Aether Science

[Ghostisfort]

jerry
I don't think I ever mentioned the word "free" in any of the above.
There is no "free energy", a phrase used by academics as a sneer that means they don't have to read-up on the subject.

PM
If you look at the links about the work of Konstantin Meyl, you will see that he has no such problems.
Also freely available are the records of Tesla's experimentation in this field. He subjected himself to any possible ill effects... very safety conscious was Tesla.

 

[Jerry_B]

jerry
I don't think I ever mentioned the word "free" in any of the above.
There is no "free energy", a phrase used by academics as a sneer that means they don't have to read-up on the subject.

You said that 'cost of wiring and maintenance which all disappears from the bill with lossless transmissions' - so the assumption seems to be that some elements would become 'free'.

I've seen the term 'free energy' used by proponents of various inventions/machines over the years, so to say that it's merely some phrase used by 'academics' is a bit wide of the mark.

 

[Ghostisfort]

I don't think I ever mentioned the word "free" in any of the above.
There is no "free energy", a phrase used by academics as a sneer that means they don't have to read-up on the subject.

I've seen the term 'free energy' used by proponents of various inventions/machines over the years, so to say that it's merely some phrase used by 'academics' is a bit wide of the mark.

As you are one of the main exponents of institutionalised knowledge, the answer was for you.
The term free energy was not used by Tesla or Keely or even by any other aether energy researcher of the time, certainly not by me. It is used as a catch-all by academics who wish to ridicule those who are involved in researching alternate energy sources.

This is not the only example as all those who find fault with evolution are labelled Fundamentalists, especially by US scientists. Such hand waving is common in academic circles and is a reaction to the adverse public perception of science in general.

Further, science has no authority to criticise that which it refuses to consider. To do so academic science must declare ownership of all knowledge of energy, which, of course would be ridiculous.

Criticism of science
Robert Anton Wilson, Stanley Aronowitz, and Paul Feyerabend all thought that the military-industrial complex, large corporations, and the grants that came from them had an immense influence over the research and even results of Scientific experiments.[2][24][25][26] Aronowitz even went as far as to say "It does not matter that the scientific community ritualistically denies its alliance with economic/industrial and military power. The evidence is overwhelming that such is the case. Thus, every major power has a national science policy; the United States Military appropriates billions each year for "Basic" as well as "Applied" research".

In his Industrial Society and Its Future, a.k.a., The Unabomber's Manifesto, Theodore Kaczynski, a primitivist, argues that science "marches on blindly, without regard to the real welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for research."[28]. He also argues that science is a surrogate activity, i.e., "an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the “fulfillment” that they get from pursuing the goal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_science

Back to aether energy.

There have been numerous free energy claims over the years.[1] Many, such as those implying perpetual motion or those based on extracting zero-point energy, are viewed as impossible according to accepted physical laws.[2] Others, such as cold fusion, while not fundamentally impossible, are not accepted as established by the scientific community. Conspiracy advocates therefore claim that the scientific community has controlled and suppressed research into alternative avenues of energy production via the institutions of peer review.[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_energy_suppression

There is no need for conspiracy where academic science is concerned as it's stuck in its own mire and prevented from considering alternatives by theory. The theory becoming so entrenched that it becomes impossible to extract the individual academic scientist from it.

Perpetual motion is impossible as it would require energy from nowhere and all of the energy I write about is from somewhere.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

For those that didn't see it, Shock and Awe covered the history of electricity generation and transmission, from Faraday to the death of Tesla. But there was no mention of aether - perhaps that will crop up when the series moves onto radio transmission.

This series is excellent and well worth watching. Professor Jim Al-Khalili, presents recreations of classic experiments and explains very clearly what they demonstrate. He goes into the historical background, the politics and the economics of the science, involving some of the key figures.

Makes the science of sometimes apparently very mysterious forces much, much, clearer.

http://www3.open.ac.uk/media/fullstory.aspx?id=22053

A v.good series indeed. :yeay:

 

[Jerry_B]

As you are one of the main exponents of institutionalised knowledge, [...]

... in your imagination, maybe...

The term free energy was not used by Tesla or Keely or even by any other aether energy researcher of the time, certainly not by me. It is used as a catch-all by academics who wish to ridicule those who are involved in researching alternate energy sources.

I didn't say that they used the term - however, proponents of various ideas about different motors, etc do indeed use the term. Simply typing 'free energy' into a search engine or YouTube will bring up plenty of examples - there's even something on youTube called 'Tesla: The Race to Zero Point Free Energy'.

You try to make out that the term is used by 'academics', but it seems that otherwise is actually the case.