructions do not indicate the pairs should be twisted at all and, in fact, includes a photograph of merely tying them all together as straight lengths of wire and only two conductors for all twelve coils to be connected and permanently crimped only after assembling the stators and rotors.

In the interest of merely replicating the original experiment; I intend to stick to the original blueprint as much as possible.
The only thing I did different, in this electrical aspect of the stators, was to tie them separately with two separate leads for each stator so they may actually be separated in the event the device has to be disassembled.

Not sure if I want to worry about EMF shielding... and if we desire to gather energy from the source field (including stray EMF), that we might be able to collect and use, do we want to actually shield the wiring?  ???

Is it possible that some people actually get better results of collecting 'energy from the vacuum' because their prototype wiring is a very sloppy pile of spaghetti everywhere?
I have no idea but do believe JB has reasons for using Litz wire for certain applications to collect more energy from the vacuum-ether-dark-source field or whatever they call it these days.

*shrugs*

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch:

From the picture it looks like the wire pairs from the far pick-up coils are not twisted.  It's a minor thing but if they were twisted it would reduce any pick-up of EMF that is extraneous to the the main signal from the pick-up coil itself.  Just like networking cable.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #111 on: November 22, 2014, 06:47:14 PM »
Scorch:

You shouldn't buy into JB's line about "energy from the vacuum."  Same thing about "open systems vs. closed systems."  That's the real disinformation.  All that you really have is energy flowing out of the battery and wiggling it's way through the coils, capacitors, rotor, generator, and so on.  Most of the time it reaches a final destination of heat.  Nor do you have to worry about any MIB bogeymen like you have posted "warnings" about half a dozen times or so.

Quote
Is it possible that some people actually get better results of collecting 'energy from the vacuum' because their prototype wiring is a very sloppy pile of spaghetti everywhere?

I think that's called an "argument from ignorance."  It doesn't get you very far.  Just like Captain Zero stated that there may be a "magic box" inside the alleged GDS generator.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #111 on: November 22, 2014, 06:47:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #112 on: November 22, 2014, 07:11:07 PM »
Compare this magnet backed magnetite (Fe3O4) powder core GAP motor coil to Doug Konzen's magnet backed ferrite core output coil:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxrJoGZy1to
 
He shorts one of these magnet backed coils in this video and gets the same rotor speed up Doug Konzen demonstrates:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UlwdLXO3AI&list=UU3v-1RhhS50L5H2_FYFFBqQ
 
@Milehigh,
 
You're the Bogeyman!
« Last Edit: November 22, 2014, 10:26:55 PM by synchro1 »

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #113 on: November 23, 2014, 12:16:47 AM »
uh-huh; whatever.  8)

I accept all your claims upon proof of your claims.  :)
Is there a verifiable proof of claim, beyond a mere opinion or disagreement, the "energy from the vacuum" educational DVD series (38 DVDs so far) is 'disinformation'?

With regards to nomenclature-
Please replace "energy from the vacuum" with whatever your preferred term may be such as: "source field" or "torsion field physics" or "dark energy" or "ether energy" or "magic" or "pyramid energy" or "flower of life" or "power of God" or "sacred geometry" or "Grand Unified Field" or "flux fields", gravitons, tachyons, etheron energy, God particles, solitons, quantum energy, the philosopher's stone, Dragon Power, gravity waves, dual currents, tree of life or whatever else they call it these days. . .  ???

Take your pick or create your own term for IT.   :D

Albert Einstein called it "Inertia Ether".
Nikola Tesla called it "Radiant Energy".
Tom Bearden calls it "Energy from the vacuum".
MileHigh calls it "disinformation"...

Doesn't matter! It's ALL the same stuff!!
The fabric of space... that which powers the universe, galaxies, solar systems, gravity, electron spin, thought processes, power creation and all life.  ;D

TED talk-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhBymLCRIU8

Articles or web sites-
www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/tesla-vs-einstein-the-ether-the-birth-of-the-new-physics
www.coralcastlecode.com
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-physics-mystery-solitons-vortex.html
http://crossingtheeventhorizon.webs.com
http://resonance.is

Open source study forum-
http://vortexspace.org/

Source field investigations-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR-klTa1y54
www.furaffinity.net/journal/6131859/

Experimental kits-
www.quantamagnetics.com

Kindest regards;

}:>


Scorch:

You shouldn't buy into JB's line about "energy from the vacuum."  Same thing about "open systems vs. closed systems."  That's the real disinformation.  All that you really have is energy flowing out of the battery and wiggling it's way through the coils, capacitors, rotor, generator, and so on.  Most of the time it reaches a final destination of heat.  Nor do you have to worry about any MIB bogeymen like you have posted "warnings" about half a dozen times or so.

