denny: Photo of my face in profile - looking to the right (Toon (with text))
[personal profile] denny
...a perpetual motion machine.

Apparently the company has taken out an advert in The Economist asking the scientific community to come forward and test their claims.


(spotted in [livejournal.com profile] olethros's journal)

The lurkers support me in email

Date: 2006-08-18 10:52 am (UTC)
babysimon: (Default)
From: [personal profile] babysimon
During 2005 Steorn embarked on a process of independent validation and approached a wide selection of academic institutions. The vast majority of these institutions refused to even look at the technology, however several did. Those who were prepared to complete testing have all confirmed our claims; however none will publicly go on record.


Now why could that be? Could it be that they just made it all up?

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 11:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] deerfold.livejournal.com
Steorn has decided to publish its challenge in The Economist because of the breadth of its readership. "We chose it over a purely scientific magazine simply because we want to make the general public aware that this process is about to commence and to generate public support, awareness, interest etc for what we are doing."


I wonder how many Physicists read the Economist? Or members of the general public, for that matter.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 01:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hythloday.livejournal.com
Around a million.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 11:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] synthclarion.livejournal.com
In the Economist, you say?

No, that's not in any way a cheap attempt to get rich and stupid investors to buy in quickly, before the scientific board decides it's snake oil prompting the 'inventors' to fuck off to Tijuana with their hats made of investors' money.

No, it's quite clearly "simply because we want to make the general public aware that this process is about to commence and to generate public support, awareness, interest etc for what we are doing."

Right?

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 12:13 pm (UTC)
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
I had assumed it was simply because no science publication would touch it with a barge pole, but yours is a good reason too...

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 12:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] synthclarion.livejournal.com
You're that PuTTY man, aren't you!

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 12:26 pm (UTC)
simont: A picture of me in 2016 (Default)
From: [personal profile] simont
That'd be me, yes.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 12:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] synthclarion.livejournal.com
Crikey, the people you run across on the Interbutts.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-19 09:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stuartl.livejournal.com
I understand you know [livejournal.com profile] rillaith quite well too :)

It's always quite entertaining when we're out and someone mentions knowing you but can't pronounce your surname right... :)

Your puzzles are rather good too...

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-18 01:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fayroberts.livejournal.com
If it's actually true, they're so going to get creamed.

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-19 09:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stuartl.livejournal.com
By the oil companies, for a start...

(no subject)

Date: 2006-08-20 01:03 pm (UTC)

May 2020

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728 2930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags