> Eric Smith <eric_at_brouhaha.com> wrote:
> > Dwight wrote:
> > > There seems to be controversy between the physicists and
> > > the charlatans. I don't think the physicists have any problem
> > > here.
> > There are at least a few legitimate physicists that think that
> > it may be possible to tap the zero-point energy (which comes from
> > nowhere).
> > Remember that not that long ago most physicists didn't believe that
> > it was possible for a black hole to emit radiation, but now most
> > of them accept it. The ideas for how zero-point energy might
> > be tapped are similar. The books get balanced by a corresponding
> > loss of energy elsewhere (or perhaps elsewhen).
> > As far as I know, no one has yet proven that you *can't* borrow some
> > of the zero-point energy.
> Yes, many still look for that magic valve. As a good rule
> of thumb, don't invest in anyone that says he has found it.
> For the most part, we haven't been able to model the
> mathematical part correctly that shows that it can't be
> done. We haven't found one case in nature that uses the principle.
> This is usually a good case for there not being a way to
> do it. As we look at everything man has done, we notice
> that nature has often been using that principle for something
> else for billions of years. It is vary important to explore
> why we can't do it but foolish to believe that because we
> don't know why we can't that somehow we will beat all the indicators
> and find the trick that nature missed and only we could find.
Do you realy want us make belive that Nature already had invented
MS-Windows before ? Not even Blind Mother Nature van be that blind.
Gruss
h.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Fri Feb 05 1999 - 13:30:02 GMT