Thoughts on 2012

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 20 Dec 2011, 18:35

clv101 wrote:We're talking about science - there's no way "The US Military"

Science is not Truth, it is a human activity. It does not exist independently of human beings - it's remarkable how many people don't really seem to understand that! "It must be true because a scientist told me" is no more sensible an attitude than "It must be true because a journalist told me."

And why the quotes? Do you not believe the US Military exists??

could censor the world's scientists - thousands of them working away, largely in freedom, in countries all other the world, specifically trying to be innovative, competing with one another. The idea of TPTB suppressing valuable scientific developments is ridiculous in my opinion. It just doesn't sit with my (pretty good) understanding of how science works.

From what I've read, "how science works" varies a lot depending on what level you're working at, and what material you're working on.

If you're working on very narrow technical matters that merely build on existing knowledge, you are probably pretty safe from interference from TPTB.

However, really groundbreaking science in the public sector often gets stymied, and the funding for it gets diverted to the military. Read "The Body Electric" by Robert O Becker if you don't believe me - his is a rather sad story of a brilliant but idealistic scientist repeatedly thwarted by the government-military-industrial complex. His research was into the body's electric field, in particular regarding wound healing and limb regrowth (the latter in amphibians, not humans!). His ideas went against much conventional thinking and were, on the one hand, ridiculed or ignored by many of his peers in universities; but on the other hand, enthusiastically taken up by the military, who ended up with the lion's share of the funding.

As Becker testifies, scientists are not saints but are prey to the same greed, vanity, dishonesty, cowardice and pressure as human beings at large. This may be less the case at lower levels, but at higher levels, where the stakes are high and the winners are showered in glory and money, lying and backstabbing are very common. Look at Watson and Crick - great scientists perhaps, but also total bastards, by their own admission ready to steal anyone's work they could get their hands on in their pursuit of glory.

Remember, funding for science comes from governments and corporations. Robert Becker ended up retiring early because he was exhausted from trying in vain to scrape enough money together to properly complete his research. But he presents plenty of evidence that the research is being done - just not at universities.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 20 Dec 2011, 19:54

It's good to have one's ideas challenged and we must look carefully before dismissing TESLA as bonkers.

.....

Right then, TESLA is bonkers.

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 20 Dec 2011, 20:03

biffvernon wrote:It's good to have one's ideas challenged and we must look carefully before dismissing TESLA as bonkers.

.....

Right then, TESLA is bonkers.

Judging by the capitals, I assume we are talking about two different things, but I confess I don't know what you're referring to Biff.

I'm not a scientist and I can offer no opinion as to whether Tesla (the man) was bonkers. But I don't think that is the generally accepted view of him. Not that I trust the generally accepted view about anything any more to be honest.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 20 Dec 2011, 20:37

If you are suggesting that there is some kind of 'free energy' device the US military is keeping from the world, well it is totally absurd.

Cheney, at the heart of the military-industial-intelligence complex going back to the 70's, when he became de facto president of America during the Bush years was driven by Peak Oil, the main reason for the invasion of Iraq.

If there was some kind of free energy TESLA thing in some Pentagon warehouse, don't you think Cheney would have known about it and thought - well thats OK, don't need to worry about energy, just get this thing out when the oil runs out/gets too expensive/arabs don't sell it anymore.

There is no energy miracle around the corner. Maybe, just maybe, technology might be develped DECADES from now but for the next few decades, we are stuck with what we have.

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 20 Dec 2011, 21:19

Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing that up for us Beria.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 20 Dec 2011, 22:12

Ludwig wrote: Judging by the capitals, I assume we are talking about two different things, but I confess I don't know what you're referring to Biff.

Yeah, there's a whole conspiracy theory thing about US military suppression of a free energy device that Nikola Tesla may or may not have invented. The guy was a smart scientist but the folks who are now running the conspiracy theory that allegedly springs from his idea are bonkers.

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 21 Dec 2011, 00:21

biffvernon wrote:
Ludwig wrote: Judging by the capitals, I assume we are talking about two different things, but I confess I don't know what you're referring to Biff.
Yeah, there's a whole conspiracy theory thing about US military suppression of a free energy device that Nikola Tesla may or may not have invented. The guy was a smart scientist but the folks who are now running the conspiracy theory that allegedly springs from his idea are bonkers.

