It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Steorn Announces Public Demonstration of Orbo Technology

page: 12
83
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by 13579
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 





It isn't possible to take more energy out of a system than you put in. It is a simple observation that is totally logical and true. Sorry guys, but the best chance for new energy technology is being able to convert a unit of matter to its equal counterpart unit of energy. 100% conversion to energy so that the mass/energy conservation law is satisfied.


and that my friend is compleat and utter bull#

why?

ever work out human motabolism? i mean wtf are people on CRACK?

look? the human body can go on water and BREAD ffs and still OUTPUT more energy than in IN TAKES

get a grip

ZPE this is not its about getting more bang for ya buck in terms of atoms wizzing about..

you give em a push the wizz about they give you more by wizzing about..

IT HAPPENS EVERDAY WHEN YOU EAT FOOD how stupid are some people???

Good look to em .. and for all you NAY SAYERS

get bloody educated




Gives us some figures to prove your statement energy in from the food then the amount generated by the body.

THEN YOU live of a feeble diet of bread and water for as long as you can doing ALL the activites a normal person does every day.

But first of all post the place where you will be buried so we can send some flowers!!

ps Can we just suggest to the millions of people starving around the world that if they just lie about a do nothing they wont need food


YOUR THE ONE TALKING BS MATE!




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


Yes, gravity is a part of it, but it is the actual water that causes the whole thing to work.

This is an example of water flowing up hill




posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by downisreallyup
For example, you say that removing the battery will cause the thing to stop.... well if you break the circuitry, of course it will stop. And until you or I know for 100% certain why a battery was used instead of a capacitor, it is pure conjecture, so why don't you just admit that you DON'T HAVE AN OPEN MIND, and that any conversation with you is like trying to convince the Pope that Jesus didn't exist.


Well this is just a hunch, but John Bedini has stated several times, that a battery is much more effective at accepting radiant energy than a capacitor, which is why a lot of his setups use batteries. I could imagine that if you had a bat/cap or capacitor with electrolyte, you could possible see some of that effect. What needs to be done is testing, which unfortunately most people don't even bother. I have built Bedini motors, and I think this Steorn device shown, is probably very similar.

This is a Bedini/cole variation which has been on the same batteries for years.

video.google.com...#

This one uses just uses a capacitor.. This motor is open source btw, so anyone can get the schematic and test it..For those saying they're putting their money where their mouth is, built it..

video.google.com...#

[edit on 16-12-2009 by Freezer]



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
This is the thing about magnet motors, sure when you try to push the repelling ends together they produce a force, but how do you get that to translate into usable energy?

Just because the force is 500lbs. doesn't mean that you get 500lbs. of usable energy. There was a thread about a company that is starting to produce programmable magnets where the magnets are multi-polar instead of bi-polar, that is a breakthrough and opens up the possibility of a usable magnet motor. I have no doubt that a magnet motor can work, but the question is it practical? If you have to build a motor the size of a car to light a 60 watt light bulb then it isn't practical.

there are tons of videos on youtube of people building all kinds of different configurations of magnet motors looking for the elusive "free energy", with all the people trying to produce this effect someone by now would have figured it out by now.

This is the thing about magnet motors in order to build one that is practical and usable each magnet has to have more force than what you are trying to over come. Which means that if you are trying produce a power of say 1 Kw each magnet must have a force that is convertible into energy more than one Kw in order to overcome the fiction and also maintain the speed.

It is doable, but you need awfully strong magnets and way to convert the magnetic force into usable energy. Electromagnets is where it is at though.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Uphill, Both Ways


Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Yes, gravity is a part of it, but it is the actual water that causes the whole thing to work.

This is an example of water flowing up hill

(Youtube video)

From the Youtube contributor's comments:


Seemingly, we invert the gravitational law by making liquid flow uphill at the Physikshow of the University of Bonn! The clue is that the liquid is a salt (coppersulfate) and the duct has a magnetic field applied to it, and a current flowing from its one side to the other. Both the current and the magnetic field are orthogonal to each other and to the direction of movement of the liquid!

As I pointed out, water won't flow uphill without the addition of some sort of energy. This example does not refute that.

