Is not this the way forward? A successful company, using a small
over-unity effect to gain an edge over the competition, but not
mentioning OU? Might it be better to 'slug' some OU device so it's not
overtly OU but is still better than the rest?
Stephen R Lawrence, Cambridge
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Griggs left the company many years ago.
There is no mention in the NASA documents or in any documents
published by Hydrodynamics Inc. that the device is sometimes
over-unity. They don't want to talk about that. It is more trouble
than it's worth.
They are friendly people, on the up and up. They are not trying to
cover up anything, but they don't want to get involved in disputes
with the physics establishment.
- Jed
</div>