You don't know that. "Free energy" is a misleading term and anyone who uses it is opening themselves up to accusations of quackery, even though IIRC Tesla used it himself. No energy is free, but the universe is full of energy that we tend to regard as non-existent simply because we haven't been able to harness it for human ends.

If Tesla himself claimed to have discovered electromagnetic propulsion, which he did, and if he was a smart guy, which he was, I think it is worth taking his claims seriously. I don't mean believe them unquestioningly, I mean what I say, take them seriously.

It's a matter of record that the US military classified Tesla's work. That is not a conspiracy theory, it's a fact. The work of crackpots does not get classified, and things that get classified get classified because people in power want them kept secret.

On writing that I'm thinking, "Does this really need spelling out?" but clearly it does.

As far as I can tell, doubts about this "conspiracy theory" do not centre around the science itself, but around (a) the assumption that it could not have been kept secret and (b) the assumption that if such sources of power had been discovered, they'd be everywhere because they'd solve the energy crisis for good.

(a) can be discounted as an argument in my opinion. By definition, we only ever get proof for things that haven't been kept secret. There's this idea that nothing stays secret because some things that were supposed to be secret ended up not being secret, and therefore everything that is supposed to be secret never, in fact, is.

This is the fallacy of hard scepticism: "I build my world-view on known facts, and therefore if there is no irrefutable proof for something, it must be untrue."

(b) is a more convincing argument, and it may be valid. But it seems to me that there are counterarguments. As I've said, if a hugely powerful technology could be engineered by boffins in attics the world over, that would represent a big threat for those currently in positions of power. Nuclear power does not present this problem because it requires industrial-scale financial and technological inputs and is, to state the bleeding obvious, hugely dangerous if got slightly wrong.

There are other possibilities that follow on from all that, which concern the motives of those in power. Namely: do they necessarily care about saving the world from energy poverty - or are they primarily interested in saving their own arses? I don't claim to know the answer but I know which way I lean.

This is all speculation. I fully agree that on the face of it, it scarcely seems possible that a solution to the world's energy problems might have been suppressed purely out of the desire of a power elite to hold on to power. But it is not entirely inconceivable if one holds, as I do, a cynical view of the motivation of the types of individuals who seek and consolidate power. There might also be other reasons we haven't even guessed of why they might do this, in addition to the ones I've mentioned.

I'm not particularly cagey about voicing these ideas because I understand enough about the scientific process to know that ridicule is not an argument. Nor is certainty that one is right.

This is stuff I am not any kind of expert on, it just seems to me that there is a fair bit of circumstantial evidence supporting it.

In my time I've entertained numerous ideas that are commonly regarded as "far out". Some of these turned out to be (from what I can tell) bunkum. Others, on the other hand, turned out not to be. If I'd rejected them all because the received wisdom was that they were all bunkum and not even worth investigating, then on the one hand I'd have avoided a bit of ridicule, but on the other hand I wouldn't have found out a lot of very, very interesting stuff.

In summary: yes, the possibility that we will be saved by Tesla "free energy" does seem unlikely. If it exists, the chances are that it is not reliable or advanced enough to solve the energy crisis, otherwise (one would think) it would have been employed already. On the other hand, there are a lot of questions that remain unanswered about what exactly happened to Tesla's work.

jb · Post by jb » 21 Dec 2011, 01:01

DominicJ wrote:
If BP had the ability to generate mains electricity at virtualy no cost, why would it waste all that effort digging for oil and appologising for spilling some?

Why wouldnt the Soviet Union have carried on Teslas work?
Or China?
Or France?
Or India?
Or South Africa?
Or Brazil?
Or Vanatu for that matter?

BP provides a product that our economies are extremely dependant on. Why would they make a change to generating electricity at no cost when what that would mean is enormous shifts in the market as the value of energy is hugely reduced (it being in over supply)? Meaning financial losses for them.

Also it could mean that a new technology becomes commercially available and then you have a scenario where the population doesn't need to buy electricity again.

Both spell enormous economic disruptions as our economies recover from a dependance on oil and fossil fuels - the best alternative (for governments and oil companies) being to wait it out, maximising income since the end to oil is inevitable.

