Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: They are selling mystery. Call it entertainment. Have a few hundred dollars If Steorn was an old prospector in a southwestern tavern, he'd be selling pieces of his treasure map to the marks. (And everyone gets the same piece, of course!) But first he'd have to convince everyone that, since the old prospector con is so obviously a trick ...that it can't possibly be an actual scam. It has to be a REAL treasure map. After all, look how many people are putting up cash rather than just laughing! The treasure-map thing is all about stroking your victim's self- importance, cultivating inner-circle investors who are special and superior to the unwashed masses. Enough FE scammers have relied on this same technique in the past that I added it to the list of scam symptoms. My advice to anyone considering buying in: it's almost certainly bogus. If you enjoy a good scam, you can buy in, Don't put money into FE investments, period. Don't buy treasure maps, they're always fake. Don't go shopping for a used car while assuming that all the dealers are scrupulously honest. Don't trust politicians, even if they have a firm handshake and inspire confidence. Oh, and don't invest in FE devices. (( ( ( ( ((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]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 03:02 PM 1/14/2010, Terry Blanton wrote: Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. This is quite the response that Steorn wants from people who realize the problem. However, that they seem to have this lack, yes. That's deliberate. Sorry, they aren't stupid.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 03:38 PM 1/14/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote: In politics, business and consulting, many people make a good living by obfuscation and sewing confusion. I like that. Sewing. They stitch it together rather than tossing seeds in the ground.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
JLN wondering about being able to cancel backemf: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veoRZh0GTkQ video description: Here an interesting experiment which shows that Back EMF exist and can be measured and also CANCELED in the toroïdal stator coils. You will notice that the position where the Back EMF is fully cancelled is very precise and a fine tuning must be done. More info at : http://jnaudin.free.fr; also, does anyone think that this post is somehow accurate on overunity, as to the functionality of orbo? http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.msg222768#msg222768 On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 03:02 PM 1/14/2010, Terry Blanton wrote: Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. This is quite the response that Steorn wants from people who realize the problem. However, that they seem to have this lack, yes. That's deliberate. Sorry, they aren't stupid.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
iPoni sent dis message. Esa Ruoho wrote it. On 14 Jan 2010, at 06:07, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: At 05:45 PM 1/13/2010, Terry Blanton . He claims that the energy output is greater than the input, but he says that again and again without showing a measurement of this. Next week, he says. So, Abd, do you even know what happens next week? They open it up for visitors to come and measure it themselves. If they (steorn) had measured it this or that way, the skeptics would have wanted it a third way. If they did that, then a fourth and fifth way. If those, then the equipment wasn't to be trusted, and so on. It never ends. I think they're doing a good thing, allowing visitors to measure it their way with their own devices, nobody is going to believe steorn's way even if they filmed themselves walking into a shop buying a meter and unwrapping it in front of the Orbo and cameras, skeptics would still believe they're scamming, somehow. If THEY come with their OWN precious devices and measure it THEMSELVES and then think that their own device was magically tampered with, well, then I guess you have a special breed of skeptic that don't believe their own equipment or eyes, which would be pretty amazing. I know some of the headcases on steornforum and villageofthebanned could even justify and rant about that too, but don't you think it'd be a bit ludicrous? Next week is less than five days from now.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
iPoni sent dis message. Esa Ruoho wrote it. On 14 Jan 2010, at 06:07, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/bzcZDr1AcEU The set of videos is too long for me to watch now. But my immediate impression. Tl;dw is a great way to go. I give you a WTG for this one, possibly followed by a few other acronyms, which I dislike, such as LOL and OMG Even I had the time to watch the live presentation, and I can't finish most documentaries or even a song.
RE: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From Abd: ... Okay, I kept watching. Questioner asked why they weren't using capacitors instead of a battery, for all the reasons we discussed. And the answer was essentially to first give a bullshit answer, that a capacitor couldn't supply the instantaneous current needed. Put enough capacitance in there and and you could vaporize the conductors if you shorted it. And then, when the questioner asked a little more, he asked him to dream the dream a bit and talked about how important this could be. In other words, please stop asking this inconvenient question I skipped most of Abd's initial questions as they seem to express critical banalities of an uninspired nature, especially since Abd has not yet had time to review most of the recent videos in their entirety. However, the last question regarding the battery versus the capacitor, IMO, is a good one. This issue has in fact been brought up and discussed many times within the Vort Collective, and indeed the fact that Storn uses a battery instead of a capacity has cast deep suspicion among its critics. Steorn deserves to give its audience a more thorough explanation. I hope it is forth coming. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:11 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Steorn deserves to give its audience a more thorough explanation. I hope it is forth coming. I seriously doubt it since the statement is false. IIRC, he said that the capacitor was too slow in current delivery. Actually, the opposite is true and evident to anyone who accidently shorts the terminals of a large capacitor. Indeed, on the VotB forum, it has been suggested that a 1 Farad capacitor be charged and tossed to McCarthy for him to catch. T
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On 01/12/2010 10:49 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: On 01/12/2010 06:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: The field of a permanent magnet must be either anchored in the magnet's material, or knotted around part of the magnet, as in the attached sketches. Oops, that's wrong. The field of a permanent magnet must be anchored in the magnet's material, period. The second sketch I gave -- bad-toroidal-mag-field-1.jpg -- is impossible to produce using permanent magnets. You can make such a field with a current ring, of course, but that's not at all the same thing. The idea I had was that you started with a bar magnet and milled out the center, and carved the rest into a smooth ring. But the field as I drew it is not what would result. The real thing would have the field going up through the magnet material, and down on the outside of the ring, *and* down on the inside of the ring. Sorry, no sketch, but hopefully the description is clear. (And I still don't know what Steorn's magnetic cores have for the shape of their fields. For that matter I don't even know what old computer magnetic cores had for a field shape -- sigh.)
