Just give it away?

[Oxygon]

Oxygon,

How do you know that giving it away will be better? I think it better to lease or franchize the rights to many companies in an organized manner that promotes very rapid developement. The parent organization uses the royalties for further R & D that then benifits all. Compare this with many companies each trying to do there own engineering thus requiring them to sell at a much higher price...

Because everyone should know that you can't keep the genie half way in/out the bottle...

I understand your desire to make some lute, but this would be a major event in human history and hardly an opportunity to become an evil capitalist deciding who can and can't have the rights to use free energy...???!?!?!?!?!

WTH, read that last line again...

The smacks of microsoft thinking...

You can look forward to un-ending court battles and perpetual "idea" theft... it will be this way...

In the end you end up being looked upon as another greedy american jerk...

just my opinion...

[jtolan]

jim_mitch wrote:

...I question whether someone else could promote and disseminate my idea better than I can?...

Disseminate, yes I can!, I'll post the living daylights out of it! LOL

But I won't promote junk!! Naturally I will filter what you give me and If I deem it worth putting my reputation on the line I'll back it up and promote it.

[graham]

There is one other point I would like to make and that is quite simply that were it not for the fact that J B proved it was possible to achieve PM then not one of us would be searching for an answer.
What we are trying to do is to REDISCOVER what has already been discovered , and if there were to be a badge attached to this invention it should be the name of Bessler.
Greed pride and ego robbed the world of the gift that was entrusted to Mr Bessler . I hope that we might have learned from his "oh so human weaknesses".

Graham

[Fletcher]

Give it away, patent it & sell the licencing rights for royalties, patent in every country in the world etc etc.

Each will have to work out their own plan. Give it away seems easiest & rewards will follow as John C said but this approach leaves you reliant on others goodwill to make that happen. In other words you have no control of the process. Jim's way means he can directly control his level of involvement & reward whilst satisfying his ultruistic requirements.

If you want to make a moderate amount of $ or even a lot, regardless of which route you go, then it will depend on your entrepreneurial quotient.

Your rated level or quotient of RLC or RAC as it is sometimes referred to.


[ Rat Like Cunning or Rat Ass Cunning ]

[John Collins]

There is another way which I'm not 100 per cent convinced on yet. I have a contact in the USA with whom I've been corresponding for a number of years. He is convinced that Bessler was genuine and that is remarkable since he is a highly regarded scientist of international repute. He has promised myself or anyone else I can recommend that he has philanthropic backers who will fully sponsor any design which proves to be workable. The contract will be open and above board and will guarantee financial security for life and fame or no fame as desired.

Obviously any successful arrangement is dependant on a working device. It does open a number of other possibilities for anyone who is unsure what next to do.

The downside is that, being a suspicious person myself, I am not completely convinced that giving such valuable information to a third party is entirely safe. Having said that the guy is so well-known that I cannot really see a problem.

John Collins

[jim_mich]

I'm deeply hurt by some of the comments made here. I've been called a number of derogatory names. I've been insulted and some have tried to make me feel guilty. Its been implied that I'm an "evil capitalist" and "another greedy amaerican jerk".

But lets face it. SOMEBODY will need to carry the ball. SOMEBODY will need to set up R & D. SOMEBODY will need to see that factories are set up. SOMEBODY will need to set up a marketing system and a sales force. Why can't that somebody be me?

If I were to tell everyone on this forum how to build it, how many of you could engineer and build your own wheel. One that is big and powerful enough to supply all your own needs? Now stop and think how many people do you know with the skills, knowledge and tools to build a wheel of their own? Not very many! So it will need to be done by some 'evil capitalist', most likely by some 'greedy amaerican jerk'.

But long before anyone even thinks about any of the above then something else must happen. How many people (not counting those on this forum) do you know that think perpetual motion is possible? Our schools and universities have been teaching this falsehood for decades. So the very first thing that needs to be done is to educate people, to provide absolute iron clad proof positive. Not a Fleischmann & Pons "cold fusion" type proof. What is needed is an "in your face" make a BIG NOISE here it is and you can't deny it as you watch it work type of proof. Anything short of that will go the way of cold fusion (or Georg's wheel).

