Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 08:58 PM 12/29/2009, William Beaty wrote:

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
But there is the tantalizing middle. They find that they "almost" 
close the loop.


You're giving them the benefit of the doubt.   Count how many times 
you have to do that!  It's very telling.


Their acting very Newman-esque and using a battery?  Rather than 
using a five dollar supercapacitor?  They're either insane, or 
they're scammers.


I've already concluded that they are a variation on the latter. But 
there is a *possibility*, I'm pointing out, that they are "sincere." 
Still unethical, but that they believe they just need to get some 
more money to fix this or that, and that this justifies withholding 
the critical information. The critical information is *why* they 
believe they have overunity, or, in fact, why they believe that they 
have any evidence at all of excess energy. What they showed us, quite 
simply, didn't reveal that.


Come on, they looked at some oscilloscope traces and they looked 
okay? The amount of energy that would need to be dumped to rotation 
would be quite small compared to the heat, as if the toroids were 
resistive loads. But, as I recall, I saw some ringing.


So they think that they are actually over unity, but with losses 
that maybe with better engineering they can fix. All it takes is more money.


If they're insane, then they'll talk themselves into using a battery 
and never actually try a supercap, even in private.  They'll have 
all sorts of important reasons why they cannot ever try a 
supercap.  Oh, and by "insane," I mean the same as "fooling 
themselves."  There is a threshold past which the self-fooing 
becomes a complete break with reality.


I don't think they are simply fooling themselves, I think they got 
led into a situation where they needed to fool others. Do they know 
that the whole thing is bogus? How could they *know* that? They'd 
have to do much more careful work, and they are too busy marketing 
what they have: a concept, not engineering to *actually work*, just 
an idea that there is some anomaly here, and they want to see you the 
anomaly. You can figure out how to use it, not their business, they 
are in the business of selling you the idea and some of the equipment 
you'd use to test it. That way, they make money whether there is 
anything real here or not. Quite a business concept, actually.


I'm even doing something a *little* like it, except that I'm fully 
disclosing everything. I don't have any supersecret idea, I'm trying 
to sell kits to replicate a SPAWAR experiment. In theory, I could 
make money even if SPAWAR is bogus, though it would be more 
difficult. I could sell you the kits to show that it doesn't work. 
(But the problem is, how would I know that my kit wasn't missing some 
critical feature, some parameter that I varied, perhaps without 
realizing it?) I can say this: if I can't get the kits to work, i.e., 
to show radiation evidence, I might still sell them, but with that 
disclosure and all the associated caveats. Maybe somebody else could 
figure out the missing link. Quite simply, I have a few thousand 
dollars in this, and I could get most of it back by selling my stuff 
for other applications. I have no intention of putting myself in a 
position where I'd have to lie or deceive in order to escape with my 
shirt on. I'd rather eke it out on social security, I'd sleep better.)


Were you here when "Doctor" Stiffler was presenting his LED 
overunity device?  One of his odd behaviors was, rather than just 
sitting down and honestly demonstrating his claims, and always 
sticking with straight un-twisted discussions, he claimed to be 
making youtube postings to "mess with the heads" of skeptics.


Steorn made a claim like that about one of their prior announcements. 
It was to lead the Men in Black astray.


  In that case, nobody knew which of his videos were hoaxes 
intended to mislead "skeptics", and which were honest 
experiments.  Steorn mentioned doing something similar.


You noticed.


But this is the real and present tipoff: their development of 
extremely low-friction bearings. That is an abandonment of 
over-unity and indicates a desire to become ever more and more 
sensitive, allowing more spectacular demonstrations where a tiny 
effect is accumulated.


Definitely!  That's the Newman fallacy: pretending that a whirling 
massive flywheel represents a huge energy output.  With low-friction 
bearings, you can spin a fairly large wheel for months using just a 
few 10s of cc of battery volume.  That's how the fake PM machine 
sculpture built by David Jones of Nature journal accomplished its 
feat.  (I replaced those hidden batteries myself more than once over 
the years.)


Yeah. Classic. I've been reading Park's Voodoo Science. He makes, of 
course, some crucial errors, he fails to understand and apply his own 
advice. But he's also right about some stuff. Some of the scams he 
reports on were truly cheeky. And he 

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[William Beaty]

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
But there is the tantalizing middle. They find that they "almost" close the 
loop.


You're giving them the benefit of the doubt.   Count how many times you 
have to do that!  It's very telling.


Their acting very Newman-esque and using a battery?  Rather than using a 
five dollar supercapacitor?  They're either insane, or they're scammers.



So they think that they are actually over unity, but with losses that 
maybe with better engineering they can fix. All it takes is more money.


