Charles Brown sez: > I am looking for people that sincerely want to > escape the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Seems there have been other recent claims just as provocative as Mr. Brown's that have been made here as well. Brown's statement, however, strikes me as one of the most curiously worded proclamations of intent that I've read in quite a while... looking for a few good men (or women.) It would seem that there have been a LOT of proclamations lately on how one's simulated s/w models have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they have discovered "the-way" to beat the 2LoT, that "their" model points the way to salvation, to a panacea of free energy just waiting to save the world. Can it be done? Who knows. Science fiction authors have certainly conquered the 2LoT barrier many times over, so why can't it be done in our provincial little universe as well. Reality is often stranger than fiction. I can only offer the following snippet of insight, the result of a few hard lessons learned at my own expense - literally at my own expense. There was a time in my own recent history when I had come up with a model that seemed to point the way to a panacea of FE. It was a well thought out model too. I did the physics. I checked out the math thoroughly, as best as I could. The software simulations I was running at the time also seemed to confirm time after time that I had been correctly applying the math to my understanding of basic laws of physics. There was only one thing left for me to do - build the contraption. Fortunately for me the endeavor, while costly, wasn't going to be so outrageously expensive that I couldn't at least get a good idea as to whether I was on the right track or not. In the end I think I spent somewhere around two thousand dollars of personal savings in R&D, building my own POC, Proof of Concept prototype. The result of my intense endeavor was - most educational. It didn't work as advertised. Why? Didn't I do the math right? Where did I go wrong? Eventually, with the help of another colleague (who shall remain nameless) I discovered my error. The biggest irony of it all for me was the fact that my math WAS correct - my "theory" worked. Unfortunately, Mother Nature never asked me for my opinion on how she runs the store. The problem was I had misinterpreted a particular law of physics, specifically how magnetic fields interact with each other. It's a rather interesting phenomenon too, an interactive condition that is easy to misinterpret. However, because I had made a simple misinterpretation in my application of physics my "flawless" math took me down a road of roses filled with the best of intentions. Sometimes I try to comfort myself with the fact that it was an honest mistake on my part, one based on the best collection of information I had at my fingertips at the time. But a mistake it still was. These days, when I hear proclamations that their specially assembled software simulations (which, granted, are claimed to be based on how the real universe operates) show how to generate oodles and oodles of free energy, I find myself remembering how my own simulations had also predicted the same claims. The best of luck to you all. May the best men and women win the prize! Don't be surprised however if it turns out to be a valuable educational experience. Hopefully, you will be able to afford the tuition Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWirks.com
