News / Business
The TIME is NOW! ONEGIFT4POWER THROUGH Dante A. Donatelli Jr. is CHALLENGING the WORLD’S CYNICAL PHYSICISTS!
Dante A. Donatelli Jr. is a non-scientist! This is probably one of the greatest things that happened in his life, as he quit college in his 3rd year because he didn’t agree with his physics professors and questioned them repeatedly, and they were flunking him instead of answering his questions. He didn’t know then, BUT THEY COULDN’T ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS although primitive as they were back then. Thus wasn’t encumbered by all the erroneous physics, laws and principles being taught and having to be learned by students, just to get through college.
He just went ahead, for 42 years researching, developing his newly discovered Power Plants. He also studied for 11years, on his own, using over 14 science and physics reference sources and to understand the TRUE historic physics and science as to why he COULD RE-DISCOVERER the an 1807, the ORIGINAL, PRIMARY FORM of ENERGY. NOW most in science call him a fraud, because THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY ANSWERS!.
NOW, DANTE HAS ALL the ANSWERS.
ONLY HE CAN ASK ALL the QUESTIONS.
AND – ONLY HE CAN CHALLENGING the ENTIRE, WORLD-WIDE CYNICAL PHYSICISTS COMMUNITY, simply because Dante is RIGHT and THEY ARE WRONG. PERIOD!
Dante A. Donatelli Jr. whose Third Use of the Bernoulli Principle, is said to be one of the greatest discoveries of the twentieth century, was validated by, Dr. Richard Olenick, professor, CHAIR of the University of Dallas physics department, and a certain world class expert Mechanical Engineer, Ted Carnes, PhD. Dante owned TEN Power Plants using this 1807 FORM of ENERGY.
He has given one of his ten power plants to a certain charitable organization, www.ONEGIFT4POWER.org, for them to prorogate. He and this organization have made certain CLAIMS of this NEW PRIMARY FORM of ENERGY discovery and a TOTALLY NEW, cheap as dirt “FUEL,” all brought together in a New Science Technology which Dante calls “SOLID-POWER” Technology, in July 2006, in this very venue, Trans World News and these claims were brought forth as a News Release!
To review:
To sum up all the claims, Dante and ONEGIFT4POWER simply state that the discovery will generate the CLEANEST, CHEAPEST and SAFEST, PLUS MOST ABUNDANT and MORE AVAILABLE ELECTRICITY the WORLD WANTS or NEEDS, TODAY, TOMORROW and INTO the FUTURE!
Dante doesn’t care WHO DOESN’T BELIEVE HIM, WHAT CYNIC DENOUNCES HIM! TWO EXPERTS BELIEVE HIM. THAT’S EWNOUGH, SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS CONSIDERED IMPOSSIBLE and THEY KNOW IT, and THEY BELIEVE!
There is also one or two amongst the intelligent and wealthy of the world, that also believes.
WHY, BECAUSE IT WAS THERE IN 1807 – WHY ISN’T IT THERE TODAY?
It will simply replace all known energies, fuels and power plants used for generating electricity, on Earth today, and it is FREE!
Dante A. Donatelli Jr., whose name will be inscribed in history along side Daniel Bernoulli’s and Giovanni B. Venturi, discoverers of the first and second use of the Bernoulli principle,
CHALLENGES the BEST CYNICS in PHYSICS TO ANSWER the FOLLOWING OLD SCIENCE QUESTIONS, with FACT, NOT JUST RHETORICAL SPEECH!
The most noted of these cynics is a certain Dr. William Hetherington of the Oregon State University, as immediately after Dante made the claims in July, THIS CYNICAL PROFESSOR placed on HIS WEB-SITE which is shared with OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY,
“ENERGY NEWS - FRAUD”.
