OEDU board offer by STEORN - prove it yourself!
posted by blogtrotter | 5:52 AM
About Me
- Name: blogtrotter
- Location: Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany
I'm a sort of creative person, seeking the meaning of life . Hard to capture the essence of the mind/brain/soul - but I delight in arguing with ultra-materialists on consciousness. Ah! the smell of a rose and its redness, the smell of a fine wine, a sunset, - great stuff, and all subjective. Oh yeah and actually am Scorpio by 4 hours according to expert astrologer friend - blogger auto-star-sign system missed the fact that I'm on the cusp. Though I agree with Casius when he said "the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings".
- I found 308% gain at Steorn!
- "Free Energy and Free Will"
- Syncronicity etc.
- solid state orbo revving up
- March for testing too...
- (provisional) Title: Humpty Dumpty & the Emperors ...
- Forest again after many weeks
- I went to the demo in Dublin end Jan - did you spo...
- STEORN Launch Demo started in Dublin!!
- Voynich documentary great
239 Comments:
What I don't understand is why anybody needs to prove it himself.
If Steorn's device is 300 percent OU, why haven't they pulled off
some of the output and fed it back as input to make it
self-running?
Why haven't they sent devices to testing labs and proclaimed the
amazing results to the world?
Nothing Steorn does is like what somebody who had OU would do, but
it is like what someone would do if he was a scammer, or had
deluded himself into thinking he had OU, but for some strange
reason cannot do anything useful with it, and is hoping that others
can miraculously figure out what is wrong.
Good grief!
If Steorn really could produce 308% or 750% gain, then they would simply close the loop, and not be wasting everybodies time and money with this battery-powered joke! They can't, and anyone who spends money on this rubbish might as well be throwing that money away.
To believe otherwise is simply irrational.
They haven't shown enough to reach the threshold of justifying the expense. They make exorbitant claims, behave in an inexplicable manner for 4 years, provide no real evidence, and expect us to shell out for a kit from them to see if they have it?
My, they do think we are fools, don't they.
"It is battery-powered" - LOL
Steorn wants others to use these kits and publish their results.
If credible researchers declare they find OU, this will influence others to investigate and develop further.
If Steorn OU gets established, a historic and unimagined future of OU energy production will begin its entry into our common history. Ten years is nothing compared to the promise of OU.
In the end, Steorn's team might be celebrated, just as Edison and the Wright Brothers are.
It's your choice: hopefulness or cynicism?
pk, Steorn's claim is nothing like the accomplishments of Edison or the Wright Brothers. Everyone knew running electricity through filaments caused them to emit light, it was an engineering problem. Everyone knew heavier than air travel was possible before the write brothers, they saw birds do it all the time--it was an engineering problem. Steorn is claim goes against one of the main rules the universe has demonstrated about how it works over centuries of observation and experiment. It is more like claiming that they can turn people into pumpkins than it is like Edison or the Wright Brothers.
That is the big problem here, people who lack the ability to understand the claim and/or think critically about it end up supporting it--even some who should know better, like Hugh.
All the negative comments are from pseudoskeptics and James Randi disciples.
They immediately pronounce judgement WITHOUT having tested ANYTHING from the comfort of their armchairs.
Gotta love it!
Coming from the high priest of the Crazy Cult of Steorn (FE "Truth" / 007 / Craig Brown) those comments are just precious! LOL
Craig had "immediately pronounced judgement" on Steorn 4 years ago before without seeing anything purely on the basis of "Sean said"! Of course he continues to ignore that everything we have seen from Steorn in the long years since then. There is a mountain of evidence that discredits both Steorn and their claim. A lot of people wanted to keep an open mind and see what Steorn had. As the weeks, and then months, and then years rolled by it became abundantly clear even to the most open minded that if Steorn really had something they would have produced it. They screamed at Steorn for corroborating evidence for their claim for 4 years, but Steorn refused to provide it. The only reasonable conclusion after witnessing all the humiliation Steorn have brought on themselves is that there is no such evidence. Then all the lies, broken promises, and failures such as the nodding donkey toys, the African Water Pumps, the Kinetica disaster, the Waterways fiasco, the 419 Euro SKDB, and now this latest battery-powered joke also have to be taken into account. And of course there is the 14 million Euro that Steorn raised from their investors!
The irony is that while having made up (and closed) his mind at the onset, and having ignored all of this evidence since then, he now pontificates about how closed minded those people who refused to close their minds and go down the rabbit hole ignoring all the actual evidence with him are!
I am with you FE Truth. For once and all, can you please tell these doubters the OU figures you got when you closed the loop. That will silence them permanently. :)
Congrats Steorn and to all scientist that have indeed taken meticulous measurements over the years that clearly show a gain. My measurements clearly showed a gain.
Will this be ready for Christmas? I'd love to get some for my kids! It looks like hours of fun, and educational too!
Steorn are fools! The powers that be will never allow this to be released. Someone is going to get grabbed in the dark if they try this--or worse! I invented a PMM in the 80's, and the people who killed John Lennon grabbed me and kept me on an island for 14 years, telling everyone I was insane.
This work is important, but you have to be very, very careful or it will be straps and needles for you!
we're at the dawn of a new great global change.
Well done to Steorn for taking the lead. I for one will be joining their SKDB and proving free energy for myself.
There's a lot of negativity and hostility from people which makes me think Steorn are for real.
Why else do these people feel compelled to shoot it down. They must be desperate to prevent this getting out there.
Yes, negativity against it makes it true. It can't possibly be that they are negative because they hate scams. Who hates a good scam?
It goes far beyond being negative. A lot of these cynics go around lying. That in itself should be enough to investigate this.
Steorn's claims is far to important. Don't listen to anyone who tries to talk you out of supporting Steorn. If these negative people are such goodies, then let them take down Steorn and prove us all wrong.
If you ask me, the negative cynics seem like the last people on Earth who care about other people. They thrive off of endless arguing, fights, and childish name calling.
I for one will support Steorn's efforts till the end of this.
How does this show the Steorn effect without a magnet?
It's true, these "cynics" are mostly paid debunkers in the employ of Peter Gabriel and Big Oil. They come to blogs like this in great numbers in order to create confusion and doubt. Don't let them win!
Back in Pittsburgh they stopped the release of my motor, and on the way destroyed the innocence of my deaf girlfriend, who is now dead.
Don't be naive, this is deeper than just random skeptics. They are very organized and in league with Ono and Frip and the rest.
Steorn needs our support.
It is a bit interesting to watch all of this. There was an odd suspicious guy posting at a another forum where I used a technique to obtain his IP address. It traced back to Exxon Mobile. Maybe a few of these guys are watching this activity. Maybe even pulling some strings.
My hats off to Steorn and all the brave researchers here. You're all heroes in my book, especially Hugh Deasy.
"It is battery-powered" - LOL
"'It is battery-powered' - LOL"
It's a bit odd how hard you're trying to trash Steorn. Having a battery does not mean that's where the energy comes from. For reasons still unknown the output fluctuates by significant amounts, sometimes even going below 100% efficiency, which is why they would need a deep battery to keep it going during the low periods.
Cars have batteries. So what. Read the following page for details (or click on my name on this post, Paul Lowrance) -->
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/09/25/fe-quote-2/
There will be Global Free Energy. People are becoming wise up to the flood of Internet tactics. ;-)
For newbies, here's the Steorn Calorimeter data (click on my name in this post, Paul Lowrance, for link) -->
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/04/01/steorn-releases-first-calorimetry-results/
The calorimetry results clearly shows excess energy.
The crazy Internet conspiracy theorists, and the lunatic fringe free energy whackoes who think that the MiB / Big Oil are suppersing free energy are clearly beyond help!
Anyone who at this stage still believes that free energy is going to come soon from Steorn either has not been paying much attention, or else they are closed mined and are deliberately ignoring the mountains of evidence against Steorn and their claim.
Anyone who has genuine hopes and dreams of a better tomorrow emerging from Steorn's labs is in for disappointment, and those hopes and dreams will wither away, just like the investors cash did!
It would be just grand if nature were different and we could all have as much matter or energy as we desire simply because we want it. From all that we know about nature that isn't so. Steorn have done nothing to change that knowledge.
Steorn have taught that PT Barnum was correct, if a bit conservative. I personally encourage anyone who still believes Steorn to buy at least one of these rigs. I personally encourage anyone who thinks that the oil companies are trying to suppress free energy to buy several or even many. Just don't forget the batteries.
Paul Lowrance, Steorn's temperature measurement: experiment, report, and conclusion do not demonstrate free energy. They demonstrate just how awful and inadequate Steorn's experiment practices are.
A little BTW for Paul Lowrance, the rig that Steorn used for their temperature measurements can in no way be considered a calorimeter.
Paul, the link you posted to Steorn's temperature data is NOT calorimetry data. It is a single run of a temperature monitoring demonstration.
