Talk:John Searl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paranormal Portal
This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Runcorn 19:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

If nobody can produce credible sources, I recommend deletion. - Runcorn 06:24, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of him; I put in the factoids I could find on him on my edit. I don't know enough about him to vouch for the original article or not. Evan1975 05:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

FDM = John Searl???

Contents

[edit] FDM

FDM, please stop editing so much. You're pushing down constructive edits with your dozens of edits a day, just modifying your previous enteries slightly. And when you have something useful to add, please provide valid citations from peer-reviewed scientific journals - no more of this fly-by-night "free energy" website crap, OK?

If you are "Fernando Morris", contributor to searlsolution.com, there is a clear conflict of interest in your editing this article. Alvis 07:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

FDM- Everthing I have contributed has been in good faith to the best of my understanding after 10 years of investigations, but since concerns have been raised I will no longer provide edits and contributions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 2007-01-21
Thank you for your considering my concerns. Good faith is fine to have, but a little more vigor is desired for Wikipedia entries. I don't ask that you cease contributing altogether, but just that you put a little more time into Verifiability. I've made note of all this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Accuracy_dispute#John_Searl Alvis 09:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Disclaimer: John Searl has never proclaimed, indorsed or even inferred that the SEG violates the first or second laws of thermodynamics but rather it functions as quantum diode. Those that impose the notion that it violates such laws are only making assumptions to suit their own forum or personal opinions and it is not that of the inventor himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 19:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The device source of energy lays on the premise that it takes advantage of Brownian motion at quantum level by creating an asymmetry and thus an orderly condition out of a chaotic state with resonance and mass density differentials. Recent advances in science have proposed harnessing it with such concept as Brownian ratchet and it been found to be an active function in biological cells. Although it is a challenging process to harness Brownian motion, it does not violate the laws of thermodynamics. The SEG and nature has provided us blueprints for performing useful work out this ever-present and abundant energy. The SEG concept has yet to gained sufficient understanding and recognition for proper research in what could be otherwise promising technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 19:50, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


Since you added this disclaimer to the article "in behalf of" John Searl, please be sure to take into account Wikipedia:Conflict of interest in your future edits on Wikipedia. Thanks. =Axlq (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I have never been instructed by the author of the subject matter, it is by my own that I contribution the understanding of the subject on this page. Fortunately, years of experience allows me to better inform against distortions that pervades the subject by the less informed and by those that imposing the assumption that it violate the laws of thermodynamics; this goes against the inventors claims and it is shameful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 19:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear. The Brownian ratchet is a famous thought experiment demonstrating that what seems a promising perpetual motion machine cannot work.LeContexte (talk) 08:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Claus Paragraph

I would like to see subtantiated the information about a one "Richard Claus" as presented in the fourth paragraph. I've been following Mr. Searl's progress since the mid-nineties, and have never once had this story intimated to me at any level.

I suggest the author investigate the current status of John Searl and the efforts to produce a current prototype, as well as legal claims put forth by Mr. Searl regarding the SISRC (www.sisrc.com) site. Please see the www.searleffect.com site "All Members Section" for more information.

I have been following up on the subject matter, Mr. searl's site is www.searlsolution.com, where as the SISRC website is not authorized or supported by Mr. searl with regards to claims or solicitations. --FDM 17:55, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I am concerned also about the fourth paragraph containing a statement of opinion regarding attempts to manufacture the device, as well as the US Military. It is my opinion that this paragraph puts the neutrality of this article in question. --Firefishe 03:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I find also that the fourth paragraph with regard to UK or US Military has no basis infact because references describe the device was manufactured utilizing the Midlands Electricity Board facilities. Mr. Searl was a young man then and he worked for the company. --FDM 18:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I find this all silly, because I actually met Richard Claus, he actually lent me this video. These things actually happened and the Searl device is real. You can't get more neutral than reality. I am willing to sign an affidavid that this material is true, and to take a lie detector test. Contrary to the oppinion of those who watch TV, strange things do occasionally happen in this world that are not part of a fictional plot depicted in a little electronic box. --Chenhall 23:32, 18 November 2006 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup/Neutralization needed