Dante was infuriated, not because he was a called a fraud, BUT BECAUSE THIS SMALL MINDED CYNIC, NEVER ONCE CALLED Dante or Dante’s two experts, NEVER FAXED Dante or his two world class experts, NEVER EVEN E-MAILED, or WROTE a LETTER of INQUIRY, to Dante, ONEGIFT4POWER , Ted Carnes or Dr. Richard Olenick, ALL WHICH ARE ON the WEBSITE of ONEGIFT4POWER, to ask ANY QUESTIONS!
He simply took it upon himself, and through his website and a few fellow Web
NOW COMES the TIME TO FISH or
Dante KNOWS MORE THAN THIS MAN ABOUT THIS MAN’S OWN OLD SCIENCE of PHYSICS, AS RELATES TO DANTE’S DISCOVERIES!
Dante FORMULATED A FEW QUESTIONS, BASED ON THIS OLD SCIENCE!
Dante NOW CHALLENGES THIS MAN to PUT HIS KNOWLEDGE WHERE HIS BIG MOUTH IS!
AND, for good measure, DR. WILLIAM HETHERINGTON, a simple physics professor, CAN ASK FOR AS MUCH HELP HE WANTS TO FROM the WORLD WIDE CYNICS of the PHYSICS COMMUNITY, or EVEN ANY ENGINEER in the WORLD WHO THINKS HE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT PHYSICS, TO HELP HIM ANSWER THESE SIMPLE QUESTIONS. With the internet, this is a simple thing to accomplish!
Dante is betting NONE CAN ANSWER THEM, and is willing to PAY the COST, ANSWERED ON THIS SAME NEWS SERVICE!
NOW, DANTE IS CHALLENGING, and DANTE IS ALLOWING THIS MAN TO USE THE ENTIRE WORLD FOR HELP, and DANTE WILL PAY FOR THIS MAN’S ANSWERS,
BUT ALL PHYSICISTS - WHO PARTICIPATE - HAVE TO BE NAMED! Not like the government bureaucratic physics community who hide behind their desks, give stupid advice, and never state who they are. Dante met a dozen or so of these over the years.
NO idiots hiding behind their titles or under their desks, as most do. NONE stating rhetoric that has no meaning as to the questions or answers. NONE using their fuzzy math, that can prove ANYTHING that one wants proved. NONE using their supposed “educational superiority:.
THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS WILL PROVE WHO IS
NONE of the PHYSICS JARGON, that ERRONEOUS, FALSE PHYSICS jargon that physics professors use, like “I am superior, ergo you have to be wrong.” The only thing superior about these cynics is their big mouths!
Let their answers be their jargon and their superiority
THEN, the WORLD’S INTELLIGENT CAN DECIDE!
First subject covered, physics, science and scientists in general:
PREFACE: Every physicist has his own opinion of physics, simply because it is a non-absolute science. Dante proved this when he asked four Doctors of Physics one exact same question, and received four different answers. The facts are proven within this text. And why are there over 500 Physics Books written, (college textbooks, as well), and only a few Mechanical Engineering books written? One discipline is absolute, the other is not. One uses absolute mathematics and formulas, the other does not. Physics is simply a “silly putty” discipline, that can be shaped to anyone’s desire and uses a fuzzy math to prove that desire. The community has millions of experts who believe differently, one from the other, and most of these are critics, some cynical critics, some who believe it can be discovered, and two who KNOW it was discovered.
Much of physics is theory that has never been proven, and according to the intelligent of the world, will someday be all proven wrong. Physicists, on the other hand, disagree, as their entire lives are tied to this discipline of science, ergo everything they think or teach has to be right, or their lives have been for naught.
The cynics of physics use their supposed “educational superiority” to fool all others who are not of science into believing they are right, and the others have to be wrong.
Please remember all FACTS, as questions will be later asked, concerning some of the previous facts, when the questions fit into the subject text at that point. Case in point: The following fact about physics, will later be used for a question like “if physics doesn’t involve ‘chemical composition,’ why then is Thermodynamics included in physics, as it is SOLELY determined by chemical composition, and heat, but matter in motion, which is physics, DOES NOT, except in a minute amount of friction heat, (but this is overcome by adding a little more a matter in motion)? This was an example!