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From Terry: Steorn deserves to give its audience a more thorough explanation [in regards to why Steorn used a battery instead of a capacitor.] I hope it is forth coming. I seriously doubt it since the statement is false. IIRC, he said that the capacitor was too slow in current delivery. Actually, the opposite is true and evident to anyone who accidently shorts the terminals of a large capacitor. Indeed, on the VotB forum, it has been suggested that a 1 Farad capacitor be charged and tossed to McCarthy for him to catch. Honorable critics of Steorn's claims [not the debunkers] should not let this issue get sidelined. Force Steorn to respond to the current official explanation, which I gather is something to the effect that using a capacitor would have resulted in too slow of a response time. I suspect Steorn will eventually be forced to respond with something to the effect of ... It's not as simple as that, whatever that might mean. But who knows. Maybe it ISN'T as simple as that. But then I'm hopelessly overoptimistic. IOW, I'm naive. ;-) Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:57:17 -0600 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Unfortunately for the rest of us who are languishing in the peanut gallery, I fear we will have to wait very VERY long time before anything of substance is revealed. McCarthy says that calorimetry results will be published at the end of this month. This is work being done by an independent firm. One of the 'skud' members says he has been told third-party testing will also be done. I hope the calorimetry results are unambiguous one way or the other. So we may know soon that they have something amazing or not. If they do, I hope enough hotshot engineers at large companies will work on it so that real products will show up within a year. FWIW, one of the engineers at waterways told a visitor he thought the first application would be to power portable generators.
RE: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
Abd wrote: And the answer was essentially to first give a bullshit answer, that a capacitor couldn't supply the instantaneous current needed. Put enough capacitance in there and you could vaporize the conductors if you shorted it. According to Sean, its not a matter of having enough capacitance... It's a matter of internal resistance, and the internal resistance of a battery is less than a capacitor; that's what's needed to deliver a very sharp risetime current pulse. So, its really both, how much and how fast; both are req'd for Orbo to work. And then, when the questioner asked a little more, he asked him to dream the dream a bit and talked about how important this could be. In other words, please stop asking this inconvenient question Didn't hear that comment... I've followed Steorn carefully, and do not think this is anything less than what they claim it to be... Regardless of whether it ends up as a mistake in their measurements or not, they are not con-artists... They are sincere. Either way, it won't take much longer to determine that... A matter of a few weeks. -Mark No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.139/2620 - Release Date: 01/13/10 23:35:00
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
I have stayed away from the Steorn discussion, but I have now looked a Naudin's device and looked at the presentation on YouTube. I have also spent time with the Newumann machine cotroversy, and dug deeply into the Correa PAGD device and looked at the Testatika publications, including hearing a talk by a man who saw it operate. Along the way I have read extensively the works of Harold Aspden. There is something there guys, and its whiskers, teeth, and claws occasionally peek out to tantalize and lot ob bright people. It is productive to ask qestionas about peripheral matters, looking for clues, but it is not productive to ask in a gotcha mode, thinking that one will expose a hidden trick. Dr. Aspden is a former head of IBM's patent department in th UK, now retired. He has made a lifelong study of the aether [no not zero-point] arising from some graduate-school experiments with electromagnetism which gave anomalous results. I won't recap this, one can find it in his extensive wiritings. Point here is that some simple observations point to anomalous thermal and magnetic relationships which give the hope of 'free energy' by a clever machine. In the YouTube presentation, a throwaway line disclosed that the magnetic coils in the Orb device are toroids with ferromagnetic cores; this is obvious in the Naudin setup. This is extremely unconventional in a motor. Small currents can saturate those cores, modulating the permeability of the magnetic circluit seen by the magnets in the rotors. I have seen the PAGD device in operation and what I saw was consistent with the Correa claims for the device. The energy released in the dislcharge is much greater than that required to sustain the conditions for the discharge to occur. Correa used carefully calibrated batteries to absorb the energy lieu of capactors which would have to have been enormous to operate in the experiment. Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On 01/14/2010 11:46 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: And the answer was essentially to first give a bullshit answer, that a capacitor couldn't supply the instantaneous current needed. Put enough capacitance in there and you could vaporize the conductors if you shorted it. According to Sean, its not a matter of having enough capacitance... It's a matter of internal resistance, and the internal resistance of a battery is less than a capacitor; No -- that statement is false. It's the other way around. Internal resistance of a cap is typically far, far lower than the internal resistance of a battery. This is widely known and supported by a lot of experimental evidence, done by lots of people, including myself. If you have any evidence to back your (or Sean's) claim that a battery is less resistive than a cap please provide it, and please specify the particular battery and cap which you are talking about. Compared with capacitors, batteries win on storage capacity, they might win on self discharge rate (or they might not), but they lose bigtime on internal resistance. that's what's needed to deliver a very sharp risetime current pulse. So, its really both, how much and how fast; both are req'd for Orbo to work. And then, when the questioner asked a little more, he asked him to dream the dream a bit and talked about how important this could be. In other words, please stop asking this inconvenient question Didn't hear that comment... I've followed Steorn carefully, and do not think this is anything less than what they claim it to be... Regardless of whether it ends up as a mistake in their measurements or not, they are not con-artists... They are sincere. Either way, it won't take much longer to determine that... A matter of a few weeks. -Mark No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.725 / Virus Database: 270.14.139/2620 - Release Date: 01/13/10 23:35:00