Meanwhile, your claims about hydroelectricity seem somewhat confused. On the one hand, you said:


Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Water can flow uphill too if you set up the right contraption. Gravity is not why hydroelectric dams work though. It is the force and volume of water that causes the turbines to spin, it has nothing to do with gravity. Gravity is just an effect of the earth an acting force that makes it feasible to create hydro electric dams.

Emphasis mine. Now you're saying:


Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Yes, gravity is a part of it, but it is the actual water that causes the whole thing to work.

So does gravity have nothing to do with it, or is gravity a part of it? These two statements are not compatible.

Don't get me wrong. I can drop it, and it's not a big deal if you don't care.

But I'm hoping you can see what's wrong with this picture.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by seethelight

Originally posted by jtma508
reply to post by seethelight
 


You can't be serious. Without the basic measurements that I have outlined at least twice on this thread no one, including you, can say whether or not this works.

Probability (based on the history of ZPE devices) says it is not a ZPE device. That's why you are able to make your courageous bet. There were LOTS of people like you betting against man being able to fly. It was a KNOWN fact that he could not. I imagine lots of courageous people, just like you, bet against it and won. Until we did fly.

Maybe ZPE will never work. Maybe there is no way of ever harnessing the energy around us. But I hope people never give up trying.


Not sure why it upsets you that my standard for success is "provability".

If I just believed everything I WANTED to believe I'd be like too many people in the world, a faith-er.

No thanks.

[edit on 16-12-2009 by seethelight]

Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually visit the Steorn demonstration...We all know you'll never visit the demo so just stop and leave us alone.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
This is the thing about magnet motors, sure when you try to push the repelling ends together they produce a force, but how do you get that to translate into usable energy?

Just because the force is 500lbs. doesn't mean that you get 500lbs. of usable energy. There was a thread about a company that is starting to produce programmable magnets where the magnets are multi-polar instead of bi-polar, that is a breakthrough and opens up the possibility of a usable magnet motor. I have no doubt that a magnet motor can work, but the question is it practical? If you have to build a motor the size of a car to light a 60 watt light bulb then it isn't practical.

there are tons of videos on youtube of people building all kinds of different configurations of magnet motors looking for the elusive "free energy", with all the people trying to produce this effect someone by now would have figured it out by now.

This is the thing about magnet motors in order to build one that is practical and usable each magnet has to have more force than what you are trying to over come. Which means that if you are trying produce a power of say 1 Kw each magnet must have a force that is convertible into energy more than one Kw in order to overcome the fiction and also maintain the speed.

It is doable, but you need awfully strong magnets and way to convert the magnetic force into usable energy. Electromagnets is where it is at though.


I agree with what your saying. But it is very very doable. I'm not on here trying to prove anything all I am saying is that the idea of magnetic motors that generate electricity works, but there are so many device (what the topic of this thread is all about) out there that are total fake. The dont work as in making more electricity coming out than going in to run it. Where as magnet motors can and have been proven to work on there own. no need for electricity to be put in but getting rotary motion out. also another note on the subject - The people who are making the devices seem to think that making there devices spin faster the better and more energy they are going to get out of it, this is wrong, they should be focusing on a slow RPM but have lots of torque (I learnt this from reading fred dibnah's book). and he is right. most devices will die after adding a load to the electrical circuit. Also when adding a flywheel to the rotor, it has only smooth out the rev range.

As for your statement of turning 500 pounds of force into energy, read some basic engineering books. There are 1000 ways of doing just that. We can even use frictionless bearings with magnets.

as for programable magnets, yes I have seen them in action and I dont see how they will help creating energy. Yes its ok for cupbourd doors and things like that. but in a gererator then i dont see how.

The V gate magnetic motor is a very fast rpm motor with not a lot of torque, we need something different, low RPM but bags of torque, then we are onto a winner.

Gareth



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


Of course gravity is what keep the water in the trough of channel or whatever you want to call it. But Hydroelectric dams work because of water, not because of gravity. If you take away the water you have no hydroelectric damn. It is the force of the water that causes the turbines to turn. That is why when you look at a hydroelectric damn the water is backed up on one side of damn in order to maintain a constant output.

What I'm saying is that the force of gravity has nothing to do with why Hydroelectric dams work. When I point out that we don't have a devices that uses gravity to produce energy that is exactly what it mean, we don't have a device that works off of gravity.