I suggest that you try exactly the same test using just about any DC motor you like. Supply it with constant power using a current and voltage regulated power supply, and measure its temperature over a time period in two conditions: rotor locked, and rotor free to turn. You will find that the temperature will increase faster. Does this indicate overunity? No, it simply shows that the Steorn test cannot "prove" what it purports to prove, and that you are mistaken in using it to try to prove your point.
--Kate Allison
Wow, it's funny watching so many people working so hard to convince you folks that Steorn has nothing, LOL. Keep at it. Maybe people will begin to get a clue.
The Steorn temperature measurements are calorimetry measurements. A ***TOTAL*** of 3.8 watts goes into Orbo. This produces a certain amount of heat in the calorimetry unit. This is compared to a control test where a ***TOTAL*** of 3.8 watts goes into a *normal* load.
The Steorn calorimetry measurements clearly shows excess energy.
Paul Lowrance you demonstrate that you do not understand calorimetry.
Ah, and by your logic Georgia State University doesn't know what a calorimeter is as well, ;-)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/calor.html
Lets outline Steorn thus far:
* So we have a company that obtained millions of dollars from business investors during the initial stage of the company. Yet there has not been one single lawsuit by any of these investors.
* Various EE's and physicists have measured the Orbo efficiency. Yet not a single one of these scientist has come forward saying he measured less than 100% efficiency.
* Steorn's shown oscilloscope measurements on an eOrbo that's shown excess energy.
* Steorn's shown the calorimetery results, which shows excess energy.
BTW, besides the three scientists shown in the Steorn video, I personally know two other people not mentioned by Steorn that flew out to Ireland, went to Steorn, and did full efficiency measurements on a SS Orbo. Nobody yet has said they measured less than 100% efficiency.
All those who are asking to close the loop and stfu the whole world, may please note that it would not be possible to do that in the current embodiment of this tech.
Lets say 100 W is the input. Most of the input (say 99.99 W of it) is converted to heat and cannot be recovered. The rest (say 0.01 W) appears as 0.03 W at the output, due to some kind of orbo magic.
So steorn says their efficiency is 3, although actually you get only 0.03 W at the output out of 100 W that you spent at the input (0.03/100 is actual efficiency), so you can never feed-back it.
But, an important thing to note, there is a clear violation of CoE here, and that's what is steorn's claim. Whether this is true remains to be seen. Please buy it and publish your results.
Note that the OU is seen only in measurements, not in the form of any real work/energy. Steorn has never clearly published their measurement protocol. I hope **Hugh Deasy** is reading this and he will agree to post the protocol that he has used when he got that result, in detail here.
Paul Lowrance evidently you don't even understand calorimetry primers on the internet either. You could improve your knowledge if you compare what hyperphysics describes and how they do their experiment versus what Steorn did. Maybe then you will understand. I'm guessing even then, probably you won't.
Anonymous you have fallen into a classic trap. Efficiency is output divided by input, period.
A claim of 99.99W + 0.01W in and 99.99W + 0.03W out is a claim of 100.02W / 100.00W = 100.02% efficiency. If one cannot get the 0.03W without also supplying the 99.99W, it is nonsense to speak of the 0.01W in isolation.
The problem with an alleged efficiency of 100.02% is that requires a measurement accuracy of better than 20ppm on all quantities. And there lies a frequent mistake made by many people who have claimed overunity. A very small percentage error: 10ppm makes the difference between underunity and overunity. If the main energy component is heat, there are very few calorimeters anywhere capable of measuring such small differences accurately.
All of this *speculation* of Orbo's producing 0.03 watts output from 100 watts input is 100% incorrect. Sean already provided the *total* power to spin the eOrbo. It's far lower than their pickup coil output.
My orbo replications produced significant gain. Total input for TOR v4 was 180 mW, and total *usable* output power was 280 mW.
The other Anonymous said -
The problem with an alleged efficiency of 100.02% is that requires a measurement accuracy of better than 20ppm on all quantities.
I totally agree with you. I did not fall in any trap, I was just repeating whatever steorn said (or appears to have done).
Theoretically, I don't find it problematic, but practically, it would need too much accuracy and very strict measurement protocol to demonstrate. So you are right and so is Sean when he said it would need the accuracy of a hard disk to replicate.
That's why I'm asking Hugh Deasy, what was the protocol ? What was the error margin ? How was the issue of noise, offsets and other errors taken care of ?
"accuracy of a hard disk to replicate."
has nothing to do with measurements. Sean was talking about adjusting the device, and would require adjustment precision found at a hard disk manufacturer.
I particularly enjoyed Steorn's live demo that showed over 300% gain.
If Steorn's live demo showed anything of any significance the mainstream press and every physics dept. of every University in the world would have been all over it. They were not because it did not!
"If Steorn's live demo showed anything of any significance the mainstream press and every physics dept. of every University in the world would have been all over it. They were not because it did not!"
Nope, that's not how they roll. Mainstream for the most part ignores such claims.
Ignoring the claims would be understandable considering the history. However proposing that they would ignore the proof of such a claim is lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist foolishness!
"However proposing that they would ignore the proof of such a claim is lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist foolishness!"
Hey, it's easy to test your theory. Name one University that will agree to analyze ss orbo? Hmmm? Sorry, academic science community is not what you think.
As I pointed out there is a long history of claims of having invented a Perpetual Motion Machine. Naturally, there never has been any proof of these absurd claims. If there ever was then "the scientific community" would stop at nothing to beat each other to the copious amounts grant and research money that would inevitably become available. To suggest otherwise exposes your lack of understanding of "the scientific community" not mine!
You're obviously not so knowledgeable in such claims. Take a look at the video clip of a recent popular television investigation show -->
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/09/24/seeking-ees-physicists-p2/
There you go, guy. The American Physical Society recommend an independent scientist, Rob Duncan, vice-chancellor of research at the University of Missouri, and an expert in measuring energy to go to a Cold Fusion lab. Dr. Rob Duncan spent two days taking measurements at the leading cold fusion lab, and searched for an explanation other than a nuclear effect, and then did the number crunching. Dr. Rob Duncan states, and I quote, "I found that the work done was carefully done, and that the excess heat as I see it now is quite real." When the interviewer asked Dr. Duncan, "Are you surprised at you yourself are saying this?" Dr. Duncan replied, "Very much. I never thought I’d say that." See the video interview for yourself. And the popular investigation television show, "60 Minutes", found that the pentagon has also clearly measured excess heat. The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, known as DARPA did its own analysis, seen in internal memo that concludes there is, quote "... no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments."
So there you go guy. One of the best University professors, Dr. Rob Duncan, an expert in measuring energy, and the USA Pentagon, and the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency all saying they measured excess heat. Now where's this mob of academic scientists breaking down the doors to see this, huh? LOL Sorry, but you have no clue of how much inertia (figuratively speaking) the academic science community has.
More lunatic fringe conspiracy theorist foolishness!
Paul Lowrance whether anyone will someday discover solid evidence of and a workable theory for cold fusion or not, the research is in very bad shape. Cold fusion suffers in that it has neither reliably repeatable experiments, nor any physical theory that holds up to scrutiny. The best it has going for it are a number of experiments that seem to have unsatisfactory chemical explanations.
The lead cold fusion proponent featured by "60 Minutes" was Mike McKubre. Dr. McKubre if not the leading proponent of cold fusion is one of the top few. Dr. McKubre now promotes his sponsor, Energetics Labs snake-oil called superwaves. Immediately following that "60 Minutes" piece he did public relations promotions with Energetics' founder, Irving Dardik. He can be heard in this interview http://pesn.com/Radio/Free_Energy_Now/recordings/2009/090420_MichaelMcKubre_IrvingDardik_ColdFusion.mp3 enthusiastically promoting that nonsense.
Energetics founder Irving Dardik first used superwaves snake-oil to cheat desperately ill patients out of large sums of money. He lost his medical licenses in both NY and NJ for that crime. What Dardik first sold as a magic cure for MS, he now sells as a magic cure for making cold fusion work. No one should be surprised even with the magic superwaves, neither Mike McKubre nor any other cold fusion fusion promoter can boil a simple cup of tea on demand.
Here is a very level-headed Washington Post piece from six years ago: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54964-2004Nov16_5.html
When after more than 20 years a field is unable to produce proof of the basic claim, and the lead proponent associates closely with and promotes the kind of total bunk represented by Dardik's superwaves the field is in deep, deep trouble.
Anon, you might fool some newbies with your twisted lies. Facts still remain. People can read my previous post and make their own decision.
It must really bug the hell out of you that the best and highly recommended University physicists, Dr. Rob Duncan from the University of Missouri, recommended by the American Physical Society said on camera that it produced excess heat. And that a memo from the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency states "no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments."
Proof is in the measurements, which clearly shows excess heat. The problem once again is the stability issue, but regardless when it is working, it does produce excess heat.