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 03:07 AM 1/14/2010, Esa Ruoho wrote: At 05:45 PM 1/13/2010, Terry Blanton . He claims that the energy output is greater than the input, but he says that again and again without showing a measurement of this. Next week, he says. So, Abd, do you even know what happens next week? They open it up for visitors to come and measure it themselves. If they (steorn) had measured it this or that way, the skeptics would have wanted it a third way. If they did that, then a fourth and fifth way. If those, then the equipment wasn't to be trusted, and so on. It never ends. That's right, and that's exactly what they are about. Release just enough to keep the buzz going. These people are marketers, and they are marketing a product, very effectively. They are marketing differently than they would market if they had an actual over-unity device. If they had that, they might not be marketing at all, by this time. They'd have a demonstration model that works, that can be replicated easily, that shows the effect they claim to have discovered. Do they believe they have a real discovery, or do they believe that they have something that looks enough like a real discovery that they can milk it for years? What I'm saying is that their behavior matches the latter possibility, not the former. In one month, they go from a totally stupid demonstration, inviting lots of derisive comment, setting up the conditions for it, then the next month, they have a far more sophisticated demonstration going, but still not actually addressing the points made by skeptics (or just neutral critics that might even welcome an over-unity device!). They've been at this for years. This should be obvious: they aren't revealing enough details so that someone can accurately replicate it. That's part of the plan, and, directly asked, they might even acknowledge this. They are revealing glimpses of the technology, meting it out carefully so as to generate maximum interest among their target audience without dousing that interest with a bucket of cold water. They would justify the drips and dabs approach by saying that, after all, they are selling the technology. Want to see it, pay for it! They don't have a demonstration device. Look carefully. Everything is we are working on it. We have arranged with a German calorimetry company so that they will All future. It is conceivable that they believe they have found an effect. A small one. And they realized that scaling this up to something solid would require much more money than they have or will be able to obtain as direct venture funding. So they got the bright idea to sell what they *do* have in hand. Some experimental evidence. Valid or not. And if they sell this, what they are doing is legal. But, of course, what they have, then, isn't a proof, it's just a clue, with the far more likely truth being that it is simply an as-yet unexplained anomaly. And by keeping it secret, they sure aren't going to allow others to find the explanation, because that would blow their business opportunity! They are selling mystery. Call it entertainment. Have a few hundred dollars to blow? Like puzzles? You can buy it and see for yourself. Of course, since it's a secret and under a non-disclosure agreement, you can't tell anyone else, and you sure can't get your money back. Or maybe you can, under certain narrow conditions. We don't know what's in the NDA, the NDA prohibits disclosure of its contents, and I'd strongly guess that before you even receive the NDA you sign a previous NDA that prohibits disclosure of the final NDA contents. Someone judgment-proof might get through and around this, but, then again, they investigate anyone applying and don't accept everyone. I assume they check out this possibility. Whatever they are, they are not stupid. And when they do a stupid demonstration, like in December, be sure of this: they know that it was stupid. That's part of their plan. You've got two reasonable choices: 1. They are stupid. This choice, however, is not terribly compatible with the opinion that they have something real. More likely, it would also be a stupid mistake, or even a less-stupid one. 2. They are not stupid. (They might occasionally do a stupid thing, but as consistently stupid as they appear to have been, no. Their apparent stupidity at times is part of their plan. Oops! The bearings burned out! We've only been working for a few years preparing this incredibly simple demonstration, and we didn't anticipate that the temperature would rise as it did. Silly us, we apologize. Then, how long was it?, a long time later, another simple stupid demonstration. This time the bearings don't burn out, but it's all run by a big battery that obviously runs down, but there is no measure of power input, nor of power dissipation in the coils, and no measure of acceleration of the rotor, with any calibration of speed vs. stored energy. Yet they
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 03:11 AM 1/14/2010, Esa Ruoho wrote: On 14 Jan 2010, at 06:07, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/bzcZDr1AcEUhttp://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/bzcZDr1AcEU The set of videos is too long for me to watch now. But my immediate impression. Tl;dw is a great way to go. I give you a WTG for this one, possibly followed by a few other acronyms, which I dislike, such as LOL and OMG Even I had the time to watch the live presentation, and I can't finish most documentaries or even a song. The writer here violated his own principles by responding to a message he did not read. If he'd read all the way through, he'd have seen that I did, in the end, watch the whole damn thing. Ah, I've been involved in on-line debate since about 1986 or so, with the W.E.L.L. Just to explain some stuff to those who might be watching. I certainly don't intend to continue this thread. As I read from another today, I concede the last word, in advance. He who laughs last laughs best, and it's impossible to actually laugh on-line, LOL isn't laughing, and about half the time the person didn't actually laugh but is simply attempting to deride, or, at least, it's impossible to laugh last, what is on-line can't cover it. I'll be laughing, I expect and have reason to hope, after I'm dead. So whatever you are doing, be sure to have fun. You'll probably do less damage if you remember this.