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.
Originally posted by Matyas
It seems to me you have set the limits of the Universe and exist in a box. Are you afraid of being found dead when it is opened? It is the way you always have been. Oh boy indeed. I think the world would change if you changed your mind.
Originally posted by djcubed
reply to post by buddhasystem
How about at 1:15 where is doesn't exsist... or Steorns square scope trace showing no back EMF where Lenz's Law states there must be one.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
Across a coil, a square wave pulse should show a current which is the differential of a square wave at least. The current flow would follow a tangential curve from zero to maximum. The voltage, if the power supply was strong enough to handle it, could show a square wave pulse, but at the end the voltage would swing back negative. This is the back EMF that is being discussed. It does not show this, even on the traditional coil arrangement.
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
so is the instrumentation wired incorectly due to :
a - incompetance
b - fraud
well ???????????
Originally posted by djcubed
How to eliminate CEMF in an orbo style motor... NOT A HOAX...
Originally posted by Korg Trinity
A- Incompetence.... Since you have not established that the instrumentation is in fact wired incorrectly you cannot claim incompetence.
B- Fraud requires some gain; I can't see Steorn gaining anything other than notoriety which is not exactly a positive thing is it?
Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by ignorant_ape
To me, that twitching looks like the magnet interacting with the ferromagnetic core of the coil which has a large enough airgap to prevent the rotor locking in that position.
All this fuss about back EMF which is simply induction at work when a magnetic field intersects a conductor but back EMF in itself does not impede motion unless it can establish a current in opposition to the supply polarity.
Originally posted by djcubed
reply to post by buddhasystem
How about at 1:15 where is doesn't exsist... or Steorns square scope trace showing no back EMF where Lenz's Law states there must be one.
Ahhhh that's it... Lenz's law!~ If you had stated it was Lenz I would have so continued this pointless conversation with you... I gave you the chance!~ Maybe another time.
Originally posted by Pilgrum
Let's say the motor is allowed to come up to speed and the switch is then opened:
What voltage would we read on the voltmeter?
Does it confirm or deny the existance of a back-EMF?
Originally posted by djcubed
reply to post by buddhasystem
Steorn does not claim they break this law... you again are just making things up to post on this thread.
Did you even bother to look at the demonstration video?
a) He says repeatedly it's an overunity device -- which means it produces more energy than it consumes, meaning breaking the law
b) in part 4, you see a poster on the wall stating same. It says in plain English that the law of conservation of energy is violated in this device. You can't use a law like Lenz's law to argue that Lenz's law is violated. Unless you are a nutjob.
Now, who has the facts?
Got you.
Originally posted by djcubed
... so getting me doesn't win you a prize.
Lenz law is not the the same as the law of conservation... So I'm not sure what you are arguing...
If ANYONE can truly debunk this experiment, I would love to see there experiment showing that back emf does exist in an Orbo system...