And you're correct about one thing, modern physics equations (Quantum Physics) cannot predict the excess heat.
Paul Lowrance, you have three choices:
*Substantiate your false accusation that my post contained lies (which you cannot) or,
*Withdraw your false accusation, or
*Demonstrate that faced with damaging information you elect to smear others with lies and lack the character to correct yourself.
Rob Duncan did not say that Energetics had cold fusion. He said that he did not find fault with Energetics data, and that the data indicated excess heat over the accounted electrical input energy.
You wrote, "When after more than 20 years a field is unable to produce proof of the basic claim"
That's incorrect. Dr. Duncan is a qualified physicists who said on camera, "I found that the work done was carefully done, and that the excess heat as I see it now is quite real."
The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency wrote, "no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced in these experiments."
Measuring excess heat just *one* time is all that is required, but it happens far more often than that. They can get excess heat 70% of the time.
Until you can admit the above facts, there's no need to waste anyones time by continuing this conversation.
Furthermore, I can prove to anyone that highly shielded and *undisturbed* diodes and piezo elements produce a voltage across a load. So far numerous EE's and physicists have verified my claim, yet you don't see an army of academic scientists breaking down the door. In fact, one EE, by profession, asked a University professor that he knows to analyze this. The professor said yes, but later on declined the offer. There is a great resistance in the academic community. Very sad. In more ancient times they used to burn people at the steak. Modern man burns careers.
sorry, "steak" should be "stake". ;-)
BTW, I blogged about one of the EE"s who replicated my diode and piezo experiments by mentioning his first name and the country he resides in. He emailed me in anger, demanding I remove the information!
Paul Lowrance, that is no refutation of my statements. It is an admission that you don't understand that excess heat in an experiment over expected results is just that: excess over what is accounted for and expected. Excess heat means that something unexplained is going on of which cold fusion remains an extremely remote and to date completely unproven possibility.
Wriggle all you want. You cannot show that I lied as you falsely accuse. What you choose to do defines your character, not mine.
You all seriously expect people to believe that Steorn has developed free energy, fire 2.0, and they are working with the SKDB, hoping some hobbyist or internet geek will overcome the obstacles and engineer something in his basement?
You expect us to believe they would do all this Waterways stuff and all this puttering around with forums and kits?
If they had such a thing, they would be approaching major corporations with boardroom presentations and getting the resources they have behind product development.
The scenario put forward here and by Steorn is laughable.
Paul Lowrance if you tried to imply an endorsement that was not granted then you abused the good name of the person whose endorsement you claimed. If that's what you did, shame on you. If I were you, and I ever wanted to get help from anyone else, I wouldn't advertise such past misbehavior without also offering a sincere and profuse apology with an honest pledge to never again take such a misstep.
Jeff, yes the whole Steorn claim nonsense is completely laughable. Just the same, some people not only buy it, they promote it.
Here's another incorrect quote, "Paul Lowrance whether anyone will someday discover solid evidence of and a workable theory for cold fusion or not, the research is in very bad shape."
That's two so far. Shall I continue.
As far as me apologizing to the EE, no need because as stated I only wrote his first name and the country he lives in. He's not a notable scientist, so there's no possible way anyone could guess his identity. Regardless, he did not like it, and it demonstrates just how *paranoid* the academic community is. Shame on all of you that discourage others from researching any field they want.
Quote, "Jeff, yes the whole Steorn claim nonsense is completely laughable. Just the same, some people not only buy it, they promote it."
You cynics are trying to hard.
You can't show one business investor who's sued Steorn.
Numerous EE's and physicists have taken efficiency measurements on the Orbo. So far they've measured excess energy. I personally know two scientists who separately went to Steorn in Ireland to take such measurements.
Phil Watson has analyzed every version of Orbo, and has recently stated on camera that the Orbo produces excess energy.
Dr. Huge Deasy has taken efficiency measurements on the Orbo, and has recently stated on camera that the Orbo produces excess energy.
I've taken detailed measurements on my orbo replications, and have clearly measured excess energy. If you want to call me a liar, then that's your privilege, but at least I don't hide behind an anonymous name trying to trash a company that will bring global free energy.
Paul, you all made the same silly mistake. You listened to Sean when looking at the measurements and threw out the law before the flaw. You were more willing to dismiss C of E, despite centuries of proof that it works, before you questioned what was really shown by the measurements. It is one thing to get readings that show OU, it is an entirely different thing to have something that IS OU.
You are like children in their math class who toss out the answer sheet and emrace their mistakes. It is a comforting world--until you try to build a bridge.
Paul Lowrance, if you don't understand the wrong you do by attributing an endorsement that was not granted, that's just too bad for you. If you don't understand what constitutes credible evidence or proof, that is again just too bad for you.
I can predict without the least fear of contradiction that your diode and piezo efforts will never realize a working power generator. I can similarly predict that Steorn will never produce either proof of their claims, nor produce a working power generator.
Revisit either or both in a year, two years or whenever. You will find that I am correct. It won't be because I can magically see the future. It will be because our understanding that nature doesn't offer a free lunch has been so well verified, and neither you nor Steorn offer the least bit of verifiable evidence to the contrary.
Great to see such a lively debate going on here. Let's see what happens on Wednesday. These boards may indeed be the idea Christmas or Halloween present for an engineer or OU fan.
Hugh, magamps have been used for more than a hundred years. Amplify, they can. Make free energy, they don't.
On the protocol I used to measure: A current clamp on a portion of wire remote from the coil (so magnetic fields don't affect it) gave current. A differential voltage probe gave voltage. We took the measurements using an oscilloscope with inputs from the 2 probes. The data was recorded and transferred to PC by memory stick. We used Excel to assess integrated energy before and after the battery was disconnected. The area after (output) was 3 times that before (input). More details or the actual data can't be given out due to my NDA. If you are really burning to know, then just sign up for a board. Is 360 Euro such a price to pay? Ask for money back if it doesn't work. But for that price you get free advice from Steorn staff who will correct whatever you're doing wrong.
On Wednesday there will be the official release.
"On Wednesday there will be the official release."
How many "official releases" have we had from Steorn now? - LOL
(Oh wait ... Don't tell .. This time it will be different ... right? - LOL)
Yes, I know it's easy to feel jaded after 2 versions were already released.
The difference this time? - Well, this time you can have your own system and prove it yourself as well as access all data on the SKDB for just 360 Euro - this board is the cheapest and easiest version yet. The spinning versions were so complex and sensitive to precision engineering that they couldn't be sent out to multiple users in this fashion.
"Yes, I know it's easy to feel jaded after 2 versions were already released.
The difference this time? - Well, this time you can have your own system and prove it yourself as well as access all data on the SKDB for just 360 Euro - this board is the cheapest and easiest version yet. The spinning versions were so complex and sensitive to precision engineering that they couldn't be sent out to multiple users in this fashion."
Hugh, does this mean that you have to join the SKDB and therefore sign Steorn's NDA in order to purchase the board? Or do you know if you can you just purchase the board without signing any NDA?
Hmmmm... good question. I presume that one must indeed sign the NDA. But I'll enquire and get back on this one.
It will be very telling if they will only allow you to buy their "tech" if you sign a gag order first!
"The area after (output) was 3 times that before (input). "
The scope image in the video appears to show:
*An initial high level drive pulse
*A much longer sustaining drive pulse
*A discharge pulse
One evaluating input and output energy is a total fool if they disregard the sustaining drive pulse. You can thank me later Hugh.
blogtrotter said...
We used Excel to assess integrated energy before and after the battery was disconnected.The area after (output) was 3 times that before (input).
Hugh,
Thanks for your reply. Now its clear that the device shows OU only in measurements. This should clear many doubts.
What is not clear from your reply is - are you talking about energy stored in some capacitor before and after the operation ?
If you are integrating the pulses at the input (V*I) then the energy before connecting the battery and after disconnecting it must be exactly zero because no battery = no current. Am I right ?
I'll ask again, (becuz its very important) -
1) What were the actual values of Ein and Eout in Watts (or micro watts)?
2) What is the error margin ?
3) whats the resolution of the scope you used ?
Note that I'm not asking you to divulge trade secrets or violate your NDA. I'm only asking some general stuff like measurement methods you have used, so that I can confidently place my order ASAP.
I hope you will oblige us all.
Correction:
1) What were the actual values of Pin and Pout in Watts (or micro watts)? (or Ein and Eout in joules)
Anon wrote, "Paul Lowrance, if you don't understand the wrong you do by attributing an endorsement that was not granted, that's just too bad for you."
Fortunately your insinuation is incorrect. If you think so, then do some self contemplation to find yourself. Here's a quiz for you: I'm thinking of a scientist whose first name is Geary, and lives in the USA. Who am I thinking about, LOL. <<>> ;-)
It's actually frightening to think scientists have become so paranoid. What has happened to academic science community.
