When Your Client Thinks They've Outsmarted Physics

Join this channel to support Tested and get access to perks, like asking Adam questions: youtube.com/channel/UCiDJtJKMICpb9B1qf7qjEOA/join Prototyping Tabletop Miniatures with Foam Board Models (Johnny Fraser Allen): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beWI0bFf5Ag

My favorite scam-artist-adjacent story like the flying car “shop” is when Accuracy International first pitched their sniper rifle to the British military. Testing and review went well, and so the MoD sent some people down to check out their manufacturing facilities to ensure they could meet demand. AI showed them around, and took them out to lunch, during which (apparently) the inspectors joked that they just wanted to make sure AI wasn’t “just a couple of guys in a shed”. Except, that’s exactly what they were. The prototypes that had been tested were built essentially in the guy’s garage. When they got wind of the upcoming inspection, they rented a big industrial unit and basically set-dressed it with machinery and gun parts and all the rest of it, and basically herded the MoD staff through as quickly as possible so they wouldn’t look to closely at it. And the contract they got for their first rifle enabled them to actually build and staff a legitimate shop to produce the rifles.

That "special" machine project is also a time to charge "F Off" rates. Rates that you think the client will turn down, but which are high enough if they do accept, to make it worth your while for the crap you're about to go through.

"If it works and im totally wrong about physics, more power to you, thats great. But i dont think im wrong." LOL Adam

Had a comp sci professor who used to work in industry. His boss tasked him with optimizing an algorithm, with strict goals for performance. After struggling for a while, he suspected it might be NP-complete, and therefore getting it to the stated goals would be the biggest breakthrough in mathematics for a thousand years (and likely impossible). So he wrote out a mathematical proof. It was indeed an NP complete problem, and the goals were (almost certainly) impossible. He brought the proof and explanation to his boss. The boss said he wanted "Results, not excuses". And that was the point he decided to quit.

Regarding client expectations and physics— I was a freelance shoe shiner for many years, most recently at a barbershop. A barbershop client kept turning down my services until one day he brought in a pair of black cowboy boots. “You’re only going to have to do these ONCE because I’m going to spray these down with NevrWet when I get home!” I explained that the spray will stick to nothing but the polish, which isn’t permanent by any means… Nope, he had outsmarted physics, and his idea was going to work! It did not.

The trouble with someone who wants you to build parts for a free energy machine is that they can't be reasoned with. Even if you do everything right up front to set expectations and make it clear that you're making things exactly according to the order, when it doesn't work it's going to be your fault and grounds, in their mind, to not pay you. Then they will be forever spreading false negativity about you, your skills, and your professionalism. Sometimes relieving a fool of their money at their own request isn't worth the cost.

My favorite saying is "The best place to start, is anywhere". Meaning, of course, to just start the thing. Don't spend so much time thinking about where or when, and just do it.

I’m a coder and the outsmarting physics question reminded me of a client I had in my early career that wanted me to make some software that implemented their own design for an algorithm/strategy for baccarat (the sequential coin toss betting game). They were convinced there was some dependency between coin tosses that would lead to profitability and tried repeatedly to convince me using their own weird mathematical theory. I took the approach Adam suggests and agreed to help build it but made sure they knew i did not believe it would work. Interestingly in this case I also had to have the program simulate hundreds of runs with detailed outputs to prove that it was accurately following their algorithm design. I made sure I invoiced hourly for the work on the implementation and testing and made no promises relating to the outcome they were hoping for. Eventually they gave up but I got paid for what I did.

For people who are failure adverse, the old saying “measure twice, cut once” becomes a curse that can bring challenging projects to a standstill.

Not only physical expectations... My gf works in VFX and a client thought she was being difficult for arguing that making a sunrise (not sunset) over the pacific ocean in a movie set in L.A made no sense.

I think I'd still run. Well you didn't make the bearings frictionless... Well you didn't use the massless rods... Well your lack of faith... Well you sabotage (listen, all y'all) it... If they think they can break the laws of fizziks... ...they don't think much of your contract either. These people tend to be nice people. And earnest. And you want to help them. And they want to tweak the contract/deliverables/design after it has been signed, and work has started, and substantially complete has been reached, and delivery has delivered. And you'll want to help them, because they're nice, and earnest and you'll bend the rules and you'll break the contract and you'll still not get paid because it doesn't work. And gee, thanks for your collaboration and input on my project but I'm afraid it just didn't work out. "Excuse me, um.." "What?" At least add the annoying client 100% surcharge up front. It will not have been enough. I think I'd still run.

As a physics/engineering professor, I've had local hobbyists and machinists ask my thoughts on their "free energy" machines. I charge $75/hr for consultation and have found that they never accept my answer. One guy showed me his math, and it was all correct except he didn't understand which side of a triangle is the hypotenuse, so his cosine/sine and thus x- and y-component forces were wrong. I absolutely could NOT convince him what a hypotenuse is. He was convinced it was going to work and he was going to be the next billionaire. I would not take any machining work from someone like that. Their machine isn't going to work, and they're going to blame your parts.

i really appreciate the thinking pauses being left in the video. it could easily be edited out but it adds to the presentation so well

I've had many clients who have asked for technology solution that I was certain that it would not work. I have gone both routes of doing the project with a disclaimer that I don't think it will work, and refusing the project from the start. It has always been better to refuse the project. If you do the project and it doesn't work, the client will almost certainly not accept that they were wrong and will pressure you to do and endless series of tweaks to "make it work".

I love the "I will gladly get paid to help you test this out" answer. It might be a very productive failure for an inquisitive mind. Dismissing a design as impossible doesn't help them at all, but if they really believe in their design enough to pay you to help make it a "reality" letting them (with fair warning and compensation) explore it is delightful

Using the phrase "outsmarted physics" I think is very appropriate here because, from my experience, people who genuinely attempt to build things like "free energy" machines have a personality type that they are much smarter than other people and think that they actually found some loophole that others missed. It is even worse if they are actually intelligent. I had a thesis advisor who was like this. He was incredibly intelligent, to the point that it took a very long time to realize that many of the things he said were just utter B.S. Working with him is a major part of why I ended up dropping out of my Phd.

One thing's for sure along with making sure your contract doesn't stipulate you have to make this machine work, you should also get paid up front! Don't be stuck trying to get them to pay you when they're disappointed and in denial about their caca mania ideas, and blaming you for the failure.

6:11 wait, i have a point of view that surprises me. Life long advice, people. If you ever find a human being that honestly says that, chain yourself to them and never let go Just being around them will make you a better human

A client who wishes to build a free-energy machine is destined to be an unhappy client and you (who wrote to Adam) are destined to have that unhappy client (who will make you unhappy). Unless you have no other work and need to feed starving children, ask him to look elsewhere and spend your time, and be paid by, other clients whom you will make happy (and you will be happy, too).