ran@ho95b.UUCP (RANeinast) (03/20/85)
> This morning (Wed. 3/13/85) I heard on National Public Radio's > "Morning Edition" about some inventor in Louisiana who applied for a > patent for a machine that puts out more energy than it takes in (don't > start laughing yet). This reminds me of another story I heard on NPR about 2-3 years ago. They were serious in their reporting (not intended as a joke). It also highlights general incompetence and non-scrutiny by the media of things scientific. Anyways, they had a long story, complete with interview with the inventor (no working model, of course) of a way to use the energy of weight to power all the cars in the country. All roads would have giant bellows under them. As cars drove over them, it would compress the fluid in the bellows. The fluid would then drive some turbine or something and extract "the energy of weight". They would then store the energy in batteries that could be used to recharge the cars. Ta-da! All that energy for free; no need to stay with those evil oil companies! Nobody involved had the slightest idea that weight!=energy, and NPR didn't address why the scheme wouldn't work, or even talk to a competent engineer who could tell them *why* it wouldn't work with his hands tied behind his back. -- ". . . and shun the frumious Bandersnatch." Robert Neinast (ihnp4!ho95b!ran) AT&T-Bell Labs
ndiamond@watdaisy.UUCP (Norman Diamond) (03/21/85)
> and NPR didn't address why the scheme wouldn't work, or even > talk to a competent engineer who could tell them *why* > it wouldn't work with his hands tied behind his back. Of COURSE it doesn't work if his hands are tied behind his back. He has to be WALKING on his hands at the time! -- Norman Diamond UUCP: {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra}!watmath!watdaisy!ndiamond CSNET: ndiamond%watdaisy@waterloo.csnet ARPA: ndiamond%watdaisy%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa "Opinions are those of the keyboard, and do not reflect on me or higher-ups."
macrakis@harvard.ARPA (Stavros Macrakis) (03/21/85)
> ... This reminds me of another story I heard on NPR about 2-3 years > ago. They were serious in their reporting (not intended as a joke). > ... NPR didn't address why the scheme wouldn't work ... -- > (ihnp4!ho95b!ran) Perhaps NPR ought to introduce the analogue of `:-)' or `LAUGH', as it seems that at least part of their audience doesn't appreciate their humor. I am certain the story was intended humorously. -s