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.

 

The Steorn magnetic motor replication by JL Naudin

page: 9
46
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Okay, apparently some folks have difficulty with English. Let's break it down:



No the live experiments will not use a calorimeter due to practical reasons - instead Joules 1st Law will be applied to calculate heat ouput.


Okay, notice the words "live experiments." This gives us context and shows that they will not use the calorimeter because of practical reasons. Now, what those reasons are, we don't know, and to JUMP THE GUN and speculate that it is because they are afraid of doing those tests for fear of being "found out," is just plain silly. There are OFTEN cases where bringing in more equipment will compromise your test, especially if you had a previous case of sabotage, as often happens with these kinds of things.

You will notice that in the present demonstration, the entire setup is encased and protected. Undoubtedly they had problems in their 2006 demo, so this time they are being VERY careful, and not giving any would-be saboteurs the chance to ruin it for them again.

Okay, next sentence:




However we will be publishing full calorimeter tests before the end of January - you will be able to download these from our site.


Notice the word "however." This indicates that the first sentence is not 100% true, but that there is an exception or contradiction to the premise. In this regard, we see that they will publish a full CALORIMETER report before the end of January. That did not say a report made by calculation, it said a report of the results that come from actual measurement.

So, I really don't see what all the fuss is about. After reading everyone's responses to this quote from their website I concluded that people must just be reading what their eyes wanted to read, based on their already PRECONCEIVED beliefs.

Really, you all should read the classic book by Thomas Kuhn if you really want to understand your own mind-blocking processes that will keep you from advancing:

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

It is a true classic that will likely make you upset... after all, the truth is sometimes hard to handle.




posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:42 PM
link   



Okay, but don't you find it kind of suspicious that they refuse to take the measurements during the live demo? That was kind of the whole point of the live demo in the first place, wasn't it?


They will be taking their measurements directly from the device... not using an outside device to calculate. The math is all there... no calorimeter is really needed.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 


But they have been claiming all along that Orbo is an energy source, that it can power cars, houses etc! So why would they only bring a magnetic motor to the live demo that isn't powering anything, instead of actually demonstrating it generating power??

Suspicious........



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


It is a power source... it has a battery that it constantly charges and pulls power from... and the next set of test should prove or disprove any theories.

The home tests do not yet include a battery that charges... THE REAL ORBO DOES.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup

Yes, and if you READ the entire statement from them, they said they WILL provide a report of their actual measurements, but that they will not do the measurements during their live demos.

OK, I will accept that. But then why was this published:

Originally posted by djcubed

During January we will be doing a sequence of live experiments - these will be streamed and then posted on our YouTube channel. The sequence is as follows: (1) Confirming that all the electrical energy input into an eOrbo interaction is output as heat. (2) Confirming that there is no change in the domain energy of the components that make up an eOrbo interaction. (3) Input to Output measurements - confirming eOrbo is Over Unity. Thats the sequence - if you have any (rational) requests with respect to the first of the above three experiments, please post them in this thread.

Steorn Forum Here
(emphasis mine)
?

Unless they measure how much heat is being produced, it is impossible to accomplish test number 1 by definition. It would have been far more intellectually honest to state that they were going to simply publish results from a calorimeter test to verify, by Joule's First Law, that all the energy was being dissipated as heat.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 


Huh?

Why wouldn't they demonstrate THE REAL ORBO at the much-anticipated live demo?

I just re-watched the presentation by Sean McCarthy, and there's no output battery there. They just demonstrate an electromagnetic motor that's not generating any power.




posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


What I mean is this is more than an empirical issue. This is where current theory fails.

Yesterday I turned 46. I started working with electricity at 6. So I have been at it for 40 years. My first introduction to the "free energy" movement was by a friendly stranger at my grandmother's house when I parked cars for the football games. I think I was in sixth grade. Pursued it on my own since then, was the first to build a logic gate in my school in seventh grade science.

Wait, I am going somewhere with this.

Around that time a peer, I remember his name as Duke Buster, had a dad who was an electrical engineer. He had asked me at the beginning of the year if I knew how a capacitor works, because he saw I was in G&T and didn't think I should be there if I didn't know. After I built the logic gate, he returned with the same question, and I failed again. Well, when working with two conflicting theories, it is impossible to tell the correct one without more information. I was working with both the Air Force version and standard EE model.

Now let me tell you all I never figured out how a capacitor worked until this year. This is because we lack a complete theory of emf. Those gents Bedini and Bearden are as clueless as sailors on a ship at sea without a compass in a storm without this understanding, and are ultimately doomed to fail in obtaining peer acceptance regarding any breakthroughs no matter how many times lab results show positive results, they don't have the language much less a complete theory to describe what is going on!

