Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 105 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here


Hot Links

American Antigravity

Chava Energy

Closeminded Science


Energy Science



Integrity Research Institute

Interstellar Technologies

JLN Labs


New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

The Orion Proj.




Science Hobbyist

Tom Bearden's Page

Unlimited electric energy


Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
Alternative Energy News
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
Magazine Sites
Distributed Energy
Electrifying Times
ExtraOrdinary Technology
IE Magazine
New Energy Times

Interesting Links

SciTech Daily Review
NEXUS Magazine

The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Easy to verify if a house runs on Edsison (Score: 1)
by chipotle_pickle on Sunday, October 12, 2003 @ 18:06:20 EDT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://freehydrogen.blogspot.com
About the house that's been using an Edison device for a year, ask for the electric bills. In the long history of perpetual motion machine scams, nobody has ever gone to the trouble of getting an electric bill consistent with their claims. The bill should be low, mostly negative, except maybe for a small positive bill January or August.

Good to eliminate the carbon possibility, though it seemed inconsistent with the rest of your description (no power input once warmed up. Carbon would require constant low voltage electrical input.).

The notion that the "catalyst" does not get used up but "loses it's potency" just doesn't make sense. Either the precipitate falls out, in which case you might not see it if you did not look in the water filter. Or the film itself oxidizes, which might be hard or easy to see. If you've not weighed the "catalyst" before and after, you just don't know.

The UFCT people are always being told that this or that important person or CEO is involved in UFCT. But the only one that's verified is the big brother of the former CEO of a veterinary hospital system. Why not talk to some of the other people independently and ask them to confirm their involvement in UFCT? Clearly, when the GWE page went up and until April, it was written by someone without the technical education required to make sense of an electric bill (10 KW/day of power, etc.).

| Parent

Re: Anthony's Edison observations (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on Monday, October 13, 2003 @ 13:24:12 EDT

With GWE producing Edison Device components since August 19, 2003 and Device manufacturers beginning their production in early 2004, does GWE have any plans to do an offical media launch by the close of 2003? Or shortly after?

From previous responses, it appears the revenue stream has started from the technology license. Other than "really soon", when do you think the revenues will start trickling down to the shareholders?


| Parent

White's analysis (Score: 1)
by chipotle_pickle on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 @ 12:25:04 EDT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://freehydrogen.blogspot.com
Anthony, above you say:

I believe that the process analysis written by Douglass A. White, Ph.D. is more along the lines of what is happening in the gcells, although I am aware of some key differences between Dr. White’s analysis and what I personally observed.

Which White analysis was that, he had two. One of them was that the gCell was a filter that water was forced through with mechanical pressure, possibly from gravity. If you like that idea, maybe you could calculate for us how many eV a water would gain falling a few cm, and how far off that is from what it would take to do any chemistry.

White's other idea was that it was similar to the work of Ondreij Votava entitled "Vibrationally Mediated
Photodissociation of Water....". Now if you like that idea, why don't we just write Voteva and ask him what he thinks of it. He seems like a nice guy with the pictures of his kids on his website and all. I am sure he would get back to us if we asked him why he didn't just use a bigger container and more water but the same amount of energy. But I don't want to waste time he could spend with his family if nobody here is going to listen to him.

| Parent


All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.