Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[Pinwheel]

it just seems like you don't want to put the work into it.

That's the ad hominem-ness I'm talking about. To paraphrase, "your own lack of moral characteristic 'X' (in this case laziness) is what is responsible for your poor point of view". Or, "your lack of moral upstanding = your invalid argument". Logical fallacy.


While this quote...

I see little to no evidence that the members of this group will be able to capitalize on EPD's communications so as to come up with a device or even a thorough understanding of the theory. EPD's ability to even communicate is really substandard. Imagine you sent your kid to school to learn pre-calculus but the catch is that he/she has to learn this somewhat advanced subject via the exact same way that the 5 dozen or so of us are supposed to be learning arcane and extinct, actively suppressed, and dead technologies. Your child would not learn pre-calculus would he/she? You wouldn't even blame them.

... is more about how learning is achieved. You'd blame the kid for not learning pre-calculus in the above case? The above method for instituting learning, while cheap and popular in the modern age, has the least statistical probability of perpetuating learning. Our current situation being only very very slightly better than if Eric was not participating at all.


For the record, EPD refusing to interact with modern technology in any way is just as absurd as having the worlds last highly qualified pre-natal neuro surgeon refusing to do a complicated surgery because he doesn't believe in the new "robo-scalpel". Also, he won't teach it because the teaching tools use 24v circuits instead of 12v circuits.

Once upon a time there were probably people that thought that the phone was from the Devil - they continued to use smoke signals. Boats? Satan! Refrigeration? Lucifer! The cotton gin? The printing press? Gun Powder? Alternating Current!?!?!? You might kill your horse if you use alternating current! Satan would love that!

And the fallacy I'm using now is appeal to ridicule, I guess.

[Aether]

I was just pointing out what your arguments were in that first post you made, that doesn't detract from them at all, they stand alone on their own. My issue was mainly with this statement,

"I see little to no evidence that the members of this group will be able to capitalize on EPD's communications so as to come up with a device or even a thorough understanding of the theory. EPD's ability to even communicate is really substandard. Imagine you sent your kid to school to learn pre-calculus but the catch is that he/she has to learn this somewhat advanced subject via the exact same way that the 5 dozen or so of us are supposed to be learning arcane and extinct, actively suppressed, and dead technologies. Your child would not learn pre-calculus would he/she? You wouldn't even blame them."

it just seems like you don't want to put the work into it.

And I do wonder myself what has happened with devices, such as the ones you mentioned. Either way, it's your opinion, and I have mine, and this is starting to get off topic so I'm done with this too.

[Pinwheel]

I don't think I'm being that negative. As well, I still feel that arguments based on my own lack of understanding or my morally reprehensible negativity, designed to invalidate my arguments, are ad hominem.

Where's the Chris Carson device? Does it work?

Where's the Variable Reactance machine?

And who knows what else?

As far as I know, those old experiments haven't been expanded upon since the late 80's. 20/30 years give or take?

I mean, bounce a dielectric wave off the moon. Okay cool - it hasn't been done before. Seems legit.
Or, Dave is building an oscillating maganderson 2nd and 3rd harmonic etc etc. Okay cool - it hasn't been done before. Seems legit.

But I'm just "being negative", or I "don't get it", when I ask, "well, what about this other stuff that has already been done?"

And when I say this group hasn't done such and such a thing it's because it hasn't since 87-ish.

So yeah, I mean okay, maybe it's not that it (the group) "can't", but I'm pretty sure it "hasn't". Implying that it "won't"... after reading the mess in the Yahoo group... that's how I felt when I wrote it.... I like what Lamare's doing now I guess... meh.

I'll shut up now, I know I'm pissing you guys off. I'm not trying to be a troll or a douche. I was just discouraged by the shenanigans in the Yahoo group.

[lamare]

For arguments sake - this idea seems to have enough potential legs that if a proper proposal was written up, one might be able to get a small amount of grant type funding for it.

Not that one could actually get funding, but a truly professional and well thought out and planned proposal could stand on it's own as demanding some kind of recognition.

Just a thought.

The point is that there is virtually no need for funding!

All we need is a few sheets of aluminum and a few copper tubes. Everything else is already there, including contacts with a radio amateur that regularly performs transverse moon-bounces with this instrument!

