From: user2039@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   Rufus Ruffian  posted:   
      
   > Von Ottone  wrote:   
   > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 12:22:01 -0700, Vincent Maycock   
   > >  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > >On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 14:41:27 GMT, E.Laureti   
   > > > wrote:   
   > > >   
   > > >>   
   > > >>jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) posted:   
   > > >>   
   > > >>> ERROR "unexpected byte sequence starting at index 287: '\xE2'" while   
   decoding:   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>> In article <0001HW.2E54AA9A0031F5CB70000253B38F@news.supernews.com>,   
   > > >>> WolfFan   wrote:   
   > > >>> >On Aug 19, 2025, Von Ottone wrote   
   > > >>> >(in article<54n8ak9iq1pa8cnl33lngo12c2qegdaci8@4ax.com>):   
   > > >>> >   
   > > >>> >> Envy is a nasty beast; it makes you jealous and clouds your mind.   
   > > >>> >   
   > > >>> >You still canâ??t lift one kilo one meter for one minute.   
   > > >>> >   
   > > >>> >Note that, according to your own â??figuresâ??, if you lifted a   
   working fluid   
   > > >>> >(water, for instance) and then let it fall past a turbine, the power.   
   > > >>> >generated would exceed the power required to lift the working fluid.   
   Thatâ??s   
   > > >>> >a perpetual motion machine of the second type. Which is impossible.   
   Your   
   > > >>> >machine simply cannot work, and never will. Youâ??re simply a bunch   
   of con   
   > > >>> >artists trying on a scam.   
   > > >>> >   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>> Disclaimer: I don't think this device works at all but if it did. I am   
   > > >>> sufficiently confident in the conservation laws   
   > > >>   
   > > >>usi il traduttore .   
   > > >>Il dettaglio essenziale che non nota è che le leggi di conservazione   
   newoniane   
   > > >>sono state elaborate senza conoscere la forza di Lorentz su cui si basa   
   la PNN.   
   > > >>E poi dimentica che la fisica ha origini sperimentali   
   > > >>e tutto si deve piegare SEMPRE all'esperimento.   
   > > >>Ho sempre detto che le leggi di conservazione di Newton vanno poi   
   > > >>interpretate con l'inserimento dell'elettrodinamica che Newton neppure   
   conosceva.   
   > > >>E' un compito che lascio ad altri   
   > > >>Mi occupo di fare BENE solo gli esperimenti e di mostrarli agli   
   increduli.   
   > > >>L'uso ossessivo della meccanica newtoniana  per la propulsione in   
   astronautica   
   > > >>ci preclude ogni colonizzazione dello spazio come la reatà finora   
   dimostra brutalmente.   
   > > >   
   > > >That is,   
   > > >   
   > > >>"use the translator. The essential detail that you do not notice is that   
   Newtonian conservation   
   > > >>laws were developed without knowing the Lorentz force on which PNN is   
   based.   
   > > >   
   > > >No, the Lorentz force is quite consistent with Newtonian dynamics. And   
   > > >Newtonian conservation laws were derived from first principles by Emmy   
   > > >Noether some time after special relativity was developed.   
   > > >   
   > > >>And then you forget that physics has experimental origins and that   
   > > >>everything must always bend to the experiment.   
   > > >   
   > > >But experiment must be consistent with previously verified theory.   
   > > >   
   > > >> I have always said that Newton's conservation laws must then be   
   interpreted   
   > > >>with the inclusion of electrodynamics, which Newton did not even know.   
   > > >   
   > > >Which led to relativity, not perpetual motion machines or whatever   
   > > >you're trying to do.   
   > > >   
   > > >> It is a task   
   > > >>that I leave to others. I focus on doing experiments WELL and showing   
   them to the skeptics.   
   > > >>The obsessive use of Newtonian mechanics for propulsion in astronautics   
   precludes   
   > > >>any colonization of space, as reality has so far brutally demonstrated.   
   > > >   
   > > >So because you want to travel through space, Newtonian mechanics   
   > > >*must* be wrong?   
   > > >   
   > > >>>that my first question   
   > > >>> on seeing it work (after checking for invisible fishing line or cgi)   
   > > >>> would be to wonder from what source the motive energy is being drawn.   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>> (It's never tachyons. It would be cool if it was tachyons, except   
   > > >>> for the whole "universes with tachyons may not be stable" deal)   
   > > >>>   
   > > >>>   
   > >   
   > >   
   > > Bhuahahahahahahaha   
   > >   
   > > You are so fun!   
   > >   
   > > You think that you know more than Laureti about PNN...   
   >   
   > It seems everyone here knows enough about Laureti's claims that they   
   > don't believe him. That's more than Laureti knows about it.   
   >   
   > Technical flaws were pointed out in Laureti's theory and practice. He   
   > was unable to respond coherently. Meanwhile he thrashes about erraticly,   
   > wondering why his machine doesn't work.   
   >   
   > The "invention" has always been ridiculed on Usenet, and ignored in RL.   
   > Always will be.   
      
   In the meantime, they must also laugh at the Italian society that properly   
    filed my patent F432BA and at those from the EPO (European Patent Office)   
    who granted it to me. But this WO2022264177 -   
    ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPULSION SYSTEM FOR SPACECRAFT MOVEMENT WITHOUT   
   THE EMISSION OF REACTION MASS   
   https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2022264177 they   
   never examine, they prefer, like all envious, worthless trolls,   
    anonymous defamation.   
      
      
      
   You laugh and you will be destroyed by yourselves, believers in a   
    fake astronautics that won't even colonize the Moon.   
   Astronautics   
   led by the top of the idiots found in NASA, ESA, and Mr. Musk,   
   the rich donkey in physics. A genius of bluster with his comical flying   
    suppositories. After all, you give credit to a maxim that fully reflects   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)