@Exn There is not one fact that the device works, not one fact the inventor has a real secret. Your supposition that the inventor try to protect his pecuniary interests being supported by none fact, is to be considered as an invention until proof of the contrary. And so, from an operational viewpoint, the argument is not relevant because it's purely imaginary.
That is your personal opinion and nothing more which I happen to disagree with on various levels from experience. 1)There is not one fact that the device works Wrong, you have no facts concerning whether it works 2)not one fact the inventor has a real secret Wrong, that is unless you know every inventor personally and they told you their secret but that is absurd 3)Your supposition that the inventor try to protect his pecuniary interests being supported by none fact Wrong, almost every inventor I have ever known or heard of has taken great measures to protect their interests, that is human nature 4)is to be considered as an invention until proof of the contrary And whom has to prove what to whom? you see the problem is that you deny anything which has not been proven to you personally thus your weird little reality depends on the number of people who must prove something to you personally ... unfortunately I have nothing to prove to you in any way and neither does pretty much anyone else. 5)And so, from an operational viewpoint, the argument is not relevant because it's purely imaginary. So you have proof it is imaginary then?, Oh sorry that's right you believe that anything not proven to you personally must be imaginary ... my mistake.
---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
|