what does anybody think about the John Searl free energy machine

ethan · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:07

I confess not to knowing much about the science behind this 9if any) but it does initially appear to be explainable insofar as the process is described and demonstrable (I would hope and like to think?)

Disco Boy · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:09

Free energy? There is no such thing as free energy.

ethan · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:13

Disco Boy said:
Free energy? There is no such thing as free energy.

Free as in taking it from the electrons that surround us.

ci_newman · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:15

Aren't they called solar panels?

Meridian · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:16

I really am not going to watch a YouTube video about Perpetual Motion, even if the person purporting to have found it doesn't use that term - there's enough lunatics on that site already. Care to summerise the fruit-loop's theory so I can laugh at it? Thanks.

M

Spit · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:16

Save the electrons!!

Disco Boy · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:19

ethan said:
Free as in taking it from the electrons that surround us.

The electrons that surround us eh?

"andy" · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:23

Disco Boy said:
Free energy? There is no such thing as free energy.

Prove it

Disco Boy · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:29

"andy" said:
Prove it

You've never heard of conservation of energy then?

mistercrabb · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:35

Disco Boy said:
You've never heard of conservation of energy then?

But what about the gaps in scientific knowledge?

Killerkebab · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:35

andy said:
Prove it

Already has been proven, via the laws of thermodynamics.

tres · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:37

So much of that video sounds like rubbish to me.

And creating the whole "Amy" and "Neo" the electrons is rubbish!

Also, the current in this device is "faster", not hitting the metal atoms?

"andy" · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:37

Disco Boy said:
You've never heard of conservation of energy then?

Yup, prove it...

yhack · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:38

"andy" said:
Prove it

The old "I've decided this thing exists, prove it doesn't" argument.

Raikiri · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:41

"andy" said:
Yup, prove it...

The onus is on the person claiming something exists to prove it, it's practically impossible to prove something doesn't exist.

Killerkebab · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:41

"andy" said:
Yup, prove it...

It already has been proven. This is why it is accepted by everyone and taught to all of our children. The laws of thermodynamics hold.

"andy" · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:48

Killerkebab said:
It already has been proven. This is why it is accepted by everyone and taught to all of our children. The laws of thermodynamics hold.

And you can guarantee that laws based on our current understanding will alway match our future understanding ? We once taught our children all sorts of crap , that doesn't mean anything.

I'm not debating that it's the best we currently know

Killerkebab · 31 Mar 2012 at 19:52

"andy" said:
And you can guarantee that laws based on our current understanding will alway match our future understanding ? We once taught our children all sorts of crap , that doesn't mean anything.

I'm not debating that it's the best we currently know

I can't guarantee that, no. But every great man in the past who came along and revolutionised the way we look at the world first started by showing why the current ideas don't work, and then came up with something better.

This guy hasn't done that.

scrlk · 31 Mar 2012 at 20:54

10/10 for troll OP.

VaderDSL · 31 Mar 2012 at 21:03

Imagine the possibilities of combining John Searls machine with Andrea Rossis catalyzer!!! It would only be a matter of scale then, we could have clean free energy for everyone!

But as usual the fat cats in charge of the oil companies continue to bury these new technologies and condemn us to a fate dependant on oil. :roll eyes:

Granted this is a bit of spam, but a daft topic requires a daft reply does it not?