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From Abd: Tl;dw is a great way to go. I give you a WTG for this one, possibly followed by a few other acronyms, which I dislike, such as LOL and OMG Even I had the time to watch the live presentation, and I can't finish most documentaries or even a song. The writer here violated his own principles by responding to a message he did not read. If he'd read all the way through, he'd have seen that I did, in the end, watch the whole damn thing. Abd, you initially stated: The set of videos is too long for me to watch now... But later at the end of that same post you state: Okay, I kept watching. Fortunately for me I did read that entire post, (not the previous MUCH LONGER ONE!) and I generally concurred with your concern that the battery versus capacitor explanation is inadequate. Nevertheless, you state at the very beginning that you didn't have enough time to watch the show in its entirety. Let me reiterate: It is in fact the first thing you tell your readers. While, in a sense, you are taking advantage of literary license (something I'm guilty of having done as well) I still think you share some of the blame for misleading some of your readers. Ah, I've been involved in on-line debate since about 1986 or so, with the W.E.L.L. Just to explain some stuff to those who might be watching. I certainly don't intend to continue this thread. As I read from another today, I concede the last word, in advance. He who laughs last laughs best, and it's impossible to actually laugh on-line, LOL isn't laughing, and about half the time the person didn't actually laugh but is simply attempting to deride, or, at least, it's impossible to laugh last, what is on-line can't cover it. I'll be laughing, I expect and have reason to hope, after I'm dead. So whatever you are doing, be sure to have fun. You'll probably do less damage if you remember this. I agree. This is a fun topic, regardless of what side of the fence one is leaning towards. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
The Orbo is a motor as I am sure we will all agree. In order for the motor to be OU, it must be outputting more mechanical energy than electrical energy it consumes. Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. T
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
Terry Blanton wrote: Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. Or, they understand it perfectly well but they don't want to do that because they are in the business of obfuscation. Let's call that the Abd hypothesis, in honor of its most verbose advocate here. In politics, business and consulting, many people make a good living by obfuscation and sewing confusion. It is less common in science and technology, but not unheard of. Academic rivals opposed to cold fusion have made a fine art of it. Many people fail to perform definitive tests. I cannot be sure, but in most cases I get the impression this is because they are inept, not devious. Mike Carrell mentioned Newman and the Correas. Newman strikes me as inept. The Correas are a strange mixture. Carrell describe their PAGD tests which impressed many people, and which are legitimate as far as I can tell: The energy released in the discharge is much greater than that required to sustain the conditions for the discharge to occur. Correa used carefully calibrated batteries to absorb the energy lieu of capacitors which would have to have been enormous to operate in the experiment. That's fine as far as it goes, but when I last heard from the Correas they were working with Gene Mallove on two experiments that struck me as absolutely looney, to the n'th degree. One was with a gold leaf electroscope which they claimed was producing energy when the leaf was extended out, like a person holding up his arms. A person does, in fact, expend energy to do this, but an electroscope emphatically does not. The second was with a device they claimed runs on energy from the sun that comes right through the earth, like neutrinos. That is at least plausible, but the method they chose to test it is perhaps the worst imaginable one. I would put the gadget in a sub-basement or a mine shaft to exclude other possible sources of energy. As I recall, they put it in bright sunlight outdoors and combined it with a Crookes radiometer or some other solar powered device (I don't recall). That's like trying to tune a piano in a boiler factory. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From Terry: The Orbo is a motor as I am sure we will all agree. In order for the motor to be OU, it must be outputting more mechanical energy than electrical energy it consumes. Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. Fro Jed: Or, they understand it perfectly well but they don't want to do that because they are in the business of obfuscation. Let's call that the Abd hypothesis, in honor of its most verbose advocate here. I tend to sympathize with Terry's assessment, and give Jed's an honorable mention. As odd as this might sound, at present I take comfort from the realization that I'm not smart enough to determine whether the ORBO prototype is an intentional scam, an invention of the deluded, or a closeted energizer bunny. I'm reminded of a fine book I purchased decades ago, titled In Advance of the Landing, Folk Concepts of Outer Space http://www.amazon.com/Advance-Landing-Concepts-Outer-Space/dp/0789207087/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1263502029sr=1-1-spell http://tinyurl.com/y8tpmmb There are some priceless photos in this book. One photo showed a flying saucer being constructed in the basement of an individual's home. The individual had a vision one evening. His vision was of Jesus who instructed him to build a flying saucer. Jesus had also commanded him to pilot the flying saucer around the world in order to distribute copies of the bible.The flying saucer was coming along nicely. It took up most of the basement floor. One wonders if the builder had figured out how he was going to get it up the stairs and out the door. Film at eleven. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On 01/14/2010 03:02 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: The Orbo is a motor as I am sure we will all agree. In order for the motor to be OU, it must be outputting more mechanical energy than electrical energy it consumes. Not exactly -- not the way the term has been used to describe the Steorn motor. Granted, Sean's 300% OU would lead to this conclusion. However, his fundamental, most basic claim is that the motor has no back EMF, and consequently *all* input energy appears as heat in the coils. If that were true, then the motor would be OU if it did any mechanical work at all, no matter how small the amount. The OU thing here, however, is not mechanical_work/input_energy, but rather (mechanical_work + heat_in_coils)/input_energy To determine if this is actually OU it would be necessary to stuff the whole thing into a calorimeter, which is, I think, the test the firm in Germany is supposed to perform. If it could be shown that the motor was, indeed, OU by this test, it might still be the case that (mechanical_work/input_energy)1, which would make it impossible to either close the loop or even get any useful work out of it, *but* it would still be an incredible, amazing, remarkable, stunning achievement (or a measurement error, of course). Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. T
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
No, it does some mechanical work, it's spinning. It is overcoming bearing friction and wind friction. No doubt it is performing mechanical work. But to be OU, it must perform more mechanical work than electrical input. But the freakin' motor would not work without magnetic floating bearings. And windage is virtually zero from the geometry. But so is the electrical input. Put a string on the axle and see how much weight it can lift. My bet is a fraction of a gram. I have no doubt that when the energy balance is calculated, the efficiency of the motor will be 0.5. On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: On 01/14/2010 03:02 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: The Orbo is a motor as I am sure we will all agree. In order for the motor to be OU, it must be outputting more mechanical energy than electrical energy it consumes. Not exactly -- not the way the term has been used to describe the Steorn motor. Granted, Sean's 300% OU would lead to this conclusion. However, his fundamental, most basic claim is that the motor has no back EMF, and consequently *all* input energy appears as heat in the coils. If that were true, then the motor would be OU if it did any mechanical work at all, no matter how small the amount. The OU thing here, however, is not mechanical_work/input_energy, but rather (mechanical_work + heat_in_coils)/input_energy To determine if this is actually OU it would be necessary to stuff the whole thing into a calorimeter, which is, I think, the test the firm in Germany is supposed to perform. If it could be shown that the motor was, indeed, OU by this test, it might still be the case that (mechanical_work/input_energy)1, which would make it impossible to either close the loop or even get any useful work out of it, *but* it would still be an incredible, amazing, remarkable, stunning achievement (or a measurement error, of course). Somehow Steorn must measure the torque or have the motor perform work, eg lift a weight, pump water, etc. But they seem to have a basic lack of understanding of this fact. T
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
- Original Message From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, January 14, 2010 10:31:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig From Terry: Steorn deserves to give its audience a more thorough explanation [in regards to why Steorn used a battery instead of a capacitor.] I hope it is forth coming. I seriously doubt it since the statement is false. IIRC, he said that the capacitor was too slow in current delivery. Actually, the opposite is true and evident to anyone who accidently shorts the terminals of a large capacitor. Indeed, on the VotB forum, it has been suggested that a 1 Farad capacitor be charged and tossed to McCarthy for him to catch. Honorable critics of Steorn's claims [not the debunkers] should not let this issue get sidelined. Force Steorn to respond to the current official explanation, which I gather is something to the effect that using a capacitor would have resulted in too slow of a response time. I suspect Steorn will eventually be forced to respond with something to the effect of ... It's not as simple as that, whatever that might mean. But who knows. Maybe it ISN'T as simple as that. But then I'm hopelessly overoptimistic. IOW, I'm naive. ;-) A capacitor discharges quickly, but then it needs to be recharged and that takes time. So over time would the delivery of current be slowerer than a battery? harry __ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 01:03 PM 1/14/2010, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Nevertheless, you state at the very beginning that you didn't have enough time to watch the show in its entirety. Let me reiterate: It is in fact the first thing you tell your readers. While, in a sense, you are taking advantage of literary license (something I'm guilty of having done as well) I still think you share some of the blame for misleading some of your readers. Sure. I wasn't blaming him purely for thinking that what I wrote at the beginning was no longer true. That's obviously something reasonable for him to conclude. But he was faulting me for commenting without, supposedly, watching the whole damn set of videos, which would take much longer than to read over my post, yet he commented on my post without reading it all the way through. Don't you agree that's ironic? So whatever you are doing, be sure to have fun. You'll probably do less damage if you remember this. I agree. This is a fun topic, regardless of what side of the fence one is leaning towards. Yes. I think Steorn is brilliant. (I have trouble using the plural for them, except like in this sentence. Steorn are brilliant? Sorry, that grates. it is a company, a single entity, but I can also speak of those involved as them.) Brilliant as entertainers and sophisticated marketers. Never mind the product they are marketing, it's an excuse for making money, which is what marketers are supposed to do.