They never learn. First you invest in this "plausible" fantasy on the web, then their doubts seep in, then they go cruising in techno websites to find out, then they learn that they been had, but NO.., there's this endless mantra uttered "Everything is possible. It's just that it would take some more effort and open-minded attitude"

As that bloke in Cliffhanger says: "Where's my money at?" - the whole thing in a nutshell.

Know your physics, and you won't have to waste your precious resources, only to justify it later with some more BS

I agree, know your physics for it will help to show the many merits of the device, but better keep it open to learn beyond the present day status-quo because there will always be new discoveries coming regardless and the SEG is such a case.

That is what the SEG represents, an advancement in science and technology that will rock this World by taking it all to a higher level of technological advancement.

Here are some reasons why being closed minded can be a big problem!

Now, THIS is what it's ALL about. The rest is mere fireworks:

Yuval that was entertaining but you forget that no one here was born yesterday and we are all capable here of weighting it out on ourselves. I for one have spent plenty of time learning about the concept and I think the classical design merits investigating with a prototype which would really make it the first time it been done in decades. I was going to end talking about the subject with my last post, but your remark was just too pointless and uninformative to leave as is. That project is already fully funded, so it really does not matter what you or anyone else says about it. Lets just hope for the best with it in 2008.

Fair enough. So, how would you theoretically associate electromagnetic fields, to Anti-Gravitational fields, if the latter, at all, not fictional?

"...That project is already fully funded..." - This is by no means a sign for fruition or completion. So are endless multi-billion $ attempts at Cold-Fusion, which result-wise amounts to the biggest scam of the twentieth century.

Wouldn't you say?

- - - -

As the late Yuval Ne'eman (leading theoretical physicist) was quoted to say, as early as 1993 "...The coldest known fusion possible is called 'The Sun', and it's very, very hot..."

It is unfortunate that you choose that side effect off the top to start the topic because there is so much more to the SEG just as a generator alone. Let me put it to you this way, just ask yourself what is gravity, inertia or even magnetic and electric fields? Of course, you do not know nor does present science, even thou we are aware of it and make use of it. That being the case, we cannot say with absolute certainty that the electromagnetic opposite of gravity does not exist until we fully understand what it is! Nature does normally provide opposite forces in principle, such as negative and positive electric fields or even with matter such as electrons verses protons, etc. Therefore, could it be that lurking within the gravitation formula is an opposite and the same for inertia? Prudence does not exclude these possibilities until the day science fully understands these basic forces of nature.

"...we cannot say with absolute certainty that the electromagnetic opposite of gravity does not exist until we fully understand what it is..."

The above may be typified as "Negation Tautology".

Not very scientific, empirical or even methodical, for that sense.

It's like saying: "How can we certainly be sure in advance that the next galaxy is not made of Heintz Ketchup, when we have never even been there?"

- This is an opening to an endless stream of nonsense: :"How can you proclaim no one can anti-gravitate, when the future is full of unlimited improbabilities?" or: "How do you know travelers from the future are not among us, when you have never even been to the future?" - or: " Can any one positively prove that time-travel is impossible?" - or: "You have to be an extraterrestrial to claim that they have not visited earth" - or: "Wouldn't you be surprised if the future will prove that modern physics is a total bag of folly" - I hope you get the point...

> Please refer to:

1. John Searl's "Chinese Room" paradox

2. Karl Popper's Conditional Validity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room

I agree that sentence needs rephrasing without negating itself, but I trust anyone can understand the point nevertheless.

Please refer to:

1. John Searl's "Chinese Room" paradox

John SEARLE -- the real professor... not John Searl the: deluded? intentional fraud? scam artist? In this case spelling means a lot.

Sorry, my bad.

My point (with Searle's) was: A closed-loop argumentation is capable of proving nothing, other that it's mere existence.

With Popper was: Any hypothesis not viable for direct or indirect testing, may not be valid in advance. See also "Verification Theory" in modern Philosophy Of Science.

What I find offensive about this and your other posts is the profoundly negative tone.

You are probably thinking you are the positive guy. But you are not. You are the naysayer, stating that everything we know about nature, through observation and centuries of science is all wrong. The first law of thermodynamics if wrong. The second law of thermodynamics is wrong. All of Newtonian physics is wrong. All of magnetic science is wrong. All of quantum mechanics is wrong (with the exception of that part that says that anything is possible, it's just a matter of probablility). All of what Feynman said is wrong. All of what Einstein said is wrong. Everyone in science is wrong. Only you and John Searl are right. The combination of arrogance and negativity are stunning.

Perhaps you can see why, on an engineering site (given that engineering is based on science, and given that many of us actually like science, as ridiculous as that may seem to you and John) your promotion of anti-science does not get a warm reception.

Science requires observation. No one* has seen John's flying saucers levitate and jump into space. No one has seen John's SEG creating energy from nothing.** No one has seen anyone's health improve from being near one of these. No one has seen anything run without friction. His four main claims are all unsupportable by science, because science relies on observation. But, of course, his claims are entirely unsupportable by the accumulated knowledge, won by century after century of real work, codified in scientific theory. We don't even need him to demonstrate that the SEG won't work: the accumulated wisdom of thousands of very smart people says it can not. That accumulated wisdom has enabled us to do astonishing things: walking on the moon, for instance. The anti-science types said it could not be done.

John Searl, and you, are promoting nonsense. Are you in it for the money too?

*Other than John in his dreams.

** In a slight bit of cunning, John mentions the room gets cold. He hopes engineering types will say "Oh well maybe then he really is extracting heat from the room." But of course he is not. By his own admission, he lived in a house in which these supplied all the electricity. He didn't freeze to death, did he?

Now now this is the internet, you are bound to come across people who don't agree with you or are going to make it a point to cause trouble without first looking at the facts.

