The Bashing of Perpetual Motion Seekers - a Sport Still !!

[primemignonite]

"These days, the quest for perpetual motion is a joke - and those who pursue it are on a par with the flat-earthers. SteveBaker (talk) 17:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)"

I was searching though old Scientific American references on Google, and came across a page on WIKIPEDIA "TALK:Perpetual motion" and took a look to see what all the talk might be about.

Much to my interest, I saw there that very thing that so-boils my blood about Establishment types, they and their slobbering boot-licker allies, classic bashers of all that does not come from their snotty and elitist, scientific ranks.

The contributor of most of the offense to be observed there - one "SteveBaker" - seems to take special relish in doing what and as he does, and contributes most of it.

Much like Dircks (though not yet for a thousand pages plus) he displays a seeming pleasure-taking obsession with sprinkling onto us his loads of vituperative cut glass.

By this means, just what might he desire to accomplish? Offense to a whole class of searching "lowlies"? If so, then he has achieved his goal here, with this reader/writer; he and his allies have my attention.

Over the years, I've noticed that most P-M seekers seem to not mind such pointed, jabbing abuse, whether coming from the ancient past like the pure scum that was Wagner, Borlach and Gartner or, just recently like what goes on over at "TALK:Perpetual motion" as done by those smart guy pokers.

I find this lack of objecting curious. Most curious.

[Well, when the elusive and exotic, "impossible" creature itself is finally in my hands, you know . . . "NO MERCY" it will be for them!]

Take a look and see what they think of us, and if you like it.

And please, don't forget the good Professor Simaniac's (did I get that spelling right?) page he cooked-up some time ago, all about our "psychology" as entitled fittingly "The psychology of perpetual motion machine seekers"

Maybe that will raise just a bit of steam in a few fellow seekers-after but . . . maybe not. ("Deadened is as deadened doesn't.")

Here is the link leading to Baker et al: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3APerpetual_motion

And, one going to the good professor's masterpiece of it's kind: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/psych.htm

Ta-ta!

James

P.S. The Naughty and Nice List does proceed apace; some nice new names being now added. The sinistral side column veritably burgeons!

[ovyyus]

James, which of Baker's comments (other than the one you posted) do you find steam-worthy? His facts appear solid even if his tone seems brusque.

[Ed]

James,

This is why I keep saying its important for people not to publicly say they have something without the follow up of a real demonstration. Every time someone does this it hurts the cause, because people like the ones you mention can use it against us. And you can't really blame them, can you?

People might think the problem is or will be conspiracy or academia, but really we are our own worst enemy.

[primemignonite]

Bill,

I guess it's just that all the jabbing deprecations he makes rather predictably, seem more things insolent and painful to myself. I see it as being yet-more of the same (as I indicated above) when referencing the nefarious three hornets from Hell, and what they did to Bessler.

He is not alive to take-up the battle with their nasty, insolent and pride-filled successors, whereas I am.

I've absolutely no doubt that when the principle is finally known, they will suffer great pain due to anxiety gone mad, extreme duress which they shall have earned and most richly deserve. (Although, quite a number of the younger ones I expect will see what angst they and their forebears have caused so many others throughout the centuries, and will be aghast at what they have been taught as near holy writ, that it was defective or at best, incomplete.

This mad war against any notion of P-M being acceptable for the thinking is just way past the pale. To me, their dirty style and attitude has been execrable and is unforgivable. From since the time of the hornets, they have not changed. (But, James Clerk Maxwell was a saint.)

That real and plentiful energy good for use could come from apparently nowhere, will inflict massive damage to their diseased paradigm, an event that will not be easily reconcilable to their expectations. Good, I say.

I do believe what Fletcher has so carefully said (in quotes to follow), that if The Event is one indeed wholly untoward to them and their purposes, then the best outcome would likely be that the present laws and the newly observed phenomenon are and always were "but a subset of a larger reality" (this being drawn from memory, but what he wrote was to this essential effect.)

Also, I am afraid that Newton's Third Law of Motion may be in for a real bruising, which really would surprise me.