I think that's called an "argument from ignorance."  It doesn't get you very far.  Just like Captain Zero stated that there may be a "magic box" inside the alleged GDS generator.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #113 on: November 23, 2014, 12:16:47 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #114 on: November 23, 2014, 01:03:20 AM »
There is a big difference between a "TEDx" talk, like the "Free Energy" video above, and a true TED Talk. It is a misrepresentation to try to legitimize the content of the TEDx presentation as a "TED Talk".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_%28conference%29#TEDx

You can find all kinds of nonsense in TEDx presentations. You are shooting yourself in the foot, twice, by posting that particular video of nonsense. It is not a "TED Talk" and it makes false claims for which there is no evidence.

Why don't you ask Marko Rodin, or any of the Rodin Coil claimants, where they get their electricity? I know where they get it and so do you. Not a single one of them has ever shown any real evidence of a single Joule of "free energy" or even any unusual electromagnetic phenomena from a "rodin coil". They are works of art, nothing more.

ETA: Let's review. If you think you have a new "theory" that is different from, say, Quantum Electrodynamics, then you have to be able to show several things.
1. Your new theory has to fully account for everything covered by the old theory -- AND --
2. It must make testable predictions NOT already made by the old theory -- AND --
3. Those predictions must be found to be true, by properly constructed experiments.

So go ahead and demonstrate how "vortex based mathematics"  does these things. Please.  Demonstrate something that a Rodin coil does that cannot be described fully by ordinary A-level electromagnetism. Present something that "vortex based math" predicts that is not predicted by standard physics/maths and then demonstrate that the prediction is accurate.  But of course you cannot.

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3790
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #115 on: November 23, 2014, 01:57:54 AM »
There is a big difference between a "TEDx" talk, like the "Free Energy" video above, and a true TED Talk. It is a misrepresentation to try to legitimize the content of the TEDx presentation as a "TED Talk".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_%28conference%29#TEDx

You can find all kinds of nonsense in TEDx presentations. You are shooting yourself in the foot, twice, by posting that particular video of nonsense. It is not a "TED Talk" and it makes false claims for which there is no evidence.

Why don't you ask Marko Rodin, or any of the Rodin Coil claimants, where they get their electricity? I know where they get it and so do you. Not a single one of them has ever shown any real evidence of a single Joule of "free energy" or even any unusual electromagnetic phenomena from a "rodin coil". They are works of art, nothing more.

ETA: Let's review. If you think you have a new "theory" that is different from, say, Quantum Electrodynamics, then you have to be able to show several things.
1. Your new theory has to fully account for everything covered by the old theory -- AND --
2. It must make testable predictions NOT already made by the old theory -- AND --
3. Those predictions must be found to be true, by properly constructed experiments.

So go ahead and demonstrate how "vortex based mathematics"  does these things. Please.  Demonstrate something that a Rodin coil does that cannot be described fully by ordinary A-level electromagnetism. Present something that "vortex based math" predicts that is not predicted by standard physics/maths and then demonstrate that the prediction is accurate.  But of course you cannot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqNqMfBj_F8&list=UUo4TZccCL4Y6reMBGJSl0NQ

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #115 on: November 23, 2014, 01:57:54 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #116 on: November 23, 2014, 02:20:21 AM »
TK:

Thanks for pointing out the difference between TEDx and TED, I was not aware.

Scorch:

Like TK said, show a milli-Joule of free energy coming from a "Rodin" coil before you start talking about "energy from the vacuum" or any variant thereof.  One more time you are trying to shift the burden of proof when you state, "I accept all your claims upon proof of your claims."  I don't have to prove a single damn thing, so get that in your head and start thinking clearly about this issue.  On the forums many times people have claimed that they can get excess energy from the vacuum by pulsing a coil and I ask them to do a simple experiment to prove it.  I have asked it about five times from various people making strong claims along these lines and never once got a response.

Quote
Albert Einstein called it "Inertia Ether".
Nikola Tesla called it "Radiant Energy".
Tom Bearden calls it "Energy from the vacuum".
MileHigh calls it "disinformation"...

I am not aware of the term "Inertia Ether" associated with Einstein.  Your little word play where you squeeze me into the mix falls flat.  Where is Tom Bearden's Motionless Energy Generator?   Wasn't in in something like 2002 or 2003 where he was supposed to go into production with this alleged free energy machine?  Until somebody offers up tangible proof that can be verified by multiple independent and technically competent third parties it's all just crap and disinformation to sell books and DVDs and downloads, just like the "Energy from the Vacuum" series.  It's all just word verbage heaped on impressionable people with free energy fantasies to fleece them of their money.  This applies to Quanta Magnetics and your pulse motor also.  There is no mystique and opportunity to discover something new with your basic beginners "Electronics 101" pulse motor.  If you took a dozen or so electronics and electronics related courses and did about 150 electronics laboratory experiments then perhaps your attitude would be different.