The QUESTIONS START RATHER MILD, BUT BELIEVE US, THEY PICK UP SPEED AS THEY GO! Redundancy is also used, as there are QUESTIONS that NEED REAL ANSWERS! Dante has the answers, lets see if the cynical physicists do!
FACT: Webster defines PHYSICS as; “1. that branch of knowledge treating of the material world and its phenomena; natural philosophy. 2. The science which deals with these phenomena of inanimate matter involving no changes in chemical composition; more specifically, the science of matter and motion”.
QUESTION #1. If this is fact, who then are experts of “chemical composition”, as this states PHYSICISTS are not, but they profess to have knowledge in this discipline?
QUESTION #2. If this is fact, why don’t physicists still work with Classical Mechanics, as Dr. Richard Olenick stated this was a “dead” field of science, and is defined as according to McGraw-Hill; “the science dealing with the description of the positions of objects in space under the action of forces as a function of time?” It goes on; “In the broad sense, classical mechanics includes the study of motions of gases, liquids and solids, but more commonly it is taken to refer only to solids.”
QUESTION #3. And, if physics specifically deals with matter in motion, and Classical Mechanics mainly deals with solid matter in motion, why don’t they know more about “SOLID-POWER” the New Science Technology Dante A. Donatelli Jr. had to discover?
FACTS:
OBJECTS are defined as: “Something put, or regarded as put, in the way of some of the senses; something visible or tangible; a concrete thing.”
SPACE is defined as: “That which is characterized by extension in all directions, boundless, and indefinite diversibility; the subject of determination of position and direction”
FORCE is defined as: “Physics. The cause of the acceleration of the movement of material bodies , as the cause of a body falling freely”
TIME is defined as: “The period during which an action , process etc., continue; measured or measurable duration.” Usually the units of time are seconds, minutes, hours etc.
FACTS: Objects of LEAD weigh 710 lb. avg. per cubic foot, that of STEEL, 495 lb. avg. per cubic foot, that of CAST IRON, 450 lb. , EARTH (dirt) weighs avg. 115 lb. Per cubic foot, STONE, avg. 150 lb. per, water, 62.6 lb. per, AIR, avg. .09lb per cubic foot.
QUESTION #4. Taking all of what is fact given, why cannot an individual use objects, placed in space, under the influence of the force of gravity, and as a matter of time, DEVELOP FREE MECHANICAL ENERGY? (More about this later on around Question 24).
THEY DISCOVERED HOW IN 1807 and 1853!
To continue with science:
FACT: As presented by Dr. Isaac Asimov, as relates to changes in science, and specifically the changes Galileo made, but are attributable to any scientific progress due to change, by anyone in or out of science. “The Aristotelian view “ (speaking of the view that for 2000 years, all the science believed in the view that two dissimilar weighted objects, free falling from a given height, the heavier ball (object) would reach the ground first. Galileo disproved this, as both balls, objects of weight, no matter how heavy and how light, as long as air resistance was negated, would hit the ground at the exact same time, but why was it ERRONEOUSLY believed for 2000 years ,) “seemed logical and useful. Why then was it replaced? If it was ‘wrong’ then why did so many people of intelligence believe it to be ‘right’ for so long? And, if they believed it to be right for so long, what eventually happened to convince them that it was ‘wrong’? He then gives the answer!
“One method of casting doubt upon any theory (however respected and long established) is to show that two contradictory conclusions can be drawn from it”
QUESTION #5 Why don’t the physicists of today, remember this? When one presents one conclusion, say that of FREE ENERGY existing on Earth, and this is in total contradiction with science, why doesn’t science at least listen? Is it because science believes they cannot get something for nothing? (See further where this is explained).