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Jan 12, 2010, at 6:49 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: On 01/12/2010 06:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: [And by the way I'd still love to see a sketch of the field of the toroidal magnetic cores, if anyone happens to have a link to one (don't spend a lot of your time searching the Steorn site for a diagram, tho, please, just to save me the time to do that, wouldn't be fair).] This is from one of Fred Sparber's (GRHS) favorite sites (mine, too since it's from Ga): http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/toroid.html Thanks, Terry... but unfortunately, that page is not what I'm looking for. That's the field of the coil, and it's entirely contained within the toroid. I'm looking for a sketch of the field of the toroidal *core* when the current is switched off. For the magnetism of the core to mean anything, that field must not be entirely contained in the toroid, and consequently must not be a purely circular field running parallel to the torus ring. The field of a permanent magnet must be either anchored in the magnet's material, or knotted around part of the magnet, as in the attached sketches. But those aren't the only possibilities for a toroidal magnet, and I don't know what the fields of the Steorn toroidal magnets look like. (bad in the image file names refers to the quality of the sketches, which are, well, bad...) bad-toroidal-field-2.jpgbad-toroidal-mag-field-1.jpg I can say that, experimentally speaking, it was surprising to me the degree to which the field of a toroidal coil is entirely contained within the torus surface, even if that surface is highly distorted. Here is an experiment I did along those lines: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/OddTransNotes.pdf I tried to make a transformer that could tap the fringe field energy of a highly distorted toroid surface. There was very very little there to tap! Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, January 12, 2010 1:15:34 PM On 01/12/2010 12:34 PM, Esa Ruoho wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/79138...@n00/4268789755/ First slide: However certain components (such as the magnets used) store energy, to prove over unity we must prove that the energy of these components does not degrade during the interaction. As far as I know this is totally a red herring -- a straw man. I don't think a motor which consumes the energy stored in permanent magnets, which eventually are demagnetized, has ever been demonstrated, and I'm not at all sure it's possible. Sure, you can ruin magnets in a motor, but that's not at all the same as *making* *use* of the magnetic field of the magnets as it degrades -- i.e., loss of magnetization is always just an artifact, never something vital to the motor's operation. If the magnetic field of the permanent magnets is being used up, then replacing them with *better* magnets which didn't degrade would destroy the motor's operation. I haven't been following the steorn demo. Did he actually replace the magnets as part of his demo? Presumably the honest thing to do would be to measure the strength of the magnet's field to show it hasn't decreased. harry __ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: I haven't been following the steorn demo. Did he actually replace the magnets as part of his demo? Not yet. He has 2 more demos to go. Here is 1 of 5 youtube vids: http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/bzcZDr1AcEU Terry
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
At 05:45 PM 1/13/2010, Terry Blanton wrote: Here is 1 of 5 youtube vids: http://www.youtube.com/user/SteornOfficial#p/u/0/bzcZDr1AcEU The set of videos is too long for me to watch now. But my immediate impression. The demonstrations are technically far more complex, they *look* much better. But it still seems like a snow job. Actual description of the details of the motor seem to be missing, and there are lots of statements that miss and don't address the fact that it would only take a relatively small amount of energy transfer during a transient, and there are lots of transients, to cause the rotor to accelerate. It amounts to hand-waving. The man keeps saying absolutely no back-EMF. He claims that the energy output is greater than the input, but he says that again and again without showing a measurement of this. Next week, he says. Steorn is bypassing the normal process of revelation of a new discovery. Why? I've already speculated why. He's not selling energy, he's selling technology or access to information. If he reveals the real scoop, he's got nothing to sell if he doesn't have patents. And he doesn't. If he has a working model that is over unity, he could get a patent, he'd have to submit the model, I believe. And it would have to work. That's not building motors or generators, that's demonstrating the effect. Basically, it's blatant: he's blowing smoke, a *prediction* that the effect can be used to generate power. He hasn't done calorimetry, they are working with a German company. And they will be doing this or that test. Okay, I kept watching. Questioner asked why they weren't using capacitors instead of a battery, for all the reasons we discussed. And the answer was essentially to first give a bullshit answer, that a capacitor couldn't supply the instantaneous current needed. Put enough capacitance in there and and you could vaporize the conductors if you shorted it. And then, when the questioner asked a little more, he asked him to dream the dream a bit and talked about how important this could be. In other words, please stop asking this inconvenient question
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
http://www.scene.org/~esa/merlib/orbo-cop.png On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote: spotted these on the steornofficial flickr site http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266704511/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266693651/sizes/o/ also, the talk#2 ( “Orbo Electromagnetic Interaction COP 1”, ) is supposed to start at 5pm irish time ( Tuesday 12th January 17:00 GMT on Live Stream view 1 3 ). i hope it'll be fun :) will be tuning in at 7pm finnish time.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