Before that happens a number of POP models should be built so they can be displayed. Without working models any announcement will be met with ridicule and disbelief. Understanding the principle of how and why a gravity wheel works takes a little studying. Without doing complex calculations involving gravity, inertia and trigonometry then many won't know if it works or not. So the alternative is to see a wheel live and in action. Or you can just take my word that it works.

So to prevent another Fleischmann & Pons fiasco, I choose to delay any disclosure until I have everything ready. And that will take some time. How long? Whatever time it takes.


Maybe I should sign as "another greedy evil capitalist amaerican jerk"?




John,

That person sounds interesting. Setting up factories and such will require financial backing. I am sure there are many will step forward when shown a working model.

[ovyyus]

Come on Jim, not everyone thinks you're a 'capitalist jerk'. I have no problem with anyone's views and actions concerning their own work and how they feel they might like to deal with success if it should happen to come their way. Your's might not be my own approach, but so what! You can give it away or you can patent and try to make a zillion, makes no difference to me - it's your baby, right!

What I do find frustrating, as you know, is when someone comes out teasing and making unsubstantiated claims of success. Especially the ones that put no obvious effort into anything and then think they're owed some special gratitude because they post an idea, or pretent to post an idea - geez, pathetic really. That's definitely not you!

IMO, you shouldn't worry too much what people think - just get on with proving your design. Until you have proof it's all academic anyway.

[Jonathan]

John, I too would like to know who this guy is. I'm surprised he's convinced, I'm well acquainted with the evidence but I'm not convinced.

[rlortie]

Jim,

If I were to tell everyone on this forum how to build it, how many of you could engineer and build your own wheel. One that is big and powerful enough to supply all your own needs? Now stop and think how many people do you know with the skills, knowledge and tools to build a wheel of their own? Not very many! So it will need to be done by some 'evil capitalist', most likely by some 'greedy amaerican jerk'.

I am in agreement with your above explanation, only I would carry it further. How many will even be able to understand a set of working blue prints.

THe proto and proof may be concieved here in America but the enviromentalist will see to it that it is mass produced elswhere.

I have had a problem trying to explain a modification to Ken's "Ball Machine" that I think has merit. all I need is one full circular pipe and one half circle of same size. The other day I spotted some hula hoops and thought darn, its too bad they dont make these big enough for ping pong balls.

Ralph

[Clarkie]

Jim,
My view is "no patent, no credibility", what you do with it after is up to you, the inventor.

As Bessler didn't leave a record of how his wheels worked they cannot be considered prior art.

If your intention is to defend the patent to maximise profit you will need many $millions, if you just want recognition then give out free licences to all interested parties.

If you want to make some money then just attach a small fee to each licence.

There are many way to satisfy your needs and wants after you have built one that works and filed the patent.

Be very careful of how you patent as the US govenment will confliscate it in the national interest if given the chance.

If you need any advice on this subject just let me know.

Good luck with proving your concept.

Pete.

[John Collins]

John, I too would like to know who this guy is. I'm surprised he's convinced, I'm well acquainted with the evidence but I'm not convinced

.

You're right Jonathan - I wrote in short hand! From memory (I have all of his emails saved but time is short) he said that my book had thoroughly convinced him that Bessler's claims were real but now we had try to explain them within physics.

Here is a brief extract from an email sent to me about two and half years ago
"My recommendation is this. When you have it up and running, let us
> verify it, and produce a verification and validation report that is
> yours to do with what you want, at no cost to you and your intellectual
> property protected by a nondisclosure/noncircumvention agreement of your
> choosing. We then introduce you to our private backer to check out an
> opportunity to negotiate prototyping, manufacturing and globalization.
> He is an altruistic, private, non-greedy, non control freak individual
> whose goals are the same as yours (to get it out to raise the quality of
> life on the planet), and, not being concerned about "return on
> investment," (he has more money than he could spend in several
> lifetimes) he would make you an offer that I'm sure would beat any other
> on the planet, making you very wealthy in the process. And he has the
> clout to make sure it doesn't get buried. If for some reason you
> didn't like the offer (can't imagine it!), then your hands are not tied
> in any way and you can pursue any other alternative you want, and with
> our verification report in hand, at no cost to you or commitment from
> you.
>
> How more encouraging can I be?!

