Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Michel Jullian wrote: Indeed it does. Hi Terry, for another opinion Stephen could have a look at the controversy you and I had about this some time ago, I had found what looked very much like a large error in input current measurement by analysing the Mosfet's voltage waveform and applying Ohm's low to it knowing it's ON resistance (search for Sprain in the list archive). I've recused myself from all technical debates on the reality or possibility of OU magnetic motors until I come up with a good answer to the following question: When an electron is accelerated in a nonuniform magnetic field due to the electron's own (permanent) magnetic dipole, where does the energy come from? Once I've got an answer to that one I'll be a lot happier about barking at magmos again. :-) Been busy with other stuff for the past many moons and haven't pursued it, tho. My comments on Steorn, you may have noticed, were all based on the company's externally visible behavior, not on the feasibility of their approach...
[Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence I've recused myself from all technical debates on the reality or possibility of OU magnetic motors until I come up with a good answer to the following question: When an electron is accelerated in a nonuniform magnetic field due to the electron's own (permanent) magnetic dipole, where does the energy come from? Depends on how many layers deep to you need to go, Neo. This can be one deep rabbit-hole, especially when you forget your meds... On one lower level there is the well-known prhenomenon of magentic precession of domains in a permanent magnet (PM), no? Precession involves angular momentum, no? Angular momentum can be transfered, no? If a PM is capable, at the domain level, of transfering some of its precessional angular momentum away from its aligned and synchronous domains- then that would necessarily be a conservative situation... and the magnet would/should become demagnetized... unless ?? Unless something (some quantum force or effect) akin to the Casimir force was capable of applying an effectvie pressure, at the domain level, so that the angular momentum of the PM - which had been lessened by a small amount in the transfer of energy [to either a valence electron or another unrelated domain] was immediately recouped (or regauged as Bearden likes to miss-state). Can we stop at the level of the Casimir force? Jones ...ain't Vortex great? ... fast-and-loose answers for every deep mystery. Kinda like Wonderland, no? ...that marvellous place like a dream come true and with the occasional pop-literary Down the Rabbit-Hole, cross-referencing. ... as when Morpheus says to Neo I imagine that right now you're feeling a bit like Alice. Tumbling down the rabbit hole ... take the red pill and I will show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.
[VO]:Re: Interesting News About Steorn
BlankJones wrote.. On one lower level there is the well-known prhenomenon of magentic precession of domains in a permanent magnet (PM), no? Precession involves angular momentum, no? Angular momentum can be transfered, no? If a PM is capable, at the domain level, of transfering some of its precessional angular momentum away from its aligned and synchronous domains- then that would necessarily be a conservative situation... and the magnet would/should become demagnetized... unless ?? Unless something (some quantum force or effect) akin to the Casimir force was capable of applying an effectvie pressure, at the domain level, so that the angular momentum of the PM - which had been lessened by a small amount in the transfer of energy [to either a valence electron or another unrelated domain] was immediately recouped (or regauged as Bearden likes to miss-state). Howdy Jones, Been thinking about how to fit a section of 4 inch clear PVC pipe into the test rig we are designing . The pipe will encase the eyewall type vortex .. approx 3 ft in vertical length. In this section we plan to flange in various pipe segments for experiments. One will be a section of magnets. The idea is to use neodym 1/2'dia x 1/4 and imbed them flush with the inside dia of the pipe. Then came and idea to fix the magnets into the pipe in an upward spiral that matches the normal vortex upward spiral . Also add some removable s shapedclips inside the pipe would enchance the vortex possibly. The question arose about adding a section of pipe for a ultrasonic horn segment .. above or below the magnet section.. We decided since the pipe segments are modular, they can be installed either way to determine results. Had another e-mail suggesting we design a segment with copper rings and add a tesla coil setup firing circuit into the water vortex... sounds kinda wild but we will add it if anyone has any experience in electro- water setups of this type. Weare also studying how to install a UV lamp inside the pipe to interact with the vortex. Als planning to arrange the 4 inch vertical pipe so an external pipe shroud can be installed and sealed with another liquid. This experiment could be used to determine if there is a temperature differential result from the formation of the vortex in the inner pipe filled with water.. Fun stuff.. Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif Description: GIF image
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: But electrons aren't simple electric charges, and if the electron's dipole isn't exactly perpendicular to the B field it's in, and if the field is nonuniform, the electron will feel a (linear) force acting on it, either up or down the field gradient depending on its orientation relative to the field. And as soon as it starts to move, it's gained kinetic energy. The energy came from _somewhere_. But where? From gravity? Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: But electrons aren't simple electric charges, and if the electron's dipole isn't exactly perpendicular to the B field it's in, and if the field is nonuniform, the electron will feel a (linear) force acting on it, either up or down the field gradient depending on its orientation relative to the field. And as soon as it starts to move, it's gained kinetic energy. The energy came from _somewhere_. But where? From the flow of time itself? And can the source of the energy be described by a model which uses a (conservative) potential-based force field to describe the motion of the electron? Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/28/06, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Indeed it does. Hi Terry, for another opinion Stephen could have a look at the controversy you and I had about this some time ago, I had found what looked very much like a large error in input current measurement by analysing the Mosfet's voltage waveform and applying Ohm's low to it knowing it's ON resistance (search for Sprain in the list archive). Of course he may do so if he wishes; however, others have confirmed the measurements since your conjecture. In addition, the modification to a four magnet rotor showed the anticipated effect on COP. Face it mon ami, a magnetic gradient can do real work. Did you read the paper on spin consciousness that I posted on earlier? Terry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Indeed it does. Hi Terry, for another opinion Stephen could have a look at the controversy you and I had about this some time ago, I had found what looked very much like a large error in input current measurement by analysing the Mosfet's voltage waveform and applying Ohm's low to it knowing it's ON resistance (search for Sprain in the list archive). Michel - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 1:21 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn On 11/27/06, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An example might be an electric motor which produced more mechanical energy than the electrical energy it consumed -- to close the loop you need to convert the mechanical energy back into electrical energy, which introduces losses which may eat up your OU. The result would be something that was in reality an amazing breakthrough, but which still wouldn't convince Bob Parks. (Does this describe the Sprain motor? I haven't been following that one.) Indeed it does. The Sprain Magmo uses a spiral magnetic gradient to produce torque. An electromagnet is used to kick the rotor past the sticky spot. The energy consumed by the electromagnet is less than the mechanical energy produced by the gradient. The problem with self running has been the waveform of the energy produced by the PM generator. The voltage from the permanent mag gen ramps from 13 V to 28 V. 20 V is required to fire the EM. The min V is produced after the firing (when the torque is at a minimum). I have tried trigger circuits which don't draw from the magmo torque until the V exceeds 20 V; but, we have had no success since this eliminates a large part of the energy produced. The gradient of the field of the present configuration is 0.8 G per degree. We have a new magnet which will produce a gradient of 20 G per degree. We lack the enthusiasm to pursue a self-runner when you know that the new mag will ship soon. Now our limiting factor seems to be the inductance of the EM. The new EM weighs 45 lbs but only doubles the inductance. We will not achieve the theorized 4500 RPM; but, we will far exceed the current 90 RPM. I have no doubts this new mag will let us self-run. Stay tuned. Terry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. Right. The ceo has said he does not know the source of the energy. It isn't anything obvious, so maybe it is something like Frank Grimer's gamma atmosphere. Whatever it is, it just goes on and on and on, even to powering a 550bhp motor. This makes no sense, really. If they had something that really poured out far more power than it consumed, how much testing would they need to do to verify that it worked? The testing was done early on to eliminate the possibility of a measurement error. As I understand it, the testing since then has been to make it more efficient. Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On Sunday 26 November 2006 23:13, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. It has a COP100% which means it produces more power than it consumes, but to have a meaningful COP it _MUST_ consume power! Without input COP=infinity. Second, they have some obscure comments to the effect that the devices can't be cascaded. That also suggests very strongly that there's power going in, and power going out (and sounds very fishy IMHO). Finally, the description makes it reasonably clear that it's a magnet-based torque amplifier of some sort. (Can't cite a page on that; sorry, I don't recall where I saw the actual description.) They won't do demos because, they say, they'll be put down as conmen unless a jury of reputable scientists confirms the OU. OU is _NOT_ an issue IF the machine is self-powered!! If you've got output and _no_ input, then it's OU by construction. But again, their machine is not self-powered. They'll announce their first products the day the jury announces its verdict. They have said they continue to file applications for patents on different implementations of the basic configuration. If they had a working model which had no input power, they could patent the whole thing. Perpetual motion machines are patentable in the United States if you have a working model, but not otherwise. But, they don't have a working model (in that sense) -- it requires external power to operate. So, they can't patent the closed-loop version. Some would be willing to bet that the country that had the excellent judgement to grant Wal-Mart a patent on a lazy susan in the face of probable testimony from MBA types that had to have soaked their faces in wet cement and allowed setting to take place in order to keep straight faces before testifying that there was 'only anecdotal evidence of possible prior art', would be capable of granting any IP creation request to anyone with a sufficient amount of money and a 'friendly' examiner. Yet serious scientists going forward with: cold fusion devices; black light rockets; or photonic thrusters that actually have a chance of lifting themselves and their power units.will get a cold shoulder. If we as a nation succeed in stopping progress here, that does not mean that the whole world will go along. There is a focus fusion device out there that is going to see a test in South America soon. See it at: http://www.focusfusion.org They recently succeeded in raising the temperature of their electrostatic confinement D-Bo fusion device to nearly 3 billion degrees K. They are now building a larger proof of concept reactor. This, if successful would be a nuclear fusion generator most everybody would love except: a terrorist (no radioactive substances to steal or use); an oil company (oil now only useful as lubricants or in plastics in near future...no more gravytrain); a middle eastern country (no more money from an accident of geography to finance destructive wars and ostentatious lifestyles). Deuterium-Boron fusion requires a very high temperature, but there are no reaction products that can be used to hurt anybody in any significant way. The difficulty is attaining the reaction temperature and feeding the reaction, and this appears to possibly be reachable. These folks envision a reactor the size of a two car garage being able to produce many megawatts of power. If true, we could go back to what we were in the late 1800's when very many small towns had their own power plants and gas generators. Standing Bear The world needs and feeds on hope, not fear!