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 21 Dec 2011, 01:06

I've read a little about Tesla before (about Tunguska), and I've just looked him up on Wikipedia for more details. It's clear he was a genius who was decades before his time. Like wireless energy transmission: this is now only being used to charge mobile phones and such. Maybe his research and inventions are only now being made feasible.

I've also been reading the Quantum science book recommended by Lidwig and its clear that scientists don't really have a clue what's going on. Like, they have 12 theories or such of reality and all are currently as valid as each other. So, maybe a new energy source has been with us all along, and has only needed our science and technology to catch up and exploit it.

Anyway, I'm hoping 2012 or maybe sometime soon after will give us a revolutionary new technology or even reality which will help solve our present problems.

Ancient civilisations knew about oil but never used it in any advanced way. They could also have easily built the mechanical clock and other machines but never did. I've often wondered why.

jb · Post by jb » 21 Dec 2011, 01:27

I found this online the other day - 2400 pgs devoted to 'free energy devices'

http://www.free-energy-info.com/PJKBook.html

I haven't had a chance to really go through it, but it's a compilation of any devices that have ever managed (or claimed to manage) a COP > 1.

Much of Tesla's work is covered - as to the accuracy of it I guess it would need to be tried out

PhilSage · Post by **PhilSage** » 21 Dec 2011, 08:48

Snail wrote:I've read a little about Tesla before (about Tunguska), and I've just looked him up on Wikipedia for more details. It's clear he was a genius who was decades before his time..

Actually, he was very much a man of his time; we tend to forget those inventions of his which have become so commonplace that we simply accept them as normal infrastructure, for example AC electrity generation/transmission and the multi-phase induction motor.

Certainly a genius though, who seemed to have an understanding of his science on an intuitive (some even said mystical) level, which is perhaps a reason that much myth has grown around him.

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 21 Dec 2011, 08:53

jb wrote:BP provides a product that our economies are extremely dependant on. Why would they make a change to generating electricity at no cost when what that would mean is enormous shifts in the market as the value of energy is hugely reduced (it being in over supply)? Meaning financial losses for them.

Why would it mean financial losses for them?
If they generate electricity for free, with no carbon emissions, they can sell it to the grid for 5p per kwh.
Average usage is what, 30gw?
Thats £13bn in pure profit, just from the UK

Also it could mean that a new technology becomes commercially available and then you have a scenario where the population doesn't need to buy electricity again.

Not if BP owns it, it can simply refuse to sell the technology, and maintain ownership of all of the generators.

Or it could sell shoe box sized ones that power homes.
Whatever.
The problem is, if 10 companies all have this technology, the first to market it wins.
The advantage of a price fixing cartel exists primarily in being outside it, or being inside and cheating

hodson2k9 · Post by **hodson2k9** » 21 Dec 2011, 13:34

whats peoples thoughts on LENR/cold fusion seemsto be alot of peolpe claiming to have cracked it even, nasa have been doing work on it

hodson2k9 · Post by **hodson2k9** » 21 Dec 2011, 13:40

http://pesn.com/2011/12/15/9601980_E-Ca ... cember_15/

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 21 Dec 2011, 13:47

Snail wrote: I've also been reading the Quantum science book recommended by Lidwig and its clear that scientists don't really have a clue what's going on. Like, they have 12 theories or such of reality and all are currently as valid as each other. So, maybe a new energy source has been with us all along, and has only needed our science and technology to catch up and exploit it.

Indeed... Until my late 20s, when I started reading about science again, I didn't realise how little we know. But a lot of technicians are convinced that knowing how things work, or even just knowing that they work, is the same as knowing why they work.

Anyway, I'm hoping 2012 or maybe sometime soon after will give us a revolutionary new technology or even reality which will help solve our present problems.

That would be nice, eh

Ancient civilisations knew about oil but never used it in any advanced way. They could also have easily built the mechanical clock and other machines but never did. I've often wondered why.

There's a theory that the pyramids were power plants :\ I have no idea how seriously to take the idea. I intend to read some more before drawing any conclusions. What I've read so far, while I don't understand much of it, is written by people who at least sound as though they know what they're talking about.