Work of AIAS on New Sources of Energy
This is generally recognized worldwide as being important work, because it gives a theoretical foundation for experiments.
Defective ‘proof’ of defective ‘experiments’.
It uses the basic ideas of relativity in many new ways.
Read ‘wrong’ for ‘new’.
These new sources of energy are already available,
Such crackpot catchpennies have always been available and have never worked.
those governments and companies that do not keep up with the new industrial revolution will be left behind.
Any government which invests in pseudoscience should be voted out of office. This is sadly never the case: the Pentagon wasted money on the non-existent hafnium bomb, the CIA squandered millions on paranormal ‘remote viewing’, NASA wasted millions on the imaginary ‘Podkletnov effect’ and Stalin’s backing of the moronic Trofim Lysenko led to state-sanctioned murder of valued scientists and wrecked Russian agriculture for generations. This is why real scientists must not be polite to pseudoscientists: we can spot crackpots but others obviously cannot.
LENR was dismissed, at the same time as cold fusion, by the physics community.
The feedback to the blog of www.aias.us has been dominated for about two months by our theories on LENR.
Yes, because LENR inevitably attracts every loony on the planet. Our own records show this. In any case, hits on a crackpot website are not feedback.
In my opinion the work of Alex Hill and his group is very important,
Your opinion counts for nothing in the scientific community and trying to foist perpetual motion on customers is fraudulent.
recently the group was visited by high ranking Mexican Government personnel, all of them capable scientists, or advised by capable scientists, and many Mexican companies and universities study www.aias.us all the time.
This pattern is repeated in one hundred and forty six countries.
The way in which these devices were tested by the U. S. Navy is also well known.
Oh we do so hope that the US Navy really did test them. It was the ONR’s scathing report on T.T.Brown’s so-called anti-gravity machines that demolished that crackpot’s hope for government funding.
It is well known that the U. S. Navy asked me to try to explain them.
Post the relevant letter; you are never slow to post other documents.
Another interesting device is the Alex Hill dimmer, which should be developed as quickly as possible for street lighting as pointed out by Dr. Gareth Evans,
Someone working in local Welsh government, and apparently charged with overseeing loft insulation, double glazing and drains, should be more astute.
and the small solid state device in the nuclear physics department of the University of Illinois at Urbana Campaign, which turns out several hundred watts continuously, in excess of input.
No, in the hands of a well-known pseudoscientist who somehow avoided dismissal by that university.
This is energy from spacetime.
No it’s not. On the other hand, it might be best to check for isotopes. Some years ago, Mexican (sic) thieves stole a portable radio-therapy van, melted it down and made saleable items riddled with cobalt-60.
There are many LENR devices and anyone can see this for themselves just by using google.
Google is not evidence; this ‘disinformation highway’ has been a boon to the lunatic fringe and pseudoscientific fraudsters.
Many of these are being made available for schools, and some are so simple that anyone can try them at home, or in a lab.
‘Made available’, but not accepted, one fervently hopes.
I am a Baconian scientist, and follow the rule that if experimental data are reproducible and repeatable then the data are valid in science.
Sure, with the proviso that the data has to be reproducible by everyone; not just a few friends plus similarly deluded crackpots and conmen.
Theory must be tested against experimental data. In all my work, these rules, taught in every school, are followed.
Then why are you holding Eckardt’s dubious numerical results above elementary analysis? We do not observe ‘petal’ and ‘fractal’ orbits, so how are they relevant to experiment? Newtonian mechanics has been shown by computer (sic) to permit figure-of-eight orbits; but they are not observed either! We seem to recall that this Eckardt nonsense started with a letter from a schoolboy: a schoolboy howler from a ‘real (h)Erbert’?
Much of what is called “standard physics” is not physics at all, some of it has over three hundred adjustable parameters, from which any fantasy can be constructed. A notorious example is string theory.
We hold no brief for string theory, but that is not yet science because it cannot yet be tested.
Fourteen industrial scale LENR plants have been sold or ordered so far, at a million dollars each,
We anticipate 14 fraud trials in the offing.
one is being used by the military.
Have they put it next to the hafnium bomb that they bought (and which will also never work)?
So AIAS scientists were far ahead of their time, and their work on spacetime energy has been verified experimentally many times over.
The basic point is that the energy does not come from nothing, it comes from spacetime.
It might appear that way if one gets the math wrong. There are many situations which appear to contradict Newton’s third law (and therefore the 1st law of thermodynamics) but physicists recognize them to be mere paradoxes.
Some less than educated people have called relativity “perpetual motion”.
Well, that would be uneducated. For ourselves, we merely give the term ‘free energy’ (as used by the lunatic fringe) its correct name.
Anyone with the slightest knowledge of relativity will know that the energy of the original theory of general relativity is defined by the metric and infinitesimal line element. In general relativity the lagrangian is defined by the metric, i.e. by spacetime, and by geometry. The lagrangian expresses energy, the metric expresses spacetime.
Every physicist knows that, in spite of the paradoxes of relativity and the ‘spookiness’ of quantum mechanics, one entity remains a solidly reliable guide (as it has always done in classical mechanics) and that is the Hamiltonian.
People who abuse distinguished scientists are outlaws, they commit crimes.
What about crackpots who pretend to be ‘distinguished scientists’? And since when is free speech ‘criminal? We bet that you would have got on well with Stalin … as Lysenko did.
Those who smashed the spinning jennies were outlaws, they committed crimes. It is understandable how poor and illiterate weavers were alarmed by the spinning jenny, but to attack those who work on desperately needed new sources of energy is serious criminality against which new legislation is needed.
TOO RIGHT: keep the current crop of anti-progress luddites away from the wind turbines.
For example all anonymous hate blogs should be banned from the internet, especially those that still contain ethnic abuse. The laws against ethnic abuse are particularly severe. If the anonymity is removed, the instigators face charges of aggravated harassment, carrying prison sentences of up to five years. The victims of hate bloggers should not have to go to the expense of taking out an injunction, the hate blogs should never be there in the first place. It is well known that hate bloggers are severely disturbed psychologically, many stalkers commit assaults, some commit murder.
We refer you to the answer which we gave earlier with regard to Stalin.
The South Wales Police had to open an investigation on one such hate blogger who was traced to Charlotte, North Carolina, pseudonym “Lizzie Borden”. Within a short time, hate mail was received here, and reported to the police. The hate mail has been displayed on this blog. In any era there are luddites such as these who will not accept progress, but criminality is unacceptable in any realm of society. This should be blazingly obvious.
Please post that hate mail. So far, we have seen only evidence of gentle ‘joshing’ from former colleagues. But perhaps this could be a first job for the new Crime Commissioner: looking into wastage of police time and paying attention only to ‘the gate that squeaks’. Of course, Stalin enforced a different version of that saying: ‘only the nail that sticks up gets hammered flat’.