You should expect some criticism from your peers, the only evidence you have given to back your theory,
is from whats being posted on web sites.
Understood. Not all of it is derived from the deranged, though, and most of it isn't tied together or stated clearly on those sites.
But yes, if I were my peer, I'd also be waiting in line to take a shot.
Thank you for understanding that that would do no good, and reading with an open mind.
We all know there are a number of individuals who enjoy sending people on wild goose chases just for the hell of it
and the web seems a good place for them to operate.
Most definitely. But I'd like to say that, more often than not, where there's a chase, there's a goose. I say, if we're already on the chase, let's try harder to catch the goose than to disprove its existence.
What you are trying to do has been tried in many well equiped labs around the world, with no success.
My guess is they tried not to prove it.
It's very easy to not prove something.
Ever pondered if the conclusions of myth busters may be malformed by improper experimentation through negligence, ignorance or bias?
Maybe not myth busters, but I wouldn't put it past any government of funding organization..
Its the water molecular vibration bit, causing the disassociation of water molecules,
with zero energy input from a driving oscillator; that dosn't have any evidence to support it.
I have no proof for you now, maybe someday I shall have.
But in the meantime, I propose the theory that "if it can work, with regard to observed physical laws and habits of the universe, then it most likely will."
Has anyone found it not to work?
If you can find any factual/proven evidence that supports the theory, please post it and I will eat crow...
And if it doesn't, it's black-bird pie for me..
Regards,
Myles