News / Business
THE SECOND of a SERIES of CHALLENGES, MADE TO CYNICAL WORLD-WIDE PHYSICISTS from DANTE A. DONATELLI JR. and www.ONEGIFT4POWER.org!
This takes off from Question 24, made public on September 18, 2006, and continues challenging the old science cynical physics professors and physicists, world-wide, as it will need ALL of them to even begin to think about answering the questions.
If your new to this New Release format, go back to September 18, 2006 and get a brief update.
BY the WAY, ANYONE WHO FEELS HE or she is SMART ENOUGH, CAN ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS! THEY ARE NOT NUCLEAR or ROCKET SCIENCE!
As of this date, what has transpired from September 18, 2006, is that NOTHING legitimate has come forward, IN FACT, NOTHING ON the WORLD WIDE WEB, has come forth, as well, as no answers, so far, were attempted. Yes, the Web
IF WE ARE FRAUDS – SCIENCE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW IT TO THE WORLD, AS THEY COULD ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AND SHOW DANTE and www. ONEGIFT4POWER.org, WRONG, AFTER ALL, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE “EDUCATIONALLY SUPERIOR”! Everyone knows the Web Worms are sick and disgusting puppies.
LET’S NOW CONTINUE and SEE WHO IS SMART and WHO IS FRAUDULENT!
GENERAL CATEGORY: ENERGY, WHERE DID IT COME FROM? EXACTLY WHAT IS IT?
FACT:
Historical fact states that in 1807 the concept ENERGY was suggested by Thomas Young, and English physician, for the “work-stored-within” inanimate objects. This was ENERGY in 1807. There were no other forms!
Please answer the following questions:
QUESTION #25. Why isn’t this ENERGY of 1807 recognized today by science, as if one states, like Dante has stated, he can put solid matter objects into motion and extract this historical energy, why is science so against it when it was the FIRST FORM of ENERGY, being the potential energy of solid matter inanimate objects?
QUESTION #26 And, since it was the FIRST ENERGY, and TRUEST ENERGY, WHY ISN’T IT BEING USED TODAY?
QUESTION #27 What FORM of energy is it? What was it? What should it be called, as a primary FORM, since it was the first, and still exists today, even though physicists have NO NAME for this FORM?
DANTE HAS A NAME FOR IT!
FACTS:
It is a fact that science ONLY knows of FIVE PRIMARY FORMS today, as listed in McGraw-Hill, being
(1) CHEMICAL ENERGY, which source is fossil fuels, biomass etc.
(2) ELECTRICAL ENERGY, which sources are electric power generation plants and batteries,
(3) THERMAL ENERGY, which includes the Sun’s energy and the Geo-thermal energy from the Earth,
(4) NUCLEAR ENERGY, which of course comes from fissionable materials,
and the last,
(5) CONVERTED from the other FOUR FORMS, the 5th FORM, CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY, as this converted mechanical energy costs something in real value to deliver as it has to use UP the other FOUR COSTLY FORMS, as potential energy cannot be brought back, so MORE SOURCE has to be USED, and EACH OF THE FOUR FORMS SOURCES, COST REAL MONEY!
QUESTION #28 Which FORM of energy does the DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY of 1807 go into?
That which Dante calls his ENERGY of OBJECTS in MOTION, as it COSTS NOTHING, IN DANTE’S POWER PLANTS TO DEVELOP FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY, and if one doesn’t think it is MECHANICAL ENERGY of ANY KIND, EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS, AS EVERYONE KNOWS ENERGY is BEING DEVELOPED WHEN ANY OBJECT, or VOLUME of WATER or WIND DEVELOPS ENERGY and ACCOMPLISHES WORK, as in EVERY HYDRO and WIND-POWER project ACCOMPLISHES?
In other word’s, CAN ANYONE NAME the FORM of ENERGY conventionalized and accepted by science, of 1807?
FACTS:
Science states that ANY MECHANICAL ENERGY costs something. They will state that it will cost REAL MONEY because EVEN the OBJECTS HAVE TO BE PUT INTO MOTION!
BUT, AS DANTE DESIGNED INGENIOUS MACHINES, (as will be brought forth later in this text when the definition of “Machine Design” is analyzed), HE USES the BASIC LAWS of NATURE as relates to objects, PUT INTO MOTION, and OBJECTS KEPT IN MOTION.
One Law, to start and put objects in motion, COST REAL MONEY and ENERGY.
A Second Law, TO KEEP THEM IN MOTION, REQUIRES MUCH LESS MONEY AND ENERGY!
Then, as the ELECTRIC MOTOR has ITS OWN BASIC LAWS, DANTE CAN, BY INGENIOUS MECHANICS, DEVELOP MORE FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY because the FUEL is in MOTION, than the RUNNING of the OBJECTS is PERFORMED.
In other words, he can develop MORE ENERGY than he uses, SIMPLY BY INGENIOUS MECHANICS, and INGENIOUS MACHINE DESIGN, and the UNDERSTANDING of the PAST, PLUS WHAT the BASIC LAWS of NATURE ARE, PLUS HE PLACES FUEL, IN MOTION, AND THIS FUEL DEVELOPS MORE FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY than the COSTLY ENERGY IS, PLUS, BY USING THESE TWO MECHANICAL ENERGY SUPPLIES, the ELECTRICAL GENERATOR PERFORMS WORK USING BOTH, and THE MORE AMOUNT GENERATED, CAN IN FACT SUPPLY THAT SMALL AMOUNT TO BE USED by the ELECTRIC MOTOR, THAT HAS BASIC LAWS of it’s OWN, and the POWER Plants Dante has discovered, using ingeniously innovative machines, DO IN FACT RUN THEMSELVES, ELECTRICALLY, ANOTHER BASIC LAW of NATURE, SCIENCE HAS YET TO FIND OUT ABOUT!
PLEASE, WHEN ONE ANSWERS THIS QUESTION, PUT YOUR NAME ON YOUR ANSWER. Dante wants the WORLD TO ESPECIALLY KNOW of YOU, after all, IF YOUR “EDUCATIONALLY
QUESTION #29 Doesn’t it seem, that if one wanted the CHEAPEST, SAFEST, and CLEANEST form of ENERGY to be used on Earth, for humans, WOULDN’T this FIRST TRUE ENERGY of 1807, proved in 1856, BE the ENERGY TO USE to HELP SAVE the WORLD’S ENVIRONMENT?
OR, WILL the POWER BROKERS and OIL BARONS, protected by GOVERNMENTS, PUT the KIBOSH ON IT, and NOT ALLOW SCIENCE TO EVEN USE IT?
This makes more sense of why science wouldn’t use it.
WOULD SOMEONE IN SCIENCE STAND UP and ADMIT THIS? And, NAME YOURSELF AS WELL!
Doesn’t it seem stupid that all the oil, natural gas, and others of the FIVE PRIMARY FORMS of ENERGY have to be used up for energy and purchased when there is a CHEAP as DIRT ONE available?
FACTS:
The same historical fact states that in 1856, an English physicist Lord Kelvin introduced the term KINETIC, for the “work-stored-within”, when the inanimate OBJECT is in motion, as it is now assumed that POTENTIAL energy was the type of energy that was “stored-within”, of 1807, because the object was still.
MORE QUESTIONS:
QUESTION #30 If KINETIC energy is the energy of an inanimate object in motion, what is the KINETIC ENERGY called of all the other four primary forms mentioned above?
Is it the same kinetic energy or not?
QUESTION #31 If it is the same kinetic energy, then why cannot it return to potential when the kinetic energy is finished with it, as an objects kinetic energy can?
Why does anyone then have to put more energy supply like gasoline, electricity, heat, or nuclear material back into the streamline of work being done?
Is this why the 5th CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY , COSTS SO MUCH?
IS THIS WHY the 6TH DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY cannot be considered FREE?
NO MORE ENERGY HAS TO BE PUT INTO AN INANIMATE OBJECT! IT’S ALWAYS THERE! IT NEVER WEARS OUT! IT ALWAYS IS DEVELOPED, USED, AND GOES BACK TO POTENTIAL AGAIN!
In fact, in machine it can accomplish this back and forth trillions of times, thus delivering developed free mechanical energy trillions of times.
