natecull wrote:
Lifters happened that way.
The microcomputer revolution happened that way.
Aviation happened that way.
Lifters are a toy.
Microcomputers were commercially started by IBM. What you refer to is garage industries building what were referred to as IBM clones. This was made possible by Gates only licensing the OS to IBM and the small guy could buy the program.
Aviation, the Wright Brothers didn't make any money from their invention?
Historically, this is how major breakthroughs do happen. A scientific or hobbyist community builds, publishes and shares rather than hoarding technology. A scene is created, new physical principles demonstrated. Commercialisation comes later, and often slows innovation.
Yes, it's possible that building an exploitable device requires very expensive hardware that can't be bought at Radio Shack. That's the attitude of the hot fusion community and mainstream physics, certainly. That no interesting physical discoveries can be made in a garage anymore because the components require huge budgets. It's possible that that's true.
How much would you say is affordable for a "garage" invention? It is sometimes not the device itself but the equipment to create the device or components for the device. Try manufacturing a silicon diode in your garage. You will spend a few bucks. As for the hot fusion community, I have no idea.
As far as secrecy goes, it works when the moral attitude is there.
It's my belief, as it was many of the Pugwash scientists, that secrecy might be tolerable in small doses but is fundamentally corrosive to many of the ideals we call 'moral' as well as 'scientific' and 'economic' - such as democracy, repeatability and simple efficiency. If we want to maximise those 'moral' attributes it would seem sensible to minimise anything that gets in the way, such as the compartmentalisation of information. Do we want to follow the AEC model and try to leverage this knowledge into power of one group over against another? I, for one, don't feel safe recreating that kind of closed system.
But I'm aware that there are people on this forum who don't share that take on how the world works, and it's possible I'm wrong.
You totally missed my point. I was speaking in regard to the "garage" inventor. If someone spends a large amount of their own personal money to build something, why wouldn't they want to keep it secret until they are done? And lastly, you totally missed the later half of my sentence.....moral attitude.
TANSTAFFL.... If you don't know this word, here's a hint: The moon is a harsh mistress
Yes, I'm familiar with Heinlein. I simply don't happen to hold to his philosophy.
Do you even know what the meaning of the word is? It is VERY apropos to over unity energy. Your short statement is a cop out. I'll bet all you did was Googled the title and found out is was Heinlein and you haven't a clue to the context of how the word was derived within the novel.
Look at this forum. Are our small discoveries happening because of secrecy, or because of openness, sharing and trust, on Paul and Linda's part as well as others?
You think so? Ok, here you go, ask Ms Brown for a copy of the Structure of Space or a copy of the Rain on the window papers or better yet, ask for access to all of Paul's research, I am sure you will receive it because there is so much openness and trust and sharing.
Perhaps a little of both? I'm quite happy to respect people's boundaries and their personal choice of where and when they feel morally able to disclose. But I'd put my money on breakthroughs coming more through the trust than the secrecy.
Perhaps trust takes a while to build. So I don't want to push people who don't want to be pushed. But trust is a two-way street, and from the outside looking in, it is the 'new energy community' who are the ones who are not trusted by the mainstream, and for good reason, because of a history of overblown, fraudulent claims and commercial scams. It does us no good to deny this.
Breakthroughs from trust, a very novel approach. Should I open my notebooks to you? Would you even understand what is in them? And what is it that I am supposed to trust? What can you bring to the table that would make it beneficial to take you into my confidence? Who would benefit more from a union of trust, you or I? Have I ever made any claims here in this forum that I could "do this" or I could "do that"? I have stuck to what I know from either experience or education or from accomplishments that I have done. Have I speculated on this forum? Yep but then who hasn't for speculations are not false claims. And by the way, I don't consider myself part of the "new age energy community".
*If* we want to produce workable devices and achieve open validation for extraordinary claims - and perhaps after all is said we do not, perhaps that is too dangerous for the world and we'd rather hide it forever - then we will eventually need to take the scientific route of open, honest, freely replicated disclosure.
(Where I say 'we', I mean a community wider than this forum, of course. I consider this group one of the most open in this whole scene. But rhull has a point.)
"freely replicated disclosure", you really have a loaded gun there and you don't realize it. The trick is to make sure the hammer never gets cocked. As to Mr. Hull's point, yes, there are many a charlatan out there just look at Joe Newman, that is the only device that I ever had the pleasure to debunk. And all I ever essentially did was to monitor power in versus power out, waveforms etc and guess what? It was less than 1.
Edit: And when you say 'put up or shut up': I've disclosed everything I know to this forum. I have no knowledge of any physical devices that I've witnessed with my own eyes. For all I know consensus reality may be correct and *they may not exist*. I try to keep an open mind, and that requires admitting that for all our stories, this may all be a rabbit hole with no rabbit. Perhaps Townsend Brown only ever did invent an improved loudspeaker and ionic fan and an interesting way of shaking sand. But even if that were the case, I'm glad to have met the people in this group, just as people.
T
he "put up or shut up" was in reference to "Money" not what you know. If you can't do it yourself, pick a snake charmer, there are many out there as Mr. Hull has pointed out. As to what Dr. Brown ever invented, perhaps you are correct or maybe he did and it was as they have been saying, "born secret". I don't have the answer but I am sure that there are others that know. I know what I have done, I know what I am doing and I certainly hope that I know what will come but through out all of this there is only one trust I have to have....myself and those I choose to work with.
If it appears that I am picking on you, I am not. However, I am weary of hearing how those that come up with something new and can prove it should just put it out on the Internet for all. Well, that is a very nice gesture, that is, if you are a wealthy individual. The true inventor is a driven individual. He has ten dollars in his pocket and decides to buy lunch or a new tool bit for his lathe....he buys a $.99 hot dog and buys the tool. He dreams of his idea taking reality but at some point the reality of his situation is that he needs to eat, to pay for the electric, heat and real estate taxes on the garage that he is working in. Reality is a harsh mistress. He works extra hours at work to have the extra disposable income to buy the parts, tooling or whatever he needs to continue and more than likely at the expense of his health. He owns a junker to drive around in and dreams of the day he can replace it, all he has to do is finish his idea and sell it....oops, I suppose he will go to hell for that one, okay, let me rephrase, ...he dreams of the day that he is finished and gives it to the world so that all will benefit from it and then he can park his junker and live in it since he couldn't afford the taxes, the electric etc and the county came in and took it for back taxes.