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Rhong Dhong wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. Right. The ceo has said he does not know the source of the energy. It isn't anything obvious, so maybe it is something like Frank Grimer's gamma atmosphere. Whatever it is, it just goes on and on and on, even to powering a 550bhp motor. They said it was a 550 hp unit. They didn't explain what that meant. Presumably it means either 550 HP _in_ or 550 HP _out_. It tells us nothing about the difference between power in and power out, however. There seems to be far less information on their website than one might think at first glance. This makes no sense, really. If they had something that really poured out far more power than it consumed, how much testing would they need to do to verify that it worked? The testing was done early on to eliminate the possibility of a measurement error. As I understand it, the testing since then has been to make it more efficient. Nothing in, something out = efficiency = infinity. Their jury of 12 scientists has not yet produced any public report, AFAIK, and they're supposed to be verifying that it works, not just tweaking it. So I'm not so sure the initial testing phase is really over. The whole thing seems to come down to this: If there's more usable power coming out than going in, you _CAN_ close the loop. (COP1 does not imply the _usable_ power balance is positive, please note -- a heat pump typically has COP1 and is anything but a perpetual motion machine.) If you close the loop, then you have PPM#1 and you're done. If you CANNOT close the loop, then you need to depend on expert witnesses and indirect data to show that you really have something. They apparently cannot close the loop, so they must resort to expert testimony to convince people that they've really got something. I am strongly reminded of the self-powered electric car which was ballyhooed around a while back -- whose was that, anyway? It used lead-acid batteries to power it (oops, not quite self-powered!) and recharged them as it ran. Couldn't close the loop; why not? Because the power really did come from the batteries, which were being whipped to bits to produce more power than is usual for batteries of that type. That's known to be possible, but not normally done; down side is that it supposedly ruins the batteries in relatively short order. This is where the lengthy cycle of testing to be sure the machine is not consuming some piece of itself comes in. If, to use the foregoing example, it uses lead-acid batteries, one needs to confirm that the machine isn't gradually chewing up the batteries while appearing to recharge them on the fly. There isn't enough information on their website, that I could see, to tell if they have any little gotchas of that sort built into the device. However, if it's really taking a jury of competent scientists a substantial amount of time to determine whether the thing actually works, it seems like a plausible guess that there might be some such issue involved.