http://www.flickr.com/photos/79138...@n00/4268789755/ On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.scene.org/~esa/merlib/orbo-cop.pnghttp://www.scene.org/%7Eesa/merlib/orbo-cop.png On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote: spotted these on the steornofficial flickr site http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266704511/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266693651/sizes/o/ also, the talk#2 ( “Orbo Electromagnetic Interaction COP 1”, ) is supposed to start at 5pm irish time ( Tuesday 12th January 17:00 GMT on Live Stream view 1 3 ). i hope it'll be fun :) will be tuning in at 7pm finnish time.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On 01/12/2010 12:34 PM, Esa Ruoho wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/79138...@n00/4268789755/ First slide: However certain components (such as the magnets used) store energy, to prove over unity we must prove that the energy of these components does not degrade during the interaction. As far as I know this is totally a red herring -- a straw man. I don't think a motor which consumes the energy stored in permanent magnets, which eventually are demagnetized, has ever been demonstrated, and I'm not at all sure it's possible. Sure, you can ruin magnets in a motor, but that's not at all the same as *making* *use* of the magnetic field of the magnets as it degrades -- i.e., loss of magnetization is always just an artifact, never something vital to the motor's operation. If the magnetic field of the permanent magnets is being used up, then replacing them with *better* magnets which didn't degrade would destroy the motor's operation. Certainly if a motor were demonstrated which genuinely converted the field of the permanent magnets into kinetic energy, while draining their magnetism, it would be nearly as remarkable as a true OU motor. On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com mailto:esaru...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.scene.org/~esa/merlib/orbo-cop.png http://www.scene.org/%7Eesa/merlib/orbo-cop.png On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com mailto:esaru...@gmail.com wrote: spotted these on the steornofficial flickr site http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266704511/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4266693651/sizes/o/ also, the talk#2 ( “Orbo Electromagnetic Interaction COP 1”, ) is supposed to start at 5pm irish time ( Tuesday 12th January 17:00 GMT on Live Stream view 1 3 ). i hope it'll be fun :) will be tuning in at 7pm finnish time.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From Stephen: ... Sure, you can ruin magnets in a motor, but that's not at all the same as *making* *use* of the magnetic field of the magnets as it degrades -- i.e., loss of magnetization is always just an artifact, never something vital to the motor's operation. I'm a little confused here. Perhaps you can clarify what you mean when you use the term, magnetic artifact, particularly why an artifact shouldn't be confused with PMs making use of the magnetic fields. For that matter, don't traditional electric motors make use of the PMs magnetic fields? As we all know, abusing PMs will eventually cause them to demagnetize. They can be abused by heating the alloy beyond the point where the internal structure is no longer able to maintain a cohesive magnetic alignment. PMs can also be demagnetized by repetitively forcing two like poles too close together. I would speculate that Steorn is probably going to claim something to the effect that they have overcome this particular magnetic abuse issue - in conjunction with also claiming to have allegedly ameliorated the counter electromotive forces. Obviously, maintaining magnet permanence within the PMs is very vital to the motor's health and well-being, as well as ultimately leading to their hotly contested claims of having achieved OU. ... If the magnetic field of the permanent magnets is being used up, then replacing them with *better* magnets which didn't degrade would destroy the motor's operation. I especially don't follow this logic, or where you're going with it as an explanation. I also don't understand what this conjecture allegedly proves. I thought the whole point of the controversial ORBO demonstration was to allegedly prove to a skeptical world that their PMs are not demagnetizing over repetitive use. So, what does the conjecture of replacing the PMs with better PMs that don't degrade have anything to do with ORBO's claims? Certainly if a motor were demonstrated which genuinely converted the field of the permanent magnets into kinetic energy, while draining their magnetism, it would be nearly as remarkable as a true OU motor. Why would this be such an extraordinary claim? Personal disclaimer: Just to be clear on my current position, even if STEORN proves that their ORBO PMs are not demagnetizing that does not (by itself) necessarily mean they have successfully proved OU. I suspect STEORN has much more proving to do before they can claim that prize. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
http://freeorbo.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/cop_live/
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Jan 12, 2010, at 9:15 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: On 01/12/2010 12:34 PM, Esa Ruoho wrote: http://www.flickr.com/photos/79138...@n00/4268789755/ First slide: However certain components (such as the magnets used) store energy, to prove over unity we must prove that the energy of these components does not degrade during the interaction. As far as I know this is totally a red herring -- a straw man. I don't think a motor which consumes the energy stored in permanent magnets, which eventually are demagnetized, has ever been demonstrated, and I'm not at all sure it's possible. Sure, you can ruin magnets in a motor, but that's not at all the same as *making* *use* of the magnetic field of the magnets as it degrades -- i.e., loss of magnetization is always just an artifact, never something vital to the motor's operation. If the magnetic field of the permanent magnets is being used up, then replacing them with *better* magnets which didn't degrade would destroy the motor's operation. Certainly if a motor were demonstrated which genuinely converted the field of the permanent magnets into kinetic energy, while draining their magnetism, it would be nearly as remarkable as a true OU motor. So true. There isn't very much energy embodied in the permanent magnetization. I haven't been following this thread, but from the above it is still clearly noteworthy that it does not take much more energy (in terms of orders of magnitude) to permanently magnetize a neo magnet than it does to energize a similar sized piece of iron for a single cycle of an induction motor. A single very brief discharge of a good sized sized capacitor through a coil around the magnet will do the job - even from zero magnetization. If the flux changes of the motor tend to de-magnetize a neo magnet, then isolating the magnet by an intervening iron or soft steel magnetic circuit can in some cases greatly diminish the de-magnetization, especially if you can coordinate the parts motion such that the flux always has a nearly constant high mu path back through the permanent magnet. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
The biggest energy cost in creating a NdFeBo magnet is in the great and rapid thermal shifts required in sintering the material. The energy expended in the actual domain alignment is infinitesimal in comparison.
