Re: YES, mechanical perpetual motion generator based on the Coriolis effect is going to work (JP)

In sci.physics, Dan Bloomquist
<public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
 wrote
on Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:34:25 GMT
<lm%Aj.5821$7d1.4330@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> In sci.physics, Dan Bloomquist
>> <public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>  wrote
>> on Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:26:55 GMT
>> <PkqAj.5745$7d1.92@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
>>> Androcles wrote:
>>>> "Dan Bloomquist" <public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>> news:18hAj.5718$7d1.2157@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>
>>>> | And the underlying mechanism is understood to
>>>> | be receding galaxies.
>>>>
>>>> Naive nonsense.
>>> Once a crank, always a crank. How you doing cranky?
>>>
>>> You have quite the track record...
>>>
>>> http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/ImmortalFumbles.html
>> 
>> Yes he does, and I think Dirk gave up out of sheer frustration on
>> cataloging all of them. ;-)
>> 
>>>>  
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/geoopt/optpic/brokpen.jpg
>>> Retard. Does it hurt?
>> 
>> The only thing that appears to pain him is the fact that
>> SR has been widely accepted in the world of physics...
>
>> Regrettably, actual data validating SR is a little hard to
>> come by, and some experiments are easily misinterpreted --
>> he routinely touts Sagnac as disproving SR, for example.
>> (Short answer: it doesn't, really.)
>
> I know. I tried to explain the Sagnac effect to him about four years 
> ago. At least, that if c' = c + v there would be no beat frequency. He 
> is adamant about his beliefs.

And has been since about 1999.

>
> Best, Dan.

-- 
#191, ewill3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 C++ Programming Idea #12995733:
bool f(bool g, bool h) { if(g) h = true; else h = false;  return h;}

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com