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. Right. The ceo has said he does not know the source of the energy. It isn't anything obvious, so maybe it is something like Frank Grimer's gamma atmosphere. Whatever it is, it just goes on and on and on, even to powering a 550bhp motor. [** They said it was a 550 hp unit. They didn't explain what that meant. Presumably it means either 550 HP _in_ or 550 HP _out_.**] It's clear from the context that it is 550bhp out. There is nothing that they can detect going in. Presumably, the gamma atmosphere or something else is being tapped, but they haven't been able to figure out what it is. The unit is self-sustaining. Nothing needs to be 'fed' to it to keep it running. That sounds like a closed-loop to me, at least as far as the user is concerned; I guess if you are sucking up the gamma-atmosphere somebody might say it's really not a closed loop. Who cares? If the CEO is telling the truth, they have some kind of OU. [**This is where the lengthy cycle of testing to be sure the machine is not consuming some piece of itself comes in. If, to use the foregoing example, it uses lead-acid batteries, one needs to confirm that the machine isn't gradually chewing up the batteries while appearing to recharge them on the fly.**] They tested it for six months to make sure there was no measurement error, and have refined and tested it for 2.5 more years. They are completely confident that it isn't chewing up something in the environment. They are certain that they have OU. The jury is to help convince the public that they have the OU, not to convince them. It's a publicity gimmick. This is all based on what the CEO has said, of course, but if he's lying, he deserves an Oscar. - Cheap Talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
--- Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Nothing in, something out = efficiency = infinity. The concept of infinite efficiency is somewhat interesting. Consider a black box that requires 100 watts input, and outputs 1 KW. When operating the black box could theoretically do away with the 100 W input by robbing 100 watts from its 1 KW output. So now the black box requires no input, but outputs 900 watts. :-) [snip] Regards, Paul Lowrance Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. http://new.mail.yahoo.com
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/27/06, Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It isn't anything obvious, so maybe it is something like Frank Grimer's gamma atmosphere. You can count on it. Whatever it is, it just goes on and on and on, even to powering a 550bhp motor. This is larger than the alleged Perendev magmo. Terry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Paul wrote: --- Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Nothing in, something out = efficiency = infinity. The concept of infinite efficiency is somewhat interesting. Consider a black box that requires 100 watts input, and outputs 1 KW. When operating the black box could theoretically do away with the 100 W input by robbing 100 watts from its 1 KW output. So now the black box requires no input, but outputs 900 watts. :-) Absolutely -- and that's the point. They say they've broken the first law but they're still fiddling around trying to convince a panel of experts that their device really is over unity. If it's over unity, close the loop, and then there's no issue. COP1, which is their explicit claim, doesn't necessarily imply over-unity, unfortunately, and almost surely implies they haven't closed the loop, as I've already said. On the other hand, the fact that they apparently can't close the loop (at least, as I read their claims!) doesn't necessarily mean they haven't got an OU device. Something which consumed 495 watts and produced 500 watts might be hard to close the loop on, but it would nonetheless be a spectacular breakthrough. An example might be an electric motor which produced more mechanical energy than the electrical energy it consumed -- to close the loop you need to convert the mechanical energy back into electrical energy, which introduces losses which may eat up your OU. The result would be something that was in reality an amazing breakthrough, but which still wouldn't convince Bob Parks. (Does this describe the Sprain motor? I haven't been following that one.)
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Rhong Dhong wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. Right. The ceo has said he does not know the source of the energy. It isn't anything obvious, so maybe it is something like Frank Grimer's gamma atmosphere. Whatever it is, it just goes on and on and on, even to powering a 550bhp motor. [** They said it was a 550 hp unit. They didn't explain what that meant. Presumably it means either 550 HP _in_ or 550 HP _out_.**] It's clear from the context that it is 550bhp out. There is nothing that they can detect going in. They never actually said that, as far as I can see. They waffle around it but never quite come out and say it. If they said it, that would mean they had closed the loop. But, as I said, they have not asserted that they have _no_ input -- merely that the input is not sufficient to explain the output. They use a lot of very vague language, but try to find anyplace where they actually say there is _no_ energy input. I sure couldn't find such a claim. Here is what I found, on their technology page: [ ... ] Steorn's technology appears to violate the 'Principle of Conservation of Energy' [ ... ] 1. The technology has a coefficient of performance greater than 100%. 2. The operation of the technology is not derived from the degradation of its component parts. 3. There is no identifiable source of the energy. I would describe these statements as intentionally vague (what _IS_ the COP value, anyway? They don't say!). However, in view of statement #1, it appears to me that the energy in #3 can _only_ mean they have not identified this value: (output - input) It seems clear that it does not mean there is no input at all. If there were no input, statement #1 would be silly: COP=infinity in that case, and nobody would describe it by saying COP 1. Furthermore, their statement that it _appears_ to violate COE would be equally absurd IF they had no energy input -- there wouldn't be any appears about it in that case. But, they clearly _do_ have energy going in, and therefore they need to base any such claim on careful measurements to determine how much is coming out, versus how much is going in. There are two key points here: a) A heat pump has COP1 but it has an identifiable source of the excess energy (the exhaust air gets cooler). b) You can't close the loop on a heat pump because it doesn't violate either the first or second law. Presumably, the gamma atmosphere or something else is being tapped, but they haven't been able to figure out what it is. The unit is self-sustaining. Nothing needs to be 'fed' to it to keep it running. I could find no such statement on their website. As far as I can tell they wave their hands a lot but nowhere do they claim to have closed the loop. Anyway, enough. I will grant you that their statements are vague enough that, if you want to, you can interpret them to mean they have no energy going in at all, but I remain unconvinced that that's what they mean.