Thanks for info Dr. Hugh. That clarifies a lot. You were measuring *total* coil input power. It appears you were not including joule heating on the output. Very impressive results! So this seems to clarify that the 300% to 750% people are measuring is usable power, and could easily self-run. I'm sure Steorn already has self-running SS Orbo's, as eOrbo's have been self-running for a long time. Of course, you know my stance on the instability effect, which you may or may not disagree on. This technology still needs a deep battery to keep the device running during the low periods, but the technology is still sufficient for public sale. :-)
Garbage In, Garbage Out.
With a transformer, the input energy is what drives the primary, and the output is what is delivered by any and all of the windings together, which in a simple arrangement would just be the secondary. Hugh says they used one voltage probe and one current probe. The board shows a two winding transformer. That means that they did not measure everything going in and out of the transformer.
First on the NDAs - no official statement yet, but SKDB-ers opinions as well as the wording on the website, clearly indicate a n NDA is needed. Otherwise the trade secret is violated.
On the exact power in and out and resolution of hte scope, I'll get back on that later.
To Paul - yes, the power should be available for use. Sean said a few says ago they hadn't built a self sustainer yet as they hadn't time - they are 'not IBM'. But it should be possible.
Quote, "That means that they did not measure everything going in and out of the transformer."
Hugh already said he measured input and output power.
Hugh, it will be great news to hear when Steorn gets a self running SS Orbo.
Has anyone heard of a company that's working on implementing an Orbo into their product?
"First on the NDAs - no official statement yet, but SKDB-ers opinions as well as the wording on the website, clearly indicate a n NDA is needed. Otherwise the trade secret is violated."
Very Funny! If there was "trade secret" to protect, it would be out the moment one of these boards was shipped! No silly NDA would get in the way of that! The Chinese and the Russians wouldn't really care much about any unenforceable NDA. I also suspect that the American military would not let the NDA prevent them from acquiring this "trade secret"! Ever heard of Wikileaks? Of course there isn't anything of any value to protect, so the point is moot.
"On the exact power in and out and resolution of hte scope, I'll get back on that later.
To Paul - yes, the power should be available for use. Sean said a few says ago they hadn't built a self sustainer yet as they hadn't time - they are 'not IBM'. But it should be possible."
Very, very funny! What makes Sean think IBM have the literally Godlike ability to create energy from nothing? But seriously, closing the loop would is the only important thing that Steorn need to do. It would eliminate all argument and doubt. For Sean to say that they have not had time to do that, while they seem to have had 4 years for playing around creating online discussion fora, e-learning modules, and this latest battery powered joke, beggars all but the most naive belief!
Hugh has said many things. Among the most important is that he has said that Steorn's rig demonstrates the god-like power to create matter/energy. That statement defies the most basic and intense research in science. The probability that the statement is correct is essentially zero. Look to many delays from Steorn closing the loop, as it will never happen.
Official statement:
purchasing of a OEDU gets you the following items
http://www.steorn.com/skdb/oedu/
* 12 month Developer License
* 12 month SKDB Membership
* 1 Orbo Evaluation and Development Unit (OEDU)
* 1 USB memory stick with test data
So no on the NDA - its the same license agreement that is available here for review
http://www.steorn.com/skdb/legals/developer-license.aspx
The SKDB membership agreement section 12 is an NDA section.
On the gain and resolution etc:
The gain on this sort of board is typically of the order of a few milli-Watts. That's subtracting input. So if you did close the loop, you would get out some mW. The time resolution of the scope we used for our measurements was a fraction of a micro-sec. But you could use a somewhat lower resolution scope. I can't give any more details than that.
"Haven't had time to build a self-runner."
That is the exact same thing as saying, "It won't self-run."
The idea that you would simply not get around to trying to make a self runner is absolutely silly.
Wouldn't closing the loop be the very first thing you do with a discovery like this? Having worked in engineering for almost twenty five years I cannot imagine any engineer not wanting to do this as soon as possible for the ultimate "eureka" moment. I mean after seven years since Steorn made the alleged discovery they couldn't find a day or week to do the most obvious thing imaginable?
And I believe Steorn have stated having had self-runners from three or four years ago but now they say they haven't done it? The PM Orbo was supposedly a self runner but no one outside of Steorn has ever seen it work and they abandoned it.
This also goes against the Waterways demonstration which supposedly showed a self runner. Is Steorn saying now that they in fact have had the time to do that?
This does not make sense.
Watts go in, milliWatts come out, and the promoters call this nonsense 308% overunity.
The closest Steorn will get to closing the loop is when they stop trying to turn the machine on in the first place.
Who said anything about the SS Orbo requiring "Watts"? Has anyone seen figures on input power?
I'll bet the Africans waiting for the promised pumps (which Sean said were in the process of being built, years ago--another lie) wish they had "gotten around" to making a self-runner.
Another lie by anonymous. Show a quote by Sean where he "promised" that?
As for the African pump, as I've detailed, there is an effect I refer to as the Instability effect. This is clearly seen in a wide range of excess energy claims from Cold Fusion to Orbo to my Hue device. There's no chance the PM or E Orbo could have achieved that job, but I betcha way back then Sean thought for certain the Orbo would be stable like some Alkaline battery.
Excess energy researchers, be prepared for the biggest task so far, solving the instability issue.
blogtrotter said...
On the gain and resolution etc:
The gain on this sort of board is typically of the order of a few milli-Watts. That's subtracting input.
Thank you very much. This clears up why it will not self run. (unless you have superconducting coils)
Assuming that the total output is input+gain, it is OU, but since the input is always lost as heat, it will never self run. You must convert all the heat back into electricity to be able to feed it back, every cycle.
A superconductor may solve the problem, but cooling it will required many more orders of energy than you can gain. Even IBM won't be able to self run it at this time. It needs serious engineering.
Yeah Paul, nothing is as unstable as something you only imagine is working.
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/09/24/cold-fusion-proof/
Quote, "But there’s another problem that critics point out. The experiments produce excess heat at best 70% of the time. It can take days or weeks for the excess heat to show up, and it’s never the same amount of energy twice."
Dr. Rob Duncan, a PhD in physics, vice-chancellor of research at the University of Missouri, an expert in measuring energy said the Cold Fusion experiments produce excess heat.
Just thought newbies to this blog should know that. :-)
As I have pointed out before, ALL of these "anonymous" posters are debunkers and pseudoskeptics from the moletrap forum. They are NOT in the least bit "anonymous" - lol
There is zero point in engaging with them. They have a crystal clear agenda to shoot anything down that argues with establishment thinking.
Half of them are religious nuts who believe there's an invisible man in the sky, but then tell you there's no such thing as free energy.
lol
Actually Craig, there is a much higher percentage of us who are atheist than the general population. And skeptics is what we are: people who won't believe outrageous claims without appropriate proof. You can call us pseudoskeptics all you want, but the scientific skeptic movement is strong and growing, and is fighting irrationality, superstition, lies, frauds, hoaxes, and uncritical thinking everywhere.
You hate us because you champion those things.
The idea that you are only a skeptic if you subscribe to the insane idea that all claims are equal, that say, the claim that the moon is made of candy is equal to the claim that there is oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere, is insane.
Philosophical skepticism is different from the scientific skepticism that defines our movement, but we never claimed to be philosophical skeptics.
Just thought I would help clear that up for you. You sound even more like an ignorant buffoon every time you shout your silly "pseudoskeptic" nonsense.
Jeff Omalanz-Hood, I claim that highly shielded and undisturbed diodes and piezo elements produce a voltage across a load. This effect cannot be explained by conventional physics. It's actually a very easy claim to prove, and has baffled a lot of EE's and physicists who've replicated my claims. Would you care to make a legal bet, a business deal on my claim? Any time pal. Put your $ where your big mouth is.
Another area that academic science cannot explain is Cold Fusion. One of the most qualified scientists in the world, Dr. Rob Duncan, PhD in physics, vice-chancellor of research at the University of Missouri, an expert in measuring energy said the Cold Fusion experiments produced excess heat.
Anytime big boy. We'll see who has the better mind. You think your so rational. What you lack is intuition, guidance, intelligence, and a focused mind. You're a lost personality. Your skepticism is being replaced with objective truth seekers. Where so-called scientific skepticism fails is where it attempts to prove something wrong. The problem with such a methodology is that it's very easy to obtain the results one seeks. The idea with truth seeking is that one seeks data without making a judgment until after all of the data is meticulously analyzed. We should all be thankful the court systems do not follow your failed and flawed so-called scientific skepticism because a lot more innocent people would be imprisoned. Truth is your method didn't last long at all in old court system. What ended up working was a jury of people who do not judge until *after* all of the data was in and meticulously analyzed. Your demonstrate your so-called scientific skepticism when you instantly judge claims without having replicated and meticulously analyzed the claims. You somehow believe you don't need to fully analyze such claims because in your mind you "Just know it," which classifies your unscientific skepticism methodology as a faith religion. I can promise you one thing, your modern so-called scientific skepticism has failed, bursting at the seems, and will not survive another decade.
