Dear Ed:
How very unkind of you to do what you did. To what purpose was it?
You ask me for MORE Wesley Gary information. How COULD you possibly believe that I would now be inclined to give it out, after having seen that you posted links to material which you MUST have known that I was conserving to larger purpose? By being insane? In light of this, this request is, prime facie, not in-earnest, nor is it for any good reason other than that of low mischievousness.
The fact that those posted links, now to be seen by all the world, are in the public domain and can be had on-line, IS NOT THE POINT, as you must realize, do you not, Ed?.
You request that I provide you with additional details of what I will be including in my book. Again, I ask, to what purpose might it be, Ed; so that you might find the source for them also, and expose still more, as you did today? In a word, "NO!", is your answer; I will NOT share with you a micro scintilla of any results attained from my hard-earned research, including those with regard to other patents found.
As you may or may not already know, one has to actually GO to Washington personally, wade into those huge, disorganized stacks consisting of MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of pages, AND DIG for any results such that may be found, which most often are not.
Since you seem to already know so much, and appear to be cheerily forthcoming while doing actual harm, why do YOU not write the book, and directly onto these pages, with YOUR thousands of hours of research being splayed-out gratis? You are no doubt well-off, young and in good health, and therefore in conditions far more qualifying for doing so, than I. Why don't you, Ed?
That this will serve as a valuable lesson -- a Bessler-class lesson -- actually, to all viewing here on the forum, is THE UPSIDE to today's nasty surprise, compliments of your very self, Ed.
A lamentable fact of our collective, low condition in these modern days, is that some people simply cannot be trusted to do the right, civil thing based on inward powers of empathy. Fortunately however, many can, BUT, it is always that VERY FEW who are in such desperate need of peer esteem, the kind which is so often gained at the expense of others, that spoils the party for EVERYONE, is it not, Ed?
This is a first-time, fledgling effort for me, never having tried 'doing' a book before, so I am green, admittedly, and have much to learn, particularly about the ways-of-being of some people, and what they are capable of doing when giving in to particular, darker urgings.
Not at all friendly, what you did, actually being destructive in intent and effect, and from my standpoint, bordering on the veritably treacherous, for you could NOT have been unaware of the effect that your actions would have, could you, Ed?
minus/r, James MIller
GENERAL MESSAGE:
In light of this fiasco-in-miniature, which will no doubt be ever-evolving like some cancer, as persons these days cannot, generally, hold themselves to account after doing wrong; in light of it, CAN ANYONE CONTINUE TO WONDER, why it was that our dear Bessler kept his God-given secret so very close to himself?
We know that he was given to spontaneous fits of anger; but, before then, when he was young and vulnerable, I would guess that there must have been many a deep, unjust disappointment, or FAR WORSE, put upon his youthful, idealistic head, THIS ALL DONE compliments of others functioning in common, low human mode. Only later, did this series of bruisings turn into his FAMOUS RAGE in the face of the despicable, grasping and willfulness-driven human way, such that it was, and continues to be in our time.
NO, for my part, I would have done and behaved EXACTLY as he did, given his circumstances, and I strongly suspect that YOU, dear reader, would have also, if truth-be-told. All the man desired was what he needed: shelter from the rain and cold for he and his family in their later years, reasonable sustenance, and a modicum of security from the threatening terrors of penury, which in those days must have been truly dreadful.
His most reasonable offer of exchange for his minimal needs was TO BE REFUSED by the world, and so, HE DENIED to the world that which WE now desire, and seek desperately IN VAIN !
Simply put, the world then WAS NOT YET READY for what was ostensibly entrusted to him, by our Lord God; it's miraculously simple inner works remaining safely hidden from prying eye, and all force of intellect, from then 'til now.
So, is it, the world, NOW READY?
Since the answer to this paramount question involves the prickly issue of 'worthiness', I shall mercifully withhold my opinion with regard to it; your imaginings about just WHAT that might be, being sufficiently amusing, I am sure.
As Gary's tormenting editor put it in his razor-like, hurtful verbiage: ". . . . Well, we will see."
a/b/r, James Miller
Conservative forces
Moderator: scott
-
primemignonite
- Devotee
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 8:19 am
re: Conservative forces
Last edited by primemignonite on Fri May 27, 2005 10:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
re: Conservative forces
Hold on there big fella! I didn't post links to those articles in "Making of America" with the intent to hurt sales of your book! You make me out to be willfully malicious.How very unkind of you to do what you did. To what purpose was it?