I watched that Randy Powell TEDx talk about a month ago and I was shocked to see that the "TED" organization gave that guy a platform.  His talk was ridiculous stating that a Rodin coil and the associated alleged "vortex math" could be used to solve just about all of our energy and social problems.  He was full of crap.  Somewhere I read that he promised to email the TEDx people with some follow-up information to back up his outrageous statements.  He was supposed to respond in email within 30 days but never did.  Surprise surprise.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #117 on: November 23, 2014, 02:26:51 AM »
Here we go:

http://blog.ketyov.com/2012/10/ted-pulls-pseudoscience-talk.html

TED pulls pseudoscience talk

A few months ago TEDxCharlotte released a video from its event of a guy named Randy Powell just talking a bunch of pseudoscientific-but-grand-sounding nonsense about "Vortex Mathematics".
 
 Carl Zimmer mentioned it in his evisceration of TED's weak science draw (specifically Philip Zimbardo's talk) which lead me to ask a question about the talk over on Quora.
 
 Specifically, I asked, "Is Randy Powell saying anything in his 2010 TEDxCharlotte talk or is it just total nonsense?" It got a lot of great answers (which is what I was hoping for) including the currently top-rated response from Jay Wacker, Stanford professor of theoretical physics:
 
 <blockquote> Wow. Such fucking bullshit. Well, I am theoretical physicist who uses (and teaches) the technical meaning of many of the jargon terms that he's throwing out. And he is simply doing a random word association with the terms. Basically, he's either insane a huckster going for fame or money doing a Sokal's hoax on TEDx I'd bet equal parts 1 & 2.

</blockquote>and this one from Joshua Engel (one of my favorite Quora users):
 
 <blockquote> This is one of the reasons I'm not crazy about TED talks. The argument is gibberish; not a single point makes any sense. But without a transcript, it's tricky for me to make a point-by-point refutation. I have to stop, transcribe, then explain. It's a slow and tedious process. The question is, is anybody engaging in that kind of critique for the talks that aren't obviously deranged? Or is everybody just accepting what they hear and then letting the video move on to its next point? Video is a poor way to make an argument. It's a good teaching tool, since it's very convincing when the subject is actually valid. But it's equally good at making an invalid argument with little opportunity for critical thought.

Well it would appear that TED has officially responded by removing Mr. Powell's talk from their TEDx YouTube channel. Specifically, TED editor Emily McManus left this response on my Quora question:
 
 <blockquote> Randy Powell's talk onstage at TEDxCharlotte 2010 came under criticism for its lack of scientific validity. Criticism came from mathematicians and science writers as well as threads on specialist science and math blogs and other online communities. Members of the TED and TEDx teams watched the talk, sought further advice from experts, and ultimately agreed that the criticisms had merit and were serious enough to warrant removal of the talk from the TEDx official YouTube channel, in compliance with our policy.
 
Randy Powell was given several opportunities to directly defend his work, but did not do so. In a phone conversation with members of the TED and TEDx teams on September 12, 2012, Powell stated that his brief onstage talk at TEDxCharlotte did not include complete data on his work. He could not point us to that data online during the call, but agreed during the call to email TED his data, including a detailed 10-page paper, for a further independent review by a mathematician and possible replication of his experiments by a physicist. Neither the paper nor any other data was ever received. We consider the matter closed.

 In response to this incident, TEDx has clarified its policies on the scientific validity of talks and is working with independent TEDx organizers to help them access more and better resources for vetting speakers.</blockquote> Personally I don't think that removing the content to scrub its record is the best way to go but it's interesting to see that TED is at least taking some steps to clean up its scientific appearance.
</blockquote>

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #118 on: November 23, 2014, 03:11:05 AM »
Just some comments to deal with some cliches that Scorch mentioned.  Scorch is just one of many people around here that state things like this.

Quote
The fabric of space... that which powers the universe, galaxies, solar systems, gravity, electron spin, thought processes, power creation and all life.

Galaxies, solar systems, and orbiting electrons are not powered by anything.  They require no power to keep moving.  This is an annoying bugaboo for me that people often state.  It comes from ignorance, or a lack of education, or from blind repetition, or from a form of superstition, or from a failure of the imagination.

Anybody that believes this kind of nonsense should do their own investigations and learning to figure this out for themselves.  Take the solar system as an example.  Prove to yourselves that the solar system is not in any way whatsoever being "powered" by something.  If you can't figure out the truth here for yourself, then you have a problem if you want to discuss energy and related matters.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #119 on: November 23, 2014, 03:29:41 AM »
Synchro1:

Quote
@Milehigh,
 
You're the Bogeyman!

You're a dirty little synchronously looping ├╝ber tempest!

 

OneLink