In case you have already forgotten, I challenged you to a legal bet. I predict you'll wiggle your way out of the challenge, try your best to avoid it, make a bunch of ignorant excuses, and change the subject, and to be perfectly honest with you it's no big deal to me. Just know that I'll always back up my claims. Albeit, I'm the first to admit that some claims are extraordinarily difficult to prove in a short period of time in that they require a significant amount of time to complete. Although the shielded piezo experiments are relatively simple to prove.
This comment has been removed by the author.
No Jeff, skeptics are open minded and have a pursuit in of the truth NO MATTER WHERE IT LEADS.
You and your pseudoskeptic band of merry men have ALREADY pronounced judgement WITHOUT TESTING ANYTHING.
A real skeptic would never do this. A REAL skeptic applies critical thinking while ALSO keeping an open mind.
There is a difference that you would do well to understand.
Take time to reflect on what you truly are.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_YYtF_2Hno
Actually, the courts DO follow the rules of scientific skepticism. The side making the claim (that the accused is guilty) must prove it, or the status quo holds.
If they took the attitude you take to claims that go against what we know about how the world works, the assumption would be that either guilty and innocent start equal, or that guilty is true until the status quo proves it isn't.
Thank goodness you are wrong and that our criminal justice systems use a process like that used by us skeptics.
As for making a wager with you. I will not take advantage of your self-proclaimed high functioning autism financially. I know you have Aspergers syndrome, and applaud you for how you have adpated, but I won't benefit from your disability for gain.
Paul Lowrance, nothing you have actually shown defies established physics. Perhaps someday you will realize the fundamental errors in your thinking. I'll not hold my breath waiting.
Jeff Omalanz-Hood wrote, "Actually, the courts DO follow the rules of scientific skepticism. The side making the claim (that the accused is guilty) must prove it, or the status quo holds."
You are incorrect because you failed to acknowledge a fact that the jury does NOT judge a person until after all of the data is fully in and meticulously analyzed. You see, Jeff Omalanz-Hood, you just proved the great flaw in so-called scientific skepticism. You were so gungho at disproving me, that you were guided to not see certain aspects.
Fact: Mass majority of scientist have immediately judged my diode and piezo claim replying back that I am wrong, that such components do NOT produce voltages across a load. They have repeatedly made this judgment call without replicating or meticulously analyzing the claim. An honorable objective truth seeker would say they simply don't have the time, rather than saying the claim is wrong. The truth is, Jeff Omalanz-Hood, you skeptics are in love with immediately dismissing claims based on your magical abilities "to just know." Your so-called scientific skepticism has evolved into the very monster you people hated so much, modernized faith religion.
As for your reply to my legal bet, hmmm, looks like my prediction was correct. You wiggled your way out of it by insulting me (a distraction) saying you won't take advantage of my Aspergers syndrome, LOL. Oh, you pseudoskeptics are so predictable and pathetic. ;-)
There was no insult intended and I would not have mentioned it except for the fact that you bring it up often yourself. But I was sincere.
As far as the courtroom analogy, it is clear. The person making the claim (in court the prosecution, in this case Steorn) has the burden to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. If they do not, the default (in the case of a trial, innocent. In the case of Steorn, that C of E holds) stands.
It is simple, it is clear, it is rational.
Steorn has not come anywhere near a conviction of C of E.
Jeff Omalanz-Hood, you said:"As far as the courtroom analogy, it is clear. The person making the claim (in court the prosecution, in this case Steorn) has the burden to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt."
Your scientific proouncements are made the comfort of sitting on your fat arse in a chair. You have tested NOTHING, yet you offer the courtroom analogy where as you well know; the verdict comes at the end after ALL of the evidence is in.
Which courtroom are you ACTUALLY talking about? The one named after an Australian marsupial?
Jeff Omalanz-Hood, you someone think you're being rational, but you've missed the obvious by a long shot. Regarding my piezo claim, the scientist that I submit my claim to would be the jury. After all, the scientist must make his own decision about my claim. I've submitted my claim to numerous scientists. Often they will make an immediate judgment without replicating or going over the data. The fact that you've failed to understand this concept proves my point about skepticism. That is, you went out of your way to prove what you believe in. Regarding me being the prosecutor, indeed, the burden of proof is on me, but that's kind of difficult to achieve when the jury judges me before I even get a chance to present the data, LOL. Hello?
So again, everyone should be thankful that juries do NOT follow your so-called scientific skepticism by immediately placing a judgment on the prosecutor without accumulating all the data and meticulously analyzing it. Man should we should be thankful. Modern science is still barbaric, with patches of faith religion. The fact that a scientist I am working with became paranoid because I mentioned his first name and the country he lives in is a testimonial of tho present state of modern science community. They're still barbaric and to proud to see it.
An honorable and intelligent scientist would either say he doesn't have the time, or would agree to analyze and replicate my claim. To be perfectly blunt with you, in my firm opinion, you my brother, and your pals at moletrap are causing a lot of harm to society. I've received nothing but total harassment from you people, yet you can't name one person at moletrap that has taken an hour to carefully stick a piezo element inside a chassis to even get an idea if my claim is correct.
The defense rests.
lol - The defence rests on it's fat unscientific arse.
I hear Seamus has said that the Wednesday release has been moved to "soon."
Is anyone surprised?
Oh please big bully, take advantage of my Aspergers syndrome. He he, I've never heard that excuse before.
ps, mass majority of psychologist firmly believe that Isaac Newton had Aspergers syndrome. I'm in good company. Truth is, Aspergers syndrome is a syndrome where the personality is heavily dominated by a mental logical existence, while humanity in totality is dominated by an existence of the emotional state.
Aspergers syndrome is your next evolutionary step. ;-)
Anyhow, good night, and pleasant emotional dreams. May you have a Soul awakening one day.
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/10/11/failed-scientific-skepticism/
Jeff Omalanz-Hood, you said: "I hear Seamus has said that the Wednesday release has been moved to "soon."
No Jeff, not true. Seamus or Steorn have not publicly specified a launch date for this previously, so the date has not been "moved" as you say.
This is the first official word on a possible launch date and is yet further proof of your attempts to sling mud and to hope some of it will stick.
Hugh announced that it was to be Wednesday on this blog.
Are you saying Hugh made it up or is lying? If so, that doesn't speak well for his testimony about the 308% gain.
On the self-running version: We had this debate with e-orbo as well: we all urged Steorn to close the loop while they seemed more interested in the scope measurements. Eventually, at the demo in January though, they DID close the loop. They are careful engineers and only when all the detailed research is a done deal do they go for the full self runner. On the afro-pump - that's still on the plan, but it seems African bureaucracy has slowed it down.
As for the scepticism debate - the best is just to ignore the scoffers and get on with the job of OU and breaking Newton's laws and thermodynamics etc.
If they had a self runner, why didn't they show it?
They seem to be terribly shy about showing anything that doesn't look like a silly attempt at fraud.
Hugh, this fantasy that Steorn demonstrated a self running eOrbo is beyond ridiculous. Steorn never monitored battery current and voltage in public view. Yet the battery is the primary energy input and output of the eOrbo. A show of self-sustaining operation requires at a minimum more energy returned to the battery cycle by cycle than drawn. Steorn did not do that.
Steorn did use as a buffer a battery that could run easily run such a small, low speed motor on fine bearings for many weeks. Of course that was much longer than the reed switches could hold up.
Steorn were careful alright. They were careful to avoid any direct measurements that would immediately expose the falsity of their claims.
Steorn were asked why they needed a battery, especially such a large one. Sean's priceless complete nonsense answer was that the battery was needed because capacitors have inferior pulse handling characteristics to batteries. The real world facts are exactly the opposite.
The fact that science does not have all the answers does not mean that the answers that it does have are wrong!
CoE is one of those answers.
Anyone proposing that Steorn can somehow create energy from nothing should look into that ...
Soon this board will spread like wild-fire and we'll look back on these quaint comments with amusement. Steorn were never about satisfying comments as the above. It was a case of 'just do it'.
Soon this board will spread like wild-fire and we'll look back on these quaint comments with amusement. Steorn were never about satisfying comments as the above. It was a case of 'just do it'.
More like a case of "just say you will do it, raise some money, and then stall, misdirect, prevaricate, procrastinate, move the goalposts, go silent, re-invent yourself, launch something that isn't it, promise some more stuff, launch something else different that still isn't it, then make some more promises, create various online fora, make announcements, then stall some more, then rinse and repeat!"
Dr. Hugh Deasy wrote, "Soon this board will spread like wild-fire and we'll look back on these quaint comments with amusement."