I have had a look at the Hydrostar system (again, as I have come across this one before). It is a variant of the standard electrolysis H from H20 free energy generators and is rather seriously flawed in its theory and design (I will stop at the fact that the electrodes are stainless steel which is about the worst material to use when trying to extract H from water (which is actually one of the worst materials to try and extract H from)). This one has been scientifically dis proven like all the rest. I am sorry if this causes offence, but you cannot beat simple laws of chemistry and electricity. You, like many others have been mislead, however if you want free energy or magical increases in mileage, and just want to take someones word for it Rather than assessing the facts and science yourself (or listening to others that do have the engineering and scientific background to understand whats actually going on here) then please feel free to go out and buy one of these and try it yourself. Sometimes that is the only way to prove to someone that something just doesn't work.

Just remember that I am actually posting this while at work as a power engineer (and part of my job is assessing previous and current developments in power extraction and generation, including the fringe ones). I have taken the time out of my busy day to try and offer some advice and guidance, I hope you can do the same by reading what I have written.

No jokes, no put downs, just one person trying to help others. You don't have to believe me or others that will say the same. Look into the actual science yourself.

"...the electrodes are stainless steel which is about the worst material to use when trying to extract H..."

Why not say it out-right: Nearly chemically intert...

Sometimes too much information can cause more damage (and confusion) than too little. That and if I give all the important answers, where's the surprise and learning experience when someone decides to look into the science behind the supposed invention/discovery themselves which so few people seem to be willing to actually do (rather make decisions based on a flashy web page and ignore all the other contradictory information on the site or the web in general).

Come on people, think about it. A discovery like this (if true) is monumental and the holy grail of engineering - clean, efficient, virtually free power. This isn't something small, if true it would change the world and make the developer billions. Why are none of these "working" free energy and hydrogen electrolysis inventors rich and the world changed! Why!

Something to seriously think about.

Like I said before, I do not know much about this H2O technology but I expect to get another chance to investigative it later on. Now I do recall him saying that others that try to copy it do have problems with the electrodes, but not a problem with his demonstrator. Clearly, this thing ran on a gas without any attachments or batteries.

It does run on a gas (H as an additive into the air stream). No one is disputing adding hydrogen into the air stream of a standard gasoline powered car can increase performance and mileage. The biggest problem (due to the nature of the extraction and the science behind it) is how pathetically small the the amount of continuously extracted gas actually is (we are talking bubbles here not jets of H), especially when compared to the massive amount of electricity that is needed to generate it (and hence, since it is coming from the vehicles alternator, the increased load on the motor, which reduces the mileage FAR, FAR more than any potential gains).

Try a web search on the Hydrostar system. There is plenty of information out there on the web regarding it and the science behind the VAST number of backyard water electrolysis projects and experiments.

"...others that try to copy it do have problems with the electrodes, but not a problem with his demonstrator..."

In Wiki, it is quoted that: "...He claims that the initial prototypes worked but were lost during testing..."

You are getting confused, the "electrodes" comments has to do with the Hyrostar and not SEG.

LOL, POWER engineer eh? I hate to shatter your ego but, there is no such thing as a 'power' engineer ! POWER is the rate ENERGY is converted at, hence, you might be an ELECTRICAL engineer or an HVAC engineer or a NUCLEAR engineer or even a CHEMICAL engineer etc etc etc etc, (I'm sure u get the picture by now!), but certainly NOT a POWER engineer !!! HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAA! ROFL...

Getting back to the subject of this thread: some years ago, Searl complained that his brother Peter had stolen equipment from his flat; not to mention 'the technology'. Following this bitter schism, Peter Searl set up his own company; taking some of John's company directors with him. Now, would anybody care to guess how much a UK 'regional development agency' paid to Peter Searl to 'research the marketing potential of a revolutionary magnetic motor'? Here is a clue, it was more than £5000. Answers on a postcard ...

Oops! Correction (misread my own book manuscript!): it was not for a 'motor', but for a 'new power supply'. Kinda removes the last element of doubt, doesn't it?

That must have been some careful choice of words to appease both ends !

Looks like a urine extractor to me <Cough>.

First post! They keep throwing this Godin & Roschin paper in our faces as evidence. The more I look around, the more I feel like questioning the validity of this experiment and published results. Any thoughts on this?

AIAA-2001-3660, Godin & Roschin (Russian Academy of Science) Godin presented this experimental paper, based on results from 1993. This was by far the most controversial paper of the entire conference. The apparatus described in the experiment was a large rotating magnetic stator, surrounded by a collection of smaller external rotors of opposite polarity, all arranged such that they all rotate while spinning on a central axis. It appears to have been based on the so called "Searl Effect Generator". Results include reports of gravity reductions of 0% to 35% for rotation velocities of 0 to 550 RPM. However, the apparatus was mounted on an aluminum frame, which could have easily supported a counter-rotating induced current, as per Lenz's Law. However, the gravity reduction was just one of many reported anomalies, which included: 1) Runs on its own after being brought up to speed. 2) Begins to generate a net power after it is up to speed. 3) Drops the temperature in the test lab by 6 deg C to 8 deg C. 4) Strange "striped" magnetic field distribution (Bessel Function?) surrounding the device. 5) Blue & pink visible corona glow surrounding the device. Unfortunately the device was destroyed (by unhappy financial backers?) over 6 years ago and so it is impossible to verify any of the results without recreating the device. They have been waiting to do just that for the last 6 years but for some reason have been unable to raise the funding so far. Their visit was sponsored by IRI (Integrity Research Institute?) and per Tom Valone of IRI, they have also recently visited a DOE site, and were faced with a skeptical audience there as well. Funding is still TBD. RESULT: Experimental - WEAK POSITIVE (in question)

I hate to break this to you, but there are a number of properly qualified (i.e. they earned their doctorates rather than buying them, like Bearden and Valone) scientists who nevertheless fail to keep to proper scientific norms.

I estimate that there are less than 200 of them world-wide, but they do a disproportionate amount of damage to the public's understanding of (and ultimately respect for) science. If you ever read a newspaper report which says that some ufo-sighting, free-energy claim or spoon-bending demonstration has been declared genuine 'by scientists', you can be sure that the scientists in question belong to the above group. I call them 'Rentacrank'.