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/27/06, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: An example might be an electric motor which produced more mechanical energy than the electrical energy it consumed -- to close the loop you need to convert the mechanical energy back into electrical energy, which introduces losses which may eat up your OU. The result would be something that was in reality an amazing breakthrough, but which still wouldn't convince Bob Parks. (Does this describe the Sprain motor? I haven't been following that one.) Indeed it does. The Sprain Magmo uses a spiral magnetic gradient to produce torque. An electromagnet is used to kick the rotor past the sticky spot. The energy consumed by the electromagnet is less than the mechanical energy produced by the gradient. The problem with self running has been the waveform of the energy produced by the PM generator. The voltage from the permanent mag gen ramps from 13 V to 28 V. 20 V is required to fire the EM. The min V is produced after the firing (when the torque is at a minimum). I have tried trigger circuits which don't draw from the magmo torque until the V exceeds 20 V; but, we have had no success since this eliminates a large part of the energy produced. The gradient of the field of the present configuration is 0.8 G per degree. We have a new magnet which will produce a gradient of 20 G per degree. We lack the enthusiasm to pursue a self-runner when you know that the new mag will ship soon. Now our limiting factor seems to be the inductance of the EM. The new EM weighs 45 lbs but only doubles the inductance. We will not achieve the theorized 4500 RPM; but, we will far exceed the current 90 RPM. I have no doubts this new mag will let us self-run. Stay tuned. Terry
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Rhong Dhong wrote: Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. No it's not. It has a COP100% which means it produces more power than it consumes, but to have a meaningful COP it _MUST_ consume power! Without input COP=infinity. Second, they have some obscure comments to the effect that the devices can't be cascaded. That also suggests very strongly that there's power going in, and power going out (and sounds very fishy IMHO). Finally, the description makes it reasonably clear that it's a magnet-based torque amplifier of some sort. (Can't cite a page on that; sorry, I don't recall where I saw the actual description.) They won't do demos because, they say, they'll be put down as conmen unless a jury of reputable scientists confirms the OU. OU is _NOT_ an issue IF the machine is self-powered!! If you've got output and _no_ input, then it's OU by construction. But again, their machine is not self-powered. They'll announce their first products the day the jury announces its verdict. They have said they continue to file applications for patents on different implementations of the basic configuration. If they had a working model which had no input power, they could patent the whole thing. Perpetual motion machines are patentable in the United States if you have a working model, but not otherwise. But, they don't have a working model (in that sense) -- it requires external power to operate. So, they can't patent the closed-loop version. The basic configuration is simple. My guess is that if somebody versed in the art were to have even a cursory look at the device, he could go home and build his own. That's just a guess, but it would explain their reluctance to demo it. To put it another way, whatever good their demo did for them would be outweighed by everybody and his brother copying the device and beating them to the market. They're not struggling or dying for public recognition. The CEO says they used the economist ad and the early interviews to get scientists to take up their challenge. Now that that has been accomplished, they don't need publicity. From what I can see, they are doing nothing to seek publicity; there is almost zero media mention of them these days. They claim to have a 550bhp motor, and have tested the effect for three years. A measurement error seems very unlikely. This makes no sense, really. If they had something that really poured out far more power than it consumed, how much testing would they need to do to verify that it worked? Certainly if they had closed the loop they'd be _done_ with the testing phase, because that's a 100% go/no-go test: if you can pass that test, you're done, you've broken the First Law. Instead, they're looking for expert testimony that it works, which suggests (to me) the goal is to suck in more investment dollars. The CEO says no device has stopped running unless a mechanical part wore out or they shut it down. They are fully funded and do not need investors to bring the device(s) to market. The CEO has said they will not accept investment money. Steorn have not 'come out of nowhere', at least in the sense of being a bona fide company, with a track record of accomplishment. In completely unrelated areas, I think? That goes, too, for the CEO, who has been an engineer since 1989. They have about 20 full-time employees and several consultants. Their engineers all have university degress, some of them advanced degrees An independent observer has visited their offices, which she describes as extensive and well-guarded, seen documentation on a couple of the jurors, and confirmed that they are reputable scientists. And completely unnecessary, if they actually had a working model that did something useful. How many scientists does it take to determine that something's producing power without consuming any? None, really -- all it takes is a building inspector to make sure all the power lines into the building have been properly severed. She has seen a video of the CEO of a European manufacturing partner of Steorn's as he assembled a test device and started it running. He said, in the video, that he left it running over a weekend and when he returned it was still running. She looked him up on the internet, and found a picture of him on his company's website. It was the same man she saw in the video. You say: [**magnetic overunity [or magnets with coils, pendulums, or some combination of mechanical recycling of torque with a magnetic boost] will probably be demonstrated by someone next year - 2007 ! as there are many groups who are on the verge now. MPI would be expected to have something next year and/or Sprain in Atlanta...**] You think MPI is 'on the verge', but they've been 'on the verge' for years, and have continually asked for more money, and have demonstrated nothing. Sprain has demonstrated nothing that is OU, but
