Re: Dr. Garry W. Denke, Dr. Anthony M. Perks, Dr. Darlene M. Bailey


Posted by paul on Sep 23, 2003 at 13:03
(65.144.156.109)

Re: Dr. Garry W. Denke, Dr. Anthony M. Perks, Dr. Darlene M. Bailey (Amaranth Rose)

but what if hes right?
take the curssing out and the overall message is clear.
perhaps he understands that Im right.

everybody I actually talk to about this can understand except people who are affraid of the peer pressure associated with agreeing with controversial ideas.

everyone on this list can perform the necessary math to
arrive a their own conclusions , yet to post that math seems to be impossible.

when my simple 2 ft diameter test model performs exactly as my math sudgested that it would , then what should I trust , the actual test results or the words in the non-mathemetical replies I read on this list.

should I trust a pressure guage , or what pasti says?
should I trust a tachnometer or what you say?
if I see my test model working as predicted should I ignore this and mark it down as a un workable concept?
or should I do as true scientist do and write down the results , gather data , and determine from that data if
the concept is viable?

way back in 1995 when I first posted the cfm concept here on this list , it was laughed at.

even the simple pipe example is being laughed at.

since then the overall system has changed but like the cfm it still works as predicted , it is now so simple that
any welder or mechanic can produce one.
the cfm would have cost an enourmous amount of money to make.
this has been reduced to several hundred dollars.
so the lack of funding or acceptance of the concept has resulted in a extremely affordable concept that performs
execelent.




Follow Ups:


Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:
Comments:

[ Forum ] [ New Message ]