So no Hydroelectric dams do not work off of gravity, gravity is a force that exerts itself upon everything on earth, there is not one motor that works off of gravity itself and alone.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 

Again, this is somewhat confusing.

Are you asserting that hydroelectric power plants would work without gravity?



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Majic
 


Of course gravity is what keep the water in the trough of channel or whatever you want to call it. But Hydroelectric dams work because of water, not because of gravity. If you take away the water you have no hydroelectric damn. It is the force of the water that causes the turbines to turn. That is why when you look at a hydroelectric damn the water is backed up on one side of damn in order to maintain a constant output.

What I'm saying is that the force of gravity has nothing to do with why Hydroelectric dams work. When I point out that we don't have a devices that uses gravity to produce energy that is exactly what it mean, we don't have a device that works off of gravity.

So no Hydroelectric dams do not work off of gravity, gravity is a force that exerts itself upon everything on earth, there is not one motor that works off of gravity itself and alone.


I wasnt saying its ONLY gravity, I am saying Gravity plays a part. as it does with everything on earth, as you clearly said yourself.

if the rain water that fell on top of the hills then gravity pushes it down into the dam, or is it someother force that does this function?

All in all, I am saying gravity plays a part. thats all.

Gareth



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by gareth01422
 


But frictionless bearings is not usable energy, it is useful in the sense that it allows things that need bearings to cost less to maintain.

The same thing with the repelling force of the magnets like I said yes it produces energy, but the key to that is converting it to usable energy.

And yes you are correct torque is what you want, not RPM. Also you want to generate amps. So how do you specifically turn that 500lbs of repelling power into torque, you can convert it into other types of energy, but nothing usable. But if you turn them into electromagnets then you can get usable energy, the problem with that is though is that a certain amount of torque is being used to spin your stator through the magnetic field that is generated from producing the electricity.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


What is confusing about it? Take away water you have no hydroelectric dam. Add water you have a hydroelectric dam. Gravity plays a part as it does on everything on earth, but gravity is not the reason why hydroelectric dams work.

So to clarify gravity has its effect on everything on earth, even water, but gravity is not why hydroelectric dams work.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by gareth01422
 



But frictionless bearings is not usable energy, it is useful in the sense that it allows things that need bearings to cost less to maintain.


Thats not entirelly correct, Friction causes loss of energy, Heat energy is transfered from usable energy to heat energy. But yes maintainance is a valid point.


The same thing with the repelling force of the magnets like I said yes it produces energy, but the key to that is converting it to usable energy.


Read a basic mechanical engineering book. there are examples all around you. Engineering is more like common sence its only the manufacturing processors that can get complex.


And yes you are correct torque is what you want, not RPM. Also you want to generate amps. So how do you specifically turn that 500lbs of repelling power into torque, you can convert it into other types of energy, but nothing usable. But if you turn them into electromagnets then you can get usable energy, the problem with that is though is that a certain amount of torque is being used to spin your stator through the magnetic field that is generated from producing the electricity.


Well I think turning 500 pounds of force into rotory motion is not as hard as you think. Amps will come later when you attach a generator. I am not going to tell how to do it as that seems to be what your fishing for. Go do the research yourself. A great example of this is in .pdf format on the project camelot website.

The only things I want to point out in this thread is:-
1. I dont think this would be a viable way of producing enough electricity to power anything, let alone a vilage or town, the size of the unit would be huge.
2. I believe this is a devise to stop people looing into free energy as it will turn out it wont work the magnets in the generator are too far out from the center of the rotor.
3. What the hell is a depth gauge doing on the top of the device? is this to make it look more engineered?
4. there seems to be no PWM on the device (Pulse width module) which would pulse the electricity going to the motor coils, this would reduce the amount electricity required to turn the rotor.

Just my thoughts.

Gareth



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Majic
 


What is confusing about it? Take away water you have no hydroelectric dam. Add water you have a hydroelectric dam. Gravity plays a part as it does on everything on earth, but gravity is not the reason why hydroelectric dams work.

So to clarify gravity has its effect on everything on earth, even water, but gravity is not why hydroelectric dams work.


Uh not quite.