The basic problem is that a doctorate is like a driving licence; it proves only that one obeyed the rules for a limited period. Now think of all of the awful driving that you see. Do you really think that they are all driving without a licence? Unfortunately, it is not as easy to remove the 'licence' of a scientist as it is that of a medic, a priest, a lawyer or even an engineer. If it were, then pseudoscience would disappear overnight. Amateurs would still play pointlessly with magnets, but there would be no 'maverick scientists' to back them up in the layman's mind.

So, whereas Godin and Roschin (and Pitkanen in Finland) may appear to be bona fide scientists, I would suggest that they are the Russian/Finnish equivalents of Harold Puthoff (with his support of Uri Geller, 'remote viewing', over-unity, etc. etc.).

Indeed, I would reverse the implied principle and suggest that 'academic' support of an obvious conman like Searl does not prove that Searl is correct, it instead proves that the supportive academic is 'many sandwiches short of a picnic'.

You may like to read Nobel laureate V.L.Ginzburg's article about the problem of pseudoscience even within the Russian Academy of Sciences (Skeptical Inquirer, Jan/Feb 2005). I believe that it is available online.

I have already written to Akademician Ginsburg in order to question what positions Godin and Roschin hold within the RAS, and whether they should keep them. Perhaps others should do the same.

NB: Godin and Roschin have patented the machine which they claim is the same as the SEG. In the patent, it is described as being merely a homopolar generator. That is, it has to be driven by something else. Not very convincing, is it?

I'm on my way out the door, but wanted to take the time to say that this is a great post! It's a treat to have you with us. The term "Rentacrank" is priceless!

I am beginning to wish that I had taken out copyright on that neologism! ;->

You should have! I love it and can't resist stealing it. Your royalty check is in the mail.

I only hope it doesn't bounce -- I just invested a lot in a machine which takes in water, creates hydrogen to run a generator, which, in turn, supplies current to a magnetizer and a robotic assembly system which builds permanent magnet motors, which, when running, drive the generators which feed the electrolysis process. The resulting permanent magnet motors are then sold for viral replication.

Atlanta, where miracles never cease

It is my sad (ha-ha) duty to report the demise of the main Searl website. Could it have been something that I said? Perhaps it was something that they thought I was going to say in my next Youtube clip! The other sites do not seem too 'happy' either, with few questions being posted in their fora; and even fewer being answered.

In their site (yes, it's still there), and I quote,

"...Prof. Searl is also the sole inventor of the technology referred to as "The Searl Effect" which is based on Prof. Searl's technology entitled "The Law of the Squares".

The Purpose of this organization is to develop and market an electric generator called , The Searl Effect Generator or (SEG) and a flying craft called an Inverse-G-Vehicle or (IGV), as well as related projects in this field...."

- End of quote, I would like to ask:

1. Could anyone here shortly describe what is that specific technology mentioned, referred to as "Law of the Squares" ?

2. What, in heaven's name, is "Inversed Gravity" ?

Any one here, any one at all, please, enlighten me

Which site is still there? I was referring to 'swallowcommand.com'; a site so loaded with fancy presentational tricks that one needed a couple of MB of free RAM just to look at it.

http://searleffect.com/

"...one needed a couple of MB of free RAM just to look at it..."

And a couple of thousands to be considered a donating honorable member?

- Or was it about something else ?

Law of the Squares:

This will completely floor you.

I suspect he called it "The Law of the Squares" so ill-informed people would confuse it with the inverse square law (that describes radiating into a sphere, etc). It has sort of a scientific ring, he hopes.

But! But! It is actually based on magic squares! You remember the ones you worked on as a kid, where the diagonals, verticals, horizontals all add to the same number? You'll think I am making this up -- but I'm not. If you dig around his various sites, you'll find his "paper" on magic squares -- and after reading it, you have to feel a little sorry for the guy , because he is delusional -- but then he keeps pressing on with the fraud, aided by people who are not so much delusional as sleezy.

Inverse Gravity is his term for anti-gravity: when you spin up one of these generators, they can fly off into space if you are not careful. He claims to have lost several into space in the 60's!

Sheeeeeesh

As vermin said: "I have recently seen someone, levitating his lady, way, way up" or something like that.

Sorry for that last comment of mine. It was stupid and unnecessary

Me and my big mouth, I know

There is a strange affinity between electricians and magic squares.

In the 1930s, various British electrical trade magazines were full of them. Searl probably saw them there in his youth.

Around the turn of the 19th/20th century there appeared a book on magic squares - written by an electrical engineer.

Some months ago, Searl challenged me to a public 'magic-square filling' contest. I accepted the challenge, but the Searl gang then lost interest.

BTW: there is a very interesting paper coming up in American Mathematical Monthly next year. It proves that, given n the side of a magic square, one can find numbers such that it is magic for every positive integer power of the numbers - up to n.

They are not that trivial a subject: there exists a Royal Society paper co-authored by one of the UK's leading mathematicians and one of its leading physicists.

LOL! These are not a miracles. What Ken_fry describes already exists and there volumes written about it. Search for Schizophrenia.

Wouldn't it be fun if we could think of ways to lure 'rentacranks' into this forum. Right? A banner somewhere? :)

(my apologies to Flowerbower for using 'rentacrank' in plural without prior permission)

Hey, ken_fry, Univ.of GA or GaTech?

Hey, ken_fry, Univ.of GA or GaTech?

Neither, although I have a son taking a course at Tech, and an advisor who is a professor there. Tech is an incredible value for people in state! Keep your grades up and it's free!

To all of you critisizing John I think you should all personally contact him. I myself am in quiet frequent contact with him. He knows what he is talking about.

If you could be bothered to look at the technical details for it and why he says it flys and not just take things on face value you might actually see he isn't delusional. You my friends are the delusional ones.

He uses the term inverse gravity for a reason, because its not anti-gravity. He has other forces playing on the ship. Its not an anti-gravity force.

How do know that I am not also in frequent contact with him, and his friends? How else do you think that I know so much about him? The 'technical details' at swallowcommand are a joke, and the 'Law of the Squares' is moronic; it is not even 'clever' numerology. So which particular technical detail, in your opinion, explains its flight? Not that it has ever flown, of course, except in his imagination.

