[Another message to Hathaway]
To summarize, your readers will probably all assume that every
machine on earth must have a primary source of energy: nuclear,
chemical or mechanical.
If your claim is that this machine does not tap any primary source,
and it just sits there generating energy apparently from nowhere,
then I think you must boldly state this is what you mean. Perhaps you
should call it "an apparent violation" of the conservation of energy.
You seem to be ignoring this issue. This will give your readers the
impression that you do not understand elementary physics and the
conservation of energy. You have to show that:
You DO understand conservation of energy,
BUT
You think it does not apply (for thus-and-such technical reasons
which are over my head).
Do not evade the issue. Confront it directly. Many people, including
me, will assume you are wrong and your claim is impossible. But at
least we will see that you are familiar with the textbooks, and you
realize this claim is impossible by the standards of conventional
physics. It is better to be thought wrong than both wrong and ignorant.
- Jed
[That last point about politics and perception is something that free
energy claimants often overlook. Some of them, of course, are unaware
of the conservation of energy. They do not even realize their claims
violate conventional physics.]