If they're insane, then they'll talk themselves into using a battery and 
never actually try a supercap, even in private.  They'll have all sorts 
of important reasons why they cannot ever try a supercap.  Oh, and by 
"insane," I mean the same as "fooling themselves."  There is a threshold 
past which the self-fooing becomes a complete break with reality.


Were you here when "Doctor" Stiffler was presenting his LED overunity 
device?  One of his odd behaviors was, rather than just sitting down and 
honestly demonstrating his claims, and always sticking with straight 
un-twisted discussions, he claimed to be making youtube postings to "mess 
with the heads" of skeptics.  In that case, nobody knew which of his 
videos were hoaxes intended to mislead "skeptics", and which were honest 
experiments.  Steorn mentioned doing something similar.


But this is the real and present tipoff: their development of extremely 
low-friction bearings. That is an abandonment of over-unity and indicates a 
desire to become ever more and more sensitive, allowing more spectacular 
demonstrations where a tiny effect is accumulated.


Definitely!  That's the Newman fallacy: pretending that a whirling massive 
flywheel represents a huge energy output.  With low-friction bearings, you 
can spin a fairly large wheel for months using just a few 10s of cc of 
battery volume.  That's how the fake PM machine sculpture built by David 
Jones of Nature journal accomplished its feat.  (I replaced those hidden 
batteries myself more than once over the years.)


Though it obviously is. They claim there is no energy going there, but that 
hasn't actually been shown except by a gross and coarse display that would 
completely miss the tiny amount of energy expenditure necessary to make that 
rotor accumulate angular momentum.


Why not just use a supercap and remove the whole battery problem?  Watch 
the capacitor voltage rise slowly as excess energy comes from nowhere? 
Stick a Zener across it to keep it from overvoltage.  There's really no 
sensible excuse for their bizarre setup, unless it's obfuscation.  Their 
setup looks sensible unless one realizes what the lack of a supercap 
implies about their collective mental state.



(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 06:00 AM 12/28/2009, William Beaty wrote:

Rather than focusing on some perhaps-unexpected measurement, just 
close the loop.   Ditch the battery.   Make a perpetual wheel.  Close the loop.

If it's real, then closing the loop should be easy.   If it's an artifact
which misleads FE-enthusiasts, then closing the loop will be impossible.


But there is the tantalizing middle. They find that they "almost" 
close the loop. So they think that they are actually over unity, but 
with losses that maybe with better engineering they can fix. All it 
takes is more money.


But this is the real and present tipoff: their development of 
extremely low-friction bearings. That is an abandonment of over-unity 
and indicates a desire to become ever more and more sensitive, 
allowing more spectacular demonstrations where a tiny effect is accumulated.


But given so much energy being dumped into heat, in the end, it only 
takes a tiny, tiny fraction of that to be coupled into rotor motion 
instead, very difficult to detect, if you have a very low-friction 
rotor which won't lose heat there. So much, though, for actually 
generating power, which will immediately dump much rotor energy into 
heat again.


Calorimetry would show the overall problem, but, of course, doing 
really accurate calorimetry is difficult. Much easier to make a roter 
spin fast and claim that the energy for that is free, that the 
battery is only generating heat, that none of this cycling of the 
magnetic field is accelerating the rotor.


Though it obviously is. They claim there is no energy going there, 
but that hasn't actually been shown except by a gross and coarse 
display that would completely miss the tiny amount of energy 
expenditure necessary to make that rotor accumulate angular momentum. 

RE: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[William Beaty]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:


The current necessary for the temporary depolarization of
the magnetic domains of the ferrite is independent of the
mechanical coupling produced on the shaft of the motor.


I wonder how much energy is consumed manifesting the temporary
depolarization cycle.


Bingo.What if that consumption is significant even when the rotor is 
not present?   How circular is the BH curve for that material?


I could imagine a situation where the core's nonlinearity is just right to 
create a weird artifact: the VI drive waveform remains about the same 
whether the moving magnets are present or not, and the magnets get driven 
forward, and if magnets are being moved, then the core doesn't suffer as 
much heat loss as it normally would.   Remove the rotor, and drive VI 
curves don't change.   But with the rotor gone, the wattage goes into core 
heating rather than doing work upon magnets.


If true, then the rotor would APPEAR to extract zero energy from the drive 
circuit.  The result might be to drive some FE enthusiasts crazy with

dollar signs dancing before their eyes.

Remember the "Butterfly" circuit on Keelynet, back around 1992?  It 
demonstrated a vaguely similar phenomenon (adding a load did not result in 
increased drive wattage.)  It was based on transistor switching and 
decaying RF standing waves trapped in long coax.  But drive and load were 
completely decoupled, so if the load was removed, the drive wattage stayed 
the same, even though it all went into wire heating.  Not FE, just a weird 
artifact.


