Perpetual Motion Machines

John K Clark (
Tue, 29 Apr 1997 13:42:08 -0700 (PDT)


On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 MikeRose <> Wrote:

>This is not the National Inquirer, it is the Extropy List, but there
>does seem to be an inquistion by some self-dubbed high priests of

Welcome to the wonderful world of Science, it's not nice, it's not polite,
nothing is more fulfilling to a Scientist than smashing somebody else's
theory into a quivering bloody heap begging for mercy. Take no prisoners is
the rallying cry, look for the slightest logical flaw, the smallest possible
crack, then use it to pry open the entire theory and expose the disgusting
stupidity inside for all the world to see. And that is EXACTLY what they
should do because nearly all theories are wrong. The few ideas that survive
this brutal process are possibly true and certainly tough as nails, they have
to be. Historically one of the very toughest of these is the law of
conservation of energy, it has withstood fierce attacks by brilliant minds
and come out without a scratch. If it were untrue we'd need to throw all the
Physics books written in the last 300 years in the garbage, if the evidence
was strong enough I'd be willing to do just that and start from square one,
but it would take one hell of a lot more that some Bozo saying "Trust me.
Why would I lie?"

Perpetual motion machines are a dime a dozen, crackpots have been making them
for thousands of years, life is short and I see no reason to spend any more
time studying this one than the millions of other such designs.

John K Clark

Version: 2.6.i