The Secret of Perpetual Motion

Status
Not open for further replies.

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
I figured out a long time ago that if you are smart enough to crack the perpetual energy problem you are also smart enough to know why keeping it to yourself is a wise idea.;)
 

spinnaker

Joined Oct 29, 2009
7,835
I have pills that turn water into gas.

And a machine that turns sea water into gold.

Maybe the OP is interested in investing the load of cash he gets from his invention?
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,012
I figured out a long time ago that if you are smart enough to crack the perpetual energy problem you are also smart enough to know why keeping it to yourself is a wise idea.;)
Agreed, and the opposite is also true. If you are not smart enough to do it, the only way to make money off of it is to tell everybody you can do it.
 
Vis a vis my post:

Anyone who thinks this is a big reverse psychology deal is talking nonsense.

I would like to receive additional hard, cold evidence about the physical validity of my theories from professionals of science.

The reason the devices are simple is that they require proof, and unfortunately, many fewer people are qualified to prove them than I ever would have supposed originally. I have received almost NO input from professionals in up to nine years since I thought of them. Most of the internet is even more dead than this forum is.

The devices I'm concerned with are not simple re-hashes of the Bhaskara wheel, FYI. My father is Michael Coppedge, who received a Yale PhD, and my mother was Valedictorian at Randolph Macon, graduating in four or five years. I come from a family of relative geniuses. That I use my intelligence for the specific study of perpetual motion should be no fault against me.

I realize it could be over-stepping to contribute perpetual motion ideas to a forum about circuit boards literally. But I found that this discussion was already open, and I was nice enough not to start a new thread.

I'm contributing my material in the interest of information (or innovation, if I'm lucky). I'm trying to attract those people who already have an interest in the 'machines'.

And it is an interesting topic, isn't it? If you like philosophical paradoxes, like I do.

In separate work, I've invented a philosophical solution to all paradoxes and a method of objective knowledge analogous to math. So, my videos supporting over-unity are not my only prospective accomplishment. It's even possible that I'll be remembered as one of history's polymaths.

Would you shut a polymath out of a discussion of technology? That sounds counter-productive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top