To cut through the illusion, just try to close the loop. The excess energy 
APPEARS enormous, so if it's impossible to close the loop, then something 
is bad wrong with your theory.






(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[William Beaty]

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009, Harry Veeder wrote:


Terry,

Look at test 3 at the bottom of this page

http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm


"No induction and no back emf if the motor is turned by hand"

faulty metering or is it truly new physics?


Perhaps this was their initial discovery?  If so, it explains a lot. 
Suppose some odd but conventional physics makes it look like a FE device 
for some measurements.Rather than trying to debunk their own ideas,
some people might go forward with taking investors, even though everything 
was based on a weird artifact.


Rather than focusing on some perhaps-unexpected measurement, just close 
the loop.   Ditch the battery.   Make a perpetual wheel.  Close the loop.

If it's real, then closing the loop should be easy.   If it's an artifact
which misleads FE-enthusiasts, then closing the loop will be impossible.


(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[William Beaty]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009, Esa Ruoho wrote:


a friend helped translate this, off we go


Excellent, many thanks for the xlation


Recall that the magnetic field on the outside of a toroidal coil is null and
simulates that of a coil of infinite length.*


Wrong.  wrongwrongwrong.  The bfield outside an AIR CORE toroid is null. 
If you use a ferrous core, then that rule no longer holds.


However, if you use very low hysterisis material (not steel,) and keep the 
core well below saturation, then the core might approach the behavior of 
an air-core toroid.   But it's not guaranteed.



There is no direct interaction between the magnetic field of the torus with
the magnetic field of the rotor's magnets.


Of course there is.  The torus is attracting the magnets.  That's a very 
strong interaction.  If they could keep the core far away from saturation, 
then the core might self-shield, so the coil would not couple to the 
moving magnets.  But that doesn't appear to be what they're doing.




The magnetic field of the
toroidal coil serves only to temporarily depolarize  the magnetization of
the ferrite core.*


All in all, this sounds like yet another FE machine which supposedly works 
IN THEORY, and so everyone gets excited.  To find the error, build a 
working closed-loop version (by "working" I mean "closed-loop self-acting, 
no batteries added to confuse the issue.")


When they replace the lithium battery with a relatively small 
supercapacitor, THAT's the time to get excited.  Or not ...since first 
we'd have to trust that the whole thing isn't just a simple hoax.





*Continuing: we have a "non-reciprocating" and asymmetric system. There is
no counter electromotive force (Back-EMF) on the toroidal coils of the
stator produced by the rotation of the rotor.


If the magnets bring the core anywhere near saturation, then there will be 
a strong mechanical interaction between cores and moving magnets.


Possibly the changing fields will average to a zero induced voltage in the 
toroid coil, but that doesn't remove the need for the battery to do 
magnetic work on the core by cycling its operating point along the BH 
curve.


Add a big mechanical load to the rotor, then measure the average power 
supply wattage (or just power it with a supercapacitor to make things 
easy.)


The Newman Fallacy:  a big spinning rotor to impress everyone, and a 
chemical battery having unknown lifetime in that particular application.

SO SIMPLE to add a water pump or whatever known load, and use a supercap.




The current necessary for the
temporary depolarization of the magnetic domains of the ferrite is
independent of the mechanical coupling produced on the shaft of the motor.


Ah, that might be the source of the mistake.

If normally the core is being slightly heated by hysterisis (by moving 
it's operating point around the BH curve,) and if the moving magnets end 
up reducing this heating yet also simultaneously being mechanically driven 
forward ...it would look like a relative violation of energy conservation. 
In reality some of the usual energy lost as core heat is getting diverted 
to run the motor.  But this illusion would be broken if anyone bothered to 
try designing a closed-loop system.  The battery would gradually run down. 
(To fool yourself just use a lithium cell which takes months to run down. 
Or to cut through your self-delusion, use a supercapacitor and watch the 
voltage slowly drop.)


(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty chem washington edu   Research Engineer
billbamascicom  UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
206-543-6195Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

On 12/27/2009 01:39 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
> >From the translation recently given to us by Esa:
>
> ...
>
>   
>> The current necessary for the temporary depolarization of
>> the magnetic domains of the ferrite is independent of the
>> mechanical coupling produced on the shaft of the motor.
>> 
> I wonder how much energy is consumed manifesting the temporary
> depolarization cycle. 
>
> It would seem to me that understanding the particulars might be crucial in
> determining whether there really is any OU going on here or not.
>
> Or have I missed something crucial here?
>   

:-)  No, you've got the point, loud and clear, I think.