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
--- Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Esa Ruoho they can't say why its overunity - who would believe them? that's why they went public and are picking out a row of skeptical scientists to prove once and for all if its overunity or not. Forget all that. Can you answer the single critical issue of self-power (or lack thereof) ? If a self-powered unit exists now - where is it? - regardless of any explanations/ skepticism - a self-powered unit is all the evidence which in needed by anyone, skeptic or not. Why not just call the BBC in to film it running under self-power, while those supposedly skeptical scientists are debating the underlying modality, which is probably related to ZPE/Casimir in some fashion? Is that too much to ask from a company which is seemingly struggling and dying for public recognition - and paying dearly for much of it instead of putting those resources into development ? Let me say at the outset - that magnetic overunity [or magnets with coils, pendulums, or some combination of mechanical recycling of torque with a magnetic boost] will probably be demonstrated by someone next year - 2007 ! as there are many groups who are on the verge now. MPI would be expected to have something next year and/or Sprain in Atlanta, and five or six lesser and fringier efforts which include Perendev, Minato, Torbay and Steorn etc. I would put Steorn firmly at the tail end of this list, due solely to the way they have handled the announcement - but a single self-running demo will immediately change that. Not that it matters. Proof - not PR - is all that matters. Self-running = Proof. If Steorn were not so PR-oriented - and highly desirous of every kind-word of public recognition - why else did they announce this in such an expensive way, characteristic of a PR blitz (or the Czech Dream) ? shouldn't a company which apparently has not paid their corporate licensing fees have saved the 100,000 pounds for the expensive advertising and just called up Oxford/Cambridge for a private showing? It just does not make sense - the way they have handled it, unless they have been hired to do it as a stunt of some kind. Maybe Branson or some other drama-queen is hiding in there somewhere. Apparently (or if) it is not a self-runner, then that narrows the issue considerably, as **measurement error** is very common in this type of device. Almost anyone here, especially the consultants - if that was said in a derogatory fashion - could have explained this issue of likely measurement-error to Steorn - and in great detail. That is, had Steorn not come out of nowhere --- which is yet another problem for their credulity. There is a community of creative but careful scientific people involved heavily in this field, and no one at Steorn was not part of it - prior to recently. And look at the wasted time. Steorn has wasted infinitely more precious time with mundane PR details, endless press questioning and facility tours, etc then a single BBC filming would have accomplished on day-one ---IF--- Steorn has a device which will self-run. If not - the most of us will agree that it is likely measurement error. Skeptics who want to go on record with the told you so thing should be focusing solely on that issue: is it self-running or not. If it is not, then Steorn has a monstrous problem on their hands and will probably look like fools in the end. Plus - did not someone at Steorn actually claim that they had a device self-running for an extended period, but that they could not show it for some strange reason --- like it had been disassembled to make an even better model ! Ha! Sounds very much like the English crank scientist who claimed to have invented an anti-gravity device but he cold not show it to the skeptics because his wife had inadvertently turned it on - and it blasted through the roof of his home and escaped into space ! He could show the hole, however. Suspension of disbelief has its limits. Jones (not a Steorn skeptic yet -- just stating the obvious inconsistencies with their story, and the sad way in which they have handled what could be a monumental discovery, if it could be believed) Let me repeat - This is NOT the way science - even fringe-science is handled, and that is why all the suspicion is warranted - even though Steorn does not yet have the tin cup stretched out -- as the less-sophisticated scammers like to do early-on. I have something to add. I have no idea if Steorn is legit, but personally I have seen far too many claims. We all know what has happened. Such a group claims to have completed a free energy device, and the group fades over time. Time will tell, but I have a hunch Steorn's purpose is to inflict damage on the free energy
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
Here's what I've been able to glean from their site. It is self-powered. There is no input. They won't do demos because, they say, they'll be put down as conmen unless a jury of reputable scientists confirms the OU. They'll announce their first products the day the jury announces its verdict. They have said they continue to file applications for patents on different implementations of the basic configuration. The basic configuration is simple. My guess is that if somebody versed in the art were to have even a cursory look at the device, he could go home and build his own. That's just a guess, but it would explain their reluctance to demo it. To put it another way, whatever good their demo did for them would be outweighed by everybody and his brother copying the device and beating them to the market. They're not struggling or dying for public recognition. The CEO says they used the economist ad and the early interviews to get scientists to take up their challenge. Now that that has been accomplished, they don't need publicity. From what I can see, they are doing nothing to seek publicity; there is almost zero media mention of them these days. They claim to have a 550bhp motor, and have tested the effect for three years. A measurement error seems very unlikely. The CEO says no device has stopped running unless a mechanical part wore out or they shut it down. They are fully funded and do not need investors