Take away the gravity and the water will not flow down to the turbines

Can't have a hydroelectric dam without both



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATS23

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Majic
 


What is confusing about it? Take away water you have no hydroelectric dam. Add water you have a hydroelectric dam. Gravity plays a part as it does on everything on earth, but gravity is not the reason why hydroelectric dams work.

So to clarify gravity has its effect on everything on earth, even water, but gravity is not why hydroelectric dams work.


Uh not quite.

Take away the gravity and the water will not flow down to the turbines

Can't have a hydroelectric dam without both

thats what Ive been trying to say



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Zero Point


Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
So to clarify gravity has its effect on everything on earth, even water, but gravity is not why hydroelectric dams work.

I'll defer to the math on this. Here's the formula for approximating how much power a hydroelectric power plant will generate, courtesy of good old Wikipedia:

P = phrgk, where P is Power in watts, p is the density of water (~1000 kg/m3), h is height in meters, r is flow rate in cubic meters per second, g is acceleration due to gravity of 9.8 m/s2, and k is a coefficient of efficiency ranging from 0 to 1.

Set any of the terms to zero, including gravity, and you get zero power.

While I still see assertions worthy of some head-scratching in your posts, I'll leave it at that, and leave the rest to you.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Majic
 


I think they have provided proof, just not to you and me, since we have not gone there and taken a serious look at it... at this stage, I don't think they are interested in lookie-loos, but are only interested in people who either want to experiment with it (paying their small license), or those who want to actually build a commercial product. Paying them even small fee gives them the right to enter into contractual agreement with you, giving the ability to control what you do with their intellectual property and remedy if you break the rules. Pretty standard really for people planning to make some money from their years of hard work.

In either case, there are consumer laws to protect a person if they are selling "snake oil" as some might suggest, but if that is what they are doing, they are being extremely stupid about it, since the small fee of a few hundred Euros is not worth the hassle or embarrassment of law suit and criminal charge, and all it would take is a single "proven" fraud charge to do them in.

Don't forget, we KNOW where their office is, where their demo is, who the CEO is, etc. It's not like they have been hiding and it's not like they are doing what typical con-artists do... give themselves a good escape route.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by downisreallyup
reply to post by Majic
 


I think they have provided proof, just not to you and me, since we have not gone there and taken a serious look at it... at this stage, I don't think they are interested in lookie-loos, but are only interested in people who either want to experiment with it (paying their small license), or those who want to actually build a commercial product. Paying them even small fee gives them the right to enter into contractual agreement with you, giving the ability to control what you do with their intellectual property and remedy if you break the rules. Pretty standard really for people planning to make some money from their years of hard work.

In either case, there are consumer laws to protect a person if they are selling "snake oil" as some might suggest, but if that is what they are doing, they are being extremely stupid about it, since the small fee of a few hundred Euros is not worth the hassle or embarrassment of law suit and criminal charge, and all it would take is a single "proven" fraud charge to do them in.

Don't forget, we KNOW where their office is, where their demo is, who the CEO is, etc. It's not like they have been hiding and it's not like they are doing what typical con-artists do... give themselves a good escape route.



You have made some fair points there BUT I still dont think it is what they say it is.

If I had device I personally would get a contract drawn up that stops people putting a patent on it, and the fee for the plans would be just to cover the charge of the contract drawn up.

See the thing is here in the UK, inventors come up with great ideas and try patent it, they draw the process out for 2 years and by the time they come to grant the pattent it has allready been copied for the big oil companys patent on the sly and then shelved. Ive seen this happen twice.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by broli
 


Is the orbo powering anything besides charging its own battery?
It would be great if it truly works as they say, but I haven't seen them put a load on it to show me its usefullness.



posted on Dec, 16 2009 @ 03:00 PM
link   



T. Science can't explain why electrons spin endlessly with no apparent power input!
That conundrum is always conveniently swept under the rug!

I'll give Stoern the benefit of the doubt for now!


[edit on 16/12/09 by plumranch]


Electrons don't really spin. The term was made up in Holland in 1925 to explain the electromagnetic field angular momentum of an electron. Pauli hated the term and wanted to exclude it, although Heisenberg liked it. Maybe. That was a joke. About WP and WH, not electron spin is a conceptual non-starter, given the point particle nature of electrons.



new topics




 
83
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join