> Regards
>
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks 
>
>   

RE: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

>From the translation recently given to us by Esa:

...

> The current necessary for the temporary depolarization of
> the magnetic domains of the ferrite is independent of the
> mechanical coupling produced on the shaft of the motor.

I wonder how much energy is consumed manifesting the temporary
depolarization cycle. 

It would seem to me that understanding the particulars might be crucial in
determining whether there really is any OU going on here or not.

Or have I missed something crucial here?

Regards

Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks 

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

from overunity.com
"
Just found out Sean has been making a lot of posts at his forum recently.
Here are a few interesting posts regarding the technology,

Quote

Ok - I agree that a great way to see if the system has CEMF is to test it as
a generator - and we will be including that in the next experiment.

As for there being current through the coils when we say its turned off -
thats just nonsence, but again we will make the switch from the power supply
a lot more clear in the next one.

As for shorter and longer pulses - I assume that you are reffering to
induction losses through the interaction - and there are none (in fact there
is a greater energy returned from the field collapse than there is energy
put into the field creation) - but THAT is the next experiment, so lets see.


Quote

"Eddy currents in the core - how do you measure them"

Well you could just use a nonconducting core and then not have them at all.



Quote

"I think the main basic thing people are waiting for is the input
voltage/current along side the output voltage/current. I take it this will
be included in 2010 demonstrations?"

Yes


Quote

"That vibration does have my attention over all the other claims."

Its the nature of the bearings that we are using.


Quote

"Will you be "redoing" the experiments before or after Christmas? (Never
mind, I see you said January)"

Not sure on the date, but it will be prior to Jan 10th (we may do two
experiments together - will have to look at the practicality of this).


Quote

Ok the first sequence of experiments are about showing that in eOrbo all the
input energy goes to output as Joule heating (no back emf, no induction
losses) and yet work is still done by the rotor. The second sequence is
total input energy, total output energy and the energy of the system itself.


Quote

"Why have the demo "Orbo"s been changed out occasionally, was this due to
"issues",,, or is that in some way a future part of the demonstration?"

Its been asked (and answered) - we made a call to use reed switches - they
are across an inductive load and flyback dioide or not there is still a high
failure rate.


Quote

"You've mentioned that the overall thermodynamic efficiency of the system is
about 3X. Shall we take that to mean, that if 10W (avg./cont.) battery power
input is measured, calorimetry would indicate a heat
 flow of 30W
(avg./cont.)?"

It means that for the type of system shown to date, 1J of elec input will
produce circa 3J of output (heat, work done by the rotor and electrical) -
but again this has yet to be proven, and it will - but I will not open the
Xmas presents early".


--



On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl5ZxPkGxmQ  some excerpts of q&a  after
> the steorn talk on 19th dec..
> this isnt in the original steorn video released by steornofficial
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
>> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/html/steffecten.htm
>> here seems to be a simple experiment to comprehend the steorn effect. any
>> opinions?
>>
>> also it seems the original JLN labs steorn replication text is available
>> in english :) http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl5ZxPkGxmQ  some excerpts of q&a  after the
steorn talk on 19th dec..
this isnt in the original steorn video released by steornofficial


On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/html/steffecten.htm
> here seems to be a simple experiment to comprehend the steorn effect. any
> opinions?
>
> also it seems the original JLN labs steorn replication text is available in
> english :) http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm
>
>

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/html/steffecten.htm
here seems to be a simple experiment to comprehend the steorn effect. any
opinions?

also it seems the original JLN labs steorn replication text is available in
english :) http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Terry Blanton]

On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:


> [Aside:  Has Naudin ever attempted and *failed* to repro *any*
> alternative energy claim?  I get the impression his repro attempts
> *always* succeed, but perhaps I'm just ignorant...]

Nope, quite accurate.  He and Sterling Allen of Peswiki would make
great mates.  Neither saw OU they didn't love.

BTW, if the coils are bifilar wound, you couldn't make them show self
inductance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar_coil

Terry

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

also, gleaned this from overunity.com:
http://www.steorn.com/skdb/e-learning/flash-promo/3.1/index.html

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

+ i have a feeling this is exactly what steorn wanted - 3rd-party
eplications that state the perceived results.
cant even conceive of anyone more 3rd-party than jean-louis naudin :)


On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> i dont think i've ever seen jean-louis naudin write there and then  the
> end-result and the conclusions. we'll know a lot more come a month from now.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Harvey Norris  wrote:
>
>> --- On Sat, 12/26/09, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>>
>> > From: Esa Ruoho 
>> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo
>> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> > Date: Saturday, December 26, 2009, 7:42 PM
>> > a friend helped translate this, off we go
>> >
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

i dont think i've ever seen jean-louis naudin write there and then  the
end-result and the conclusions. we'll know a lot more come a month from now.