Very true. It's often difficult for me to resist commenting on the twisted lies of cynics. It's just bothersome thinking that newbies will not see the other side. :-(
Anyhow, what you said about Steorn closing the loop on the eOrbo makes perfect sense. If memory holds true, Sean said it required a few milli watts to keep the eOrbo spinning, yet the eOrbo produced over 30 mW. Not sure if the few milli watts was everything, but if my memory is correct, that tells me the eOrbo had plenty of excess to self-run.
So this recent info dismisses the silly ideas of for example one watt input and only a 1.03 watts output.
Good job everyone! As Larry the Cable guy says, git r done.
"Steorn were never about satisfying comments as the above. It was a case of 'just do it'."
If by 'just do it', you mean make big claims, never substantiate those claims, and collect lots of investor money, then Steorn have done lots of doing. If by 'just do it' you suggest make anything that proves their claims, Steorn's motto is 'just fail'.
Oh the bliss of ignorance!
The investors were inverting in Steorn as it was a security and general innovation company. Sean showed them the evidence of the PM orbo and asked if they could change direction and research that, and they said 'sure - go ahead'. There are no new investors.
LOL! Hugh in your position I don't think it's very wise to wield the ignorance sword.
My prediction is that Steorn will be lucky if they sell 10 of these boards. They will never reveal how many they have sold and the dearth of online forum chatter about it will be the only clue about the sales figures. It's a desperate attempt to generate cash to delay bankruptcy.
Look at the case of the Waterways "third party testing." I don't think anyone is aware of a single company participating in that.
It's possible that there are only four remaining full-time employees and they twiddle their thumbs and surf the net.
MileHigh
When I was there 4 boards were ready and destined for ' corporate customers' . So it seems some (possible big) companies will be provided with the boards before individuals. i already heard of several people new to this signing up for a board - so it will be a problem meeting demand. The SKDB will also have many boards being tested.
Paper Collar Joe said it best: "There's a sucker born every minute."
It is certain that many of the people signing up are doing so to show how silly is the claim that the board showed a 308% gain in energy.
I know of a few who have signed up for that reason myself. Personally, I don't like to give money to frauds.
Jeff Omalanz-Hood wrote, "It is certain that many of the people signing up are doing so to show how silly is the claim that the board showed a 308% gain in energy."
Lets remember that Dr. Hugh is talking about gain, not electrical efficiency. Electrical efficiency in electrical engineering is defined as *useful* power output divided by the total electrical power consumed.
No one thought we were talking about that Paul
Yes, Paul we know the latest from Steorn has no useful output in excess of its input. Unless one needs a little more heat in the room it may have not useful output at all. We know that it's only use is to confuse the careless and/or ignorant into believing Steorn's nonsense claims that they can create energy/matter.
I said that because of the known tendency for skeptics to go out of their way to debunk. In this case the skeptic might take the easy path by only considering *useful* power output. So my statement was helpful.
Skeptics have no need to "take the easy path." We have reality on our side. You should try it sometime.
One prime example is the bad science done by one who posts under the anonymous user name of Alsetalokin. For example, all of Alsetalokin's eOrbo replications are prime examples of bad science. He's been warned numerous times that the magnetic cores he uses have insufficient permeability, yet he continues on with his crusade to so-call "disprove" Steorn's eOrbo claims.
Any nonlinear transfer function can be utilized to produce gain. Gain does not constitute the creation of energy/matter.
The eOrbo as I understand it from my TOR replications would indeed produce excess energy from most magnetic cores, but the gain would be so infinitesimal with a common ferrite core that the tester would have to consider *total* output, and that includes wind and bearing drag. To see significant gains requires a special magnetic core.
Once again you speak of stuff you don't know. You mean tinselkoala. Tinselkoala has completely reproduced all of the behaviors demonstrated by Steorn's eOrbo. Unlike your nonsense and Steorn's, Tinselkoala's science is rigorous and fully exposed.
Nonsense Paul, Al has shown that the Steorn Waterways claims are invalid, and you know it, unless you are as dim as you claim.
Jeff, Paul Lowrance is what you see.
If you can't see how the reproduction of all the behaviors Steorn says show OU in a device that is demonstrably NOT OU disproves Steorn's claim, you are a very dull boy indeed.
Anonymous wrote, "Any nonlinear transfer function can be utilized to produce gain. Gain does not constitute the creation of energy/matter."
No, not for *energy* gain. We're not talking about the gain of an op-amp for example, LOL.
BTW, the term "excess energy" does *not* insinuate the creation of energy or matter. It merely suggests there's more energy output than what the system *itself* put it. For example a common term used by EE's is "excess noise," but it does not insinuate that noise what created from nothing. Anyhow, CoE is perhaps where I disagree with Sean and Dr. Hugh.
yes Paul, most of us already know you're dumb as a boot.
regards , genesis
Quote, "You mean tinselkoala."
Wrong, as stated, he posts under the *user name* of Alsetalokin.
Alsetalokin bad science has been exposed on numerous occasions. Another example beyond the fact that Alsetalokin uses the type of magnetic cores that would provide bad results is that Al places a rotary blade directly over the spinning plastic disk, as seen in Alsetalokin's video. This is bad science to the highest degree because as stated in the rotor blade specs from the manufacturer the blade is calibrated in "*free* air space" appreciably far away from other surfaces extended by a thin pole. Any EE or physicists would immediately see the huge error in Alsetalokin's work.
It's a bit sad that he's your only so-called hero. Truth is, he's a reflection on moletrap cynics who are classical pseudoskeptics.
LOL! No Paul, Steorn have no energy gain. Signal gain from a non-linear transfer function is absolutely all that Steorn have. It is century old science. Steorn are playing games with magamps. Steorn's gains do not constitute an increase in energy over that supplied.
PS work on definition of your system boundaries.
Tinselkoala's You Tube channel link is:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=tinselkoala&aq=f
Alsetalokin / Tinselkoala user name at moletrap.
Tinselkoala's You Tube Orbette videos are very complete. They reproduce the behaviors of Steorn's eOrbo in every way. Tinselkoala shows that the Orbettes are not overunity. If you want to keep claiming that there is something wrong with the Orbettes, it is up to you to show that the eOrbo behaves differently.
Anonymous wrote, "Tinselkoala's You Tube Orbette videos are very complete. They reproduce the behaviors of Steorn's eOrbo in every way. Tinselkoala shows that the Orbettes are not overunity. If you want to keep claiming that there is something wrong with the Orbettes, it is up to you to show that the eOrbo behaves differently."
Incorrect. Again, Alsetalokin, uses incorrect cores? Listen, anyone using ferrite cores can get the same scope signals that Steorn displayed. Steorn only showed a few areas of the setup on their scope. Does that mean Steorn used ferrite cores? Of course not. That's the mentality and logic of a pseudosceptic.
In case it did not sink in. I can replace my MAGAMP cores with a ferrite core, and with fine tuning could get the same scope shots that Steorn displayed. There are countless more areas in the setup that one needs to stick a scope and match up in order to see the difference between the two cores. Were you aware that my *first* Orbo replication attempt used ferrite cores. That's correct, and my scope shots were just like Steorn's. It was a complete joke, a disaster. Then I used Metglas MAGAMP (not necessarily the same cores Steorn uses), but the difference was as night and day. The ferrite cores produced less than 10% efficiency. The MAGAMP cores produced over 100% efficiency.
I've done everything but beg Alsetalokin to take my simple advice. He won't do it, which is suspicious in itself. The first step would be to use some recommended magnetic cores. The cores he uses are a joke, and a blatant attempt at disproving Steorn.
Alsetalokin will continue to ignore the advice because his intent is as clear your intent.
LOL! You have just done a wonderful job of establishing that Steorn have failed to prove their eOrbo claims.
And no your metglas cores did not produce over 100% efficiency. By saying so you simply document your inability to measure properly.
Ages ago this is what made the cynic and debunker Alsetalokin / Tinselkoala famous, the whipmag Alsetalokin motor -->
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV7CO8No-CE
Alsetalokin to this day refuses to allow anyone look at this motor. Is Alsetalokin a faker attempting to destroy (or keep destroyed) the "free energy" community?
It's the Metglas MAGAMP core fetish effect in action.
The only way you can observe this effect is to be with Paul Lowrence and put on a pair of glasses with special glazed glass lenses while hopping on one foot and chanting Schrodinger's equation backwards.
I know how to shed light on you people. Anonymous, if you and your pals can muster up a $100,000 reward, then I'll work my b--t off making another TOR, find a University professor to take the measurements. *If* the University professor measures more power on the output than the input, then I win the $100,000 reward.
Metglas is really useful material for building useful real-world devices like magamps. Many a free energy believer have deluded themselves into believing that metglas cores and some hocus-pocus results in free energy. What they mistake for free energy has been erroneous measurements, every time.
I'm done with my LTSpice work on the PC, but will be back later on to see your response, or shall I say your excuse as to why you & your pals will not offer a reward.