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
From: Esa http://freeorbo.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/cop_live/ Excerpt: 11:44 Question: Why aren’t product developers jumping up and down? Answer [Sean?]: They are. Ever since Dec. 15th people are knocking their doors down. Licenses open on February 1st, we’ll see how many developers are serious about it. First the good news: It would not surprise me in the least if Steorn gets many companies to sign on the dotted line. Nothing venture... nothing gained. Once companies have paid their dues, one would imagine that they would be highly motivated to get a positive return on their investment. I wonder if we will be able to find out who signs up. I suspect most companies would prefer to remain anonymous. And now the bad news: Unfortunately for the rest of us who are languishing in the peanut gallery, I fear we will have to wait very VERY long time before anything of substance is revealed. I bet we are looking at many years of highly classified underground work. My fear is that should all RD efforts fail (which seems to be the prevailing opinion these days. ;-) ), most companies would prefer try sweep it all under the rug. I suspect most might be inclined to feel embarrassed at having taking on such a controversial effort. I wonder what might be a reasonable period of time to wait before assuming everything was swept under the rug. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
the whole talk: http://jandemooij.nl/temp/steorn/20100112%20cam1.flv http://jandemooij.nl/temp/steorn/20100112%20cam3.flv and in case they get removed, just zoom to http://www.scene.org/~esa/merlib/steorntalk2
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
maybe these are better and more useful Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ib9u811WXJU Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtKHo9dKHtQ Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gTyS_RKLXc Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSa-Mcd24Ac (think its valid to post these here, cos last steorn-talk, they cut the qa)
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: [And by the way I'd still love to see a sketch of the field of the toroidal magnetic cores, if anyone happens to have a link to one (don't spend a lot of your time searching the Steorn site for a diagram, tho, please, just to save me the time to do that, wouldn't be fair).] This is from one of Fred Sparber's (GRHS) favorite sites (mine, too since it's from Ga): http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/toroid.html T
Re: [Vo]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Certainly if a motor were demonstrated which genuinely converted the field of the permanent magnets into kinetic energy, while draining their magnetism, it would be nearly as remarkable as a true OU motor. NIB supermagnets can be demagnetized by forcing two alike poles together. As they approach each other, the repulsion force is strong, but after they pass by and retreat, the repulsion is weaker. Perhaps three magnets on a rotor could harness this effect: two large magnets are pulled together, a 3rd smaller one performs the demagnitizing step, then two large magnets fly apart, having gained some KE. If this effect could somehow be used to power a spinning magnet rotor, then toy 'magnet fueled' motors could become a desktop curio. (( ( ( ( ((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]:steorn talk#2 today at 5pm irish time + closeup shots of steorn talk#2 demo-rig
On 01/12/2010 06:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: [And by the way I'd still love to see a sketch of the field of the toroidal magnetic cores, if anyone happens to have a link to one (don't spend a lot of your time searching the Steorn site for a diagram, tho, please, just to save me the time to do that, wouldn't be fair).] This is from one of Fred Sparber's (GRHS) favorite sites (mine, too since it's from Ga): http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/magnetic/toroid.html Thanks, Terry... but unfortunately, that page is not what I'm looking for. That's the field of the coil, and it's entirely contained within the toroid. I'm looking for a sketch of the field of the toroidal *core* when the current is switched off. For the magnetism of the core to mean anything, that field must not be entirely contained in the toroid, and consequently must not be a purely circular field running parallel to the torus ring. The field of a permanent magnet must be either anchored in the magnet's material, or knotted around part of the magnet, as in the attached sketches. But those aren't the only possibilities for a toroidal magnet, and I don't know what the fields of the Steorn toroidal magnets look like. (bad in the image file names refers to the quality of the sketches, which are, well, bad...) attachment: bad-toroidal-field-2.jpgattachment: bad-toroidal-mag-field-1.jpg
