> You also wrote;
> > Then start comparing electronics to economics to find a working
> > model, and use comparison and analogy to explain it (free energy).
>
> Go for it if you think this is a viable approach (though I can't see any
> energy relationship between electronics and economics that would make
> sense to me), and I look forward to any POSITIVE findings that might
> lead to a working overunity device or even a concept!!!
Economics and Electronics share many relationships. For instance, the
economy obeys Newton's 2nd law (correct me if I'm wrong, but said law is
"for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction", right?).
At first glance this would not seem so -- I go to the store, I buy food...
but that food had to come from somewhere. Our economy is a dynamic system
of exchanges - no one action can occur without an equal and opposite
reaction. Of course, the economy has known over-unity for millenia --
it's called profit. :)
> Sometimes you lead me to think you are on this list purely by accident
> or out of boredom. Never makes sense to me to argue without a point or
> direction except for the sake of arguing.
Ahem - I am here neither out of boredom nor accident - I am here because
science is something I enjoy. However, I don't have the luxury of being
able to actively experiment - because I have this neat thing that's called
a "life", Jerry. I don't REALLY don't appreciate such assertions.
> My point was that, IMHO, the climatic changes and other ecological
> weirdness produces new reports almost every week and that mankind surely
> is a major contributing factor directly due to our primary methods of
> energy production.
Well, at any rate - I think we can both agree that our problems are coming
to a crux quite rapidly. As you said, arguing our points would be like
arguing the existence of god - we'll all be dead soon enough, so why
bother. :) Likewise, no matter which of us is right - certain doom looms
in the future - so we'll know one way or the other soon enough.
> This realization acts as a catalyst in my own seeking for a means of
> practical non-polluting overunity that, when adopted globally, will over
> time, reduce these destructive climatic changes.
Hence, why I suggest the link between economics and electronics.
Again - although the link between the two sciences seems weak at first,
it does exist. I find this fact a perfect tool for comparitive analysis
and analogy to prove my points.