I asked you what KIND of information would be in your book, not for more FREE information. It was an honest inquiry!
The truth is that before you jumped to conclusions and insulted me and my honor, I would have PAID you for your book even in unfinished form.
Obviously I have done my own Wesley Gary research, and I have posted information about him on the Internet before you came along. I used to have a Wesley Gary section on my old website at www.pfeul.com.
James, I have given out the Harper's article, patents, and "Making of America" links before. Are you telling me that when I did, even years before I knew about you and your book, that it was some giant conspiracy to thwart your book?
If your book only has the standard Gary items (Harper's article, etc.) along with many bits from the "Making of America" archives, then I'm sorry your endeavour may not be so profitable.
Take an example from John Collins. He has given out some information freely, and has also sent me (and I'm sure others) information privately free of charge. However, I am highly appreciative of him and have bought all of his books!
If you are writing a book about Wesley Gary to make a profit, you are not going to get rich. You would be better off writing about some other subject.
As you have proven here, it is always a mixed bag to post ANYTHING on these forums. Even when I think I'm just being helpful, I've got to worry about pissing off someone.
I'm sure that even posting the actual solution would probably ruffle many feathers!
-Ed
-
primemignonite
- Devotee
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 8:19 am
re: Conservative forces
Dear Ed,
The words and assertions appearing were chosen with greatest precision; they say what they mean and mean what they say. Any dispassionate reader can well understand what you did, why you probably did it, and come to his own conclusion regarding all.
Your protestations and declarations of clean intent sound the clear ring of hollowness.
What I wrote I meant, and will STAND as done!
However, before this goes TOO far out of control and gets really down and dirty, speaking now theoretically, IF the page with it's offending links were to DISAPPEAR, I would be inclined to REMOVE MY RESPONSE to it. (the top part that is, above the general message part, the rest below being for recyclement somewhere else, at some later time).
Judging by what you did and the timing of it, this after I had written in crystal clarity of my intentions to publish for any reader to see, I will NOT be holding my breath until it does . . . believe it!
J.
The words and assertions appearing were chosen with greatest precision; they say what they mean and mean what they say. Any dispassionate reader can well understand what you did, why you probably did it, and come to his own conclusion regarding all.
Your protestations and declarations of clean intent sound the clear ring of hollowness.
What I wrote I meant, and will STAND as done!
However, before this goes TOO far out of control and gets really down and dirty, speaking now theoretically, IF the page with it's offending links were to DISAPPEAR, I would be inclined to REMOVE MY RESPONSE to it. (the top part that is, above the general message part, the rest below being for recyclement somewhere else, at some later time).
Judging by what you did and the timing of it, this after I had written in crystal clarity of my intentions to publish for any reader to see, I will NOT be holding my breath until it does . . . believe it!
J.
re: Conservative forces
Hollowness I know not a trait of dear Ed slew
Machinations a-plenty abound 'tis true
But when one speaks of censorship, or makes a sound
To quell the truth in a slight of rage
Is much less worthy than befits a sage
Machinations a-plenty abound 'tis true
But when one speaks of censorship, or makes a sound
To quell the truth in a slight of rage
Is much less worthy than befits a sage
re: Conservative forces
James,
I am sorry you feel the way you do, but I am NOT going to be scared into submission by your rants!
And yes, let all judge for themselves! I will not play any "remove the post" games. I know what I did, and also stand by it. It's called giving information away in the hopes to come up with a solution.
You have given out details about your book already yourself. Now everyone knows there is an image of Gary out there somewhere. Are you going to cry if someone goes and finds it in a library somewhere and posts it? If you were so worried about stuff like this hurting your book, why did you even tell anyone until your ready? This seems to be a common theme on this forum.
If you look back to the beginning of this very thread, you will see that I posted the actual Harper's article for all to see. Are you going to demand that I remove that as well?
I did NOT post links to publicly available information to hurt your book. If anything I did it to HELP YOU. All the effort you went to typing that information, I assumed you didn't even know about that source and that it could help in your research. I'm sorry that you can't figure that out.
What good is removing a bunch of public links? That information has been online for YEARS! All someone has to do is go there, type in Gary, and read it for themselves. The fact that I gave specific links to a few of them is now MY fault?!