On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Harvey Norris  wrote:

> --- On Sat, 12/26/09, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
> > From: Esa Ruoho 
> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo
> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> > Date: Saturday, December 26, 2009, 7:42 PM
> > a friend helped translate this, off we go
> >
>

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Harvey Norris]

--- On Sat, 12/26/09, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> From: Esa Ruoho 
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Date: Saturday, December 26, 2009, 7:42 PM
> a friend helped translate this, off we go
> 
> Le nouveau moteur de Steorn présenté le 15 décembre 2009
> par Sean McCarthy à Dublin est composé d'un rotor
> équipé d'aimants au néodyme et d'un stator
> comportant des tores en ferrite bobinés.
> 
> 
> The new Steorn motor presented 2009.12.15 by Sean
> McCarthy in Dublin is composed of a rotor equipped with
> neodymium magnets and a stator containing wound ferrite
> torii.
> 
> Les aimants du rotor sont attirés par le matériau
> ferromagnétique du tore l'énergie magnétique
> potentielle est transformée en énergie cinétique de
> rotation. La ferrite va se polariser magnétiquement se
> transformant temporairement en aimant de polarité opposée
> à celle de l'aimant du rotor.
> 
> 
> The rotor magnets are attracted by the ferro-magnetic
> material of the torus, The magnetic potential energy is
> transformed into rotational kinetic energy. The ferrite
> becomes magnetically polarized and is transformed
> temporarily into a magnet of opposite polarity from that of
> the rotor magnet.
This is dubious, but now a better principle of the action is shown, it resebles 
an Addams motor?
> 
> 
> Il y a donc attraction, l'aimant se rapproche de la
> ferrite, mais l'empêche de s'en éloigner.
> 
> With such an attraction, the magnet approaches the
> ferrite -- but will not be able to leave.
An emf may show on the windings of the toroid however.
> 
> Lorsque l'énergie potentielle magnétique est minimale
> et que l'énergie cinétique est maximale (point le plus
> proche de l'aimant en face du tore), une impulsion de
> dépolarisation est envoyée dans la bobine torique
> changeant l'orientation des domaines magnétiques
> (domaines de Weiss) de la ferrite, ce qui permet de libérer
> l'aimant.
> 
> 
> When the magnetic potential energy is minimal and when
> the kinetic energy is at maximum (the point of closest
> approach of the magnet across from the torus) a
> depolarization impulse is sent to the torus winding changing
> the orientation of the magnetic domains (Weiss domains) of
> the ferrite, which allows the magnet to be freed.
Yes if the cancellation of lenz law occurs by a cancellation voltage produced 
from an exterior source, which as noted need expend no energy. 
> 
> Je rappelle que le champ magnétique extérieur d'une
> bobine torique est nul, elle est assimilée à une bobine de
> longueur infinie.
> 
> Recall that the magnetic field on the outside of a toroidal
> coil is null and simulates that of a coil of infinite
> length.
This is somewhat untrue, it actually acts as a coil whose electrical length of 
wire is vastly expanded by the time period it takes for transversal of impulse 
from end to end, which in turn indicates that the electrical impulse is reduced 
far below the speed of light.
> 
> Il n'y a pas d'interaction directe du champ
> magnétique du tore avec le champ magnétique des aimants du
> rotor. Le champ magnétique de la bobine torique sert
> uniquement à dépolariser temporairement l'aimantation
> de la ferrite du tore.
> 
> 
> There is no direct interaction between the magnetic field
> of the torus with the magnetic field of the rotor's
> magnets. The magnetic field of the toroidal coil serves only
> to temporarily depolarize  the magnetization of the ferrite
> core.
Would not this naturally happen if the windings of the torroid were given 
short? Perhaps I miss the picture here? 
> 
> Ainsi donc, la force magnétique d'attraction du rotor
> devient asymétrique, l'énergie potentielle magnétique
> en phase d'approche de l'aimant du rotor est
> inférieure à l'énergie potentielle magnétique en
> phase d'éloignement. Il y a donc cet effet de
> "regauging magnétique" longuement expliqué par
> Tom Bearden.
> 
> 
> Thus, the magnetic force of attraction of the rotor
> becomes asymmetric, the magnetic potential energy in the
> approach phase of the rotor magnet is less than the magnetic
> potential energy in the repulsion phase. Thus this is in
> effect "magnetic regauging" as explained some time
> ago by Tom Bearden.
Seems like that should be in reverse as in the Addams motor idea.
More mechanical energy created by innate magnetic attraction, and then energy 
expended for repulsion?
> 
> 
> Pour résumer, nous avons là un système
> "non-réciproque" et asymétrique. Il n'y pas
> de force contre électromotrice (Back-emf) dan