IF THIS ISN’T FREE ENERGY, NOTHING IS!
QUESTION #32 If it is a different kinetic energy, like Dante A. Donatelli Jr. believes, why then doesn’t science just say so?
Is it because of this kinetic energy and potential energy thing that this 1807 energy cannot be FREE, and SCIENCES CLAIMS IT ISN’T FREE?
IS IT REALLY?
EXPLAIN IT ALL FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT AS SMART AS YOU ALL?
It’s no shame to have two sets of kinetic and potential energy, one that goes back and forth like a still object, then moving, then becoming still again, which means the “WORK-STORED-WITHIN” is still in the object, and YET, ONE OTHER SET for all the other energies that have to be CONVERTED to mechanical energy and never can go back to potential again, but need replaced?
After all if there are TWO SETS of CONDITIONS, WHY NOT TWO SETS of POTENTIAL and KINETIC ENERGY?
In other words, ONE SET of KINETIC and POTENTIAL ENERGY, to cover the 1807 ENERGY SCIENCE FORGOT ABOUT and NEVER NAMED, the FORM IT BELONGS IN, and ONE SET THAT DESCRIBES the KINETIC and POTENTIAL ENERGY in the FIVE PRIMARY FORMS THEY HAVE NAMED and LIVE WITH! Only seems fair!
AFTER ALL, THERE SEEMS TO BE, and as a matter of fact, Dante claims it to be, TWO SETS of MECHANICAL ENERGY, one that is CONVERTED and ONE THAT IS DEVELOPED FREE simply by objects in MOTION, as the 1807 ENERGY and the 1856 KINETIC TYPE of ENERGY, directed so!
CYNICAL PHYSICISTS SEEM TO HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT SCIENCE IS SIMPLY BASIC LAWS of NATURE, and ALL ONE HAS TO DO, IS LOOK AROUND at the SIMPLE THINGS IN LIFE, LIKE INANIMATE OBJECTS, AND ONE WILL SEE the SIMPLICITY of DANTE’S QUESTIONS, FACTS, and CLAIMS!
SCIENCE WANTS TO MAKE IT HARD! After all, they have these funny math formulas to use, and to dream up more, and they HAVE TO HAVE DIFFICULT SITUATIONS for them to operate in, OR TAKE GOVERNMENT GRANTS FOR!
PLUS, THEY HAVE THIS Universal LAW they are still looking for! It’s a law, they believe, a magic law, that will solve all the Universes questions, SO THEY PUT EVERYTHING THEY CAN, EVEN IF IT ISN’T OR DOESN’T FIT, INTO AS MANY FEW LAWS AS THEY CAN, ERGO, HISTORY WAS FORGOTTEN!
And if ANYONE READING THIS, doesn’t believe this, YOU HAVEN’T READ ONE
FACT:
And history also reveals that some in science believe that MOTION itself was the FIRST ENERGY.
QUESTION #33 How could this be, as the “work-stored-within”, the ENERGY is in the OBJECT as was accepted by all of science after 1807?
QUESTION #34 If MOTION was energy, is there “work-stored-within” it, as well?
If there is, THEN WHY ISN’T MOTION a primary form of energy today?
Or, why wasn’t it even mentioned in the Science Time-Line as being an ENERGY?
FACTS ARE:
Truth is there is NO ENERGY in MOTION!
ONLY ENERGY in OBJECTS, that HAVE TO BE PUT INTO MOTION TO GET IT OUT!
We still have motion don’t we? And, if it isn’t, THEN WHY NOT JUST STATE THIS and TEACH IT, after all, IT’S SCIENTIFIC HISTORY?
QUESTION #35 Does MOTION or OBJECTS have “work-stored-within” as stated in 1807?
In other words, WHAT IS ENERGY? Objects in motion, or just plain motion itself?
Truth is, MOTION CONTAINS NO ENERGY!
OBJECTS CONTAIN POTENTIAL ENERGY!
QUESTION #36 If objects in motion, of and in 1807 had “work-stored-within”, is it still there today, or has history drained it all?
If it is still there, why doesn’t science recognize it, teach it, and use it?
If it isn’t there, then how can bullets, wrecking balls, automobiles, any object of matter, even volumes of water and wind, accomplish any work?