Now I will reveal the the correct theory. I did not discover it, but I discovered the one who did, and that is close enough for government work.

EM 1

Of course if anyone is interested in the person,

Ivor Catt

Even if empirical results and theory are important, which they are, the path to mainstream acceptance lies in an education curriculum. Without an entrenched curriculum for the theory it cannot be taught successfully, AND THEREFORE WILL NEVER BE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.

In other words all of you must lead yourselves out of the wilderness. Teach yourselves, then teach others.

Happy new year, and with luck, a new era.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


In the real tests that they ran with the orbo (not the open face demonstration shown here in your vid)... Please see www.steorn.com.... There is an obvious battery in use. These are the tests and "the real orbo" protypes we are referring to.

DO SOME RESEARCH IN PHYSICS FOR THIS NEXT ONE....
As for calculating the joules how many times can I say... Current, Resistance, and Time are all available to calculate heat/energy output.

I will not comment on why you don't need a calorimeter for this experiment again... it's getting to be repetitive!~ Please don't dismiss this unless you can explain how one of the three things above will not be available to them during testing.

You are making an invalid argument about data that but will be published online for download after the fact.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 


What I mean is this is more than an empirical issue. This is where current theory fails.

Yesterday I turned 46. I started working with electricity at 6. So I have been at it for 40 years. My first introduction to the "free energy" movement was by a friendly stranger at my grandmother's house when I parked cars for the football games. I think I was in sixth grade. Pursued it on my own since then, was the first to build a logic gate in my school in seventh grade science.

Wait, I am going somewhere with this.

Around that time a peer, I remember his name as Duke Buster, had a dad who was an electrical engineer. He had asked me at the beginning of the year if I knew how a capacitor works, because he saw I was in G&T and didn't think I should be there if I didn't know. After I built the logic gate, he returned with the same question, and I failed again. Well, when working with two conflicting theories, it is impossible to tell the correct one without more information. I was working with both the Air Force version and standard EE model.

Now let me tell you all I never figured out how a capacitor worked until this year. This is because we lack a complete theory of emf. Those gents Bedini and Bearden are as clueless as sailors on a ship at sea without a compass in a storm without this understanding, and are ultimately doomed to fail in obtaining peer acceptance regarding any breakthroughs no matter how many times lab results show positive results, they don't have the language much less a complete theory to describe what is going on!

Now I will reveal the the correct theory. I did not discover it, but I discovered the one who did, and that is close enough for government work.

EM 1

Of course if anyone is interested in the person,

Ivor Catt

Even if empirical results and theory are important, which they are, the path to mainstream acceptance lies in an education curriculum. Without an entrenched curriculum for the theory it cannot be taught successfully, AND THEREFORE WILL NEVER BE PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD.

In other words all of you must lead yourselves out of the wilderness. Teach yourselves, then teach others.

Happy new year, and with luck, a new era.


I really liked this material and think that it is definitely heading in the right direction and may indeed serve as foundational thinking. I especially liked this quote and analysis of something that Heaviside said:


"Now in Maxwell's theory there is the potential energy of the displacement produced in the dielectric parts by the electric force, and there is the kinetic or magnetic energy of the magnetic induction due to the magnetic force in all parts of the field, including the conducting parts. They are supposed to be set up by the current in the wire. We reverse this; the current in the wire is set up by the energy transmitted through the medium around it...."

The importance of Heaviside's phrase, "We reverse this;" cannot be overstated for digital designers. It points to the watershed between the 'practical electricians', who have held sway for the last half century, promulgating their theory - which we shall call "Theory N", the Normal Theory: that the cause is electric currents in wires and electromagnetic fields are merely an effect - and the 'ethereals', who believe what we shall call "Theory H": that the travelling field is the cause, and electric currents are merely an effect of these fields.

The situation is of course obscured by the many who claim that it is immaterial which causes which. However, experience shows that it is damaging to ignore causality when trying to assemble reliable digital systems.


What Bedini and Bearden both asserted was that everything in Bedini's circuit had to be reversed... in other words, all the components operated in a manner that was opposite of conventional electronics. That is what seems to be missed by those who want to debunk this kind of thing. They try to apply their forward thinking to a backward mechanism, and naturally that will not make sense. Bedini made it clear that he had to think completely backwards from conventional thinking in order to see what is likely going on.

Perhaps this is somewhat the same as Viktor Schauberger and his implosion vs. explosion mentality.

