You're viewing the old pesn.com website
 

Free Energy is all about freedom:
Power to the people -- literally and figuratively



 "Free Energy" 

News XML
- PESN Specials
- About
- Pure Energy Blog
- Daily FE News
- Features
- Free Energy Now
- This Week in FE
- Newsletter
- How you can help
- Submit  
- Subscribe

 

Directory
Energy Topics

• Alt Fuels
• Anti-Gravity
• Batteries
• Betavoltaic
• Biofuels
 - BioDiesel
 - BioElectricity
 - Biomass
• Body Electric
• Brown's Gas
• Cold Fusion
• Conservation
• Electrolysis
• Electromagnetic OU
• Fuel Cells
• Fuel Efficiency
 - Electric Vehicles
 - Engines
 - Hydroxy
• Fusion
• Geothermal
• Gravity Motors
• Human Powered
• Hydro
• Hydrogen
• Joe Cells
• Lighting
• Magnet Motors
• Nanotechnology
• Nuclear
• Nucl. Remediation
• Oil
• Piezoelectric
• Plasma
• River
• Salt Water Mix
• Solar
• Solid State Gen.
• Tesla Turbines
• Thermal Electric
• Tidal
• Vortex
• Waste to Energy
• Water
 - Water as Fuel
• Wave
• Wind
• Wireless Electricity
• Zero Point Energy
• MORE . . .

Open Source
• Freddy's Cell
• Bedini SG
• Safe Haven Villages
• MORE . . .

Resources
• Awards
• Conservation
• Conspiracy
• Directories
• Investment
• Kudos
• Legal
• Organizations
• Plastic and Energy
• Recycling
• Suppression
• Tools
• Trends
• MORE . . .

Mingling
• OverUnity Forum
• Employment
• Events
• Humor
• Magazines
• Movies
• Newsletters
• Discuss. Groups

Shopping
• Store
• Buyer Beware
- - - - - - - - - -
- Donate
- Contact

 

 

 


/2015/06/24/9602637_WDR-TV-expert-not-objective-regarding-Rosch/
You are here:
PureEnergySystems.com > News > June 24, 2015; 13:15 GMT

WDR TV expert not objective regarding Rosch

E.ON is a leading energy supplier of gas and electricity. If they fight it, Rosch' technology could make them obsolete. Michael Adolph of E.ON, was recently featured on TV saying Rosch' KPP system couldn't possibly work because it violates the laws of physics -- without exploring whether it works. 

E.ON ERC scientist should recuse himself, not be featured as objective.

The KPP is a buoyancy technology involving floats that fill with air at the bottom of a water tank to cause them to rise, turning a generator in the process, such that the system self-loops while also producing excess energy for base load power production.


by Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News

In the end of May, German TV station WDR did a segment on Rosch' Kinetic Power Plant (KPP). The piece is highly skeptical and gives low marks to Rosch.

In the segment, they show an "expert," Michael Adolph, running calculations, shaking his head, and giving essentially a strong thumbs down to the technology. "It doesn't work."

They quote him as saying: "More output than input. That's perpetual motion." 

I find the next statement he makes laughable in it's flat-Earth narrow-mindedness: "Taking away from a physicist the law of conservation of energy is like taking away Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny from a three year old."

He is not the least bit open in his mind to the possibility that there could be yet-to-be-properly-understood principles of science at play that will describe how this device harnesses the wheelwork of nature in some new way. Nor is he open to the possibility that Rosch's technology is fully compliant with presently-understood laws of physics and that they have come upon a way to combine principles in such a way as to get a new effect and chose not to disclose those at present for proprietary reasons.

Both of these latter possibilities are what scientific exploration and examination are about. This happens all the time in technological advances -- a new effect that others had not thought of or implemented before.

This wouldn't be the first time in history that academic science was shown to be wrong. The Wright Brothers is a classic case of something science said was impossible. That was a classic and royal mess-up on their part, which should have humbled them more than it apparently has.

The first question that any "expert" who is truly a scientist, not politician at heart, will ask is: "Does it work?" Not "Does it appear to violate the laws of physics as presently codified?"

Adolph is completely of the latter mindset -- to the point that this episode could serve as a poster child of scientific dogmatism that is completely out of line with the true spirit of scientific inquiry. By coming across as an "expert" while being so closed-minded and dogmatic, he's bastardizing science in the name of science.

As we were driving to the airport yesterday, I remarked to Detlef Dohmen, Rosch CEO, and his assistant: "I find many so-called 'scientists' to be more dogmatic than what they accuse religionists of being."