Scott (or anyone ELSE), if you think I did something wrong here, please let me know.
Are we to let a few others TELL us what to post? This seems to be a common thing in the world these days. What is going on?
-Ed
I am sorry you feel the way you do, but I am NOT going to be scared into submission by your rants!
And yes, let all judge for themselves! I will not play any "remove the post" games. I know what I did, and also stand by it. It's called giving information away in the hopes to come up with a solution.
You have given out details about your book already yourself. Now everyone knows there is an image of Gary out there somewhere. Are you going to cry if someone goes and finds it in a library somewhere and posts it? If you were so worried about stuff like this hurting your book, why did you even tell anyone until your ready? This seems to be a common theme on this forum.
If you look back to the beginning of this very thread, you will see that I posted the actual Harper's article for all to see. Are you going to demand that I remove that as well?
I did NOT post links to publicly available information to hurt your book. If anything I did it to HELP YOU. All the effort you went to typing that information, I assumed you didn't even know about that source and that it could help in your research. I'm sorry that you can't figure that out.
What good is removing a bunch of public links? That information has been online for YEARS! All someone has to do is go there, type in Gary, and read it for themselves. The fact that I gave specific links to a few of them is now MY fault?!
Scott (or anyone ELSE), if you think I did something wrong here, please let me know.
Are we to let a few others TELL us what to post? This seems to be a common thing in the world these days. What is going on?
-Ed
re: Conservative forces
Thanks Bill.Hollowness I know not a trait of dear Ed
Bill is another good example, James. He has images of MT on his site and also is letting people know about his MT book. Even though I can see all the images on his site, I would still buy his book when it's available!
You don't make customers buy ranting at them and calling them dishonorable, among other things.
It appears you will hurt your book more than anything else!
-Ed
-
primemignonite
- Devotee
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 8:19 am
re: Conservative forces
Dear ovyyus,
I like your lines, even though they might be agin me.
From what I've read of what you've written, you seem to be a square fellow as certain others do as well.
My words on Ed's doings and the color of them stand, however.
For myself, I never would have done likewise to him or anyone else, much less craft a defense afterward, based on indignation and standing indefensible ground. We live in a very different world and it's one where no one can self correct and be seen as just plain wrong.. That is why we have tens of millions of statutes and armies of cops in order to now to COMPEL civil demeanor, which used to be far more naturally occurring, a time ago. This world I no longer recognize.
No doubt things are different "down under", but as for here, in the US, it is a victim culture and NO ONE is going to allow themselves to be observed as being wrong on any one thing, short of the brute force of law; THAT we all DO understand up here - the application of RAW POWER!
All else is just TALK and fake paper money and zinc tokens, with NO honor . . .
a/b/r, James Miller
I like your lines, even though they might be agin me.
From what I've read of what you've written, you seem to be a square fellow as certain others do as well.
My words on Ed's doings and the color of them stand, however.
For myself, I never would have done likewise to him or anyone else, much less craft a defense afterward, based on indignation and standing indefensible ground. We live in a very different world and it's one where no one can self correct and be seen as just plain wrong.. That is why we have tens of millions of statutes and armies of cops in order to now to COMPEL civil demeanor, which used to be far more naturally occurring, a time ago. This world I no longer recognize.
No doubt things are different "down under", but as for here, in the US, it is a victim culture and NO ONE is going to allow themselves to be observed as being wrong on any one thing, short of the brute force of law; THAT we all DO understand up here - the application of RAW POWER!
All else is just TALK and fake paper money and zinc tokens, with NO honor . . .
a/b/r, James Miller
re: Conservative forces
Yes James, the World is different than it was, and will be - I suspect.
Information used to be held secret and sacred, a sign of power and wealth. Today it is just more stuff - and quite rightly so!
Even though you may think badly of Ed, you could also take his message well. I try to eloquently say, it is the presentation, the sell, that makes the difference between interest and passáe ;)
Information used to be held secret and sacred, a sign of power and wealth. Today it is just more stuff - and quite rightly so!
Even though you may think badly of Ed, you could also take his message well. I try to eloquently say, it is the presentation, the sell, that makes the difference between interest and passáe ;)
-
primemignonite
- Devotee
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 8:19 am
re: Conservative forces
Dear Ed,
Do you "feel", and are you "sorry'? If you can do this NOW, then why did you cause the upset that you did? We needn't go over this like a worn out old bone; I already outlined my case against your more-than-thoughtless action in my "rant", as you choose to characterize it. Yes, a serious indictment is a "rant" these days among the non-self-accountable. (Is this cheap little ploy not pathetically transparent and tawdry? What IS this?)