to bring the device(s) to market. The CEO has said they will not accept investment money. Steorn have not 'come out of nowhere', at least in the sense of being a bona fide company, with a track record of accomplishment. That goes, too, for the CEO, who has been an engineer since 1989. They have about 20 full-time employees and several consultants. Their engineers all have university degress, some of them advanced degrees An independent observer has visited their offices, which she describes as extensive and well-guarded, seen documentation on a couple of the jurors, and confirmed that they are reputable scientists. She has seen a video of the CEO of a European manufacturing partner of Steorn's as he assembled a test device and started it running. He said, in the video, that he left it running over a weekend and when he returned it was still running. She looked him up on the internet, and found a picture of him on his company's website. It was the same man she saw in the video. You say: [**magnetic overunity [or magnets with coils, pendulums, or some combination of mechanical recycling of torque with a magnetic boost] will probably be demonstrated by someone next year - 2007 ! as there are many groups who are on the verge now. MPI would be expected to have something next year and/or Sprain in Atlanta...**] You think MPI is 'on the verge', but they've been 'on the verge' for years, and have continually asked for more money, and have demonstrated nothing. Sprain has demonstrated nothing that is OU, but promises to do so soon. I don't see how you can speak respectfully of those outfits while deprecating Steorn's claims. You complain that Steorn has demonstrated nothing, but neither has MPI or Sprain. It's almost as if you require 10 times the proof from Steorn that you do from anyone else. You also say: [**Steorn does not yet have the tin cup stretched out -- as the less-sophisticated scammers like to do early-on.**] It sounds like you are flat-out calling them scammers. Amazing Jones Beene wrote: - Original Message - From: Esa Ruoho they can't say why its overunity - who would believe them? that's why they went public and are picking out a row of skeptical scientists to prove once and for all if its overunity or not. Forget all that. Can you answer the single critical issue of self-power (or lack thereof) ? If a self-powered unit exists now - where is it? - regardless of any explanations/ skepticism - a self-powered unit is all the evidence which in needed by anyone, skeptic or not. Why not just call the BBC in to film it running under self-power, while those supposedly skeptical scientists are debating the underlying modality, which is probably related to ZPE/Casimir in some fashion? Is that too much to ask from a company which is seemingly struggling and dying for public recognition - and paying dearly for much of it instead of putting those resources into development ? Let me say at the outset - that magnetic overunity [or magnets with coils, pendulums, or some combination of mechanical recycling of torque with a magnetic boost] will probably be demonstrated by someone next year - 2007 ! as there are many groups who are on the verge now. MPI would be expected to have something next year and/or Sprain in Atlanta, and five or six lesser and fringier efforts which include Perendev, Minato, Torbay and Steorn etc. I would put Steorn firmly at the tail end of this list, due solely to the way they have handled the announcement
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/24/06, Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sprain has demonstrated nothing that is OU, but promises to do so soon. I have personally measured his original device to have a COP of 2.4. A revised configuration, which I am not yet at liberty to discuss, has demonstrated a greater COP. Terry Blanton, BEE, PE
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
apologies, later found quite a few more. i think this is all. == Steorn == http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUqQKnSlPss Steorn develops free energy technology?] 5minutes3seconds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDV9Al0e_T0 Steorn Power on Fox News Interview] 3min35sec Steorn will launch a revolutionary free, clean, energy technology. Fox News interview, August 28, 2006. see www.steornpower.com for more up2date news http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNDIWY19gqA Steorn: Sky News: Race On To Prove Free Energy Irish engineers say they have built a device that creates free and clean energy. Until now most scientists have dismissed their claims, saying that they break the most basic laws of physics. So the inventors have come up with a unique challenge. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDA0oyAtNBA Steorn: Sean MacCarthy with SkyNews] This is a longer interview video of the first SkyNews clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFYRuYn__Ro AP: Steorn: Engineers Claim Machine Makes Free Energy] An Irish company is raising eyebrows with its claim that it has developed a machine that can create free and totally clean energy. (Sept. 12) On 11/24/06, Esa Ruoho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUqQKnSlPss - Steorn original intro.. 5minutes3seconds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDV9Al0e_T0 Steorn Power on Fox News Interview 3min35secbr have fun m8s On 11/24/06, Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/24/06, Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sprain has demonstrated nothing that is OU, but promises to do so soon. I have personally measured his original device to have a COP of 2.4. A revised configuration, which I am not yet at liberty to discuss, has demonstrated a greater COP. Terry Blanton, BEE, PE That's good to hear. Any idea when there will be a public demonstration? It looks like Steorn will be several months before they are ready to launch their device / products; if the Sprain motor can get to the public ahead of them, the investment money should be considerable. Cheap talk? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. http://voice.yahoo.com -- http://www.lackluster.org/ http://www.lackluster.org/shop/ -- http://www.lackluster.org/ http://www.lackluster.org/shop/
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/24/06, Rhong Dhong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's good to hear. Any idea when there will be a
public demonstration?
