Educational Blocks - If it is so amazing, why is it not used by someone?

When I discuss the existence of great unused inventions and the contents of this blog with people I am often met with the statement: "If it is so amazing, why is it not used by someone?" This phrase is so common that it almost seems like a response running on default, like the memes I wrote about earlier.

Where does this instant rejection of the amazing possibility of a breakthrough for mankind come from? If you were drowning, would you not least attempt to reach a floating object? It does not seem to be the case with long term hazards caused by pollution, wasteful energy sources, overproduction, hunger etc. When I attempt to dig in why my (of different backgrounds) debaters are sceptical towards investigating the integrity of claims on great breakthroughs, and I usually get a school/high school quote of sorts. Examples could be "my physics teacher always said engines can never produce more energy than they can consume and that it is simply impossible" or " it is against the laws of science - so I can not be". I was told these things too, and in a discussion they are statements that are hardly open for discussion. When I try to list some of the problems a good invention might meet before it is on the supermarket shelf, the most difficult to believe is the inventions design - not the problems it faces. I do not like conspiracy theories (though this blog might be labeled as one), but is it not scary that individual thoughts can get one tracked like this? Should we curiosity not be allowed to overcome scepticism in the case of need?

In my own opinion I did rather poorly in school until I realized that I was complicating things by taking too many variables into account at the same time when solving an assignment. My teachers, who I respect, did not want my interpretation or creativity so much as they wanted the correct answer. All through my education, up to doctoral level, I have been schooled in searching for answers that fit the mental box called facts. I agree this reality works very well per default - but it may restrain you and me from even accepting the existence of a revolutionary technological breakthrough. And how do you approach that as an inventor? It works, you can show it works, but people deny it because they have been taught I can not exist. If that is the case perhaps technological breakthroughs are left to be investigated by believers who can accept humanity might not know everything, but can hit a lucky strike when trying to reach for the sky.

Mental Blocks - Memes as Denial

Memes can be described as unit of cultural information passed on from human to human. Dawkins gave examples like jingles, tunes, beliefs, trends etc. In short memes can be considered bits of information (not nesscarily true) passed on between individuals like a virus or a gene, altering itself slightly over time. We all know commercials by heart like "Just do it!" (Nike) or our politicians ("Axis of terror") that uses memes to change minds by changing habits through repetition or spin.

I bring on memes because science, and the way we approach the rationale as the truth, could have become a meme. It has become commonplace to hear phrases in the news like "Statistically more....", "Experts in....", "Surveys indicate that..." and so on. It seems to me that science is used by news and politicians as undeniable tools, or weapons, for facts and correct standpoints. Odd, since journalists and politicians does not seem to communicate very well with scientists and vice verse. And because journalists and politicians speak about research results as if they were their own, they become memes by repetition.

Have you ever instinctively denied a child's fantasies? For example, if your kid would run up to you, excited, telling you there is a tiger in the yard - would you not feel urged to tell the kid there is no tiger in the yard without looking first? Kids have a good imagination by default, and we adults often do our best to dampen these tall tales with common sense. Common sense, that if we think about it, often is guided by what we have been told - memes. A little curiosity or sense of adventure might make us look for the tiger, but the inner voice often win over the instinct of curiosity.
So if I replace the kid with an garage inventor who excited enter the public forum with a new high yielding energy source running on water, the integrity does not increase much because of his years of age. I would claim the same mechanisms kick in. We are sceptical and normally categorically deny the validity of the invention due lack of documentation or conflicts with scientific "laws" (memes) - in stead of being curious and look into it with the mindset of "what if the inventor is right?".

In summary, my point here is that memes based on how the world looks like is a serious mental barrier in all of us if one innovative revolution stares us in the face, and we all help sustaining it.