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Harvey Norris]

--- On Sat, 12/26/09, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> From: Esa Ruoho 
> Subject: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Date: Saturday, December 26, 2009, 5:50 PM
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo
> 
> video desc says:
> "The Steorn motor replication : No induction and
> No Back EMF in
> the stator coils The Steorn magnetic motor replication by
> Jean-Louis
> Naudin. Here in this test, there is No induction and No
> Back EMF
> induced in the stator coils while the rotor turns at high
> speed. This
> is a successfull replication of the Steorn motor presented
> by Sean
> McCarthy on dec 15, 2009 at Dublin. There is no BackEMF and
> an
> asymetric regauging. The motor converts the magnetic
> potential energy
> into kinetic energy. More info at JLN Labs : http://jnaudin.free.fr";
Surprised to here any info from JLN 
If a motor principle is shown where no mutual inductance exists between the 
mechanical mass rotation and the electrical input, they say no lenz law exists 
and call it remarkable. I call it remarkable that in all those cases the 
efficiency is terrible on that conversion of electrical energy into mechanical, 
or I would suppose so, and thats why no back emf is noted. The issue of 
cancelling back emf is only relevant when more power is desired from the 
source, when in fact it is asked for in mutual inductance between input and 
output. This simply translates to the fact that more power is delivered when it 
is asked for by load down. The whole issue of manipulating this effect is given 
by a simple thought experiment.
One would suppose that by making an opposite voltage to the voltage induced by 
changing magnetic fields enabling a part to rotate by magnetism and induction, 
that energy would be needed to cancel that effect of induction by two 
influences. Yet the voltage needed to cancel the induced current itself issues 
no current, so no energy is used to cancel out the lenz law effect; even though 
the source of opposing voltage need be present in the oscillation. Things dont 
exactly work out in what is supposed to be special.
HDN


  

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

On 12/26/2009 11:06 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
> On 12/26/2009 07:34 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
>   
>> I have built a myriad of pulse motors and do not understand what CEMF
>> means.  Can you explain what to look for?
>> 

I used a lot of words below.

In short, integral(CEMF * current * dt) = net mechanical energy out, for
a conventional motor which plays by the usual rules of the game.

In contrast, if TVD is the total voltage drop across the motor, then
integral(TVD*current*dt) = total energy out (heat+mechanical), and is
what should be measured if you put the whole thing in a calorimeter (and
let friction and turbulence turn the mechanical energy into heat for you).

The portion of voltage drop due to resistance in the coils would be
TVD-CEMF.

Sean claims CEMF=0 in his motor, but mechanical power out > 0. 
Consequently if you put his motor inside a calorimeter you'd find that
integral(TVD*current*dt) < total energy out.  This is apparently a first
law violation (COE), not just second law; as far as I know Sean has not
made the common magmo claim that some parts of the motor "get cold"
during operation.

[Aside:  Has Naudin ever attempted and *failed* to repro *any*
alternative energy claim?  I get the impression his repro attempts
*always* succeed, but perhaps I'm just ignorant...]

> Voltage drop across a coil carrying a varying current, in a motor
> subjected to a varying load.  For a stationary coil it's just -L*dI/dt. 
> Of course if you're looking at battery voltage, you won't see the CEMF;
> and in fact that's the main objection to Sean's demo.  He didn't find
> back EMF, but he didn't look very hard, either.  To get a good
> measurement you would need to simultaneously measure voltage drop across
> the motor (or, better yet, an individual coil) along with current
> through the motor (or coil), and if the inductance is small, you'd need
> to look very carefully at the edges.  Then look at how it changes as the
> RPMs and the load change.
>
> Sean appears to have been measuring battery voltage and current through
> one coil.  The battery voltage droops slightly when the coil turns on. 
> Inductance of the coil is indeed apparently small, so the back EMF as
> the B field builds up is hard to see in the scope traces the way Sean
> had the thing set up -- but since he apparently didn't say exactly where
> the probes were placed, and since I didn't study the comments carefully
> or listen to the original video (just read a transcript), my comments
> here should be treated with extreme caution.
>
> An experimenter who always distrusts his own results, as recommended by
> various people on this list, would have tried a great deal harder to get
> an accurate measurement of CEMF as the motor rotates than Sean appears
> to have done, if I can judge by what I gleaned of his demonstration.
>
>
>   
>> Terry
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>>   
>> 
>>> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm
>>> 
>>>   
>>   
>> 
>   