Pseudoskepticism or pseudo-skepticism denotes thinking that appears to be skeptical but is not. Term arised by Marcello Truzzi, through his Journal of Scientific Exploration, where he defined pseudoskeptics as those who take "the negative rather than an agnostic position but still call themselves 'skeptics'".
Pseudoskeptics:
1-The tendency to deny, rather than doubt.
2-Double standards in the application of criticism.
3-The making of judgments without full inquiry.
4-Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.
5-Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments.
6-Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science
7-Presenting insufficient evidence or proof.
8-Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof.
9-Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.
10-Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
11-Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.

The only people who believe in Searl are himself and a few close followers. To get the gist of the true situation, go to Youtube, search for 'Searl' and read the several thousand comments which have been made over the past 11 months.

I understand that YouTube has some of the finest examples of pseudoskepticism readily available, so I can't help but wonder how many innovations have been lost do to it. On the other hand, it is evident from the Searl Solution updates that this effort is moving ahead and building regardless. If they secede, the public will have the right to demand outdoor flogging of those guilty of pseudoskepticism.

I don't know how young you are but before YouTube and the internet (where anyone can say anything and even a completely clueless person can make themselves sound like they know what they are talking about after a little 'googling' and a trip to Wikipedia) there was the need for hard provable data, proper verifiable tests, independent verification, you know - real results.

As I and other real scientists and engineers have said, YouTube is a nice tool for showcasing technological ideas and developments BUT you still need the hard provable data, proper verifiable tests, independent verification, etc. This is ESPECIALLY important when supposed developments and discovery's are made that contradict known laws or understanding. It is in the data and science (and to a smaller part the actual person) that you will discover whether the development is real, imaginary, wrong or faked. As a side note remember, anyone can post a video or picture and now days both of these are ludicrously easy to fake or mislead the viewer. This makes proper verification of a 'supposed' discovery even more important.

Those that do not bother to delve into the science and technical details behind a technological discovery or development are just wasting everyones time.

On the other hand, it is evident from the Searl Solution updates that this effort is moving ahead and building regardless.

So is the free energy generator manufacturer (A Dr of engineering and Draco alien representative) I have been in contact with on CR4. I wouldn't trust either of them based on my understanding of the science, proof supplied and the history of the people behind both of these.

_{"If they secede, the public will have the right to demand outdoor flogging..."}

secede

One entry found.

Main Entry:se·cede Pronunciation: \si-ˈsēd Function:intransitive verb Inflected Form(s):se·ced·ed; se·ced·ingEtymology:Latin secedere, from sed-, se- apart (from sed, se without) + cedere to go — more at suicide
Date:1749 : to withdraw from an organization (as a religious communion or political party or federation) — se·ced·er noun

"Secede?"

So are they planning on spitting off and forming their own country where scams like this are legal and those who demand that science be backed up by proof will be flogged?

Now I am not going to put this post down as "Off-Topic" as I believe that the original topic has been explained in more than enough depth here and with enough facts included.

Supporters of the Searl generator who still wish to post after having not bothered to actually learn the science behind the device and the evidence and explanations presented here by people who are far more likely to know what they are talking about should stop posting altogether. If you still wish to post your thoughts, try "Keelynet". After all this is an engineering discussion site.

For those of you who don't want to listen or debate the facts and science and would rather argue, don't bother posting.

Like I said to my sister's young kid the other day, I said: "Look, You either say it's a motor, or you say it's a generator, but it can never be both at the same time, just like a car cannot go forward and back at the same time. It will either go forward, or it will go back, but never both at the same time"

The idea of a motor having the energy to run, and then producing more energy to run something else at the same time, is simply beyond science and common sense, it is straight into the realm of fantasy.

The added outrages claim of anti-gravity being a side-effect of the whole thing, may have meant to give some credibility to this far-fetched fantasy, but in my opinion only managed to overshoot this into becoming object for ridicule

If only life were that simple! When one surveys carefully the fields of pseudoscience and the paranormal, one realises that they survive only because of authority-figures. That is, there are always a few high-powered academics who are a 'few symbols short of a correct equation'. In the 19th/20th centuries, for instance, people like Crookes and Lodge lent respectability to telekinesis, etc. Even today, Brian Josephson [who received a Nobel prize for undergraduate work!] is a 'brand-leader' for the paranormalists. Such 'authorities' impress journalists and other laymen.

It is the same for pseudoscience. Think of some notorious free-energy devices, such as Bearden's 'motionless electrical generator', Bedini's machines or Coler's 'Stroem' inventions. Utter nonsense eh? Now try this experiment (I did, in 2007; never again!): contact the Alpha Institute and express your polite opinion that these inventors are/were all conmen. You will be astonished at the aggressive replies which you receive [and threats, if you persist]. The point is that the Alpha Institute consists ENTIRELY of superficially high-powered mathematical physicists with more professorships and doctorates collectively than you can shake the proverbial stick at. They all have/had posts at genuine universities and publish in supposedly bona fide journals.

THIS is what we are really up against, not just the likes of Searl!

Right. The most annoying is the appearance of once-appreciated figures, now leaning towards the occult, in the name of exactly what?

I couldn't begin to understand such a flip.

Isn't there enough ignorance as it is, that more is added with the approval (or even right-out support) of such figures?

Yes, the case of J.P.Vigier is particularly sad. He once mixed with the greats of the 'Einstein generation' and was sidelined only because of his political affiliations.

Even when I saw that Physics Letters A was publishing silly 'reactionless propulsion' papers, I assumed that Vigier (as editor) was merely leaning over backwards to be open-minded.

Even when I found that he had himself patented rather strange devices, I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

The final straw was when he attended the same crackpot conference as Searl!

By the way, after checking out the Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies (the loony-tune version of Princeton), have a look at the Santilli-Galilei sites. Santilli (former editor of Hadronic Journal) is now known as 'The Great Explorer' and has assembled dozens of like-minded 'academics' (among them Volfson, whose antigravity-machine patent temporarily worried normally complacent orthodox scientists some years ago).