QUESTION #6. Why don’t the physicists of today, some 400 years later, understand that they, as well, could be believing in what is wrong, and that by way of contradictions and controversies that Dante found in their Old Science, as they should know these as well, CHANGES WILL TAKE PLACE as to what they believe is wrong, and Dante proving what he believes and has discovered, is right?
Are they as ignorant as ALL those, some 400 years ago, that were ALL proven wrong by one man, simply because he contradicted what they stated?
But, as a matter of fact, poor Galileo was put to death, by the cynics, most everyone of his day was a cynic, because he believed what most didn’t, or the story goes! Today, all the cynics do is call one a fraud, if they do not believe in what one did, OR EVEN WHAT ONE COULD discover!
More about this later on. To continue:
FACT: McGraw-Hill states: Physical Law: “A physical phenomenon is said to be controlled or governed by a physical law when the phenomenon is one of a broad class of phenomenon such that it is possible to formulate some regularity which applies to all members of the class.” Then it continues on a little further on: “It is implicit in the notion of physical law that there are no exceptions, and unlike law made by humans, it may not be ‘violated’. For example[le, by redefining the limits of it’s application, or by recasting it to encompass the phenomena”
QUESTION#7. Does this sound like, when anyone tries to break their unbreakable laws, that science simply changes the law? Or as Dr. Richard Olenick stated, in part: “Dante found gaps in our understanding of mechanics”. (Found in the Website, under “Reports”.)
QUESTION #8. Cannot ANYONE find gaps in the present understanding of mechanics? AND, why not? Is mechanics SO PUT TOGETHER ABSOLUTELY, THAT NO ONE CAN FINDS GAPS IN THEM? Does
FACT: As will be present ed in the NEXT SERIES of question, but only noted here, OLD SCIENCE’S DEFINITION of “MACHINE DESIGN”, CHANGES ALL THIS ERRONEOUS THINKING THAT NO GAPS CAN BE FOUND!
QUESTION #9. Or, is the physical law statement something that allows science to keep up with changes in technology?
QUESTION #10. IF SO, THEN WHY DO THEY FIGHT DANTE FOR DISCOVERING A PHENOMENON that will change many of these laws?
FACT: Dante was VALIDATED by TWO experts of science, one in physics and one in mechanical reengineering, WHY THEN IS HE BEING CALLED A FRAUD by those WHO NEVER WITNESSED ANY OF HIS WORK?
QUESTION #11. Is it jealousy or plain stupidity that allows men of science, supposed “educationally superior” men, those who hold lofty positions, like teaching our young minds, TO ASSUME STUPID THINGS, when THEY NEVER EVEN WITNESSED these things they call fraudulent? What about the scientists of Galileo’s day, WERE THEY NOT COCK SURE, ABOUT WHAT THEY BELIEVED THEN, BUT PROVED ENTIRELY WRONG BY GALILEO? COULDN’T YET ONE MORE ITALIAN PROVE ALL WRONG TODAY?
FACTS: Why call him a fraud, when others WHO HAVE WITNESSED SOME OF HIS WORK, and made statements like Dr. Richard Olenick made, when he viewed the second Power Plant design of the “Dynalever”:
(One last time: All statements quoted as being made by Ted Carnes or Dr. Richard Olenick can be read in their entirety in www.ONEGIFT4POWER.org. and are considered FACTS as they witnessed what they reported on, AND NO ONE ELSE KNOWS OF IT, AS YET!)
Dr. Olenick , concerning some of Dante’s technology:
“As a physicist, I can say with some expertise that the physics behind the second design is based on classical mechanics. However, I believe that physicists and engineers should take a new look at the underlying laws and principles pertaining to his technology and devices. I can see no violation of any existing physical laws; the simplicity of his design and the apparent results of the model perhaps opens up new applications of ‘well-understood’ phenomena”
NOTE: Remember, Dante claims to own 10 such Power Plants, all different, one from the other, but all using the same FUEL, ENERGY, ENERGY SOURCE, but different areas of the vast TECHNOLOGY.
