Polymath

[ovyyus]

Did my client die and put you in charge?
Why didn't I get a memo?

Yes, your client died. No one is in charge. Sorry about the memo.

[daxwc]

Jim: So just admit that I have both “encyclopedic knowledge� and also many hands-on skills.

I would say from what I know that would be true.
So you still haven’t addressed your entitlement issue yet Jim, why was christo4_99 was not allowed to present a quick sketch or vague concept and claim success, but then you give yourself the privilege of claiming success with a vague concept?

[cloud camper]

Did you miss out on the entitlement age Dax?

Me too, but the idea is that one is "owed" respect for producing nothing
and posting on internet forums.

[eccentrically1]

Jim: EVERYONE that interacts with me is not lying, inferior or an idiot. Thus daxwc's statement is a total lie.

I meant interacts such as have a different opinion than you; I didn’t say follows or ask vague questions that you will answer. If they put you to the test they would be there too.

EC1: If you stop saying you found PM, they (the trolls) will stop.

I think it is too late for that. What he needed to do is say sorry to the forum and be on his way.

Jim: But not everyone can be an intelligent polymath.

LOL; just in case some soul out there figures you will change.

It's never too late. I think it would be the closest he will get to reconciliation. Others have claimed success, and backed off their claims when met with criticism, and not kept fanning the flames. Others have realized claims of success here must be accompanied by a working device, the same hurdle the patent office requires. The patent office can afford to be more polite than the forum, because they only have to reject your claim one time. If one submits a claim without a physical prototype, they give you the same reason for rejection you would get here. 'Incredible utility' is the phrase I believe.
Jim's motion wheel concept is thus in that same patent purgatory along with gravity wheels. Fanning the flames won't get it built any faster, I'm afraid.
But if he wants to keep claiming success and trolling the trolls, then he'll get what he asks for.

[ovyyus]

Even the great and powerful Ovyyus wrote: Step 1: solve the problem. Thus, even he agreed that the first step was to solve the problem, and was not the building of a working wheel.

More JM nonsense. In the context of finding Bessler's wheel, 'solve the problem' is the same as 'something that works'. Only frauds and fools claim 'solved the problem' or 'something that works' with a non-working idea or concept. Duh!

[Wubbly]

When I analyzed a motion-wheel, it showed unsymmetrical forces caused by asymmetrical parametric oscillation of the weights.

Apparently the above statement is "something that works".

Here's the fun test for anyone who is interested in such things or alternatively thinks that being a high ability polymath is highly correlated to scoring well in culturally unbiased IQ tests.

http://www.brainmetrix.com/free-iq-test/

I'm still stuck on question 18. Why is the correct answer 8?

[Fletcher]

number series is ... 200 .. 188 .. 152 .. 80 .. 8

200 - 188 = 12

188 - 152 = 36

152 - 80 = 72

80 - 8 = 72

12 x 3 = 36

36 x 2 = 72

72 x 1 = 72

72 x 0 = 0

Therefore 8 - 0 = 8

[Art]

You guys are weird being able to answer those questions ! : )

[Fletcher]

Not really Art - it was the only one I got right ;)

[cloud camper]

Even the great and powerful Ovyyus wrote: Step 1: solve the problem. Thus, even he agreed that the first step was to solve the problem, and was not the building of a working wheel.

More JM nonsense. In the context of finding Bessler's wheel, 'solve the problem' is the same as 'something that works'. Only frauds and fools claim 'solved the problem' or 'something that works' with a non-working idea or concept. Duh!

Since our pathetic polymath continues to heap praise on himself for achieving nothing, he needs to be reminded of the great American inventor Thomas Edison who said:

Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration!

[cloud camper]

Another great Edison quote:

I speak without exaggeration when I say that I have constructed 3000 different theories in connection with electric light, each one of them reasonable and apparently likely to be true.

Yet in only two cases did my experiments prove the truth of my theory.

[ME]

Edison vs Tesla [oo]

[jim_mich]

Walt you have been around long enough to know Jim neither wants to talk about his concept or the principle behind it. Unless of course you want to hear more of Jim’s puffery and delusions of grandeur.

More slander and lies.

Daxwc falsely claims that, "Jim neither wants to talk about his concept or the principle behind it." I WANT to talk about it. But there are two problems.

The first problem is the USPTO and IP rights. If you divulge, you lose. I want to talk about my concept, but the FULL concept MUST be held back until a patent application is filed. And I can't file an application until I have a functioning wheel that can be presented to the PTO examiner as proof of workability.

The second problem is that the trolls here don't want to listen or hear what I have to say. The trolls immediately trash any such discussions, claiming I'm WRONG, rather that opening their minds to facts or discussions.

A long time ago, I made the claim that Bessler's wheel wasn't rotated by gravity. And Stewart replied that I was wrong, for it was obvious (to him) that it used weights and thus was rotated by gravity.

I'm not going to argue the point of whether gravity "powered" Bessler's wheel, but without a doubt the cause of the wheel's rotation was an imbalance of weight. We can be sure of this if we believe Bessler's words and the words of witnesses.

Later, Steward denied that he ever claimed that gravity rotated Bessler's wheel. At one point Steward and I were going to debate this. But Steward backed out, saying, basically, that because I had already made up my mind concerning this, he did not want to debate me. And as I said before, it was "fingers in ears".

As I've written before, the reason none have found Bessler's principle of PM, is because everyone looks for a gravity wheel. Everyone looks for gravitational OOB rather than the alternate inertial-momentum OOB.

Daxwc falsely writes that I don't want to talk about the principle. Then daxwc labels the principle as puffery and delusions. Everyone runs around with their fingers in their ears, and they only hear what they WANT to hear.

Experience. Intelligence. Knowledge. Money.

If you have it, you don't need it.
If you need it, you don't have it.
If you have it, you need more of it.
If you have more of it, you don't need less of it.
You need it to get it.
And you certainly need it to get more of it.
But if you don't already have any of it to begin with,
you can't get any of it to get started,
which means you really have no idea how to get it in the first place, do you?
You can share it, sure.
You can even stockpile it if you like.
But you can't fake it.
Wanting it. Needing it. Wishing for it.
The point is, if you've never had any of it, ever, people just seem to know.

Does anyone really desire to truly discuss my principle or the concept behind it - limited to what I can legally disclose without losing IP rights? Tomorrow, Friday, June 24, I have an 8am hospital appointment at Chelsea St. Jo Hospital, where I will be hooked up to an IV for about six hours. Contrary to daxwc's lies, if I you are really serious, and the trolls behave themselves, I'll discuss my my concept and the principle behind it, preferably in the Community Buzz forum. But understand, I can't discuss EVERYTHING about my concept. Some of it I HAVE to write in general broad terms for IP protection.

[cloud camper]

Just to help those who are not fluent in JM speak I will translate.

Does anyone want to help indulge in my fantasy PM concept that I am sure will work but have absolutely no experimental evidence for since I have been too lazy to do any experiments and found it just too easy to make up false crap and post it since everyone seemed to like it and no one challenged me anyway.

Please don't plan to ask any deep questions about my ideas as I will then just call you an idiot troll.

Since I won't be answering any technical questions, this discussion is just to help stroke my ego and elevate myself above the lower class plebians on the forum.

Thank you.

[cloud camper]

And don't bother me with that fictitious force stuff.

That's all just mathematical mumbo jumbo I could never understand anyway.

I don't have a clue how CF could power a wheel but it's just part of my fantasy!