I take it that it will be obvious to any sane reader that the account offered in this article is rather credulous :-/ Recommend some fact checking and neutralization of anything not conforming to WP:V-WP:NOR-WP:RS-WP:NPOV. ---CH 11:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Video of SEG interview

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8635897559220353909&q=searl

I'm not sure of the source of this video, but it's the only in-depth video that I have found. I remember seeing a BBC video of Searl flying a Levity Disc, but I'm having trouble locating the files. I'm still not certain of the legitimacy of SEG as I am having trouble finding reputable sources. Companies dealing with SEG but do exist, but I don't recomend expanding this article via unreputable websites in lieu of promoting funding for companies that soley exist to collect funding for bunk science.

[edit] An actual article from a magazine

http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue1/ar1antigrava.html --Filthy swine 20:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Well done to Filthy swine, but I can't say I'm strongly convinced! --Runcorn 19:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
404'ing as of 1st April 2008. Al.locke (talk) 15:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Better Revision of Article

Hello, I am new to wikipedia , and haven't registered an account yet. I will register an account before any editing.

I think that this article needs alot of work since I've looked at several sources for John Searl's claims and think that a more accurate representation from cited sources can be presented for this article. I discovered Searl's claim while investigating physicist Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov's initial peer-reviewed , withdrawn, and later resubmitted peer-reviewed physics articles on a very small anomolous gravitational effect he had discovered over his cryostat containing a superconducting spinning disc. I think to date Podkletnov's effect has not been replicated with any success either by NASA, Dr Ning Li's (She had theorized a similar effect would occur several years before, and was working along similar lines.) US Defense funded program, or Boeing if they have conducted a private investigation like some would claim. If you are interested in some peer-reviewed articles in this area, I would suggest looking at the above sources. After I had initially researched the above claims of Dr. Podkletnov and others in library journal searches, I went online to search for more of these topics and found among others John Searl's claims. I have a university physics background, and I was interested in this fringe area initially because of Dr Podkletnov's claims and some private speculative discussions I used to have with one of my electrical engineering friends since I always wondered if there was a connection between gravity and electromagnetism as postulated by the later works of Albert Einstein during his more eccentric years in his futile attempt to create a Unified Field Theory between those two fields. I would say that any current claims in this area are fringe science like Dr. Nig Li's theory and that most are pseudoscientific at best.

The claims of John Searl are considered by some investigators in the fringe areas of research far fetched even for them such that it is pseudoscientific even for them because he claims that their is both a very large gravitational effect several orders of magnitude greater than anyone would concieve and that his devices are self-powered by no input source which comes into conflict with general relativity for the size of the effect considering the amount of energy needed along with the fact that it might require negative mass (never seen) or negative energy (The Casimer effect may be kind of an example of a small amount of negative energy but nothing nearly as large as this claim which is not even similar.) and the laws of thermodynamics for the claim of a self-powered device with no apparent energy source. In mainstream science both in Europe and the United States, the Searl Effect is pseudoscientific. Now, since I have given some explaination as to why I first examined some of he claims of John Searl, I will now discuss the briefly some things and add comments at a later date.