As to this very thing, we might keep in mind some of Bessler's own worte:

"The world should see this principle, in itself so simple, and yet
at the same time so deeply hidden, of everlasting motion." DT 209

Indeed deeply hidden and everlasting.

James

P.S. Immediately after I post this, I will "PM you" something new (old) on the Gary saga. It is by no means a dead subject here.

[John Lindsay]

Or perhaps restated, Those who snidely think they have Perspectivus Absolutus when they do not. To me it is not a question of making something out of nothing or magically altering a force or pressure signature of a mass or charge to suit your needs (although we are dealing with Infinity, so I can't count it out) but rather clever use of out-of-the-ordinary leverage applications. We are familiar with Johann, and have also heard rumors of other devices that go around or use so-called Newtonian(or whoever) mechanics differently. Once again we are dealing with Infinite options although only certain surprise possibilities may show up in our kind of time-space-matter format, if you really look for them. Also, since there is no Ultra-leveraged example in nature...that I know of (Ingeniusly designed as nature seems to be), there may be a reason for this...like the occasional four leaf clover that grows to the size of a circus tent. Peace and vitality to All, John

[MrTim]

(...)
I've absolutely no doubt that when the principle is finally known, they will suffer great pain due to anxiety gone mad, extreme duress which they shall have earned and most richly deserve. (...)

No, they won't. They'll resort to name-calling, nitpick any solution because it doesn't conform to their definition of PM, and dismiss it because "It's already been done". In short, the same behavior you'll find on political discussion boards.
I'd just ignore them.... ;-)

[pequaide]

Actually their beliefs are the ones difficult to prove, but they have the preponderance of believers so proof is not necessary for them.

Some arraignments have 95% of the motion energy lost in a ballistic pendulum, but they pretend that this lost energy takes some mystical form. Mystical in the scene that it has never been measures. And the energy loss is always a precises amount no mater what materials is used. Maybe they have to bluster and call us names because they have not means of proof. Maybe they are the ones that should compare themselves to the people that thought the earth was flat.

I have been working with triangles and forces around the circle; sine and cos of an applied force over a period of time. I seems like a prefect system to me; Newton's F=ma (or his three Laws of Motion) that is.

That is another funny one; they pretend that Newton is on their side. Newton was vehemently opposed to Leibniz’s mv² energy formula. But most of their side don't know the history or the formulas.

[primemignonite]

[These are all fine, considered comments. The author of this thread greatly appreciates them.]

Ed:

All that you said I concur with and sure, I would not blame any, even them, for any irritated noting of premature announcements, of successes not-yet realized.

Sure, P-M seekers can work at parting-off their own noses, but the centuries of mad ridicule and spiteful disparaging, as done by those supposedly elevated (actually, by mostly wannabe proxies such as in our present case here), should not go unnoticed to put it leastwise.

For my own part I desire to go considerably further, and do seek some parity in the game where none has ever existed before, just bashed P-M seekers.

As I stressed before (above), when IT appears, all this will change.

This is a long-winded way of saying we are singing the same tune, essentially, but with one as a baritone and the other bass. :-)

Kindest Regards

James

[primemignonite]

John Lindsay:

Nicely restated!

You serve-up much good food for thought, John. (My little gray cells are now buzzing!)

". . . Also, since there is no Ultra-leveraged example in nature...that I know of (Ingeniusly designed as nature seems to be), there may be a reason for this..."

On both counts, I think, Truth is likely here.

As to the last phrase, observances as-done here, urge me to accept the possibility that the "reason" you posit is intended, and that this intention (as well as such a supposed, single highly anomalous effect) quite likely might originate from without. (Just yet, any further than this I'd best not go.)

Indeed!

The possibility that the most mundane of common leverage as used in a lone, particular way, that would then result in a most astounding, non-conforming-to-natural-earthly-laws-phenomenon, is truly dizzying a contemplation to this ponderer.

There is much else in what you offered that I'll be thinking-on.

You've got me going, John.

Thanks much for your thoughts.

James

[primemignonite]

(...)
I've absolutely no doubt that when the principle is finally known, they will suffer great pain due to anxiety gone mad, extreme duress which they shall have earned and most richly deserve. (...)