Mr. Dohmen replied, "The shit-storm against Rosch is a modern inquisition."


click for enlargement

This was during a conversation we were having about the above-mentioned TV coverage and some recent posted statements by Michael Adolph.

Mr. Dohmen held up his phone to show me the phone contact info for Michael Adolph. He works at E.ON's Energy Research Center. E.ON is one of Europe's largest energy suppliers. Here is the entry for them in a Google search:

UK Energy Supplier & Energy Company - E.ON

https://www.eonenergy.com/
Millions of people get their gas & electricity from E.ON, one of the UK's top energy suppliers. Discover why E.ON is one of the UK's top energy suppliers here.

Update: On June 24, 23:11 GMT, Michael clarified:

The Energy Research Center is part of the RWTH Aachen University. It is true that the utility company sponsored the center. But this is not uncommon in science. Nevertheless most of our funding is public, mainly the BMWi and BMBF (both federal ministries). Personally I have never been paid any money by E.ON and I’ve always worked on public funded projects. None of them had any relation to E.ON or any other utility company. Fun fact: I originally declined to do the interview for WDR because I assumed that there would be somebody claiming that I was just paid by a utility company to speak badly about an competitor. So I disclosed the information to WDR and they said that they don’t see any conflict of interest. So I finally went to visit Rosch.

While Michael has the credentials to be an expert, in my opinion he is no scientist in the true sense of the word, which requires and open mind to new information before drawing conclusions based on dogma.

Furthermore, his connection to E.ON could easily be argued as clouding his objectivity to technologies that could render E.ON obsolete if they don't get on the bandwagon with these emerging technologies. Their choice: they can honestly investigate it and adopt it, and eventually understand it; or they can become obsolete.

And with Michael's dogmatic coming out against Rosch' technology because it violates the laws of physics as he perceives them, the fact that E.ON has a horse in the race should disqualify him as a reliable expert. He is discredited as a good scientist by his narrow-mindedness and he is disqualified as a reliable expert by his vested interest.

A truly independent group, TUV, did investigate Rosch' technology (the Plexiglas demo unit) and they concluded (single sentence, easy to overlook) that it does in fact produce a continuous, net 150 Watts. I would argue that they qualify as "experts" more than Michael, and they have no conflict of interest.

We at PES also tested Rosch' technology. Here are my conclusion from a few days ago:

  • Featured: Buoyancy > Rosch > Demo >
    Why I'm 100% sure Rosch's KPP free energy technology works - We ruled out the water tower as having an energy source due to some hidden wire in the air hose. We ruled out the generator and table as having some kind of hidden wire going to it. Conventional wireless transmission is ruled out as well. That leaves one conclusion: self-sustaining with ~15 kW output as claimed. (PESN; June 20, 2015)


Dialogue

Here is my dialogue with Michael. (Slightly edited for spelling.) 

I apologize to you and to him that I wasn't as tactful in my responses to him as I could have been. My patience is wearing thin on narrow-minded, dogmatic "scientists" who have turned science into politics.

From: Michael Adolph
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 4:08 PM
Subject: A faked physicist

Dear Mr. Allan,

I hope you enjoyed your stay in Germany and you returned well to the United States. I followed your's and Stewart's examination of Rosch's famous KPP.

But well, please let me introduce myself first: My name is Michael Adolph. If my name doesn't ring a bell: I'm the physicist from RWTH Aachen University who also visited Rosch Innovations for a TV Show. As part of this I came across your website.

As you'd probably assume, we don't agree on anything regarding the KPP. I have absolutely no idea how you can believe that an infrared camera is an acceptable method to look for hidden wires powering the power plant. There are surely more suitable ways, e.g. measuring for electro-magnetic fields. And I'm rather impressed how easily you are willing to wipe away accepted laws of physics just by a superficial examination of the KPP and some explanations from Rosch CEO Detlef Dohmen (who has no idea about physics, which he is all to willing to admit). And it is not like I am expecting you to believe my words, but the laws of physics are not my point of view but more the result of experiments, theories and oberservations of one of the most intelligent persons of the last centuries (say Newton, say Galileo and so on). The energy conservation law has been proven endless times, in contrast to some exotic "free energy sources" that have never been observed under scientific conditions.

But I guess, you've heard these arguments a thousand times, and decided that laws of physics are for stupid morons. Maybe you want to check Wikipedia for the Dunning-Kruger-effect. Anyways, I think we don't have any room for discussions. We both examined the same system, and I came to the conclusion that there won't be any overunity. You are convinced of the contrary. I suggest we just let time tell the truth. If you are right, I'd be happy for Mr. Dohmen and for you, because you'll both make a fortune. And that's okay, because you solved mankind's biggest challenge. But to be honest, if I were you, I'd look for alternative ways to make my living.