And, if science states that bullets, wrecking balls, etc. HAVE CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY associated, and that another PRIMARY FORM of energy was converted to get these in motion, THEY ARE RIGHT!
BUT, the OBJECTS THEMSELVES DEVELOP FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY!
Even FLYWHEELS are designed to have THREE ENERGIES INVOLVED!
YES, there are THREE FORMS of ENERGY INVOLVED WITH ALL THESE.
ONE Being the (1) CHEMICAL ENERGY or any other of the PRIME FOUR FORMS like Electrical.
TWO, the (5) CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY that does the actual work of moving the OBJECTS, the FLYWHEELS, etc.!
THREE, the 6th DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY of OBJECTS in MOTION, NO MATTER HOW THEY GOT INTO MOTION!
YES, the developed free mechanical energy of the wreaking ball, DOES ALL the WORK! The FLYWHEEL, that has a very heavy rim, an object of 360 degree proportions, DOES ALL the WORK, with the DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY!
NOW, understanding all this, as fact:
QUESTION #37. HOW CAN ANYONE STATE, FOR A FACT, THAT DANTE DIDN’T DISCOVER HOW TO PUT the THIRD ENERGY STATED ABOVE, TO WORK?
FACT:
Dr. Richard Olenick believes Dante discovered a new type of mechanical energy that COULDN’T BE, THAT DOESN’T, THAT WASN’T RECOGNIZED BY DR. OLENICK AS BEING CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY, SO WHAT KIND COULD IT BE, AS DR. OLENICK NOTICED THREE SYSTEMS OF IT IN JUST ONE OF DANTE’S DEVICES? ( He states there are 5 systems, but two of them ARE IN FACT CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY, CONVERTED from ELECTRICAL ENERGY, BUT HE DIDN’T STATE WHAT the OTHER THREE ARE.
He stated, as fact, in one of the three “POWER SYSTEMS” of the “Mini-Power Plant”, when he was shown it:
“The Test device is a machine that incorporates seven coupled energy systems and five mechanical energy systems.”
YES;
The FIRST SYSTEM was ELECTRICAL ENERGY.
The SECOND SYSTEM was CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY.
But, what he didn’t know then as Dante only discovered this in 2003, was that the;
The THIRD, FOURTH and FIFTH SYSTEMS of ENERGY are DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY from the OBJECTS in MOTION. THREE SETS in this specific Power Plant. Dr. Olenick didn’t know what kind of mechanical energy this was in 1994. It can be explained better today, 2006.
The SIXTH SYSTEM is the sum of both the SMALL AMOUNT of CONVERTED COSTLY MECHANICAL ENERGY of the ELECTRIC MOTOR, AND, the 6th MUCH MORE DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY, ALL ADDED UP and TRANSMITTED TO THE FLYWHEEL, THEN TO THE ELECTRICAL GENERATOR, (and by the way, ANY electrical generator does not care WHERE or WHAT KIND of MECHANICAL ENERGY IS DELIVERED, AS LONG AS the FOOT-POUNDS ARE WHAT IS NEEDED,)
The SEVENTH SYSTEM is the ELECTRICAL ENERGY DEVELOPED by the GENERATOR, and:
BY the WAY, the GENERATORS’ DEVELOPED ELECTRICAL ENERGY DOESN’T Care WHO or WHAT USES IT. ANY OTHER MOTOR, LIGHTS, HEATING UNITS, ETC., ANYTHING, even the SMALL AMOUNT NEEDED FOR THE INPUT, NUMBER ONE ABOVE, ELECTRICAL ENERGY NEEDS!
Even Dr. Olenick recognized this, but advised Dante to not make a big deal out of it because the cynical, biased minded physics professor community wouldn’t believe it.
He was right, as this cynic from
Lets see if HE can answerer these questions!
QUESTION #38. CAN ANYONE NAME ANY OTHER MACHINE, DEVICE or POWER PLANT, EVER DESIGNED or CONSTRUCTED on the FACE OF the EARTH, THAT HAD or HAS SEVEN ENERGY SYSTEMS?
