Steorn Gives Alleged COP > 1.0 Demo Jan. 12 2010

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
pesn.com...











So here's the long-awaited Steorn Overunity demo. I found this just now and haven't watched the vids yet so I will have more to say later.

Enjoy!




posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Thanks for the update on this story, I have also been following it a while. Watching the vids at the moment.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I am up to the second video, but something just looks wrong.

I'll make more comments once I have studied this out thoroughly. Just know I am watching.


TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Seems sketchy to me.

McCarthy seems to get visibly nervous when the audience starts asking him detailed questions.

And they still haven't brought out the really good stuff - something that can actually power a load. "Oh, we'll be doing two more demonstrations still....."

Why not just bring out their best stuff right away?




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
So here's the long-awaited Steorn Overunity demo. I found this just now and haven't watched the vids yet so I will have more to say later.
Enjoy!


This certainly isn't an OU demonstration.

They didn't even show the circuit or where the diff probes are connected to.

I suspect the diff probe is connected across a coil. When you switch the coil off without a flywheel diode across the coil the current and voltage measured will drop to zero instantly because there isn't a circuit anymore.

The position of the optical switch sets the rotation direction not the coil polarity.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   
He might seem nervous but he's right. They are not trying to convince Joe and Jane Public but developers who can make real products out of it. I'm surprised that he didn't respond to the load question directly, since there is a load on it namely the generator on top charging the battery. Do you think a development company would care whether these demos are convincing to EVERYONE. No all they care about is the license fee and the cost of the product.

[edit on 14-1-2010 by broli]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Geez... In 4/5, what a load of cr@p he gives as an answer to the feedback question -- same question asked many times here on ATS.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Two questions:

1) if this can produce more energy than it requires, why Steorn doesn't become a motor developer themselves? this is a printing money machine.

2) the guy in the video said "it's about time frames interaction". I am no physicist, but with my limited knowledge of physics I can say that they draw energy from a future time frame of the machine.

I wonder if they can answer this question.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by masterp
 


Not to say I like their business strategies. But it makes sense. If you have a revolutionary car engine idea, are you going to built a car plant with little to no start capital to sell the cars that use the technology or would you sell its license to people who already own the plants to produce it? I think the latter is much more realistic and partially what patents are about.

On your second point. I believe the PRACTICAL science behind the eOrbo is not that hard. You just have to look at it stepwise and see what happens as the magnet approaches and leaves. And consider the effects in the meantime.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by broli
reply to post by masterp
 


Not to say I like their business strategies. But it makes sense. If you have a revolutionary car engine idea, are you going to built a car plant with little to no start capital to sell the cars that use the technology or would you sell its license to people who already own the plants to produce it? I think the latter is much more realistic and partially what patents are about.


Infinite source of energy is not a car. If their prototype works (which it doesn't) as advertised, and it doesn't even qualify as hi-tech, it should be trivial for them to build a larger unit to power their homes and start saving money on electricity and heat. One can power their electric car, too! That's a lot of saving.

Well I agree that venture capital would become necessary at some point, but after seen your free-energy house, car and the works, you'd have venture capitalists with wheelbarrows of money, cases of Cristal champagne and caviar lining up your street, vying for as much you bat your eyelash at them.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


buddhasystem, debunkers (if you even qualify for that) like you should be ignored without further notice. You're the type that will deny something even though you are experiencing it just to either protect your delusional sense of pride or worse get your paycheck from debunking.

So let's keep this simple. Ignore my posts and I'll ignore yours.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by broli
 





Not to say I like their business strategies. But it makes sense. If you have a revolutionary car engine idea, are you going to built a car plant with little to no start capital to sell the cars that use the technology or would you sell its license to people who already own the plants to produce it? I think the latter is much more realistic and partially what patents are about.


If that was even remotely close to the truth, they wouldn't be holding demonstrations for 'John Q Public'. They would be having independent labs verify the effect and negotiating in private with developers. The public would hear about it when they signed with Siemans or Phillips or whoever.

If the 'effect' was real, and they understood it, they would publish it, win the Nobel prize for physics and have all the legitimacy they need to license it to 'developers'.

The guy says you can't duplicate it unless you understand it. In other words, unless you understand that it is a fraud to begin with you won't come up with the same results.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
If Steorn are a fraud, why do they insist so hard? Selling the idea to developers will return a profit only if this works. Steorn will get a specific amount of money upfront, but the big bucks will come from each motor sold. So, if it does not work, there is minimal profit for Steorn. Not only that, but the damage done to their image would not allow selling Orbo to other developers.
Furthermore, developers will sue them for big bucks.
Usually, snake oil salesmen target the average Joe, not specialized customers.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
If that was even remotely close to the truth, they wouldn't be holding demonstrations for 'John Q Public'. They would be having independent labs verify the effect and negotiating in private with developers.


Remember what the hand picked by Steorn jury said? "The unanimous verdict of the jury is that Steorn’s attempts to demonstrate the claim have not shown the production of energy"


If the 'effect' was real, and they understood it, they would publish it, win the Nobel prize for physics and have all the legitimacy they need to license it to 'developers'.


That is the way proper science is done, not the way Steorn are doing it! Remember that they could very easily win the JREF $1million challenge, just by showing overunity!



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


No one's ever going to win Randi's unwinnable prizes, dereks. So maybe that's why a lot of people don't even bother dealing with him.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
No one's ever going to win Randi's unwinnable prizes, dereks.


It is not unwinnable, in fact it is very easy to win. All dowsers have to do to win it is dowse! All psychics have to do to win it is something psychic! All Steorn have to do to win it is simply show the Orboo is overunity!

So it is very easy to win (if you are a dowser, or a psychic, or make a magical perpetual motion machine like the Orbo)



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
If Orbo is fraud, why do they insist and for 6 years? they don't sell a product, so why do they insist on it?



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
If Orbo is fraud, why do they insist and for 6 years? they don't sell a product, so why do they insist on it?


Many OU inventors run on and on for the rest of their life with the same non working device. For example Joe Newman/

Steorn do sell products just not OU generators.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 02:47 AM
link   
I *was* going to watch the videos since they showed some fancy electronic test equipment, but then I read this:


McCarthy described some pending demonstrations they have planned, including a demonstration that will show that their neodymium-iron-boron magnets are not degrading, followed by showing that there is more electrical output out than is put in

pesn.com...

Bummer.

So I'm just gonna throw a guess and say that those three 8 minute videos just to show they have a motor that works on PWM (I assume thats why they need the oscilloscope for), then they talk about more over unity crap and provide no evidence whatsoever. Is there something I missed that will make the videos worth watching?

[edit on 16-1-2010 by daniel_g]



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by daniel_g
Is there something I missed that will make the videos worth watching?


No, there is still no sign of overunity, just as expected. There will be another demonstration "real soon now" that will not show it either





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join