John Collins

[Clarkie]

John,
This would be the simplist and least painful way to get from A to B but no one individual can do it.

If the inventor tried to do it on his own he would need to be a technical genius, a skilful engineer, a fantastic negotiator, rich and, above all, very very tough.

Find me one person who has all these attributes, as this is highly unlikely whoever cracks this will need to rely on and trust others.

If I crack it you will be the first to know (when I get over the hangover that is).

I have thought long and hard about this subject and discussed it with my patent agent, making it work is only half the battle, the way forward would be like walking through a mine field on a dark night.

For those who are interested, in my opinion inventing is 50% skill, 50% determination but intuition also plays an undefinable part.

Pete.

[bluesgtr44]

I can't leave this one alone...I should.

I do not think that the real value of this will be "...A wheel in every home!" So to speak. The value is going to be the PRINCIPLE. And this is what is going to knock the science world on their ears! I do not believe any of us can really fathom what things will be like years from now with developement of this PRINCIPLE.

Think about flight. The Wright Brothers could not have even imagined such a rapid pace for the PRINCIPLE they (arguably) discovered. I believe this PRINCIPLE is going to be even bigger than that! And it will not be limited to what our "main stream" thinking is today, anymore than the "main stream" thinking was during the Wright Brothers time.

Think about it!

Steve

[Clarkie]

Steve,
I think we all agree this will be the biggest invention, discovery, re-discovery, that will have a huge affect on the world as we know it.

This whole thread is about how to get "the product to market" and the first big problem, after a working model, is credibility.

It is my view that a patent will be needed to achieve this because it is a certificate of recognition that the concept has been accepted as apparently novel, don't forget there is a big difference between file and grant.

To get this to grant will take a great deal of effort and money and may never get there but in trying it will bring about a huge academic debate an therefore bring this into the public domain.

It will be ridiculed by many and there will be cranks saying it must not be allowed as it will deplete the Earth's gravity.

Jim's raised the point about getting a return on his investment in time, he has every right to make a profit from his efforts, if it works, but I don't think $20 per wheel is the way.

I think there are many ways of getting a small personal fortune from this without affecting the roll out but its all about getting out there with credibility and just going public is not the way.

This is my opinion based on 20 years of experience in patenting and licencing technology, I am also a total believer that JB's wheels worked.

Pete.

[ken_behrendt]

I read through this thread again and the "tone" seems to be that Jim is making a big mistake in wanting to obtain a patent. The implication is that, if he does, he will alert the US government to the existence of a new technology and they will immediately step in and seize it for reasons of "national security" and he will then be silenced!

Actually, there have been many other patents in the 20th century whose claims were just short of stating that they produced free energy...they were granted and most of their inventors survived although they made little, if any, money from their inventions...mainly because, when it came time for a scientifically verifiable demonstration of free energy production, their inventions FAILED to deliver any free energy.

If Jim has a device that works, then perhaps he can publicly announce AND demonstrate it while his patent is being processed. If his public demonstrations are successful, then his patent must be granted even if it does claim free energy production (as long, of course, as he has not accidentally reinvented someone else's prior invention in some form) and the media attention drawn to his device should minimize the chance of it disappearing and he being silenced.

I DO hope Jim has a working device; however, from reading what little information he has hinted at in his posts, I am of the opinion that his device's mechanism is not the same one that Bessler used...although its PRINCIPLE of operation may be identical. I do not, however, believe that this principle is a mystery any longer (see my latest "update" in the "Community Buzz" forum for a detailed description of what I consider the principle to be), but the means of using the principle in a WORKING gravity wheel still is. There may be several / many ways of using the principle in a PM wheel, but my focus has to remain on the one BESSLER most likely used. Only when THAT is found will I consider the "BESSLER mystery" to be solved.

Jim's plans to protect, produce, and distribute his invention seem logical and ethical to me. He obviously wants it to be put to use on the largest scale possible in the shortest time possible and I do not get the impression that his main interest is a finanicial one. But he makes a valid point...things like patents, research, production, etc. can cost a LOT of money in today's world. Without some positive cash flow from his invention, the final realization of his vision may not be possible...

ken