Maker Pro
Maker Pro

hendershot generator

B

Brianss

Jan 1, 1970
0
HAS Anybody out there built and used the Hendershot generator to power up a
home? And if so how well dose it work?

--
+------------------[ SERVER SIGNATURE ]----
| posted via http://www.electrondepot.com
| Web, RSS and Social Media Interface to
| sci.electronics.design and other groups
+------------------------------------------
 
A

amdx

Jan 1, 1970
0
HAS Anybody out there built and used the Hendershot generator to power up a
home? And if so how well dose it work?

It doesn't matter how it works, it's free energy. :-(
 
L

Lasse Langwadt Christensen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Den søndag den 13. oktober 2013 19.00.08 UTC+2 skrev amdx:
It doesn't matter how it works, it's free energy. :-(

and if you are lucky you get what you pay for ...

-Lasse
 
J

John S

Jan 1, 1970
0
HAS Anybody out there built and used the Hendershot generator to power up a
home? And if so how well dose it work?

What the hell is it, BrainAss?
 
Perpetual motion machines work by the following mechanism:

* "Inventors" come up with some razz-matazz to convince fools
that they have a perpetual motion machine that actually works.

* Fools give the "inventors" money.

Since the function of the invention is to separate fools from their
money, they only need to generate the illusion of energy.

The real secret is to plow a small part of the money into the next
scam, hopefully with a fresh face for a partner. If you can find
someone with a PhD who will lie, like Slowman, all the better. Only
then does it become "perpetual".
 
T

tm

Jan 1, 1970
0
The real secret is to plow a small part of the money into the next
scam, hopefully with a fresh face for a partner. If you can find
someone with a PhD who will lie, like Slowman, all the better. Only
then does it become "perpetual".

I don't know. Maybe if you got him one of those "matchbook" nobel prizes?
You know, like oboma has.
 
B

Bill Sloman

Jan 1, 1970
0
The real secret is to plow a small part of the money into the next
scam, hopefully with a fresh face for a partner. If you can find
someone with a PhD who will lie, like Slowman, all the better.

If the Ph.D.s aren't any more enthusiastic about lying than I am, this is very bad advice, but since krw regards anybody who doesn't share his asininedelusions as a liar, he probably isn't being intentionally misleading.
Only then does it become "perpetual".

There are people around who've got Ph.D.s on the basis of faked results, and if your entrepreneur could find one of them before they get caught they might do better.

The most convincing "free energy" story in recent years would be Pons and Fleischmann's "cold fusion"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

and that seems to have been more of an unfortuate over-reaction to some very odd experimental results than any kind of deliberate fraud - Fleischmann at least had a very good reputation when I was working in the same department at Southhampton back in 1972.
 
R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim said:
You need to build one for each room, one isn't enough for your whole
house.

And, since all your house wiring is interconnected, it is recommended
that you build all of the needed units first, then fire them all up
together.

...Jim Thompson
"Fire" is the operative term.
Un-synched generators tied together tend to create a HOT argument
between each other.
 
R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
amdx said:
It doesn't matter how it works, it's free energy. :-(
TINSTAAFL.
Remember the 3 laws of conservation of energy: (1) you cannot win,
(2) you cannot break even, (3) you lose.
 
M

Martin Brown

Jan 1, 1970
0
Perpetual motion machines work by the following mechanism:

* "Inventors" come up with some razz-matazz to convince fools
that they have a perpetual motion machine that actually works.

* Fools give the "inventors" money.

At least USPTO have *finally* stopped accepting patents for perpetual
motion machines. The purpose of these scams is to separate the credulous
fools from as much of their money as possible. It works only too well as
the latest incarnation called eCat demonstrates so well.
Since the function of the invention is to separate fools from their
money, they only need to generate the illusion of energy.
Not even that. People will believe what they want to believe
irrespective of powerful scientific evidence to the contrary.

The closest I have seen to a perpetual motion machine is an
electrostatic Zamboni pile and an small piece of aluminium foil. They
were used to power first generation night vision equipment. The foil
jumps to and fro until metal fatigue gets the better of it. Total output
power is in the low 100s of nW.

The Oxford electric bell has been powered by one since 1840.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Electric_Bell

I think there is another somewhere using a sulphur ball and friction
also in hard vacuum not been running quite as long. It made the news a
decade or so back when an industrial dispute threatened to deprive it of
the LN2 needed for the hard vacuum cold trap.
 
P

Phil Hobbs

Jan 1, 1970
0
At least USPTO have *finally* stopped accepting patents for perpetual
motion machines. The purpose of these scams is to separate the credulous
fools from as much of their money as possible. It works only too well as
the latest incarnation called eCat demonstrates so well.

The PTO has required a working model to accompany all perpetual motion
machine patents for many years. What do you mean, "finally"?

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
 
* Both true and false.
True part: if any of the wording appears to eXplicitly imply
perpetual motion, the app is denied.
False part: if the wording talks about extracting energy from or by
using exotic and unproven techniques like Heisenbergian transformation
of Casmir energies. Or some such more opaque and mumbo-jumbo. I remember
seeing some in this class. In fact, one seemed to be an extension of a
cold fusion system.

It falls back to the examiner. If he believes that it relies on
perpetual motion, it's automatically denied until a working model can
be examined. If the energy is coming from somewhere, it still need
not be proven to patent. The rules haven't changed for some time but
the examiners are being trained to see the difference a bit better
these days.
 
K

kevin93

Jan 1, 1970
0
No, it is #3. Yours is a direct consequence of #1 & #2. If you

cannot win or draw, you must lose. That's the universe of possible

outcomes of game play.






It *is* #3.

Normally #3 is quoted as "you cannot get out of the game"

kevin
 
R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Martin said:
At least USPTO have *finally* stopped accepting patents for perpetual
motion machines.
* Both true and false.
True part: if any of the wording appears to eXplicitly imply
perpetual motion, the app is denied.
False part: if the wording talks about extracting energy from or by
using exotic and unproven techniques like Heisenbergian transformation
of Casmir energies. Or some such more opaque and mumbo-jumbo. I remember
seeing some in this class. In fact, one seemed to be an extension of a
cold fusion system.
 
R

Robert Baer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jim said:
You missed the intended joke entirely :-(

...Jim Thompson
No,i did not.
You fail to realize that some idiot may try to do that!
 
Top