I think this article can be revised with better citations from sources as to what the actual claim is with maybe a section on biography, a section on the Searl Effect and a the Searl Effect generator and what he calls the Inverse-G vehicle or otherwise known as the levity disc. I have not looked into this area for several years because of more practical persuits in my life, however I have examined several sources for Searl's claim and think that the article could be changed to reflect what he actually supposdly did without alot of explaination as to some sort of adhoc theory as to actually how it might work. I think what is missing is better sourcing of the material. This would include parts concerning his arrest and imprisonment in the United Kingdom for over a year for stealing power from the electric company which led to alot of his property being confiscated to which he claims is not true because his house was powered by his generator without any external source. It would also include a quote from the BBC on whether there was actually any video taken of his Inverse-G disc in flight to which he claims and actual small reference from the BBC on the claim that they came to video tape the construction phase of the large multi-ton disc. There are articles concerning the fact that some of his photos of an inflight disc were staged by a reporter or two while he was initially building his large disc with a hanging prototype balsa wood structure to appear to be in flight because he claim that his large Inverse-G disc had not been completed at the time so the reporters created photos for how the disc would appear in the near future in flight. (There is the other side of this story as well that the reporters who did this were doing it to stage a claim that was not possible at all and doing it to be promote the story.) There is also some material on how he supposdly created the neodymium alloy bearing magnets in his device from raw materials and unusual electromagnetizing method while heating the raw bearing alloy molds close to the Curie temperature to change the magnetic domains to produce something that has unusual field characteristics which can be reviewed in some of Searl's sources and is not a standard magnetic dipole as some might think. Whether that is true or not is a third claim that he has which puts his device further into the realm of fringe material science and pseudoscientific by some mainstream areas since these bearings can supposedly float and move without friction across another similar alloy rail with some other strange field configuration. The actual work of his concerning the Laws of the Squares which describes how to create this effect in some detail is seperated in several books totaling over 500 pages which I browsed a few years ago from an unusual dealer at an inventor's convention I attended in Utah when I lived out west in the US. At that time I had never heard of him before, and thought most of the works were obscure and hard to follow because they were full of esoteric material like magic squares which are an old medieval number game used for various esoteric practices and later as mathematical puzzles. After i saw the esoteric material in those books, I put them down because they were farfetched forme. I regret going to that convention since the majority of presentations lacked quality and were very poor. When I came across him much later online I realized I was examining his books and I think he uses those magic squares to produce ratios for the materials needed to produce his effect through some obscure way. As for a final note, I would mention that two Russian scientist, Roschin and Godin, at the Institute for High Temperatures in Moscow claimed to have replicated part of the SEG effect with a significant weight reduction of their device on a test stage which was published in Technical Physics Letters as a peer-reviewed article. They later patented their device, but as far as I can tell the Russian Academy of Sciences has severely critizised the journal for publishing that paper and claimed that the two scientist had produced a pseudoscientific paper although I've only read clips from their review since I think the complete review hasn't been translated and is in the Russian. Also, I am wondering if anyone else has come forward in Russia at that institute as their scientific peers claiming to have investigated their device since if it was built as they specified , it wsa a large apparatus with alot of machining done on premise. It would be interesting to find out whether the Russian Academy of Sciences set any scientist from RAS to investigate at that institute their researh program and funding like Nature has done in Britian in the past for some unusual publications that later prove filled with errors but are allowed to be published only if an investigator is allowed to spend time at the lab of the publisher. An example of this is when Nature let French immunologist Jacques Benveniste publish his article that water retained residual memory of biochemical reactions at very diluted concentrations and still produced biologicla effects when the biochemicals were hardly even present. They later wrote a rebuttal to his work after investigating it personally which was a very open minded approach to that situation I thought even though most likely they would find nothing.

I think I should have split that above paragraph into more parts, but I am now short on time and will leave it as is. This is my current comments concerning this article and I think I will prsent some sources later on as well as sources from Searl's own page but not sure I can produce citations from his member page. I may produce a revised page to examine while not editing this one perhaps in a month or two if it is still up. It is in a very poor condition right now along with several more mainstream articles on wikipedia. Any comments are welcome. --- David P. Soltys 2:06 GMT 2/9/07 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.80.195.97 (talk) 02:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Reasons for his time in prison

Perhaps because of this clip, and constant snipeing by one particuler critic, the main Searl site has closed permanantly and the others look dead in the water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.41.167 (talk) 01:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Some one has recently uploaded a Youtube clip showing newspaper cutings of the trial reports.