I wrote theoretically, in suggestive tenor, of what MIGHT transpire IF the offending links were to somehow "disappear". (Did you or ovyyus not pick up on this subtlety, or was it extremely too? Details. Details. What are details these days?) There was no gaming aspect to it, as you asserted in flaming error.
In short, it was an olive branch, Ed, NOT GRASPED by you. Are we surprised at this? I think not.
YOUR POINT regarding not telling about things in this arena of apparently less-than-honorable men, has a nice sharpness to it. HERE we are in perfect concordance, you and I.
(I say "men", because to the best of my knowledge there are no members of the opposite gender belonging. You fellows might well benefit if there WERE a few. They tend to have an altogether different take on what is, and what is not fair and right. Not perfect, mind you, but in the mix, much closer to the reality of matters.)
After belonging for only FIVE DAYS, I have learned a painful lesson on this forum, and I have YOU to thank for it, and I DO. Not too much blood spilt, i'll live, but as for YOU, Ed, so far, I am not impressed, to say the very least.
It seems as though we have serious differences between us, as to how we perceive reality I mean, THEREFORE, I believe that he best resolution that we can hope to come to, Ed, is to IGNORE ONE ANOTHER, even IF you are a fellow American. Come to think of it, ALL THE MORE reason to. My plan would go like this: I promise NOT to respond to ANYTHING that you write, if you will return the favor, in-kind.
Deal?
J.M.
Do you "feel", and are you "sorry'? If you can do this NOW, then why did you cause the upset that you did? We needn't go over this like a worn out old bone; I already outlined my case against your more-than-thoughtless action in my "rant", as you choose to characterize it. Yes, a serious indictment is a "rant" these days among the non-self-accountable. (Is this cheap little ploy not pathetically transparent and tawdry? What IS this?)
I wrote theoretically, in suggestive tenor, of what MIGHT transpire IF the offending links were to somehow "disappear". (Did you or ovyyus not pick up on this subtlety, or was it extremely too? Details. Details. What are details these days?) There was no gaming aspect to it, as you asserted in flaming error.
In short, it was an olive branch, Ed, NOT GRASPED by you. Are we surprised at this? I think not.
YOUR POINT regarding not telling about things in this arena of apparently less-than-honorable men, has a nice sharpness to it. HERE we are in perfect concordance, you and I.
(I say "men", because to the best of my knowledge there are no members of the opposite gender belonging. You fellows might well benefit if there WERE a few. They tend to have an altogether different take on what is, and what is not fair and right. Not perfect, mind you, but in the mix, much closer to the reality of matters.)
After belonging for only FIVE DAYS, I have learned a painful lesson on this forum, and I have YOU to thank for it, and I DO. Not too much blood spilt, i'll live, but as for YOU, Ed, so far, I am not impressed, to say the very least.
It seems as though we have serious differences between us, as to how we perceive reality I mean, THEREFORE, I believe that he best resolution that we can hope to come to, Ed, is to IGNORE ONE ANOTHER, even IF you are a fellow American. Come to think of it, ALL THE MORE reason to. My plan would go like this: I promise NOT to respond to ANYTHING that you write, if you will return the favor, in-kind.
Deal?
J.M.
-
primemignonite
- Devotee
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sun May 22, 2005 8:19 am
re: Conservative forces
Dear ovyyus,
Well put. I like your style.
The blood-spitting-fury elicited by ( ) has now subsided, now only sadness remains.
I will not suffer treachery or fools, but there are way, way too many who will. THAT IS WHY we now have a nation veritably bristling with the way, and with the kind.
Used to be that there existed lines in the sand, over which most everyone by convention KNEW not to cross. Now, no more. Also, ones who had the requisite strength and character would draw their own, and warn others NOT to cross over; if one DID, it was the ball and cap, or cold steel run through the transgressor! Now, all is MUSH, being in a state of impossible, nonsensical equality; slapping Mother Nature continually in the face! I have big news: she will take only so much!
The short-sightedness and pettiness of die volke in Bessler's time, must have driven the poor soul to the brink, and a little over, I guess. He lived sixty five years; quite an accomplishment what with all that BS and crazy they heaped upon him.
Karl, the good prince, should, I think, occupy a special place in the pantheon of characters, in the Grand Saga. Great Leibniz too. He seemed to REALLY be empathetic and insightful toward Bessler. Even MORE laurels for him, I say. What a shame he took so long to visit and see the wheel turning, and also dying so inopportunely, but, he WAS rather on in years, so I guess we can forgive him.
As for THOSE THREE in the neighboring whatever it was, someone should find their graves, dig up their bones and CRUSH them to powder, distributing the foul stuff to the four corners by wind, for what they did to Bessler- PILLORIED IN ETERNAL INFAMY!!!
I could go on, as you might well imagine.
Signing off . . . PAX.
a/b/r, James Miller
Well put. I like your style.
The blood-spitting-fury elicited by ( ) has now subsided, now only sadness remains.
I will not suffer treachery or fools, but there are way, way too many who will. THAT IS WHY we now have a nation veritably bristling with the way, and with the kind.
Used to be that there existed lines in the sand, over which most everyone by convention KNEW not to cross. Now, no more. Also, ones who had the requisite strength and character would draw their own, and warn others NOT to cross over; if one DID, it was the ball and cap, or cold steel run through the transgressor! Now, all is MUSH, being in a state of impossible, nonsensical equality; slapping Mother Nature continually in the face! I have big news: she will take only so much!
The short-sightedness and pettiness of die volke in Bessler's time, must have driven the poor soul to the brink, and a little over, I guess. He lived sixty five years; quite an accomplishment what with all that BS and crazy they heaped upon him.
Karl, the good prince, should, I think, occupy a special place in the pantheon of characters, in the Grand Saga. Great Leibniz too. He seemed to REALLY be empathetic and insightful toward Bessler. Even MORE laurels for him, I say. What a shame he took so long to visit and see the wheel turning, and also dying so inopportunely, but, he WAS rather on in years, so I guess we can forgive him.
As for THOSE THREE in the neighboring whatever it was, someone should find their graves, dig up their bones and CRUSH them to powder, distributing the foul stuff to the four corners by wind, for what they did to Bessler- PILLORIED IN ETERNAL INFAMY!!!
I could go on, as you might well imagine.
Signing off . . . PAX.
a/b/r, James Miller
re: Conservative forces
Oh, I grasped it alright... and I already responded to it previously. I said I will NOT cave in to your ridiculous "suggestions". There is no way I would remove a previous post, especially for the likes of you and your ranting. You sound like at least one other person on this forum. At what point are you going to start bringing religion into this?In short, it was an olive branch, Ed, NOT GRASPED by you. Are we surprised at this? I think not.
The FACT is, you posted off-topic in an already off-topic section of this forum! Ralph started this thread asking about information related to devices using both gravity and magnetism. I posted information about Gary related to his request. You came in and posted a plug about a book you are working on, with a follow-up post to elicit interest. In many groups that would be against the rules. So who is more wrong here? Me for posting links to info that was already freely available, or you for posting a potential solicitation?
And what the heck would I stand to gain from trying to hurt your book sales, as you so seem to think?? As I've already stated, I was interested in your book and would have PAID you for your efforts. But now... sorry, no sale!
Let me ask you this James... If you started selling your book on Amazon, and someone posted a negative review, would you demand that Amazon remove that review from their site...you know, since it could hurt sales? And if someone makes a movie, and it happens to have things in common with current events, would you demand to have that movie banned from being shown?
Yeah, I'm sure I know where that political remark stems from. And I'm so tired of that cry-baby, in-your-face, hypocritical attitude....in the name of self-appointed justice!THAT we all DO understand up here - the application of RAW POWER!
If you have such a problem, may I suggest you beat it to another forum? One that is geared specifically to Wesley Gary perhaps?
Ralph, I'm sorry your thread got so diluted.
-Ed
re: Conservative forces
Ed, I can not believe that sharing YOUR OWN research has caused such animosity. Had you tried to intentionally undermine someone's private research I could understand the flames. But I know you have been at this Gary thing for years - just as have others! IMO, it is a sad day when sharing is condemned as an act of treason.
James, you seem to be of the opinion that others must limit their own participation in your interests, and must therefore bend to your apparent demands of priority. Surely that must be a mistake on your part? Will we engage in a pissing contest about who was first, and where - as if it mattered!