No, they won't. They'll resort to name-calling, nitpick any solution because it doesn't conform to their definition of PM, and dismiss it because "It's already been done". In short, the same behavior you'll find on political discussion boards.
I'd just ignore them.... ;-)

In comparison to yourself, Mr. Tim, I am AN OPTIMIST!

On this one, doubtless sooner-than-later, Father Time himself will reveal the actual truth of it. (Confidence Level: 99.99991%)

To this, I am sure we all look greatly forward (Uh, excepting for the Establishment Scientism folks, of course.)

Thanks for that, Mr. Tim. You are one of the ones that work very hard to keep all the rest of us rascals honest, and that is one tough job.

Cheers!

James

[Andyb]

James happy new year,i agree with mr Tim there not worth the waste of breath, stick with the people that are on our page most of our lives are waisted trying to have conversations with people that really do not agree wih our mission so why bother,stick with the people that do understand and avoid the remaing,i do undertsand your frustration with people like this they make my blood boil,so i avoid them,i let them keep there beliefs and just work with the like minded in our lives and i do not ever wish to convert any other person to my way of seeing things via anything other that what i create and if that does not work how cares.All the best Andy b.

[primemignonite]

pequaide:

Thanks for yours too.

I will respond to it in a bit, but not just now as I have to track-down something special that will address a key issue you raised.

James

Work-in-progress . . .

[primemignonite]

pequaide:

I found it!

I think that this statement following correlates well, to some of your strong points you made:

"Contrary to popular academic belief, there are no actual experiments establishing the validity of the "First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics" as universal physical principles. To the extent those "laws" [do] have a certain empirical correlate at all, they are both circumscribed by a purely negative principle, identified already by Leibniz long before the Kelvin-Helmholtz gang came along: The impossibility of a so-called perpetuum mobile or "perpetual motion machine"— a hypothetical subsystem of the Universe, able to generate a net surplus of power in the course of a closed cycle, in which the system is supposed to return to its exact original state, without any other net change in the surrounding Universe."

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/educ/p ... g_jbt.html

(This "Helmholtz" of course being our wordy little physician from Potsdam and "Kelvin": "Old foot-in-mouth".)

". . . To the extent those "laws" [do] have a certain empirical correlate at all, they are both circumscribed by a purely negative principle, identified already by Leibniz . . ."

Yes, indeed "a purely negative principle" and thus one that cannot be proved to certainty.

(And here would be a nice little presentation on the subject, compliments WIKIPEDIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence )

They know full-well that they and their whole construct exists as poised on very thin ice indeed and also, that they and what they have made may crack through it, if their TERROR ever manifests.

This, I believe, is the Achilles Heel which serves to drive them often barking mad and, very very bad with their statements over centuries of time, and to which I so-object and do suggest that others so-effected might as well.

I understand and accept that general enthusiasm for this well might be more circumscribed than not, this because requiring-of some fair dedication, time and energy. However, that's really quite alright as I've very much of my own to dedicate to such a vital endeavor, it being a necessary pre-adjunct to THE MAIN ACT.

As I alluded-to earlier, some P-M searchers do not object to their faulty, centuries-long, creepy, hectoring bedside manner. I choose to do-so, and, with greatest of alacrity.

"DAMN the torpedoes; full speed ahead!"

And, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake has some to add to this line of particular demurral and of course, to much else as well but, that will be a subject for a stand-alone thread I'll be working-up in the meantime.

Be well and prosper, pequaide.

James

[triplock]

I've been reading this topic with interest as some good points have been raised.
Firstly, I don't believe in Perpetual Motion innthe classic sense as there has to be a beginning, middle and end to everything, else it, philosophically can't exist. Everything is defined by a boundary or limit.

Secondly, the title 'PM Seeker' does a disservice to the majority of people involved in this pursuit because it infers there is a lack of understanding. Quite the contrary. Scientific discovery, in what ever shape or form, is not made by dismissing the 'impossible'.

As long as our research remains considered, our claims self-censorred and our private lives / research stay in balance, then only good can come from our 'hobby'. There are far worse addictions out there !

Chris

[raj]

Well put, Chris!

This addiction keeps me mentally sharp in my old days.

Raj