Since people may invest in his technology, they have a right to know as to why he spent time in prison. Can anyone add an article to clarify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.58.214 (talk) 20:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I don’t any documents relating to that incident, but it did have to do with the electric company taking notice that Searl’s home was electrically powered, yet they could not register any usage. It is understandable that from the electric company's prospective, it could only mean one thing...he must be stealing electricity, so they took legal action to search the premise. They arrested John and conducted an aggressive search for the source, even digging up the grounds without finding the source. They eventually resorted to tracing the source by ripping wiring out of the walls which lead to John's home SEG hidden within the walls. He learned that his generator was gone, the home was wrecked and it prove to be too much for his already stressed relation with his wife; she left him. They even ignored his requests to return the device, so it also understandable why John was so outraged and angered as to make threats against the company. So yes he spent time in jail for it, more so for his own safety because the judge recognized that John was very disturbed about the incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 04:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice story. Where did you hear it? — NRen2k5, 14:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
It begs the question: if Searl had a working SEG then why didn't he demonstrate that? Anyone presenting a working free energy device would have made enough money to cover domestic electricity bills I think. Al.locke (talk) 15:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ref removed

user:JzG removed this references:

J. D. Redding 21:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

No reason was provide for the removal of this reference, so it will be undone. It has been documented that Mr. Gunnar of Sussex University had meetings with Mr. Searl, took samples from a working SEG device and attempted to create his version of the SEG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 20:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 17:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV edits

I have deleted unsourced material and conformed with WP:FRINGE. This is, at best, fringe science, and the article must reflect the mainstream view that these claims are unverified and contradict established physical laws. LeContexte (talk) 12:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Professor?

Searl's website claims he is a "professor" [2], but his CV does not show any employment as an academic. Does anybody have any sources giving background on this? LeContexte (talk) 12:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The title professor was not given to him by any reputable university, that much is sure. 79.66.107.166 (talk) 00:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


After giving a lecture at the University of Munich Germany on March 12,1989, the University officials were so impressed with John's knowledge of the mathematical process named "The Law of the Squares", that they presented him an HONORARY PROFESSORSHIP with the title- PROFESSOR OF MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURES OF CREATION AND ENERGY. I for one do infact have a VHS tape of that lecture, that much is for such as others of the public have copies of it as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDM (talk • contribs) 20:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

There is no formal qualification needed to call oneself a Professor, so Searl has as much right to use this honorific as anyone else. Of course, to do so when one is not employed by a university as a Professor is at best a sign of enormous self-regard, and at worst a barefaced attempt to mislead other. Gwernol 20:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Usually an honorary professorship is evidenced by rather more than a VHS tape but, in any event, it is generally the convention that holders of honorary doctorates and professorships do not use the title.LeContexte (talk) 11:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Refs to papers needed?

Hello,

i'm wondering if the links to the "scientific" papers is needed in this article? After all, Searl has nothing to do with these papers personally. If anything, these relate only to the SEG device that he claims to have. Same goes for some links in the notes section. If no one complains with a good reason to leave them there, i will remove them in the next days. Having them in that article (which should redirect to his SEG device page on wikipedia anyway) gives him a scientific look-alike while the whole thing is just pure pseudoscientific nonsense mixed up with numerology and divining. I call it a fraud, since tthey are actively seeking money currently, and use Wikipedia merely as a vehicle to give them a "there could be something true in it" look.

Greetings, Chris --213.160.11.146 (talk) 11:27, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, i have been bold and removed the links to papers and stuff that has nothing to do with Searl as person. The sources instead had, if anything, a relation to the device he claims to have designed. Also removed the link to BKL, since it is no real hollywood company. Hollywood wouldnt use an AOL address, but rather have their own. Even more, the "Movie" isnt made yet, all that exist are some trailers which are no proof of any real movie at all.
Again, please merge/rediret this article to Searl_Effect_Generator, since that is the only thing why Searl is known. There is nothing else to this person, except for his criminal past. --213.160.11.146 (talk) 14:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)