I would certainly welcome any further information on Gary and his machines from Ed, yourself, or anyone else - and I think they should feel free to post what they will, without risk of accusations of treason.
James, the simple fact is that if it were not for the free sharing of ideas and data then this website would probably not exist, nor my own, and you would have nothing to say on the matter of Bessler at all and certainly nobody to say it to if you did. But that is not the case. Why? Because we dare to share. I think John Collins has demonstrated the power that sharing can have in an almost totally commercial World. Worth taking note, IMO.
James, you seem to be of the opinion that others must limit their own participation in your interests, and must therefore bend to your apparent demands of priority. Surely that must be a mistake on your part? Will we engage in a pissing contest about who was first, and where - as if it mattered!
I would certainly welcome any further information on Gary and his machines from Ed, yourself, or anyone else - and I think they should feel free to post what they will, without risk of accusations of treason.
James, the simple fact is that if it were not for the free sharing of ideas and data then this website would probably not exist, nor my own, and you would have nothing to say on the matter of Bessler at all and certainly nobody to say it to if you did. But that is not the case. Why? Because we dare to share. I think John Collins has demonstrated the power that sharing can have in an almost totally commercial World. Worth taking note, IMO.
re: Conservative forces
Ed,
Now that it appears everyone has had there say I will repeat that I started this thread with the idea of discussing gravity and magnetism to augment each other.
Using the conservative force of one to overcome the other. I have not figured out how this could lead into the two pages of unrelated response that followed. My last input was that I was not going to debate or add input until I received on topic replies from other interested members. I am still waiting!
Ralph
I thank you for your acknowledgment of where this thread has gone. I gave up about two pages ago and decided to let run its course. I think it adds meaning to the phrase,Man has discovered perpetual motion, it is man chasing perpetual motion.Ralph, I'm sorry your thread got so diluted.
Now that it appears everyone has had there say I will repeat that I started this thread with the idea of discussing gravity and magnetism to augment each other.
Using the conservative force of one to overcome the other. I have not figured out how this could lead into the two pages of unrelated response that followed. My last input was that I was not going to debate or add input until I received on topic replies from other interested members. I am still waiting!
Ralph
re: Conservative forces
>And yes, let all judge for themselves! [...] It appears you will hurt your book more than anything else! [...] But now... sorry, no sale!<
I agree; I hadn't been that interested in the first place, but now you're guaranteed I'm not buying your book.
>If you can do this NOW, then why did you cause the upset that you did?<
It was you James, who caused the upset. Now I don't blame you for feeling undermined; if all information were publically available in one spot then there would be near no demand for your book. But Ed's post couldn't have compromised that much (or else your book would be awefully short?).
It has been pointed out that John's books have sold despite 'some' freely available content. But since you're new you may not realize that this is true even though that 'some' is all the juicy bits (as far as I can think of at least) in English, and the original German and Latin! But there are buyers because they are interested in the whole story, and want to get the juicy bits in context.
>in my "rant", as you choose to characterize it.<
It was a rant, because all you've said could have been completely conveyed while being far less verbose and hateful.
As for the true subject of this thread, I do not think combining conservative forces like gravity and magnetism will get you anywhere.
PS. This thread has changed enough that I didn't realize I already posted in it, I said 0+0=0, and posted a design for a nonlinear spring. That seems like it was several months ago!
I agree; I hadn't been that interested in the first place, but now you're guaranteed I'm not buying your book.
>If you can do this NOW, then why did you cause the upset that you did?<
It was you James, who caused the upset. Now I don't blame you for feeling undermined; if all information were publically available in one spot then there would be near no demand for your book. But Ed's post couldn't have compromised that much (or else your book would be awefully short?).
It has been pointed out that John's books have sold despite 'some' freely available content. But since you're new you may not realize that this is true even though that 'some' is all the juicy bits (as far as I can think of at least) in English, and the original German and Latin! But there are buyers because they are interested in the whole story, and want to get the juicy bits in context.
>in my "rant", as you choose to characterize it.<
It was a rant, because all you've said could have been completely conveyed while being far less verbose and hateful.
As for the true subject of this thread, I do not think combining conservative forces like gravity and magnetism will get you anywhere.
PS. This thread has changed enough that I didn't realize I already posted in it, I said 0+0=0, and posted a design for a nonlinear spring. That seems like it was several months ago!
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.