Philip Winestone wrote:
A quick question: We all seem to be fixated on "excess energy". What
if one of the many innovative (or potentially innovative) ideas were
to result in an engine (a fairly simple engine) of some sort that
***didn't*** produce excess energy, but did have an overall effi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I can show you proof that it's possible to capture energy from ambient
> temperature. I'll post this information in a new thread titled "Proof of
> capturing ambient temperature energy."
>
You know how to get ice cubes to melt at room temperature?!
Harry
Nick Palmer wrote:
> Steven A Lawrence wrote:-
>
> < not shoot too many holes in theories even if they look like easy
> targets. At least, that's my understanding of the Vortex rules -- it's
> supposed to be a safe place to air ideas which are not fully baked, and
> criticism is supposed to be co
Sorry for barging into someone else's letter...
A quick question: We all seem to be fixated on "excess
energy". What if one of the many innovative (or potentially
innovative) ideas were to result in an engine (a fairly simple
engine) of some sort that ***didn't*** produce excess energy, but
Paul Lowrance posted;
>Please let me know if you ever want to debate the idea that your
passive aggressive >ways of life is better than my direct ways of life.
Correct me if I'm wrong Paul, but you seem to believe that it is
possible to reverse the 2nd Law with an electromagnetic machine. Nob
5 matches
Mail list logo
