Re: Free Energy? - what about the proof prize?
- Dear S,
I've make sure to look for vans if anyone comes by. Actually,
I'd much rather earn my self a place in history by grabbing the
media's attention to the greatest invention in decades.
Barring that, I still feel there is great value in exposing frauds. If
people say, "I have no proof of FE now, but hope to soon" - I have no problem
with that. I disagree that tabloids are interested in exposing fraud - that's
a minor story, a bigger story is to report that something exciting is true.
Any astronomer will tell you that when a comet shows up, the way to grab
"network air time" is to give the most grandiose promise.
The reason I exclude solar from my prize is that it would not be a break
through like energy out of thin air. There are already 10's of millions
backing the slow rate of improvement on that. BTW: Solar power is my favorite
hope for weaning us off messy fossil fuels someday.
FE people have constant semantical debates on "perpetual motion", "over
unity" ad FE. I define FE as something not needing a fuel (other than perhaps
water) and totally different from what exists. For example making net power
a water wheel and no external moving water.
some jumble of magnets and antennas
an over unity motor-generator combination
something harnessing vortex power (what ever that is)
a heat pump/ heat engine combination (ala Dennis Lee)
something grabbing zero point energy (what ever that is)
The competition is not limited to sane people (I get too few applicants as
it is), although I have a family and prefer not to deal with the criminally
insane. I ask contestants to agree with me up front over conditions and
protocol. Hope you don't mind me copying the FE email list on this.
Any people copied can join the slow moving FE email list from:
fax (215) 654-0651 eric@...
> Dear Eric,
> I was sitting around pondering the possibility of using a high power
> directional transmitter hidden a van across the street, beaming power
> into your garage to power my device, when something hit me.
> Actually two things hit me.
> First I realised that I had better wait till you up the reward.
> Second, my 1.5kv generator with enough fuel to last for over 24 hours
> will not fit into the back of may van.
> Don't you think it is a bit optimistic to think that a new type of
> machine, it its birth, will be more efficient and smaller then what we
> have come up with in the long life of the internal combustion engine?
> I draw the conclusion from this that your main objective is not to find
> a source of "free energy", but rather to expose frauds. A noble
> pursuit, probably just as beneficial to mankind as actually finding a
> source of "free energy". Are you forgetting that these frauds are
> exposed every day in tabloids like The National Enquirer. It is not my
> fault (nor yours) that the average American believes that "there must be
> something to it" when reading one of these articles. Its like trying to
> save a sinking ship by bailing with a teaspoon. They breed faster then
> you can educate them.
> I am, however, curious as to how you define "free energy". You state
> you believe it is possible, but then go on to say you that you doubt you
> will ever have a valid claim.
> I note that you forbid fusion/fission. You also exclude solar.
> Understandable, as this is just a roundabout way of saying fusion.
> All energy comes from somewhere. That is part of our definition of it.
> I never got a bill from Mr Sunshine for my solar powered calculator (or
> from Mr Lightbulb for that matter, since I hardly use it outdoors). Its
> not perpetual though. In five billion years (give or take a few days)
> Mr Sunshine will come a knocking.
> So what is the criteria? Do I have to channel UFO rays through a
> tinfoil pyramid hat, or is this competition open to people playing with
> a full deck as well?
> Best Regards,
- Mr G, hope you don't mind me posting to the FE (free energy) mail list
your points are very good (I paraphrase them):
true, the carnot engine represents the upper theoretical performance for
pumps or engines.
There would be a high hypothetical mileage for cars (I don't claim to know
that would be) - but there's only so much energy in gas.
Yes, there is all kinds of latent energy all around us - just hard to
I think you may have implied that a FE machine may not be commercially viable
if the cost per watt is too high.
I have a an almost sick respect for people who can "separate people from
money" so easily - it can be compared to an ideal filter. Unfortunately,
these people all learn from each other.
You hit the nail on the head: skeptics mostly harbor deep latent hostility
our message is only about 1 hundredth as popular as those we debunk.
fax (215) 654-0651 eric@...
Mr G wrote:
> Please be aware that the carnot cycle is the upper limit for any engine,
> not just heat pumps.A few years ago there was a bunch of talk about the
> 200 mpg carb. This is possible, provided you make the car light enough.
> But on closer inspection the theoretical limit of a car engine is much
> higher and fuel injection placed in the same car would result in even
> higher mileage.
> Still free energy has some allure, after all there's plenty of energy
> all around us if only we could extract it. Hmmm, as soon as I figure out
> a way I pass a couple billion bucks your direction.
> Still don'r be too hard on Dennis, he has found a way to seperate
> people from vast sums of money with little useful work being produced.
> So maybe your answer is in Dennis. Too bad skeptics don't get paid like