The FACT IS:
Dr. Richard Olenick is AN EXPERT! He knows as much, or more than any other physics professor, chair, author, T. V. producers, about physics! HE WAS THE ONLY PHYSICS PROFESSOR, IN THE WORLD, TO RECEIVE TWO MILLION DOLLARS to write a high school version of his “MECHANICAL UNIVERSE” curriculum for COLLEGE STUDENTS. PERIOD. FACT.
WHY?
He also was intelligent enough to know when he reviewed and witnessed Dante’s work, , THAT HE DIDN’T KNOW ALL the OLD SCIENCE DANTE DISCOVERED or was using from Old Science in 1994, SO WHY BOMBAST DANTE for WHICH little is known, NO MATTER HOW MUCH OF AN OLD SCIENCE PHYSICS EXPERT ONE IS! Dr. Richard Olenick, HAS CLASS! Read his reports. NOT ONE SINGLE NEGATIVE WORD about what Dante showed him. WHY?
Dante states the THIRD, FOURTH and FIFTH SYSTEMS of MECHANICAL ENERGY Dr. Olenick states he witnessed, ARE DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY from OBJECTS, as in 1807 and 1856, DICTATES IS PRESENT!
QUESTION # 39 AND, by the way, WHAT IS “WORK ACCOMPLISHED” ANYHOW?
“WORK” has a CAPACITY to PERFORM, called ENERGY!
“WORK” has a RATE of PERFORMANCE, called POWER!
But, what is “WORK”?
Is the CONVERSION process of all four primary forms of energy, into the fifth form, mechanical energy, WORK?
OR is it , as in the BOB of a pendulum, does the BOB accomplish any work by swinging DOWN, after it was first lifted UP?
And if it didn’t accomplish any work, WHY THEN DID IT SWING BACK UP to the OTHER SIDE? Didn’t this require WORK?
But, was it the SAME WORK that was first put in when one lifted the BOB up, to the potential energy high position?
The ANSWER IS NO! It isn’t the same work! If it was, the BOB would stop at bottom dead center, WHERE IT STARTED!
More work was used to lift the BOB, ORIGINALLY, than was used when the BOB passed over bottom dead center dropping, in motion, with all of its kinetic energy, and raised UP to the NEXT POTENTIAL ENERGY LEVEL! LESS WORK!
NOW, ADD VELOCITY TO THE BOB!
HOW MUCH WORK THEN WOULD BE NEEDED TO GET IT FROM BOTTOM TO TOP? Remember the mgh formula, WITHOUT ACCELERATING doesn’t work in this lifting!
MUCH, MUCH LESS WORK WOULD BE REQUIRED!
IS it a BASIC LAW of NATURE?
AND, if it was thrown around in a perfect arc by way of an electric motor, the UP WORK WOULD VIRTUALLY BE NOTHING! (Dr. Hal Puthoff stated this to Dante when he reviewed it in 1995!)
Did kinetic energy and potential energy ACCOMPLISH IT or did the “work-stored-within” the BOB accomplish it?
DID MOTION and VELOCITY HELP IN ACCOMPLISHING THIS MUCH, MUCH LESS WORK TO BE PERFORMED?
QUESTION #40 IF WORK is STORED in INANIMATE OBJECTS, as history revealed, WHY THEN CANNOT SCIENCE GET IT OUT, LIKE THEY DO WITH the WRECKING BALL, the PUNCH PRESS or the SHEAR, or even the PENDULUM BOB?
WHAT EXACTLY IS STOPPING IT from BEING USED FOR OTHER WORK, SAY LIKE IN A POWER PLANT, GENERATING ELECTRICITY?
WHY DIDN’T SCIENCE DISCOVER WHAT DANTE DID?
DIDN’T GALILEO DROP TWO BALLS
of DISSIMILAR WEIGHT?
DIDN’T ONE of these, the HEAVIER ONE, HIT the GROUND HARDER, and LEFT a BIGGER DENT IN THE GROUND?
WHY THEN DIDN’T HE SEE THIS?
WHY DIDN’T HE DISCOVER POTENTIAL and KINETIC ENERGY as HE DROPPED the BALLS, and THEY EXPENDED THEIR “WORK-WITHIN” in DIFFERENT SIZE DENTS in the GROUND, the HEAVIER LEAVING A BIGGER DENT, the SMALLER ONE A SMALLER DENT?
FACT:
The KINETIC energy formula; K. E. (in ergs) = ½ MASS of the OBJECT (in grams) times VELOCITY (in cm/secs.,) … SQUARED!
FACT:
NEVER FORGET THIS SQUARED PART.
It STATES, as FACT, THAT the KINETIC ENERGY of an OBJECT in MOTION CAN IN FACT DEVELOP, or BRING OUT, the KINETIC ENERGY TYPE, of the DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY FORM and the K. E. while coming out of a given object, CAN IN FACT BE INCREASED, GAINED, or OTHERWISE DEVELOP MORE, SIMPLY BECAUSE of the INCREASE in VELOCITY, SQUARED!
SAME OBJECT – MORE ENERGY DEVELOPED!
QUESTION #41. NAME ONE OTHER ENERGY SCIENCE KNOWS OF THAT CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS? (Besides nuclear energy, which is an animal unto itself)!
The HISTORICAL scientific news states it can come out AND go back, from potential to kinetic, and back, ANYTIME, and VELOCITY INCREASE increases ENERGY.
EINSTEIN PROVED THIS!
WHY DIDN’T SCIENCE RECOGNIZE IT BACK THEN, AS WELL?
In 1625, GALILEO had TWO SIZE DENTS in his ground, where he dropped the TWO BALLS, but NEVER NOTICED IT!
In 1807, the SAME THING EXISTED IN OBJECTS as IT WAS IN THE OBJECT DISCOVERED TO HAVE “WORK-WITHIN”!
In 1856 IT WAS PROVED IT COULD COME OUT, and NAMED the TYPE of ENERGY, BEING KINETIC ENERGY!
In 1887, Ernst Mach discovered objects at the VELOCITY of SOUND, was measure in MACH.
In 1905, EINSTEIN PROVED THAT EVEN a PARTICLE of MATTER, traveling at the VELOCITY of LIGHT, Could turn into pure, unadulterated energy!
NO ONE NAMED the FORM of ENERGY IT TURNED INTO!
MOTION, OBJECTS and VELOCITY, PLUS DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY, HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR EONS!
QUESTION #42 SO, if all this is true, WHY CANNOT OBJECTS in MOTION BE USED TO ACCOMPLISH WORK?
RUN POWER PLANTS?
RUN MACHINES?
What stops it?
Why isn’t it being used?
Why cannot someone not encumbered by all the erroneous physics, find a way to accomplish this?
DANTE DID!
QUESTION #43 WHY cannot OBJECTS, which are cheap as dirt, LIKE IRON or LEAD be used INSTEAD of FOSSIL FUELS, ETC., as FORMS of ENERGY and ENERGY SOURCES, since BOTH, as proved in 1807, CAN ACCOMPLISH WORK?
EVEN HYDRO ELECTRIC NEEDS WORK ACCOMPLISHED! We know it has HORSEPOWER because we are told that 2.1 million horsepower are developed to generate some tens of millions of foot-pounds, to generate 2080 MW of ELECTRICITY, so, the RATE is THERE, WHERE IS THE CAPACITY, BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW “WORK” IS DONE?
WHAT ENERGY ACCOMPLISHES THIS WORK?
WHAT CAPACITY IS USED?
WHAT HAPPENS BETWEEN the SURFACE of LAKE MED, in the
EVEN WIND-POWER needs WORK to be PERFORMED!
WHAT ENERGY or CAPACITY PERFORMS THIS WORK?
Could the reason that NO ONE RECOGNIZES DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY is that NO ONE could tax a FREE ENERGY?
Could it be that NO ONE in science, say a medical doctor, WOULD MAKE MONEY OFF the SICK, THAT HAPPENS WHEN FOSSIL FUELS ARE USED?
Prescription drug companies wouldn’t make trillions, just billions?
Scientists who received billions of government money, not being allowed to bring it forth, to hide it, to disguise it,, as the BIG BOYS those who broker oil, gasoline, natural gas, etc., WOULDN’T GIVE MONEY TO THE CORRUPT POLITICIANS, WHO THEN WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO GIVE ALL the PEOPLES MONEY AWAY , to science, to DO THEIR BIDDING?