LOL! You can get one million from James Randi today. If you could prove you have free energy you would be able to get billions the day after you won Randi's million. Hop to it.
If for some reason you aren't up to that. $100k is fine: Yours against mine. The money goes into escrow. We agree on a neutral and fully qualified lab or university to test. The loser also pays for the test.
Sorry, I forgot to post this url, http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/10/12/light-shed-on-cynics/
Anonymous, I've documented numerous emails that I sent to the James Randi organization, and how they never once replied back. They are afraid of such claims. Furthermore, last I heard the James Randi reward ended last year.
So that leaves you and your pals. What's matter, you afraid I'm correct and will collect, LOL? Come on big boy, in your mind I'm wrong, so such a reward would be safe. Come on. What's the matter. This sheds a lot of light on your people.
Paul, for most of us, things have to reach a certain threshold to be worth bothering about. Your current work, much like the diode work you abandoned years ago after saying it was successful, does not meet that threshold.
Sorry you can't scare up any interest, even from most debunkers.
Anonymous wrote, "Paul, for most of us, things have to reach a certain threshold to be worth bothering about."
Your answer is a "No." You can be bothered posting here all day, but not accept the challenge. That's a shame for me since I could have used a $100 grand for my research. ;-) Although your refusal to accept the legal bet is a good thing for you pseudosceptics.
Anonymous wrote, "Your current work, much like the diode work you abandoned years ago after saying it was successful, does not meet that threshold."
Abandoned? Me & an investor will place a legal bet with you pseudosceptics any day that highly shielded diodes contained for say 4 months within the shield will be producing over one volt DC. FYI, the diode research was *replaced* with piezo research because they produce ~ 10 times the DC voltage. BTW, interestingly enough the built in internal E-field within piezos is ~ 10 times that of diodes. It wasn't much longer than one month that I was working on my piezo research. Furthermore, a few days ago yet *another* EE contacted me to replicate my highly shielded piezo experiments. I'd hardly call that "abandoned."
Paul,
voodoo on you:
cancel cancel cancel cancel cancel
Now you have it.
Paul:
"Me & an investor will place a legal bet with you pseudosceptics any day that highly shielded diodes contained for say 4 months within the shield will be producing over one volt DC."
Another big technical use of language FAIL in that sentence showing again that you are a rank amateur.
Personally, I am not surprised at all that you can charge a very small capacitor with a diode. If I recall correctly you can make a LED flash once per day with a minuscule "puff" of light from the charged capacitor. It's a very impressive nano-watt power source that Whoville could use.
It all comes from solar power Paul. Why not just use a solar panel?
MileHigh
Paul Lowrance, the Randi Foundation has an application process. If you follow that process you should get a response. If you don't get a response within 60 days publicize the fact with the completed application.
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-application.html
If Randi won't respond then we can arrange a bet: Your $100,000. against mine. Loser pays costs.
MileHigh, show an academic paper that shows a highly *shielded* diode or piezo element producing DC voltage that includes the math that would predict such an event.
The truth is, MH, your post is yet another blatant lie. That is why Stefan from the OU website banned you from the site, for telling too many lies, and that's exactly what Stefan said.
Anyhow, I'll be waiting for you to show the math and explanation how a highly shielded diode or piezo element that's been contained for at least four months would produce DC current across a load.
Anonymous, I posted my updates on the Randi organizations lack of email reply at the OU website. Anyhow, great, so lets get the $100,000 legal bet going. I'm the one doing the work, building the device. So you need to do all of the legal work, and find an objective 3rd party to analyze my claim. As stated, I only need to produce over one volt. This is not about how much power it can produce, but about proving the claim, that diodes or piezo elements produce DC voltage across a load, which is a clear violation of conventional physics.
Can you and your cynic pals start on this today?
Paul, does your highly *shielded* diode or piezo element block unauthorised OBE access?
Here's where I documented some of my emails to the James Randi organization -->
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6439.0
I even offered to Bcc anyone who wished as proof that I was sending out such emails.
Anyhow, since you probably don't want to hear anything about the OU website, just moments ago I registered at the J.Randi discussing website forum. As soon as a forum admin approves my registration I'll post my claim over while asking for possible explanations why the J.Randi organization did not even reply to my emails.
For anyone who's interested the details can watch my blog site where all all sent emails will be posted. Also I'll ask the J.Randi organization (if they even reply) if it's okay to post their emails as well.
LOL, so you didn't fill out one of their applications and you're surprised that they ignored you.
No you have to do better than get a voltage reading. If you wish to claim you can rectify noise energy, then you have to demonstrate that you can do that. Voltage is not energy. You have to deliver average continuous power produced by one passive device delivered to another passive device each held at the same macroscopic temperature.
Tell me what average power level you claim you can produce in a demonstration from ambient heat at or about 25C.
But seriously Paul, does your highly *shielded* diode or piezo element block unauthorised OBE access?
Incorrect, as stated many times, the highly shielded diodes and piezo elements produce DC voltage across a load.
Incorrect about the reason they did not reply. As clearly stated in my emails I must know certain things in order to fill out the application. Any sincere organization would not ignore repeated emails. They are afraid of the claim.
Hugh Deasy, are you deleting my posts?
Anonymous wrote, "LOL, so you didn't fill out one of their applications and you're surprised that they ignored you."
To prove that you have no clue what you're talking about, read the following quote from the JREF Research Assistant -->
[This blog site keeps deleting my post for some reason. Maybe it does not like J.Randi ;-), so you'll have to read it at my blog site -->
http://tiny.cc/nsv6s
Paul Lowrance
Anonymous, someone keeps deleting my posts. I've now concluded it's not the server. If it's not Hugh Deasy, then somehow has his password, and he should quickly change it.
Anonymous, if you get this message then lets please move our conversation over to my blog site. You can post comments there without a registration.
Paul Lowrance
its all sabotage Paul - to destroy your reaserch!
and watch out from cancel, btw
No -I'm not deleting any posts. I honestly don't know what's happening with that.
@blogtrotter
it is his usual paranoia, he is backing off....as usual when triped in falsehood.
don't take him serious
Then someone has your password. Maybe someone saw my posts being deleted and will come forward, and lets hope the hacker does not delete their posts as well.
BTW, it might take more than just changing your password. If they have access to your email account, then they could retrieve the new password by email.
Backing off of what anon? You did not even reply to my recent posts about our legal bet. I'll ask you again, can you start on the legal aspects today? It's illegal to conduct in a bet, so it must be a business deal / transaction. Also, we can continue this conversation at my blog site or by email. Your pick.
Furthermore, I sent JREF an email about where the perpetual motion machine form is for the $1000000 challenge? You think I'm backing off, LOL?
Well Paul, my impression is that your diode array is extracting energy from ambient thermal noise. So what does *shielding* have to do with it? Thermal energy is everywhere, and it will flow right through the shielding.
From your overunity.com link:
"Last night the measured DC voltage was 23.9uV (0.0239mV) DC across a 2M ohm load."
That's 2.856 x 10^-16 watts. That's not even enough for a single Who in Whoville.
"Furthermore, the mathematics shows that a diode array made of microscopic diodes could produce thousands of watts per cubic meter."
Another huge FAIL. The diode array is extracting a tiny fraction of the available ambient thermal energy in the environment. Therefore the theoretical limit for the cube would be a function of the potential heat flow through the six-square-meter surface area of the cube. That certainly would not be "thousands of watts."
So you are back to Square One. The ambient thermal energy ultimately comes form the sun. I can go to the dollar store and get a solar-powered calculator for $1.99 that will put all of your diode "research" to shame.
MileHigh
MileHigh, you're in desperate mode now. Lets go over to the physics forum where academic scientists see if you're correct. I already know because I've been there. According to academic science diodes *CANNOT* produce a DC voltage across a load by rectifying ambient thermal energy. That is a violation of 2LoT.
2nd of all, EE's have no problems measuring sub volts on op-amps that have more than 1e+15 ohms. As example, that would be 0.1 V^2 / 1e+15 ohms = 1e-17 watts. Furthermore, to demonstrate how hard you people are trying, I have clearly stated far too many times that I can get piezo elements to produce well over 5 volts @ 10 pA, which comes to 5e-11 watts.
You have no clue what you're talking about. Let me know if accept my challenge of going to the physics forum. Again, the claim is the academic scientists will clearly say sufficiently shielded diodes cannot produce DC voltage across a load. I'll be waiting for your reply to see if you accept the challenge.
Paul,
First of all, It's a pleasure speaking to you here because I know that if any of this dialog was attempted on your own web site, every single posting I would have made would have been deleted by you. That's to your shame. Here you can't do that.
"According to academic science diodes *CANNOT* produce a DC voltage across a load by rectifying ambient thermal energy. That is a violation of 2LoT."
Perhaps they are just being dismissive of you too quickly because what you are doing has no practical application.
I am assuming the following: We know that the thermal noise produces a voltage waveform with a Gaussian distribution. Therefore once every blue moon there is noise voltage spike that has enough energy to get a few electrons across the band gap of the diode. And those electrons get collected in your capacitor,or they flow through your 2 mega-ohm resistor. Wow!
Why would you say that this is a violation of the 2LoT? You are EXTRACTING some heat energy to get those electrons across the diode band gap. So thermal energy is being converted into electrical energy and energy is CONSERVED.
You have been playing with diodes for years and this never occurred to you? It's unbelievable!
I am going to pass on the physics forum, thank you.
MileHigh
LOL, this is hilarious. It's a good thing you passed on the offer to go to the physics forum because your last post would get you a lot of laughs, or they would simply delete the thread.
What you write is what I am many others have written for ages. Diodes do indeed rectify ambient thermal energy such as johnson noise, but that's not the main cause of the DC voltage that we're seeing. First of all, the BW of diodes decreases significantly near zero bias, so these diodes might produce say a few pico amps DC by such rectifications. We're seeing well over one volt on some diodes, and the DC voltage has nothing to do with the diodes BW. Piezo elements also produce a *DC* voltage, and they're not rectifies. What's interesting is that piezos thus far has produced ~ 10 times the DC voltage as the best diodes, and the data I've been able to obtain shows the piezo elements have ~ 10 times the internal E-field. There's the correlation between diodes and piezo.
As for my website, the only things you try to post are riddled with ad hominem. Also you enjoy handwaving physics by saying things like "You're wrong Paul. You don't know what you're talking about." Those are just claims. You need to stick to science, you know, something that's unambiguous like math, or perhaps experiments. Show me the experiment that shows I'm wrong and I'll gladly let your posts go through.
Sorry, this "First of all, the BW of diodes decreases significantly near zero bias, so these diodes might produce say a few pico amps DC by such rectifications."
should be "First of all, the BW of diodes decreases significantly near zero bias, so these diodes might produce say a few pico volts DC by such rectifications."
pico volts, not pico amps.
Paul:
I don't claim to be an expert in this stuff but I have the distinct feeling that I am on the right track.
I think in your letter on overunity.com you mention something about running the experiment at a constant ambient temperature.
I have a high degree of confidence that as you lower the ambient temperature of your setup the minuscule energy output will also go lower and at some point way before you get to absolute zero the output would be essentially zero.
You are not producing energy out of nothing with your diodes, you are glazed-eyed dreaming. The energy comes from the ambient thermal energy.
You diode project will never go anywhere, and it has no practical application. Same deal for Steorn's Orbo.
MileHigh
MileHigh wrote, "The ambient thermal energy ultimately comes form the sun. I can go to the dollar store and get a solar-powered calculator for $1.99 that will put all of your diode "research" to shame."
Nobody here couldn't possibly have time for you because look at your post. I have clearly said over and over that we're talking about highly shielded components (metal chassis) that are contained within for months. The longer they rest inside these chassis, in complete darkness, the better they perform.
So you go get your $2 solar cell and see how well it performs inside thick metal chassis in complete pitch darkness for 4 months? A single piezo element will blow it away.
Anyhow, this is too much time spent on this. Your intent is perfectly clear. So go ahead and lie up a storm about me and such research. Periodically I'll post here.
MH wrote, "You are not producing energy out of nothing with your diodes, you are glazed-eyed dreaming."
Geeze, enough of lies already. I never said that. In fact I wrote here at Hugh Deasy blog that I disagree with him and Sean that the energy comes from nothing. See my blog site where I've blogged up a storm how I think the energy comes from the quantum foam. I've detailed this a lot-- search for virtual particles, the sea of energy, which creates positive & *negative* energy.
Give this a rest, man.
first of all, diodes do not rectify johnsons noise. second johnsons noise doesn't come from the sun.
please stop these nonsense,this has been discussed to death.
pLOL is telling flam.
Paul,
The good old quantum foam and "negative" energy explanation, Tom Bearden to the rescue. You forgot "cold" current.
You've got nothing Paul. It's pathetic how you try to claim that I am lying all the time.
The jury has been out on you for a long time Paul. Your claims of having produced free energy systems multiple times over the years of your research are laughable. None of them would bear up to serious independent investigation. You consistently pull the wool over your own eyes because of your wishful thinking. You have never produced free energy, ever, and you never will. You will remain marginalized.
MileHigh
Ok - I'm going to change my password, just in case. But it's a mystery to me how anyone could have it.
Hugh, none of his posts have disappeared. This is a common delusion of his. He did the same exact thing back on the old Steorn public forum, claiming people were changing and deleting his posts.
He also claimed people were trying to harm his health with "voodoo words."
Hugh, Craig/007/FE Truth is over on the Moletrap forum talking about how hilarious and embarrassing it is that anyone believed you about the Wednesday release. Given that the information came from you, can you tell us if that date had originally come from Steorn? Or did it come from a third party? Or was it wholly your invention?
More lies and obfuscation in typical moletrap style. You wouldn't know the truth if it painted itself purple and danced around singing "I am the truth" in front of you.
What I ACTUALLY said was that I found it funny that you dumbasses on Moletrap quoted Wednesday without checking the OFFICIAL line from Steorn.
Get your story straight dipshits.
Actually, the comment to which you object was very accurate, Craig/007/Newseditor.
And I would also like to know where the information originated.
I suspect it came from Steorn.
Couldn't give a toss mate.
"MileHigh, you're in desperate mode now. Lets go over to the physics forum where academic scientists see if you're correct. I already know because I've been there. According to academic science diodes *CANNOT* produce a DC voltage across a load by rectifying ambient thermal energy. That is a violation of 2LoT."
One sometimes has to look pretty hard to find such ignorance.
Hugh, Paul Lowrance seems to be making stuff up again. Do whatever you feel you need to be confident of your security. I haven't seen any posts from Paul Lowrance go missing.
I'm sorry about the Wednesday thing - it seems it's been postponed for a few weeks. Though I'm sure I saw Wednesday slated for the release initially. But in recent days there have now been a few statements about 'in a few weeks' for the official release. SO that ' soon' on the OEDU pic is to be loosely interpreted.
These things happen Hugh. Only 007 thought it was a big deal.
" ... SO that ' soon' on the OEDU pic is to be loosely interpreted."
In the context of Steorn "soon" always has, and always will, simply mean "not now"!
Hugh, I'm surprised you didn't see the event in the other thread. It must of lasted nearly a half an hour where I would post, and in about 10 to 30 seconds later it was deleted, in ~~ 30 seconds later I would post again, etc. At first I thought it was the server deleting the posts, but after doing some tests determined it was definitely a person.
Anyhow, anonymous, after registering at the JREF forum yesterday, later yesterday my registration was not approved, it was denied. Maybe I'm on some undisclosed "silence" blacklist, LOL. No problem, it just gives me more motivational energy. Hey, at least you cynics are good for something, you're all a free motivational energy machine, LOL.
Another incident occurred on the popular physics forum, where I created a thread that only contained the data from my diode and piezo experiments. No headed debates, just polite stuff. I have a witness who saw my thread being deleted. ... Nice world we live in. Looks like somebody's in control of us.
Paul,
I don't have time to constantly monitor every thread. I have some simulations to run and am waiting for results from someone else of a system of my own. Could also be interesting, like your HUE and TOR!
Hugh
Good to hear you're working on such systems. The more researchers, the better.
I might end up having switch over to a magnetic core that has the coercivity of a permanent magnet, perhaps even NdFeB. That might help improve the extreme instability issues with the Hue device. The chinese government would love that, as they mine 97% of the worlds neodymium, which is raising major concerns in consuming countries.
Have you seen the MEG? It uses the same physics-- guided dipole/domain rotation. It also has the same issues, ridiculously difficult to fine tune, and when it does it will self-run for a only short periods. Years ago a french guy who visited J.L.Naudin contacted me saying that Naudin was indeed able to get the MEG to self-run, but for only very short runs. Good part is that Naudin was using ferrite magnets, not NdFeB. Anyhow, my hats off to Steorn if they made a major breakthrough in the instability issue. It's also the #1 issue with Cold Fusion.
Enough of my ramblings.
Paranoid schizophrenics often think that they see and hear things no one else does. They often think they are singled out by some organized effort against them.
Anonymous wrote, "Paranoid schizophrenics often think that they see and hear things no one else does. They often think they are singled out by some organized effort against them."
That's funny, I'm sure able to quote you guys rather well. Ah, looks like I never even made up a quote yet. Well would you believe that, LOL. And to this day not one person has been able to show any proof that I've lied about anything. :-)
That pretty much destroys your delusional sermon about me that you preach to everyone. ;-)
I just want to say that I'm 100% behind you guys. I'll be buying a Steorn OEDU myself and I look forward to announcing any gains that I find.
Well done to Steorn for getting this information out tot he world. We have free energy!
Forget the naysayers. They are assholes.
Post a Comment
<< Home