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

On 12/26/2009 07:34 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> I have built a myriad of pulse motors and do not understand what CEMF
> means.  Can you explain what to look for?
>   

Voltage drop across a coil carrying a varying current, in a motor
subjected to a varying load.  For a stationary coil it's just -L*dI/dt. 
Of course if you're looking at battery voltage, you won't see the CEMF;
and in fact that's the main objection to Sean's demo.  He didn't find
back EMF, but he didn't look very hard, either.  To get a good
measurement you would need to simultaneously measure voltage drop across
the motor (or, better yet, an individual coil) along with current
through the motor (or coil), and if the inductance is small, you'd need
to look very carefully at the edges.  Then look at how it changes as the
RPMs and the load change.

Sean appears to have been measuring battery voltage and current through
one coil.  The battery voltage droops slightly when the coil turns on. 
Inductance of the coil is indeed apparently small, so the back EMF as
the B field builds up is hard to see in the scope traces the way Sean
had the thing set up -- but since he apparently didn't say exactly where
the probes were placed, and since I didn't study the comments carefully
or listen to the original video (just read a transcript), my comments
here should be treated with extreme caution.

An experimenter who always distrusts his own results, as recommended by
various people on this list, would have tried a great deal harder to get
an accurate measurement of CEMF as the motor rotates than Sean appears
to have done, if I can judge by what I gleaned of his demonstration.


> Terry
>
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>   
>> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm
>> 
>   

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Harry Veeder]

Terry,

Look at test 3 at the bottom of this page


>
>http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm
>

"No induction and no back emf if the motor is turned by hand"

faulty metering or is it truly new physics?

Harry


  __
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your 
favourite sites. Download it now
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[FZNIDARSIC]

As before they need ot couple a generator to the unit and CLOSE THE  LOOP.
 
Frank Z

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Terry Blanton]

Actually, you would see it if the source was current limited.  You
would see a drop in coil voltage.  Batteries can supply only a limited
voltage but lots of amperes.

Terry

On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
>
>> Thus, the magnetic force of attraction of the rotor becomes asymmetric, the
>> magnetic potential energy in the approach phase of the rotor magnet is less
>> than the magnetic potential energy in the repulsion phase. Thus this is in
>> effect "magnetic regauging" as explained some time ago by Tom Bearden.
>
> But the magnetization energy of the due to the Lorentz force caused by
> the PM passing the coil must be counteracted by the power source
> energizing the coil.  No, you won't see it on a meter or scope; but,
> never the less, it draws more energy from the battery or power supply.
>
> Terry
>

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Terry Blanton]

On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:


> Thus, the magnetic force of attraction of the rotor becomes asymmetric, the
> magnetic potential energy in the approach phase of the rotor magnet is less
> than the magnetic potential energy in the repulsion phase. Thus this is in
> effect "magnetic regauging" as explained some time ago by Tom Bearden.

But the magnetization energy of the due to the Lorentz force caused by
the PM passing the coil must be counteracted by the power source
energizing the coil.  No, you won't see it on a meter or scope; but,
never the less, it draws more energy from the battery or power supply.

Terry

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

a friend helped translate this, off we go

Le nouveau moteur de Steorn présenté le 15 décembre 2009 par Sean McCarthy à
Dublin est composé d'un rotor équipé d'aimants au néodyme et d'un stator
comportant des tores en ferrite bobinés.

*The new Steorn motor presented 2009.12.15 by Sean McCarthy in Dublin is
composed of a rotor equipped with neodymium magnets and a stator containing
wound ferrite torii.*

Les aimants du rotor sont attirés par le matériau ferromagnétique du tore
l'énergie magnétique potentielle est transformée en énergie cinétique de
rotation. La ferrite va se polariser magnétiquement se transformant
temporairement en aimant de polarité opposée à celle de l'aimant du rotor.

*The rotor magnets are attracted by the ferro-magnetic material of the
torus, The magnetic potential energy is transformed into rotational kinetic
energy. The ferrite becomes magnetically polarized and is transformed
temporarily into a magnet of opposite polarity from that of the rotor
magnet.*

Il y a donc attraction, l'aimant se rapproche de la ferrite, mais l'empêche
de s'en éloigner.

*With such an attraction, the magnet approaches the ferrite -- but will not
be able to leave.*

Lorsque l'énergie potentielle magnétique est minimale et que l'énergie
cinétique est maximale (point le plus proche de l'aimant en face du tore),
une impulsion de dépolarisation est envoyée dans la bobine torique changeant
l'orientation des domaines magnétiques (domaines de Weiss) de la ferrite, ce
qui permet de libérer l'aimant.