An example of this statement from HYDRO-POWER:
The Hoover Dam is a HYDRO-POWER, Power Plant, and so is Niagara Falls Power Plant a HYDRO-POWER Power Plant, BUT the HOOVER dam, using the same HYDRO Technology, uses the science of WATER, the FUEL, UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE FROM a LAKE (Mead), PUSHING THROUGH TAPERED SIDED TUBES, and hitting turbines that are horizontally mounted, and NIAGARA FALLS, USES FALLING WATER SCIENCE of the same Technology of HYDRO, and it’s turbines are VERTICAL mounted. This is an example of using the SAME TECHNOLOGY, but a different science of it. Dante uses TEN New Sciences, natural phenomenon sciences, for his Technology!
Dr. Olenick was only witness to two of the Power Plant designs. Ted Carnes, on the other hand, no physicist but an engineer that analyzed one with formulas and mathematics, then VALIDATED it, was shown SIX of these Power Plants.
BOTH men’s reports, about ten or so, are made available at ONEGIFT4POWER’s Web-Site.
End of Note:
Dr. Olenick’s statements say that Dante discovered some new phenomena and violated no physical laws in the process, and then it seems to state that he believes that engineers and physicists should look at what THEY think is well understood, because MAYBE it isn’t as understood as they believe it is!
Who is Dr. Richard Olenick to make these statements? READ, the REPORTS. He is MORE qualified than most! Period! That’s Dante’s opinion, and WAS the OPINION of the NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION when they chose ONLY HE, to receive 2 million dollars, OUT OF ALL OTHERS in the USA, to write a high school physics curriculum to match the one he wrote for college students.
You decide for yourselves.
This statement and others Dr. Olenick made are BIG TIME STUFF for Dante, and do not fit into a “FRAUD was at work,” statements made by other cynical physics professors who do not have as much class as he OR AS MUCH EXPERTISE, AS WELL. They also do not fit into any Web
To continue:
FACT: McGraw-Hill continues under another title heading: “Discovery of Fundamental Laws: Physicists aim to reduce the number of laws to a minimum to have as few as possible a unified theory. When the laws are known, it is possible from any given initial condition of a physical system to derive the subsequent event in the system. Sometimes in quantum theory, only the probability of various events can be predicted”
QUESTION #12. Does THIS sound like physicists want a unified theory and are erroneously jamming laws and principles, plus theories, into one basket, hoping they are right, just like they do with all who claim FREE ENERGY, being jammed into the Perpetual Motion basket?
QUESTION #13. Does this sound like responsible science, or that which is HOPED for by science?
After all, there cannot be one unified theory, if there are so many DIFFERENT and DIVERSE natural phenomenon, but this is only Dante’s opinion, and he doesn’t have a sheep skin hanging on his wall, THANK GOD, he states!
NOTE: Dante A. Donatelli Jr. attended the
One day, while in a debate with a mathematics professor, Dante stated, out of frustration, “well at least one (1) plus one (1) is TWO (2)”. The mathematics professor stated, “Oh, but I can prove one(1) plus one(1) is THREE (3).”
Dante said go ahead. The professor took some ½ hour and a full 5 foot x 20 foot blackboard, but at the lower right hand corner, there it was, after a string of numbers, constants, symbols and other junky math, “therefore”, the professor stated, “ ONE plus ONE equals THREE!”
Dante looked at him and didn’t say a thing, because the professor KNEW he had just snookered Dante with his fuzzy math, AND THE PROFESSOR KNEW DANTE KNEW he did as well, but this didn’t bother him as he was arrogant as hell, as most professors are. DANTE STOOD UP, AND WALKED OUT AND NEVER LOOKED BACK!
Can one imagine all those poor souls, who went to college, didn’t have questions, believed all that crap, and GRADUATED, being totally indoctrinated about the garbage that was being taught?
