PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2019-09-22, 07:28:08
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Gauging the credibility of OU claims/systems/models  (Read 276 times)

Group: Mad Scientist
Full Member
***

Posts: 157
This is more of an abstract thread to discuss the credibility of various models and inventions that pass by the forums from time-to-time.

How should we judge the credibility of a system or claim when it is presented online?  We have to acknowledge that many different things affect this:

* Process is explained simply.
* Process is explained several different ways.
* Process is engineerable.
* Process doesn't require hard-to-find tools or materials.
* The parameters and limits to the process are well defined.
* Process can be explained in great detail.
* Process has a conceptual or mathematical proof attached to it.
* Process is consistent with other credible devices online.

And beneath all of that:
* Device is constructed to demonstrate the process.
(this is a relatively low-credibility action because anything can be faked online)

Ideally, a person trying to convey a concept to other tinkerers would focus on increasing their credibility in all of these fields and not just show a video of a motor spinning. C.C


There are a few situations where the above points will break down:
 - A person can build a working device but doesn't quite understand *how* it works.
 - A person has a good theoretical OU model that is consistent, but presents no engineerable solutions.
 - A language/vocabulary/teaching barrier prevents person's words from being correctly understood by others.


IMO these are just some things we should be aware of when evaluating systems online.
Feel free to add/comment in regards to this. :) ;)


---------------------------
Critical thinking is important, but a professional skeptic will never discover anything new.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2574
Good question.

I'm interested in experimental results based on operational devices.

1.  What is the actual measured input power and the output power?  COP based on actual data.

2.  Has the device been replicated, and what is the COP of the replication?

A one-off (not replicated) invention with an unrevealed "secret sauce" is of little use to humanity.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1472
Reiyuki and PhysicsProf:

You've both raised some very excellent points.

To my way of thinking any process or device presented
as potentially producing Free Energy or Overunity should
be able to do so either small scale or large scale.

When the "inventor" insists that only Lead Acid Batteries
must be used, and further, that those batteries must be
BIG, then something is wrong.

Explanations of the process or device should also be
worded with appropriate and correct technical terminology.



---------------------------
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." Upton Sinclair
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2574
Reiyuki and PhysicsProf:

You've both raised some very excellent points.

To my way of thinking any process or device presented
as potentially producing Free Energy or Overunity should
be able to do so either small scale or large scale.

When the "inventor" insists that only Lead Acid Batteries
must be used, and further, that those batteries must be
BIG, then something is wrong.

Explanations of the process or device should also be
worded with appropriate and correct technical terminology.

Good points. 
?  has anyone insisted that only big Lead Acid Batteries be used?
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2019-09-22, 07:28:08