Free R&D to produce free energy solutions

[Capt_Maloche]

Ah, that's an interesting debate, fashionable and perfectly open


Regarding the subject of the subject
We have to go through the understanding of these concepts described above (Duality wave corpucule of light, Spin of the electron, weak and strong force, the Casimir effect that I would like to mention here, magnetism and electromagnetism, mechanical, MHD = Magneto hydro Dynamics of Laplace forces) which are facts verified by the mathematical model and by established and reproducible experiences I recall

if we want a little to get an idea of ​​possible opening for the search for means to "extract" energy ... whose origin should be explained

I also recall this related subject: Energie du Vide, an official return

which does not prevent you from doing practical work on the tracks mentioned at the beginning of the subject, I even invite you to do so.


Concerning the influence of "the human" on the living, (note the difference, not on matter)
We can still speak of a "green thumb" for the gardener, but these examples are not made with the same soil, the same exposure to the sun, the same environment, therefore, no scientific value.

however, we all have feelings about it

[kistinie]

Knowledge of physics is useful for designing and technically using the devices, but then once the protocol is in place, the individual probably takes over the object and only the statistical tool will speak since to date I do not believe not that there is experience that has crudely demonstrated the wave nature of thought, of ether, orgone, dark energy or another name that suits you.

Thought : http://www.ldi5.com/phys/psyche%20quantique.php
ether: http://www.orgonelab.org/MillerReich.htm
Of life ? : http://www.orgonelab.org/cart/lemeter.htm


To date, a statistical approach seems to me the best tool for evaluating the effects, not to mention the fact that it is low in cost and highly accessible.

[renaud67]

another intriguing fact ...
how do we explain the so-called negative charge of an e- and positive of a proton

[kouillon]

another intriguing fact ...
how do we explain the so-called negative charge of an e- and positive of a proton

charge is also a fundamental property of every elementary particle, just like spin or mass! The charge is elementary for the electron, and corresponds to the sum of the charge of the 3 quarks which compose it for the proton. How do we explain it? I am a supporter of string theory which says that each elementary particle (which is not the proton, but the quark) has its properties determined by the vibrational mode of the string which constitutes it. The vibratory mode itself responds to Euler's equations. The fact remains that this is only an algebraic description of reality that I could in no case represent using a metaphor, especially since there is still no certainty concerning the veracity of the model. some ropes.

For the mind stuff, any detailed "study" I saw above had very, very serious flaws in the operating protocol, to the point where I wonder if it's not on purpose.
So while waiting to see a single experiment with a serious protocol, zero credit!

[kistinie]

zero credit!

To oppose the "credit" argument which is global, massive and indistinct amounts to admitting its partiality, its closure and not, its openness.

No credit?


No problemo, it just gives ... greater freedom of action!
And while waiting on the subject a very curious effect during 11/09
http://www.neotrouve.com/?p=67


Now, although these digressions are enriching, I will be honored to have your opinions on the semi-collective implementation of new solutions.

For example, a Bedini or Keppe impulse wind charger, an engine test ...

In short, to assemble the various bricks already existing in one and the other to assess the performance of the autonomous propulsion group thus created

[gegyx]

It is amusing this systematic and offensive criticism of things of the mind.

I think you can feel an even more contemptuous feeling for string theory.
That you give as reference in your demonstrative proofs ...
Because for driveling and incomprehensible verbiage, it's the pompom!
Breakthrough? A proof? Of this smoky theory of strings, which has been stirring up scientific research for many years, and whose mandarins-gurus (perhaps Raéliens?) Behave as inquisitors, and guardian of the temple (of the sect), against any new idea other original research.

Indeed ! It must be a reference ...

[Cuicui]

I suggest you experiment with O14 whose half-life is close to 20 hours! it seems pretty good to start! If you manage to highlight an extension or reduction of its half-life of 1 minute, I am willing to become a Raelian!

The problem is that belief, that is to say being convinced, for the best reasons of course, that it will work or not, is anti-scientific. Any serious experimentation requires maximum neutrality and an absence of bias to reduce the influence of the parapsychological factor in the event that it exists.
That said, hats off for your knowledge and thank you for continuing to share them with us.

[Capt_Maloche]

[quote = "kistinie
And while waiting on the subject a very curious effect during 11/09
http://www.neotrouve.com/?p=67
[/ Quote]

Funny as a principle

from there to draw predictions, anyway, but a trend, surely

[elephant]

Small zetetic interlude, a bit off topic, I agree:

This prediction is so vague that the probability of falling on it a posteriori and interpreting it as such is almost certain. However try to find a contrary prediction, good luck.

[kouillon]

my dear gegyx, very simple of mind that you are judging by the extreme mediocrity of your interventions that I have been able to read on other subjects, know that there is not the shadow of the most tiny proof of what I have written so far! I can not help but smile when you see that you could see evidence here, that explains the why of how we can hang out with a forum titled "Surunitary engines or processes, debate and ideas?" with the diligence that is yours! You are a big naive who wants to take anyone's word for it, and the very concept of proof must escape you completely!

All I have been able to do here is called popularization! And by reading better, you would have even seen that I clarified the uncertain nature of this theory.

So who knows, maybe the standard model will fall apart against another, maybe it will be confirmed, but the fact is that when I am asked a question about spin, I put it in context: physics quantum itself component of the standard model!

Finally, allow me to renew the expression of my contempt that in the face of a discipline producing no formulation, no demonstration and never having convincing results outside of experience where the very protocol was flawed.