Dante say’s THANK GOD, because if he would have been caught up in this, HE WOULDN’T BE THE GREAT DISCOVERER THAT HE IS. And this is fact, not ego talking! Point being, Dante was there! Dante suffered under physics professors and their arrogance! Ergo, Dante is experienced enough TO CALL MOST IDIOTS! Sorry, but the truth sometimes stinks!
End of Note
To continue:
FACT: Dr. Asimov notes, in his 1968 book, Understanding Physics”: “Laws of conservation are popular with scientists. In the first place, a conservation law sets limits to possibilities. In considering a new phenomenon, it is convenient to be able to rule out all explanations that would involve a violation of one of the conservation laws (at least until it is found that nothing short of a violation will do). It is then easier to work with the possibilities that remain.”
BUT, THE VERY NEXT LINE SAY’S IT ALL IN A NUTSHELL:
“In addition, there is an intuitive feeling that one will not be able to get something for nothing”
THERE IT IS!
THE REASON WHY PHYSICISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN “FREE ENERGY”, and call those who say they DEVELOP OTHER FREE ENERGY, FRAUDS! WHO REALLY ARE THE FRAUDS?
The existence of free energy already exists on Earth!
Mankind gets something for nothing every time they see the LIGHT from the Sun, and feel the Sun’s HEAT! THIS IS ALL FREE, AND IS SOMETHING FOR NOTHING, AS MAN OR SCIENCE HAS DONE NOTHING TO RECEIVE IT. The SUN’S energy is FREE ENERGY.
EVERY WIND-TURBINE OPERATES ON SOMETHING FOR NOTHING! The wind is free. Science or man has no control over it, cannot create it, cannot develop it, it is just FREE ENERGY!
EVERY HYDRO-POWER project, developing electricity, is something from nothing. Water is free, and man or science cannot create, develop or bring forth water. WATER IS FREE! Water for energy purposes is FREE ENERGY!
EVERY TON OF COAL, IN THE EARTH and EVERY DROP OF OIL, IN THE EARTH, and EVERY UNIT OF NATURAL GAS, IN THE EARTH, and EVERY UNIT OF FISSIONABLE, NUCLEAR FUEL, IN THE EARTH, and EVERY UNIT OF GEO-THERMAL ENERGY FROM EARTH,
IS ALL FREE ENERGY, PERIOD!
What made all these cost so much, are greedy men who found it and figured a way to use it, then to sell it for huge profits, BUT IT WAS PLACED THERE FREE, WHEN IT WAS FOUND IT WAS FREE and ALL THAT REMAINS IS FREE FOR THE TAKING, except those who take it, found ways to own the land under which this FREE ENERGY has existed for eons. PERIOD! Mineral rights are the way greedy men discovered how to set up and use all for their benefit, BUT ALL THEY GET OUT OF THE GROUND, IS FREE TO THEM, except the costs of taking it out, transporting it, in some way refining it, and then selling it!
QUESTION #14. NOW, is there ANY OTHER RATIONAL DISCUSSION THAT CAN BE MADE concerning getting something for nothing? Has science set this up to fool the world? Has science set this up to control the world? Has science set this erroneous belief up, to stop ANYONE from discovering YET ANOTHER FREE ENERGY? WHY HAVE THEY?
QUESTION #15. Does EVERYONE UNDERSTAND that Dante DOESN’T USE FREE ENERGY in the operations of his Power Plants? Does EVERYONE UNDERSTAND that Dante uses electrical energy to operate his Power Plants? Does EVERYONE understand that if the electricity comes from HYDRO-POWER or WIND-POWER, now SOLID-POWER, IT, AS WELL, IS ALL FREE ENERGY?
Electrical energy that comes from chemical or nuclear forms of energy, is not free. This costs something, BUT ALL THE REST, AS MENTIONED, COME FROM NOTHING, or COME FROM OTHER FREE ENERGY!
ALL the ALTERNATIVE FUELS BEING TOUTED TODAY, COST SOMETHING!
QUESTION # 16. WHY? Does our government ONLY want alternative energies that COST SOMETHING? WHY?