*When the magnetic potential energy is minimal and when the kinetic energy
is at maximum (the point of closest approach of the magnet across from the
torus) a depolarization impulse is sent to the torus winding changing the
orientation of the magnetic domains (Weiss domains) of the ferrite, which
allows the magnet to be freed.*

Je rappelle que le champ magnétique extérieur d'une bobine torique est nul,
elle est assimilée à une bobine de longueur infinie.
*
Recall that the magnetic field on the outside of a toroidal coil is null and
simulates that of a coil of infinite length.*

Il n'y a pas d'interaction directe du champ magnétique du tore avec le champ
magnétique des aimants du rotor. Le champ magnétique de la bobine torique
sert uniquement à dépolariser temporairement l'aimantation de la ferrite du
tore.
*
There is no direct interaction between the magnetic field of the torus with
the magnetic field of the rotor's magnets. The magnetic field of the
toroidal coil serves only to temporarily depolarize  the magnetization of
the ferrite core.*

Ainsi donc, la force magnétique d'attraction du rotor devient asymétrique,
l'énergie potentielle magnétique en phase d'approche de l'aimant du rotor
est inférieure à l'énergie potentielle magnétique en phase d'éloignement. Il
y a donc cet effet de "regauging magnétique" longuement expliqué par Tom
Bearden.

*Thus, the magnetic force of attraction of the rotor becomes asymmetric, the
magnetic potential energy in the approach phase of the rotor magnet is less
than the magnetic potential energy in the repulsion phase. Thus this is in
effect "magnetic regauging" as explained some time ago by Tom Bearden.
*
Pour résumer, nous avons là un système "non-réciproque" et asymétrique. Il
n'y pas de force contre électromotrice (Back-emf) dans les bobines toriques
du stator produite par la rotation du rotor. Le courant nécessaire à la
dépolarisation temporaire des domaines magnétiques de la ferrite est
indépendant du couple mécanique produit sur l'arbre du moteur.

*Continuing: we have a "non-reciprocating" and asymmetric system. There is
no counter electromotive force (Back-EMF) on the toroidal coils of the
stator produced by the rotation of the rotor. The current necessary for the
temporary depolarization of the magnetic domains of the ferrite is
independent of the mechanical coupling produced on the shaft of the motor.
*
C'est aujourd'hui une piste très intéressante à explorer pour réaliser un
moteur magnétique sur-unitaire utilisant l'énergie potentielle magnétique
des aimants ...
Jean-Louis Naudin,
le 24 décembre 2009

*From today a very interesting path to explore for the realization of an
Over-Unity magnetic motor, utilizing the magnetic potential energy of
magnets...
*
...

On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo
>>
>> video desc says:
>> "The Steorn motor replication : No induction and No Back EMF in the
>> stator coils The Steorn magnetic motor replication by Jean-Louis Naudin.
>> Here in this test, there is No induction and No Back EMF induced in the
>> stator coils while the rotor turns at high speed. This is a successfull
>> replication of the Steorn motor presented by Sean McCarthy on dec 15, 2009
>> at Dublin. There is no BackEMF and an asymetric regauging. The motor
>> converts the magnetic potential energy into kin

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Terry Blanton]

I have built a myriad of pulse motors and do not understand what CEMF
means.  Can you explain what to look for?

Terry

On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
> http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm

Re: [Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/index.htm


On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo
>
> video desc says:
> "The Steorn motor replication : No induction and No Back EMF in the stator
> coils The Steorn magnetic motor replication by Jean-Louis Naudin. Here in
> this test, there is No induction and No Back EMF induced in the stator coils
> while the rotor turns at high speed. This is a successfull replication of
> the Steorn motor presented by Sean McCarthy on dec 15, 2009 at Dublin. There
> is no BackEMF and an asymetric regauging. The motor converts the magnetic
> potential energy into kinetic energy. More info at JLN Labs :
> http://jnaudin.free.fr";
>

[Vo]:JL-naudin replicates current Steorn Orbo (Dec) demo

[Esa Ruoho]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xungPOZtIo

video desc says:
"The Steorn motor replication : No induction and No Back EMF in the stator
coils The Steorn magnetic motor replication by Jean-Louis Naudin. Here in
this test, there is No induction and No Back EMF induced in the stator coils
while the rotor turns at high speed. This is a successfull replication of
the Steorn motor presented by Sean McCarthy on dec 15, 2009 at Dublin. There
is no BackEMF and an asymetric regauging. The motor converts the magnetic
potential energy into kinetic energy. More info at JLN Labs :
http://jnaudin.free.fr";