Of course you would have had no background. There was none. You guys need to get out of the mode of thinking that anything is possible if no one can prove otherwise. That's not science; it is magic.
So, you pass on E-cat, which is a good idea for now. You don't seem to have any alternative examples. I have heard endless claims of "secret, advanced patents," and no one produces anything. Kind of like claims for "very friendly Leprechauns." And I've seen some of these inventions. If you can make heads or tails of them, good luck and good fortune. Just because something is patented does not mean in any way that it is real (and as a holder of 9 patents, I have some experience). Tesla's Wardenclyffe tower remains an enigma, both for what he was intending and what it turned out to be (and now is gone).
As for E-Cat, you missed my statement that I investigated that in my professional capacity. From my investigation, I can testify that the Wikipedia account was fair and covered the main points. It didn't go into depth on Rossi's ambiguous demonstrations, leading to lawsuits for fraud. I don't think you can use a prejudice against Wikipedia as an argument against my own technical experience.
Nixon could remember a "formula"? The equation for Einstein's general relativity tensor (for example) is very simply expressed, but the concepts behind the terms of the equation would have been far beyond Nixon's education or experience. So, there is more to merely remembering a formula. You are just repeating a mythical story. And are you seriously claiming that the Soviet Union obtained information from James Clerk Maxwell who died in 1879? Would this be something other than what science has carried down from Maxwell?
As a professional technologist and engineer, I've read a lot about "secret technology," but over the years have come to realize there is a vast difference between mythology and reality. I don't confuse the two.
I don't have time to "check out this video, dude." If you can't say something in a sentence, I have to conclude you don't know much. Running your car on water? Good trick. Can anyone do it? That always pops up, but there is never anything behind it or any practical exploitation of it. I know how to run a car on liquid air, but not on an ordinary exhaust product.
Of course you would have had no background. There was none. You guys need to get out of the mode of thinking that anything is possible if no one can prove otherwise. That's not science; it is magic.
So, you pass on E-cat, which is a good idea for now. You don't seem to have any alternative examples. I have heard endless claims of "secret, advanced patents," and no one produces anything. Kind of like claims for "very friendly Leprechauns." And I've seen some of these inventions. If you can make heads or tails of them, good luck and good fortune. Just because something is patented does not mean in any way that it is real (and as a holder of 9 patents, I have some experience). Tesla's Wardenclyffe tower remains an enigma, both for what he was intending and what it turned out to be (and now is gone).
As for E-Cat, you missed my statement that I investigated that in my professional capacity. From my investigation, I can testify that the Wikipedia account was fair and covered the main points. It didn't go into depth on Rossi's ambiguous demonstrations, leading to lawsuits for fraud. I don't think you can use a prejudice against Wikipedia as an argument against my own technical experience.
Nixon could remember a "formula"? The equation for Einstein's general relativity tensor (for example) is very simply expressed, but the concepts behind the terms of the equation would have been far beyond Nixon's education or experience. So, there is more to merely remembering a formula. You are just repeating a mythical story. And are you seriously claiming that the Soviet Union obtained information from James Clerk Maxwell who died in 1879? Would this be something other than what science has carried down from Maxwell?
As a professional technologist and engineer, I've read a lot about "secret technology," but over the years have come to realize there is a vast difference between mythology and reality. I don't confuse the two.
Well, golly. You got me. There's no way I can keep up with that kind of technical domination, despite all my training, years of experience and deep dives into technologies held back. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZRwlYtAMps https://archive.org/details/enjoy-the-show-directors-cut https://fightingmonarch.com https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QbI5RPbHWo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiBFtwbyv44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTtIPBPSv0U
I don't have time to "check out this video, dude." If you can't say something in a sentence, I have to conclude you don't know much. Running your car on water? Good trick. Can anyone do it? That always pops up, but there is never anything behind it or any practical exploitation of it. I know how to run a car on liquid air, but not on an ordinary exhaust product.