QUESTION # 17. NOW, does ANYONE IN SCIENCE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS? Is it not plain enough? Is it not true? Isn’t it something from nothing?
QUESTION #18. Does setting limits as to what can be discovered by way of laws of conservation, mean that Dante cannot have discovered what he did? And, Has science in general, set limits on WHAT THEY CAN DISCOVER, as Dante claims they have done, as they missed it, according to him, and was it sciences fault because they set up the conditions to fail?
QUESTION #19. IS Dante’s CLAIM THAT HE DISCOVERED A FREE ENERGY, by way of his DEVELOPED FREE ENERGY MECHANICAL ENERGY, the one that offends many in science, BUT THE ONE THAT WILL PROVE TRUE, BASED ON an “INTUITIVE FEELING” and NOT FACTS that can be proved against him?
In other words, AFTER reading all that has so far been presented, as fact, DOES ONE IN PHYSICS’ STILL BELIEVE THAT ONE of NON-SCIENCE COULDN’T DISCOVER WHAT THEY DIDN’T, SIMPLY BECAUSE of ASSUMPTIONS and INTUITIVE FEELINGS and LAWS JAMMED INTO A BOX, PLUS EVERYTHING ELSE THAT CONTRADICTS THESE?
QUESTION #20. Is there ANYTHING about physics that ISN’T ASSUMED, or FELT or JAMMED INTO ONE UNIVERSAL, “UNIFIED THEORY” BOX?
QUESTION #21. COULD ALL THESE FACTS, BE THE REASON SCIENCE HAS a PROBLEM WITH A NEW PHENOMENA BEING DISCOVERED, THAT DOESN’T VIOLATE THEIR LAWS and PRINCIPLES, BUT BLOWS HOLES THROUGH THEM and FRUSTRATES PHYSICISTS TO CALL THE DISCOVERER A FRAUD?
FACT: Dr. Richard Olenick, in a March 28, 1994 report stated:
“Nonetheless, it seems that Dante’s work has uncovered certain gaps in pour present understanding of mechanical devices that allows the use of solid matter using simple machines that perform like nothing before.”
FACT: McGraw-Hill states under “Machine Design, in part:
“Application of science and invention to the development and construction of machines.” And it continues later on. “Inventiveness consists of producing new combinations of old elements or, where extreme need arises, of exercising genius either in breaking the bounds of convention, or in evolving new principles not hitherto applied or known”
QUESTION #22. Now that Dante has been validated as to his finding “gaps” in the present laws, and reading the fact that he could “evolve new principles not hitherto applied, or KNOWN”, stated by Dr. Olenick, does one now think that Power Plants cannot be designed, built and operated that seemingly violate what all physicists believe is impossible, but in fact POSSIBLE?
QUESTION #23. After reading the past 4000 words or so, does one NOW think Dante could be a fraud, or maybe HE HAS DISCOVERED what he claims, as A DOCTOR of PHYSICS HAS VALIDATED and EXPLAINED A LITTLE OF IT, or are the CYNICS of PHYSICS STILL STICKING TO THEIR STORY?
To finish this section as Dante feels many, many points have been made and verified, at least the intelligent should begin to see the light, Dr. Asimov states:
”The Law of conservation of energy is probably the most fundamental of all the generalizations made by scientists and the one they would be most reluctant to discard.” Then he continues further down, “At least twice in the last century phenomena were discovered which seemed to violate the law, but both times physicists were able to save matter by broadening the interpretation of energy”
He was referring to Einstein, in 1905 and Paulli, in 1936, BUT here we have it again.
A fact that tells it all!
“broadening the interpretation of energy”
QUESTION #24. Is ENERGY well understood? Can it be broadened further? Is it “silly putty” physical science?
In the next series of questions coming on October 9, 2006, we answer these questions about energy!
Some, those who are following this, will see and hear things they never dreamed could be happening in the scientific community!