Well, not to be misunderstood, here it is again, so perhaps then you will understand.

"I understand that YouTube has some of the finest examples of pseudoskepticism readily available, so I can't help but wonder how many innovations have been delayed or lost due to it. On the other hand, it is evident from the Searl Solution updates that this effort is moving ahead and building regardless. If they succeed, the public will have the right to demand outdoor flogging of those guilty of pseudoskepticism".

I am now troubled by your neologism, 'pseudoskepticism'. What exactly does that mean? Skepticism which, in reality, isn't? Surely, that would be some sort of 'praise' wouldn't it? Or are you implying that the 'pseudoskeptics' have their OWN perpetual motion machines to sell, and are pretending to have scientific objections merely in order to disadvantage competitors?

Also, in what sense are things moving ahead? Look at the searleffect site: no public announcements for 10 months and (having access to the 'secret' parts) I can tell you that there has been no sensible discussion on the private bulletin board for a very long time (the public one had to be abandoned because of an avalanche of critical comment).

At the searlsolution site, they recently had to 'spring-clean' and remove thousands of 'pseudomembers'.

At one time, a multimillionaire was a member of Searl's group but HE was never so stupid as to provide the necessary funding himself. I have no doubt that Searl has new suckers in Italy, Israel and Thailand. They have probably even built a 'magnetiser' which might prove useful for making novelty toys. There remains, however, the 'trifling' problem that a working SEG has never existed in the past, and will never exist in the future, because it is contrary to the laws of physics.

I do not understand how anyone can read the Searl 'books' at swallowcommand dot com and not see immediately what a fraud he is: the sensible parts have been lifted wholesale from textbooks by Richard Feynman and others, while the illiterate parts are 'all Searl'.

What you appear not to know is that the SEG is ALWAYS on the 'point of going into production'. Go back 10 years and one finds a 'worldwide organisation' backing Searl. However, this is not the same organisation as the present one.

Go back 20 years and look at the newspaper articles which I have put on Youtube.

This is the longest-running free-energy scam known; it goes on-and-on; only the victims change. You believe in it? YOU back it! With money.

Einstein thought that he HAD to introduce the cosmological constant in order to make the equations fit the then-current understanding of the universe. It was ridiculous only because further observations showed that it was not needed, in that the universe was not constrained in the manner which he assumed. Some people would call that an accurate prediction.

Sure. I wasn't criticising his need to complete his prediction, but (IMHO) we have to call a thing by it's proper name, and like so many others before him, he did paint a bull's eye around the arrow-tip, which is always bad tactics.

His description of mass curving the trajectory of light on the other hand, got to be confirmed by Dodington only a few years later, given only some confidence in his intuition and the patience to overcome the then current ridicule to such a revolutionary idea, which was contradictory to current understanding.

I think that you mean Eddington, not 'Dodington'.

Of course, one also has to remember that Einstein was then an obscure scientist, holding the nationality of a recently defeated enemy state. Imagine what we might think if some unknown Iraqi scientist suddenly came up with an easily testable theoretical reconciliation of GR and QM. This is where scientific open-mindedness is really tested!

Yes. I often miss a key to the next one on the keyboard, in the rush to type. I hope my intention was clear however.

I need some ammo to defeat a scam being perpetrated on friends, concerning a perpetual motion machine.

You fellows appear to be in the right sub-set of folks who should be able to do this.

There's a fellow passing himself off as an engineer, who is using a YouTube video of someone in Australia as proof that "over unity" really works. They've duped a couple of dumb but really great folks into spending loads of hard earned retirement money for nothing but their own dishonest purposes.

This is the worst of the worst. Dummies that can afford to lose cash, deserve to be fleeced, maybe, but an old honest fellow and others that will wind up on begging for food, when all the money's gone, isn't' right.

I've given one of them stuff from the US Patent Office websites that should convince anyone, except they have to pull their punches, since someone won a lawsuit or two against them, for denying a patent pending number, just because the office thought it fraudulent.

So, would anyone be willing to invest a bit of time, working with me on this?

What I have to prove to them, is that the laws of thermodynamics is still valid, and has not been proven wrong.

If anyone knows the age of the Australian video supposely proving "over unity" really works, and if anyone there has debunked the whole thing. If the video was 3 or 4 or more years ago, then it should be fairly simple to contact someone there and prove it was a ruse.

Thanks

Simsworks

There are many over unity scams out there but most are based on a few basic pseudoscience designs (such as magnet motors, HHO, etc).

Please supply us as much information as possible to help narrow down the specific scam.

The type of over unity device (as detailed as possible please including what it does and how it does is), any website mentioning the device, any names of people selling or endorsing the device, anything else you can think of.

There is likely an internet trail that will lead right back to the scammer, because the internet is how they get their message across to as many people as possible.

Information from the US Patent Office is not going to offer much help as they have already given patents to a number of over unity devices, scams and unworkable devices before they started cracking down in recent years (and they don't really carefully assess the devices for pseudoscience or workability).

If your lucky the scam is a variant on an older well know and well documented scam in which case there will be plenty of information on the internet in places such as Wikipedia. It is possible we have already discussed and scientifically dis-proven the scam here on CR4.

Since I had to sign a non-disclosure statement sometime back, I don't want to publish it, where it can be found by a web search. Can you send your e-mail address to Simsworks@aol.com?

From there, I can provide you with all the particulars regarding this, as long as you agree not to publish the information yourself. Generic discussion, is OK, but specifics can get me sued. (:-))

Anyway, to see the specific video these fellows are pushing, as proof that their unit will also work, can be seen by doing a google on "440 over unity". It's the first thing to pop up, as well as the first 10. They are all about that same thing. Most are wacko's who swallow it hook line and sinker. Click on the first one, and it'll pull up the video, supposely published by Australia's Sun News.

I've been advised that there are at least 3 such operations in the states, going on right now. Scams, I'm sure.

I'll await your e-mail to Simsworks@aol.com

Thanks

Since I had to sign a non-disclosure statement sometime back, I don't want to publish it, where it can be found by a web search.