So, if discussing free energy is not why I'm writing, what is driving me? Well in the comments you mentioned that I'm a "fake" physicist and Rosch will take legal action. You really believe everything they tell you? If you had done something at least coming close to research you'd asked Google for my name and "RWTH Aachen" (The necessary informations are displayed in the video, not understanding German is no excuse). The top result will be my cute face on my employers site. And yes, RWTH Aachen University has a Wikipedia entry in English. If you had read this one, you'd probably realized that RWTH is very much not a TV University but one of Germany's most renowned technical universities (and German engineering is world famous, hey, we even developed a KPP (sarcasm!)). If Rosch told you, I'm be a fake physicist, they just lied to you. Straight in your face. Although this lie could have been easily spotted. And you really trust these guy? Well, now I know why there is a business case for KPPs.

Sterling, I wish you all the best, hopefully you'll realize that there is no such thing like free energy that could be harvested with something as simple and clumsy as Rosch's KPP. If not, I hope this free energy stuff won't ruin your life.

kind regards from Aachen

Michael Adolph

PS: Concerning privacy, I'd strongly appreciate if you would not disclose my email address to the public.

 

Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juni 2015 um 07:04 Uhr
An: "Michael Adolph" 
Cc: "Stuart Campbell" 
Betreff: Re: A faked physicist


Hello Flat-Earth Michael who worships dogmatism over science,

When I say "free energy," I mean devices that harness the wheelwork of nature that is free for the taking, inexhaustible, ubiquitous.

There are 25 conventional genres of free energy, incuding solar, wind, geothermal, tide, w2e; and there are 25 genres of FE, including cold fusion, magnet motors, zpe, etc.

Who's the one being ancient, rather than forward-looking?

Sterling

 

From: Michael Adolph 
To: Sterling Allan 
Cc: Stuart Campbell 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 3:40 AM
Subject: Aw: Re: A faked physicist


Hi Sterling,

as I mentioned before I'm not really that much interested in discussing free energy with you. You won't be able to convince me that the KPP will work, and I can't convince you of the contrary. Time will tell.

Nevertheless you did not answer my question what about me is a fake and why you even didn't try to check that I'm not a fake but of real existence. This may be due to my fault that it was Stuart and not you, calling me a fake physicist. So if anyone of you could elaborate why I'm a fake, who told you that I'm a fake, I'd be very happy.

kind regards from Aachen

Michael

 

From: Sterling Allan 
To: Michael Adolph 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: Re: A faked physicist


Hi Michael,

You're certainly not independent. You have a vested interest in the corporations that will be obsoleted by this technology. [A] leading energy company in Europe. (see attached)

You should recuse yourself, not put yourself forward as an objective expert. That's not science. It's politics.

Shame on you.

Sterling

# # #

Full Disclosure

We at PES Network will benefit from sales/licenses that result from our networking (including our news coverage). Be sure to mention to Rosch what role PES played in bringing you to the table, if you end up there.

What You Can Do

  1. See Suggestions for How to Get Involved with the Roll-out of Exotic Free Energy 
  2. Pass this on to your friends and favorite news sources.
  3. Donate to PES Network to help us keep this news and directory and networking service going.
  4. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay abreast of the latest, greatest developments in the free energy sector.
  5. Let professionals in the renewable energy sector know about the promise of this technology. 

See also

Resources at PESWiki.com

Page composed by Sterling D. Allan
Last updated August 04, 2015


 
 

Ads

 

 

"It is harder to crack a prejudice than an atom." // "I'd rather be an optimist and a fool than a pessimist and right." -- Albert Einstein

ADVISORY: With any technology, you take a high risk to invest significant time or money unless (1) independent testing has thoroughly corroborated the technology, (2) the group involved has intellectual rights to the technology, and (3) the group has the ability to make a success of the endeavor.
Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages:
   First, it is ridiculed;
   Second, it is violently opposed; and
   Third, it is accepted as self-evident.

-- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

    "When you're one step ahead
of the crowd you're a genius.
When you're two steps ahead,
you're a crackpot."

-- Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, (Feb. 1998)

Submit • Privacy • About • Contact

PESWiki Departments:
Latest • News •XMLFeed • Directory • Congress • Top 5 • Open Sourcing

PESN.com
Copyright © 2002-2015, PES Network Inc.