[Aether]

I just think your negativity was a little rash and it was unwarranted to say this group of people can't succeed in reproducing Eric's work, or rather the technology Eric reproduced. You can't speak for anyone but yourself. I believe Eric has provided a great outline for what you specifically have to research, and I am very grateful for that. Now it's a matter of following through and thoroughly researching the subject at hand and eventually develop some technology based on it. There is nothing wrong with having a positive attitude about things, you just have to do something with that attitude to be productive. You have to do the work. Being negative or positive wont help anyone if you just sit there expecting things to happen.

[Pinwheel]

For arguments sake - this idea seems to have enough potential legs that if a proper proposal was written up, one might be able to get a small amount of grant type funding for it.

Not that one could actually get funding, but a truly professional and well thought out and planned proposal could stand on it's own as demanding some kind of recognition.

Just a thought.

[lamare]

I've also just purused Lamare's latest project and that seems legit as well. I think it's kind of a big project. I also liked the suggestion made to recreate Wheatstone's experiment.

Big, yes, in terms of it's potential impact.

In practice, it's not such a big deal to do, provided my design works as I think it will. The beauty of this project is that it can be done by just a few people. You need a radio amateur, a theorist and a craftman with some free time and the will to do it.

Add the beautiful instrument we have at our disposal at Dwingeloo, which is just a two hours drive from my home, and we have an opportunity of a lifetime:

Dwingeloo Radio Observatory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Pinwheel]

I've also just purused Lamare's latest project and that seems legit as well. I think it's kind of a big project. I also liked the suggestion made to recreate Wheatstone's experiment.

[Pinwheel]

Perhaps I'm just trying to rationalize and justify my own inability to participate - and projecting that.

[Pinwheel]

That is an apt assesment. You, farmhand, h2ocommuter, raui - all seem to get it on some level.

Probably others.

[Web000x]

I see little to no evidence that the members of this group will be able to capitalize on EPD's communications so as to come up with a device or even a thorough understanding of the theory.

Just because we don't boast every other post about what we have learned or what we are doing doesn't mean that we are not working to apply Eric's theory. Please speak for yourself and YOUR lack of understanding/ability only.

Dave

[lamare]

@Pinwheel:

All the examples you bring forth have been done before. It is not a problem of technology. It's a political problem, as I wrote in my article before:

Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

Let me add one more thing to the discussion about what this is all about, cause in the end this is not so much a scientific or technical issue. It's really the same thing as what we are doing for ages. At some point, somebody thought "hey, the wind is blowing and delivers energy. Can't we use that to get power?" Good idea, let's make a windmill. Next thing, hey, water is flowing in a river and delivers energy. Good idea, so we got the watermill. Hey, the sun is shining light to the earth, which delivers energy. So we got solar panels. Hey, there is heat in the earth, can't we use that? Good idea, so we got heat pumps. And now someone comes along and says: "Hey, the electric field spreads with the spead of light from every charge carrier in the universe and delivers energy. Can't we use that to get power?". And all of a sudden that is "fringe" science, "impossible" and the like, while it's really the same thing. The difference is not a so much technical issue, but a political issue, because this energy source is so cheap and readily available that it will put a whole lot of companies out of business and frees the people of the earth of the burden associated with the need for energy. And that is why the whole scientific community acts like a bunch of religious zealots, as if it were written "Thy shalt not use an energy source that is cheaper than oil". And that is also why this technology will not be introduced to the people of this planet trough the scientific community, but it will be introduced bottom up, it will be a grass roots movement which is unstoppable now the knowledge how to do it is out in the public.

So, what we are facing is a political problem, not a technical problem. And the way to tackle a political problem is publicity. What better way to generate publicity than to disprove Einstein using the single 25 meter radio telescope in the world that is available for experimentation to radio amateurs?

And of course, I also have covered the theoretical disproval of Einstein's relativity at my site:
Tuks DrippingPedia : Ruins 96 Years Einstein Relativity

The same site where you can find all of Eric's work I could get my hands on.



And I have played these kinds of games before, so I have some experience on how to play in the public arena:
Dutch Parliament Considers Revoking Support for Patent Directive

So, fasten your seatbelts and enjoy the ride!

[Pinwheel]

I knew that I would be pointed out as "being negative". Keep in mind that this is, most often, an ad hominem argument. I'm attempting to be critically minded, unbiased, and therefore helpful actually.

The religious cult of positive thinking, I don't think, will really be able to help us here. Seeing the situation for what it is and then developing plans and adjusting them is the reasonable approach. The situation that I see is that a persons ability to understand and perpetuate the technology is very little different from if Eric happened to be dead.

This thread is titled "Whatever happened to EPD?". Nobody really knew but what if he wasn't around anymore and had passed away? The recent transmissions we have received could be some scrolls that were previously unknown to scholars and were found in a cave at Qumran. The only tiny difference between that absurd scenario this real one we find ourselves in, is that we DO get a form of 100% indirect communication with the John the Baptist character.

Lamare, I will go through your link/project later today. Off the top though, from the little I saw you writing about it, this is what I think: what happens if you're right/successful? Your intentions are to prove that C isn't the ultimate speed limit (thus relativism is fundamentally flawed)? So what?

I'm glad you are doing something, but what are you doing really? Proving that C isn't a hard limit of energy propagation? That's already part of the first moments of the Big Bang Theory (the universe can't expand at only a rate of C or it would be much smaller). Even Stephen Hawking publicly admits that there is problems with relativism. You have success and what? Get funding? Wake people up? I'm reminded of Plato's allegory of The Cave whenever somebody talks about "waking up" any sort of scientific community.

I mean, the Boarderlands group showed on video in the late 80's the propagation of dielectric induction happening faster than C. Why not reproduce that? One would have to actually build a resonating coil to start with. I, for sure, don't know how to do that.

Or Bolo wanted a ready made device he could get into his shop and tinker with. What about that device Lindemann had on an old Boarderlands video? Was it the "Variable Reactance Machine", or something like that? The one where they claim to be disregarding the Law of the Conservation of energy. What about that device? Why not build that? Ask Peter about it. No?

Or the rotary Chris Carson device near the beginning of this thread. Where's that? Does it work or not? Does Bolo or whoever want to reproduce that? Ask Peter about it. Somebody plug it in. If it works, then why? If it doesn't work, then why? Could Peter plug it in and maybe turn on his iphone for a bit and record some video maybe?

Or how big is a Planck? Just like EPD asked earlier in this thread.

Or an answer to the transmission line problem in CGS units.

Or that Boarderlands device that generated an AC signal independent of the rotary speed of the disk (same video as the "Variable Reactance Machine"). How do we build that? Ask Peter. Does Bolo want to make this?

You know what I'm saying? This is why I'm not encouraged. I maybe shouldn't have unregistered from the Yahoo group as perhaps Dave will have different transmissions from EPD than he will be posting in here. But other than that, what else is going on? Nothing.

I suppose that if Lamare is successful then more people might get on the F### Einstein bandwagon. That'd be sweet. Judging by the reaction from the neutrino news out of CERN I think the 99% are already actually on that bandwagon (or close), and it's just the 1% that need to keep their game face on for whatever reason.

I'm just rambling now. I'm going for a coffee.

Actually, before I go I just remembered something I've been thinking about. EPD and Tesla's means for separating the two inductions was resonating coils. All your magnetism end up on one end and all your dielectricity ends up on the other. The propagation and usage of the two separate inductions then was the main body of work of Tesla.

So really, figuring out how to separate the inductions, and tinker with them safely, in my opinion, IS a fruitful methodology to enhance understanding of, and also perpetuate, the dead technology.

See, I'm not just "being negative". I got solution ideas too.

References: Plato's allegory of The Cave.

The Cave: An Adaptation of Plato's Allegory in Clay - YouTube

[Kokomoj0]

So much drama, so little results.

I think I'm joining the camp that acknowledges that the technology is dead. The bad guys won. Our champion is a crazy person. All is lost. This is not an awakening or some sort of revolutionary 2012 meme Morning Dawn. The bad guys won very thoroughly.

Unfortunately most of these people out here do not understand the meaning of rms or how to properly test them from other respects and their projects are doomed to fail before they even start.

The technology is not dead its just not profitable to the PTB and unless you are able to build it yourself it wont get done and invariably even if you can build it for yourself initial investment is usually quite high, like the electric car for instance.

[lamare]

So much drama, so little results.

I think I'm joining the camp that acknowledges that the technology is dead. The bad guys won. Our champion is a crazy person. All is lost. This is not an awakening or some sort of revolutionary 2012 meme Morning Dawn. The bad guys won very thoroughly.

Plan B would be an escape plan rather than the prevention plan that would appear to be plan A.

May I invite you to take a look at my "kick some a**" plan?

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...e-history.html