No need I found it from the generic information supplied.

http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm

The Lutec Electricity Amplifier. Short answer - SCAM. Example, they talk about home electricity meters measuring against a fixed voltage and overcharging the customer in a utility overpricing scam that the LEA device corrects and hence saves you money.

We designed a beautiful machine that uses about 2kW and outputs 10kW, it was designed specifically for the domestic market. The problem is the meters attached to the homes that use the electricity are owned by the utilities or the distributors of electricity, and are only designed to read current and then multiply it by a "fixed" voltage.

No one outside of the meter owners is allowed to tamper with these meters(it is the same world wide). Our machines may only require say 10 volts but the meter reads 10 amps and multiples it by whatever voltage is common to the country in question. The USA for example uses 110 volt systems. The homeholder get billed 1.1kW where it should have been only 110 watts if the LEA were attached.

http://www.consumercide.com/js/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=454

Misleading rubbish. See section "Unit of measurement" of the Wikipedia entry on the meters in question. All modern and recent meters don't suffer from this problem and produce accurate readings, this is nothing but a cheap misdirection marketing trick.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_meter

As for the rest, it is nothing more than a variant of the simple pulsed DC waveform average/true RMS voltage misunderstanding/scam that is very, very common in the water electrolysis and magnet over unity generator circles. Their use of words to describe how the device works like "This harmonious triumvirate result" doesn't impress me one bit either.

I could go on, but I am not wasting any more time on this. The simple test is to properly measure the instantaneous true RMS values of power in and power out with the LEA connected and without it connected. Because this is an add-on device and not an over unity generator it makes it a bit more difficult to disprove (and a bit easier to believe), but the massive claimed power increase would be easy to see when using the proper equipment to ACCURATLY measure actual power in and out.

Extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence, and at the very least you should get them to demonstrate actual over unity in a proper example like the one mentioned above. When they cannot then depending on home much time and energy you want to invest you should demand that they give your friends a refund due to fraud. Get Lutec to prove they haven't committed fraud. Go to the media if you have to (although in my experience they like easy fluff stories rather than hard facts and "protecting the little guy"). Oh, and try the police also.

Fascinating to see how closed-loop remains the favorite over-unity scheme.

Be it mechanical (gravitational?), electromagnetic or electrochemical.

- - - -

Some of the most impressive hoax contraptions, collected on utube of course

I is easy to be fooled these days

Good info. Thanks

I can gain a lot of info from the links you've provided, and the links from there. Just a cursory review shows that I can chase this to various other sources, as well.

I found a reference to an engineer called Ian Bryce. He appears to be the lead in fighting this Lutec scam. Any idea how I can contact him?

Thanks

Simsworks

No, but a web search found some links mentioning him

http://www.google.co.nz/search?hl=en&num=100&q=%22Ian+Bryce%22+Lutec+LEA&meta=

There may be further links that give contact details or his webpage where you can get hold of him........

Oh snap, just found his magazine article on the Lutec device, including the independent testing done to prove it is not over unity which is exactly what you are after.

http://www.phact.org/e/z/lutec.pdf

Yes Engineers can say "oh snap" (if used in the correct context).

Great info!

With what you and the others have supplied, I'm good to go. I've contacted the publisher that did the article you referenced, to see if they can get me in contact with Mr. Bryce.

Even failing that, I can use the article to beat some sense into these folks. (:-))

In reading it, and searching a bit, I found a followup article in the summer issue of the Skeptic, by Mr. Bryce. In the google list you provided, there appears to be further follow up as well.

It will provide me the ammo to approach a local sheriff's detective about a possible fraud investigation, as well.

Thanks for all your help, and that of the others too.

A hearty well done for the info you've all provided.

(Love the tank, BTW!)

Adios Amigos!

Simsworks

As said here over and over, there is an easier way to think about it:

The first person to demonstrate over-unity for real, is likely to get richer than Bill Gates overnight.

The rest are all hoax.

Sure they are hoaxes.

Unfortunately, a fairly large percentage of common folks will tend to believe what others would pass off as impossible, not just because they don't know thermodynamic laws, or what they mean, but they want to believe that the shysters they have befriended are actually honest.

We elected a communist didn't we? That wasn't the intent. The man had some good points he was pushing. But, the result is far different than what he presented, and now we're all paying the piper.

In the same way, these folks are wanting to believe in the Fairy God Mother. I need some hard evidence to prove what you already know.

Thanks

Simsworks

You might want to read through the posts in this thread, which has to do with the Christie and Brit scam.

BTW, we try to keep political drivel out of these discussions for reasons that should be obvious.

Thanks!

And Roger on the drivel. It was a poor attempt to make a comparison of that versus what is happening to my friends.

Simsworks

The simplest way of testing an electromagetic-type over-unity device (AND its inventor) is to ask to see it driving itself for a long period. After all, if it is really over-unity, why does it need any other input? If the inventor brings up excuses like non-matching output/input voltages/currents/phases etc., or claims that it has to be 'primed, just like a pump', just point out that a battery/invertor/rectifier placed between output and input can overcome such problems.

And 'Jack' is right about patent offices; the staff are generally chosen for their cheapness, not their scientific insight (Einstein was perhaps the only exception lol). There are thousands of patents for over-unity devices (1500+ for buoyancy-based ones alone). The US Patent Office used to employ (sic) two of the most notorious overunity/antigravity crackpots in the world (Valone, LaViolette). I know of a patent lawyer who has patented his own antigravity machine. Another well-known figure on the loony-tune scene is Dr (sic) Harold Aspden, and he used to be Head of Patents for IBM (Europe)!! You just can't make this stuff up! And the latest recruit to cloud cuckoo land? Step forward Dr Myron Wyn Evans. He claims to have overthrown all of accepted physics and consequently calls for CERN to be closed down and for current scientists to be subjected to criminal investigation. He has also set up companies to develop over-unity and antigravity machines. Want to know the real killer-joke here? HM Queen Elizabeth II has awarded him a Civil-List Pension. This means that, in years to come, he will appear in the same august list as do Faraday, Heaviside Herschel, etc. etc. So, let's suppose that a criminal case is brought against, say, Lutec and they call Dr (real) Aspden, Dr (real) Evans, Dr (internet-bought) Valone and Dr (internet-bought) Bearden as expert witnesses. Who are the scientifically pig-ignorant jury going to believe? Them, or Joe Public and a physics teacher from the local school (and I know of at least one of THEM who has patented an antigravity machine). Pseudoscientific scammers are on a pretty safe wicket as far as the law is concerned.

