Posted by Lurker (66.222.51.206) on June 06, 2003 at 16:40:18:
In Reply to: Part III posted by Darren on June 06, 2003 at 15:23:21:
Very tantalyzing, Darren. I expect nothing less from you. You are a true desciple of Bessler. :-)
Needless to say, I am very interested in this overunity principle that you mention. In fact, it is this fundemental principle that interests me far more than the actual design of the wheel itself. My personal belief is that there are probably MANY ways of building over-unity machines. The specific design is only of secondary importance at best.
This assumes that over-unity machines are possible, of course. I'm not 100% convinced that they are, but I DO have personal reasons for believing that they are. Either they are, or there are some VERY good frauds out there. My biggest desire is to know for sure so that I can leave my personal uncertainties behind. Seeing a supposedly "working" machine is just not good enough for me. I need to know that the principle behind it's operation is valid. I'm sure most scientists feel the same way.
Thus, it is my considered opinion that the fundemental priciple of operation is the MOST important thing here. The actual design of the machine is secondary. The ONLY reason that a working machine is important is to demonstrate that the principle of it's operation is valid.
If you want my advice, don't spend too much time trying to make the "perfect" design. Just build something that works. Remember, demonstrating the principle of operation is the MOST important thing. If there is a simple way of demonstrating the principle without actually building a wheel, that would even be better. What you want is something simple that ANYONE can understand, and NO ONE can deny. That's my two cents, anyway. Best wishes.
Lurker.