Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ccnysci.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!cmcl2!rna!rocky2!cucard!ccnysci!sukenick
From: sukenick@ccnysci.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.misc,net.research
Subject: Re: Joseph Newman's Energy Machine
Message-ID: <162@ccnysci.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Oct-85 12:54:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccnysci.162
Posted: Mon Oct 14 12:54:55 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Oct-85 01:21:21 EDT
References: <173@tulane.UUCP> <tulane.174>
Reply-To: sukenick@ccnysci.UUCP (George )
Organization: City College of New York
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.physics:3376 net.misc:8687 net.research:264
Summary: 

> (John Kreuter)
>> (Kevin Centanni)
>>batteries, and there was NO trickery to be seen... it seems that the machine
							^^^^^
  ( *seems* is  most likely the correct word)

>>was actually putting out more energy than it was taking in... the energy
>>being generated by the machine was coming directly for the conversion of
>>copper to energy (E=MC^2).  Needless to say, I was very intrigued.
>
>if this is true, how about a measurement of the weight of the copper after
>a test of some duration?  There should be quite measurable changes in weight.

This is not a good test, if the machine works by converting the copper to
energy, because the amount of mass required for a few watts is very small
(C**2 is a big number) and so this measurement would be prone to error.
How about measuring power capacities of the batteries and comparing to the
power output of the machine?
>
>                                        sceptically
>                                        John Kreuter
			just as skeptical if not more,
				GDS