Yeah, from what I've read about U.S. Patents, there was a lawsuit(s) here, where the nut job judge agreed with the seeker of the patent, against the patent office. Having their hand slapped by a fruitcake judge, they've over reacted, to the point they have a directive out (See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/0700_706_03_a.htm#sect706.03a a definition of the directive) stating "A rejection on the ground of lack of utility includes the more specific grounds of inoperativeness, involving perpetual motion. A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for lack of utility should not be based on grounds that the invention is frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy..."

Now doesn't that rip your britches? So, patents can (must) be issued for perpetual motion machines, if they can't find grounds to deny the application, other than that is simply not going to work, and defrauds investors, intentionally, or not.

Well, we used to have a sensible country. I keep looking around to find where it got off to.

Be that as it may, I was attempting to stop the scam before it got to the point where they had a working model. I saw, first hand, some of the milling take place, where they were making some of the internal parts, and they are drumming up money to complete the construction. That's where my friends came in.

I've finally got one to see some common sense. It's like he has awaken from a drug induced sleep. He's shaking his head wondering how he could have been so snowed.

Gotta go. Thanks

Simsworks

Searl is a bloody crook. I wanted to become a member. But then I realised there is no definite proof of what he says. I found out this government suppression thing is what all free energy and antigravity people who can't do anything just make. I found out that. i am now looking into the ideas that NASA and other space agencies are into. Also into Richard Bransons virgin galactic. I now understand why Richard is not willing to invest in freaks like Searl and co. I once was in contact with a guy similar to Searl. I wont name names but his company is in Oregon. He always talked about suing the government and all scientists who didn't agree with him. Basically the tactic of if you don't support me then you belong to a fascist elite. Its all f*****g BS. What if you sue everyone in the world will it change the laws of physics. Pure BS. Searl is the same. Dont believe. You will only end up getting hurt and dissapointed.

The Searl effect is a fraud. The number of these free energy antigravity scamsters are going up daily. More and more people are losing touch with reality and the state of scientific education is going down the drain. Check out this other scamster called Keshe who has set up an organisation called Keshe Space to promote free energy and antigravity theory of his. Typical scamster. He says he can take people to the moon cfor 50000 Euros. He is also selling tickets to an event to demonstrate the technology. What does he think he is a rock star. He claims to be a nuclear scientist. He is joining Searls camp. Already he has started claiming government suppression a typical MO of scamsters like Searl. These guys are preying on the instabilities of the world promiksing the sun and the moon. They should not be in science but politics. They create false pseudoscience. Website is www.keshespace.com/ .

What nonsense: a 'hydroelectric dam' exploits the rain-cycle in order to extract radiated energy which originates from nuclear fusion reactions in the Sun. The SEG does not even exist, except in the imagination of the mythomaniacal Searl, and its supposed mode of operation would be contrary to the second law of thermodynamics. How are they 'not different in principle'?

Actually it makes perfect sense: first, try to get your head out of the box (or whatever is your problem) and try to think of the possibilities beyond the mainstream of stance of academic priesthood again advanced concepts which this forum seems to represent.

Ref: http://www.searlsolution.com/johnsearl7.html

Read carefully for it is clear, the SEG exploits energy with an electron-cycle, same principle as a rain-cycle for both are carrier of energy and able to replenish on the bases of an open system.

Ref: http://www.searlsolution.com/technology.html

Indeed the SEG is by design an electrical open system outside of the center to periphery; the outside air plasma completes the circuit where the sun recharges the electrons directly or indirectly.

It is incorrect to apply the closed-system expression of the second law of thermodynamics to any one sub-system connected by mass-energy flows to another ("open system"). Furthermore, to a system that operates at the quantum level where energy and the possibilities are self evident; I am sure it will be exploited by future technologies or has been already with the SEG device.

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

One has to admire Searl's resolve to redevelop the SEG once given good opportunity, regardless of all those inflicted with pathological skepticism. Let's face it, to denying the inventor a chance to recreate it does not prove it cannot be done or that it has not been done before.

Let us not forget, the TRUTH overrules all present day academic assumptions.

Here we go again:

Does "try to get your head out of the box" mean "get my drift and believe it regardless of the laws of physics ?"

Because this is just about a generalised form of any New-Age Voodoo, and we all know it by now, a bit like:

"Please keep an open mind and listen carefully: The speed of light can be easily broken, here, I think of Andromeda galaxy, some two and a half million light-years away, and my mind got there in less than a second..."

An open-mind should not become an excuse to allow for fueled ignorance.

Fantasy never cared for the laws of physics, but then again, fantasy is not science, even when it pretends to be.

My two cents worth

Let us not forget, the TRUTH overrules all present day academic assumptions.

... but fraud does not.

Very well put.

Thanks, but there was one small error: I should have written '18th century', not 17th century.

If you do not learn from the past you are doom to repeat the same mistakes. It is no wonder the S.E.G. subject is emerging out controversy with resistance; yet is gradually gaining acceptance by all indications regardless.

Here just two examples of the past:

The Wright brothers were accused of being fraudulent by the entire American press when a mathematician at the Academy of Sciences of the United States wrote an article, illustrated by numerous mathematical formulas proving that no object heavier than air could not fly because it "violating all laws of physics". The magazine "Scientific American" (the equivalent of "The Search") has even accused the Wright brothers to be as pathetic crooks. In England, Lord Kelvin (again), President of Royal Society of Sciences has even added from his pulpit: "THE FLYING MACHINES HEAVIER THAN AIR ARE STRICTLY IMPOSSIBLE.

Einstein (1879-1955): His theory of relativity has been contested by all mathematics teachers who reported that this was the BIGGEST HOAX OF THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE because it violates ALL THE RULES OF MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICS.It took 20 years to Einstein for his theory is accepted (with the Nobel Prize) and he is no longer accused of charlatanism.

Here is a quote for those that refuse to see outside the box from Howard Bloom, author of book "The Lucifer Principle":

"Things are not so different in the modern scientific community. Researchers in sociology maintain a mask of objectivity. But behind this mask, some schools of thought hidden ideological goals. When students from these movements relate facts that contradict the principles of the creed of their group, we do not congratulate for the objectivity of their work, they were punished for their heresy. They are ridiculed, their articles are rejected by the newspapers and they are excluded from the larger symposium. This is an indirect way of forcing them to "leave the movement." A similar repression mechanism exists in all scientific fields that I know. For many scientists, going against the current is equivalent to ACADEMIC SUICIDE.

Ref: http://www.searlsolution.com/johnsearl7.html

If you do not learn from the past you are doom to repeat the same mistakes.

I agree completely, but you seem to be missing the point that this also applies to both real scientific discoveries and over unity scams.

yet is gradually gaining acceptance by all indications regardless.

Are you able to provide some verifiable scientific references, because all the stuff I have seen and been shown proves otherwise (such as the following link).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Searl_Effect_Generator

I respectfully disagree with your assumption, the S.E.G. is NOT an "over unity" device, it's a "converter" and you are also missing the point with regard to scientific acceptance, it not unusual for advanced concept be ridiculed before it praised and accepted as those two previous examples illustrate.

Therefore, your reference to wiki is pointless and useless to mention for it too suffer the same old inadequacies.

He a good indicator for you all that it is an emerging technology on it is way to acceptance regardless:

Searl Technology marathon week! Broadcasting to over 150 countries World-Wide.

Live broadcast to this fascinating free program, Monday 12-1:00am on 104.4 FM - in LONDON free and ONLINE from anywhere in the World, (Mondays 5-6:00pm P.S.T. - USA) http://www.robsimone.com/

FRIDAY MARCH 26 - VERITAS SHOW w/ The Searl Team, Fri Mar. 26 8p PT / 11P ET USA, http://www.veritasshow.com/index.html

SAT. MARCH 27 - DARKNESS RADIO w/ Brad Lockerman
SUN. MARCH 28 - DARKNESS RADIO w/ Prof. John Searl
BOTH SHOWS AIR 10PM - 1A EST USA http://www.darknessradio.com/

Poor flowerbower (alias "f.b.") no way now fb will put out a silly long overdue book under these conditions, better off in the bin.

My previous post was short and to the point. If you would bother looking at the many previous posts I have made on numerous threads on CR4 you will find that I am a real power engineer in the R&D field of power generation and storage (lots of letters after my name on my business cards). I have assessed and discussed this and other devices both here on CR4 and on the internet (including direct discussions with manufacturers of some of them) with quite an open mind (because you never know if there is merit or truth if you don't look!). If you further check you will find I am also one of the few here that still do before immediately jumping to the conclusion "its all an obvious scam, I am not bothering to even look further".

After digging into the SEG device, the evidence, and the inventor I still see absolutely nothing that convinces me even slightly that this is not a total scam! I cannot find a scientifically verified test or study of the SEG "converter", I cannot even verify that John Searl is even a real "Professor"!

Therefore, your reference to wiki is pointless and useless to mention for it too suffer the same old inadequacies.

Talking about pointless and useless references, extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence and there appears to be absolutely NO verifible evidence or proof, anywhere (you have not provided any either). Can you provide me any links to REAL evidence, as talk shows are NOT real evidence, and the fact you posted them leads me to believe perhaps you don't understand the underlying theory behind the SEG are trying to blindly ignore all the evidence that is available and help perpetuate this scam?

Man, I have an even deeper grief.

I feel that so many times, with these pseudo-scientific fundraisers, where the originators actually rely on the viewer's ignorance - in order to "state" their case. You need an acute scientific orientation to pin-point the scam, sham or hoax behind it - but then you have to prove his statements wrong - instead of him having to prove his case valid.

I disrespecfully disagree with all of that tripe. There is no SEG. It cannot exist because such 'conversion' would be contrary to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The only proof for its existence (and I here use the term 'proof' in the loosest and most laughable sense possible) is Searl's word. Not exactly scientific evidence, is it? However, there are many pseudosciences that prosper under the same conditions: astrology and homoeopathy, for instance. OTOH, victims of those 2 delusions do not complain, because they feel that they are 'getting something out of them'. The Searl scam cannot produce anything that works and so it is rather more obviously a criminal enterprise which is heading towards ultimate retribution. In fact, Searl's 'career' parallels very closely that of Otis T.Carr; another UFO-building anti-gravity fraudster. He got as far as building factories and having billboard displays on highways, but the authorities eventually caught up with him. And before him there was Keeley, who was welcomed into high-society and backed by investors with far more money than sense.

That, BTW, is why my book is so long, and taking so long: there are just SO many anti-gravity fools and fraudsters. And their suckers include British Aerospace, NASA and NATO! BTW, if you listen to Searl's interview on Para-X radio, you will hear a Harvard professor phone in to ask Searl a particularly gullible question. Does that imply academic acceptance? No, the Harvard plant (or should that be vegetable?) is related to one of the ghost-botherers behind the radio show.

The 'anti-gravity' patents alone would form a stack 16ft high, not that I would ever pile them up: there is this thing called gravity you see. As De Morgan (Budget of Paradoxes) pointed out, the best way to prove a scientific point to scientifically ignorant people is to hammer home the fact using all of the failures; to show, as he said, "that the thing is always going on". But I am also taking great pains to lay much of the blame at the feet of the education system; which favours rote-learning over true understanding. I fear that my book, like Dirck's Perpetuum Mobile, will still be being re-printed (and still needed) long after we are all dead. Fools, like the poor. are 'always with us'.