Well, there's already been several. Here's one vid that is still on the web:
http://overunity.com/sprain/sprain_motor_eg_show.asf
And, his test data is on this site:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzesfls5/files/
Those more competent than I have confirmed his measurements. Recently
we were able to run an Ecosmart (neat story there) generator to power
a load at a net COP of about 3.2 including the inefficiency ('bout
50%) of the PEM gen (thanks Jones!) But, this was with a modified
version of the motor compared to the data on the sites above.
A much larger version is under construction. Oddly, the manufacturer
of the custom magnet said shipment is delayed due to inavailability
of materials. Otherwise it was due next month. A representative
from M Int'l. has been dispatched to Magnequench to see what the story
is there.
Terry
[Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
- Original Message -
From: Terry Blanton
Recently we were able to run an Ecosmart (neat story there)
generator to power a load at a net COP of about 3.2 including
the inefficiency ('bout 50%) of the PEM gen (thanks Jones!)
OK for the record, TB is being sarcastic - yes, that generator may
have turned out to be only 50% efficient at very low speed, but is
still has very high efficiency potential - at anything above a
snail's pace - not my fault!
Terry asked me to recommend a high efficiency generator, and I
sent him the idea and info on rewinding the Ecosmart, which he
did. As have others - it is an excellent low cost generator for
home windmills etc.
This motor is made by Fisher Paykel in OZ but available here for
a fair price. At even 1000 RPM they have told me the generator
should be 95% eff. - but hey - Terry wanted to run it a less than
100 RPM ! and without gearing it up !
Bad Idea. Many motors have very high drop-offs in eff. when run
out of spec and - worst of all - it would have been relatively
easy to gear this thing up with two bicycle sprocket-pairs and
chains - if it had been done from the git-go - which they never
did. Pity because this generator coulda/shoulda been enough to
allow self-power --- if--- that is, Sprain truly does have that
much COP margin to play with (despite Terry's formidable skills, I
am not convinced of that large margin from what I've seen on the
site he has referenced).
But then again, nobody slows/tells everything...
Jones
Re: [Vo]: Re: Interesting News About Steorn
On 11/24/06, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK for the record, TB is being sarcastic - yes, that generator may have turned out to be only 50% efficient at very low speed, but is still has very high efficiency potential - at anything above a snail's pace - not my fault! Not scarcism, please! No, you misunderstand, true appreciation since we had found nothing which was comparable. (The humor is in the name Ecosmart.) http://www.ecosmart.com Terry asked me to recommend a high efficiency generator, and I sent him the idea and info on rewinding the Ecosmart, which he did. As have others - it is an excellent low cost generator for home windmills etc. This motor is made by Fisher Paykel in OZ but available here for a fair price. At even 1000 RPM they have told me the generator should be 95% eff. - but hey - Terry wanted to run it a less than 100 RPM ! and without gearing it up ! Ackshully, NZ; but, that could be OZ, too. It is directly driven at 90 RPM; and, I truly believe that it is the best that we could have achieved without a custom built gen. Bad Idea. Many motors have very high drop-offs in eff. when run out of spec and - worst of all - it would have been relatively easy to gear this thing up with two bicycle sprocket-pairs and chains - if it had been done from the git-go - which they never did. Pity because this generator coulda/shoulda been enough to allow self-power --- if--- that is, Sprain truly does have that much COP margin to play with (despite Terry's formidable skills, I am not convinced of that large margin from what I've seen on the site he has referenced). Be patient, Jones. My only challenge at this point is the inductance of the 45# custom built EM. But with only 84 mH inductance and 12 ohm resistance, the rise time is only twice the earlier EM, 7 ms. But then again, nobody slows/tells everything... Sign the NDA and you will know all. But, it might conflict with your earlier committments. Terry