OR, COULD IT BE THAT THE GREEDY COULDN’T EXTRACT TRILLIONS FROM the POPULACE?
COULD IT BE THAT SCIENCE HAS BEEN in the POCKETS of BIG BUSINESS and GOVERNMENT FOR CENTURIES?
AND, the REASON the OBJECTS, of 1807 in MOTION, HAVEN’T BEEN USED? SINCE THEY ARE FREE ENERGY!
QUESTION # 44 WHY, IF IT WAS and STILL IS SCIENTIFIC FACT THAT IT EXISTS, WHY NOT HAVE IT COME ABOUT, SCIENTIFICALLY?
OR is it because cynical physicists are so busy denouncing those who claim they can develop energy from objects in motion?
QUESTION # 45 IF ONE DISAGREES WITH ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, WHY DO NOT YOU, OR YOUR BUDDIES, PROPOSE YOUR OWN SCENARIOS, REMEMBERING HISTORY HAS RECORDED FACTS.
HOW WOULD YOU, a MEMBER of SCIENCE, EXPLAIN ALL THESE FACTS AWAY?
QUESTION #46. How many FORMS of PRIMARY ENERGY are there today, known by physicists and recorded as part of their Old Science?
QUESTION # 47. How many TYPES of energy are their?
QUESTION #48. FIVE FORMS and TWO TYPES, DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS?
FACT:
McGraw and others say: “Chemical, Electrical, Mechanical, Thermal and
Nuclear” have two TYPES, being kinetic and potential energy!
QUESTION #49. WHAT ARE THE SOURCES OF ALL THESE?
FACT:
McGraw-Hill states: (1) Chemical from fossil fuels, (2) Electrical energy distributed by a Utility Company, (3) Thermal Energy from the Sun and the Earth, and (4) Nuclear energy from a reactor.”
QUESTION #50. But wait a minute, THERE ARE FIVE FORMS. WHERE DOES MECHANICAL ENERGY COME FROM? And, if there is a source, WHY DIDN’T MCGRAW-HILL PUBLISH IT?
If you don’t believe this, CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELVES. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD, IN ANY LIBRARY!
FACT: Every physicist in the world will state: “mechanical energy is converted from the other four forms.”
FACT: EVERY energy known of today, has to fall within these FIVE, PERIOD!
FACT: However, the kinetic energy and potential energy of each, IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT for each FORM!
QUESTION #51. Shouldn’t there be DIFFERENT SETS of the TYPES, KINETIC and POTENTIAL ENERGY, as asked before? WOULDN’T THIS HELP SOLVE THE UNCERTAINTY THAT IS OBVIOUS IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY? Or, is simply something that physicists DO NOT WANT?
FACT:
There is ONE MORE definition Dante found, that makes all the sense in the World: “ENERGY…ANY PHENOMENA CAPABLE OF PERFORMING WORK” from the World Book Encyclopedia..
QUESTION #52. Dante has been validated as to his discovering a phenomena, so why doesn’t physics at least use this explanation as the one he used to discover a New Science ENERGY and ENERGY SOURCE?
FACTS:
Science uses erroneous phrases like, “the kinetic energy of falling and rushing water”. It mentions NO form of the energy developed!
They also use “pressure energy” or “gravity energy” plus others that have nothing to do with chemical, electrical, thermal.
QUESTION # 53. What other FORM of energy could these be, and why doesn’t science use the proper FORM of energy to describe all they are trying to describe? Couldn’t these be mechanical energy?
COULDN’T THESE BE DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY?
AND, IF NOT – WHY NOT?
FACT:
Asimov states:
“kinetic and potential energy are types of energy made use of by machines built up out of levers, inclined planes and wheels, and the two forms may therefore be lumped together as MECHANICAL ENERGY.”
McGraw-Hill states:
“A force applied or about to be applied to liquid, solid or gaseous matter”.
There are others, as well, in other sources!
QUESTION #54. WHO IS RIGHT? WHICH IS RIGHT? DOES SCIENCE REALLY KNOW WHAT MECHANICAL ENERGY DOES?
Or, are both right and there should be TWO CLASSES of the FORM Mechanical Energy?