Another thing to keep in mind is that conventional education in magnetism is likely incomplete. Men like Howard Johnson devoted their lives to better understanding magnets, and in the process, discovered some fascinatingly new things. Here is a link to his book:

The Secret World of Magnets

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 


The live streams are down while they're on holidays.

Were the live streams demonstrating a motor-generator or just an electromagnetic motor, as in the Youtube video on their home page?

As for the calorimeter business, well anyone can just post a bunch of data after the fact. It would be a lot more convincing if they allowed independent third parties to take measurements during the actual demo.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorDisaster
 




And they say they are going to have outsiders testing in Jan. I guess we will see.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
It would be a lot more convincing if they allowed independent third parties to take measurements during the actual demo.


Remember, independent third parties did do just that before the live demo, and decided that jury announced its unanimous verdict that "Steorn's attempts to demonstrate the claim have not shown the production of energy".



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


Yeah, you have a point, that definitely didn't look good for Steorn. I have my doubts about them, but I'm quite certain Bedini and Bearden are the real deal.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Now let me tell you all I never figured out how a capacitor worked until this year. This is because we lack a complete theory of emf. Those gents Bedini and Bearden are as clueless as sailors on a ship at sea without a compass in a storm without this understanding, and are ultimately doomed to fail in obtaining peer acceptance regarding any breakthroughs no matter how many times lab results show positive results, they don't have the language much less a complete theory to describe what is going on!


Hi Matyas

I'm not so sure Bedini and Bearden are "clueless" about this. Bearden seems to have an especially strong grasp of the physics involved - not surprising since he has a PhD in nuclear physics.

BTW, since you say you have 40 years of experience, how would you feel about testing out one of Bedini's systems in person, with TheRedneck and maybe a few other guys?



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


Agreed... it doesn't look good.

Remember there's always Greer's sneaky scientists.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by djcubed
 


The reason I would defend the usage of a device to measure energy output as opposed to a calculation is that one is as real as your nose and the other is as sublime as your thoughts.

I put this in terms a math wizard could accept. The device if it functions as promoted should satisfy the objectivists and the theorists equally.

Normally it's those who are objective who have the gelt to promote this into economic viability. Do it my way and NO ONE can argue the findings as false.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   
Ok, I haven't read this complete thread because some of what you nay-sayers are regurgitating is ridiculous.

First: Over unity means, simply, that you get more energy than what is put in. It doesn't mean that you get energy with no input engergy.

Second: Tesla built a device for a Pierce Arrow electric car that, when two rods were inserted, got electric power from, as Tesla called it, the aether(ether). That would be electricity from nothing, boys and girls.

Third: The recreation of the Steorn device doesn't have a motor...it IS the motor. The battery powers the circiut that powers the torroidal coils. This creates a push/pull effect on the magnets on the wheel. The wheel in the back of the machine is to be attached to a generator. For the people saying that you can't see where the wires go to...did you look at the site? I'll post it again: jnaudin.free.fr....

Fourth: fyi: I believe the story about Tesla finding out about radiant energy was in a DC power plant that was being turned up.

For the rest of you: may your minds be open and may you see the truth.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 02:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by digifanatic
Third: The recreation of the Steorn device doesn't have a motor...it IS the motor. The battery powers the circiut that powers the torroidal coils. This creates a push/pull effect on the magnets on the wheel. The wheel in the back of the machine is to be attached to a generator. For the people saying that you can't see where the wires go to...did you look at the site? I'll post it again: jnaudin.free.fr....


You're right. The Steorn device is just an electromagnetic motor. But if they've found a way to eliminate the back-EMF, they should be able to add a generator in and have it generating power too.




Fourth: fyi: I believe the story about Tesla finding out about radiant energy was in a DC power plant that was being turned up.


Yeah, the Westinghouse plant, that Tesla designed himself.




posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster

You're right. The Steorn device is just an electromagnetic motor. But if they've found a way to eliminate the back-EMF, they should be able to add a generator in and have it generating power too.


Yes, he said on his site that adding a generator was his next step. I am eagerly watching his site to see what he finds when he does it. :-) There were people suggesting there was a separate motor which is why I brought it up. :-)



Yeah, the Westinghouse plant, that Tesla designed himself.


Cool...I didn't know it was the Westinghouse plant. The article I read just said he realized it in general, nothing very specific. Thank you.



posted on Dec, 31 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   


Newest Test Posted On YouTube

This test is pulling very low power to run... and notice when drag is added to this motor power consumption goes down, not up. This is a very important princible to add to a motor when looking at OU.

Personaly I really like this model for the motor.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join