This would answer the question of the two sets of kinetic and potential energy, as two mechanical energy classes would then describe BOTH the “converted costly mechanical energy” from the other four energies, and the “DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY” that is already being used on Earth in the form of HYDRO and WIND-POWER!
FACT:
The mgh formula was used to state that Dante cannot raise solid matter by less force than it develops when free falling. Dr. Olenick states, that mgh is a true formula, BUT – HE ALSO STATES :
WITHOUT ACCELERATING the OBJECT!
QUESTION #55. If Dante ACCELERATES or DECELERATES his lifting and/or falling, does this interfere with the mgh law? And if it does, as Dr. Olenick claims, WOULDN’T THAT NEGATE A NEGATIVE THAT CYNICS USE, the mgh?
COULD THIS BE ONE OF THOSE “GAPS” IN Old Science LAWS and PRINCIPLES DANTE DISCOVERED, THAT DR. OLENICK VERIFIED?
QUESTION #56. Is the Law of Conservation of Mechanical Energy, which was included in the original Law, exact, or was it included to reduce the number of Laws to satisfy the Unified Theory deal? In other words, we now know that DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY is possible and has been being developed as we speak, and we also know that any matter used, liquid, gaseous or solid, can be in motion, FASTER or SLOWER, thus controlling the energy quantity developed. Why, even after Einstein stated in 1905 and he has been proved right, that a particle of matter, traveling at the speed of light, becomes pure energy, does science still state “energy cannot be gained, increased or be discovered that uses this very premise,” but with much more VOLUME, groups of particles, and a more manageable velocity?
QUESTION #57. Do particles of water and/or air determine the development of energy in hydro or wind power, or do VOLUMES of each determine the amount of energy developed? HOW ABOUT A SOLID MATTER OBJECT, WHICH IS A VOLUME INTO ITSELF. WHY CANNOT THIS VOLUME BE USED AS WELL to develop energy?
QUESTION #58. Knowing that POWER is absolute, and is the rate work is performed, does one need the capacity to perform work, as well? Does it have to be equal? What if the situation at the Hoover Dam or any hydro or wind project, develop HORSEPOWER to perform the work of turning electrical generators, but there CANNOT BE any increase of energy according to science, IS THIS TRUE? Or could there be a more definitive explanation as Dante presents it, and if you say NO, WHY NOT?
QUESTION #59. Is the Bernoulli principle applicable to hydro and wind power, plus the second use applicable to Air Flight? If they are, doesn’t it seem logical, at least, that if one discovered the Third Use of the principle, that it can be used to GENERATE ELECTRICITY, by way of a “MECHANIFOIL,” a mechanical version of the AIRFOIL? And, if you say NO, WHY NOT?
QUESTION #60. If the Kinetic Energy formula, that is published in most reference books, states that ½ MASS times the VELOCITY, SQUARED, why then cannot a mass of solid matter, at a velocity, develop kinetic energy of mechanical energy, and since it cannot be converted from the others, why cannot this be called DEVELOPED FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY, as it is exactly what it is?
We have put, to this point in time, 60 –PLUS questions, with a number of facts attached, in this text. The reason was simply to SEE IF CRITICS of PHYSICS, ARE RIGHT or IS DANTE RIGHT?
If these questions can be answered by FACTS, then you will have the bases of knowing the answer. Dante, however, can prove all he claims, BY FACT, period!
He feels he doesn’t have to explain it or prove it to the cynics, as they would find a way around it.
All they have to do, is to answer the TOTAL 300 or so simple questions, as all the answers can be found in their Old Science. Dante found them, being the experts THEY CLAIM, THEY SHOULD KNOW THEM!
AFTER ALL – DANTE WAS INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO DISCOVER THEM – and FORMULATE THEM – THEN ASK THEM!
SHOULDN’T SCIENCE BE INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO AT LEAST ANSWER THEM – SINCE THEY CAME FROM THEIR OWN HISTORICAL OLD SCIENCE –
AND THEY ARE the SUPPOSED EXPERTS OF SAME?
EVEN A NON-SCIENTIST KNOWS THE ANSWER TO THIS LAST QUESTION!
