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 to demonstrate OVERUNITY PROOF!!! Sat 30th

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   
From another forum

"Basically it went like this:

"testing 1,2,1,2"
"Orbo is overunity"
"thanks folks, bye" "


So as expected no sign of overunity at all, just snake oil salesmen!



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TheBorg
 


I hear you TheBorg...

And that is pretty much as good an explanation as we're likely to get regarding this kind of phenomena.

It's similar to what i've been saying, but if i may say, you have put it much more succinctly than i.

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
OK looks like I missed it, if by it I mean nothing just like I kinda expected


So what's next? Cold fusion?



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 


And i appreciate you too!

I've copied your last post, and i'll be pouring over it shortly, but i want to digest the information you've written a bit more before i reply, if that's OK with you. There's a LOT to think about in there!



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Well folks...

That...was...it.

I have to say, it actually was pretty much NOTHING like i was expecting.

If i was to say i felt a little deflated, i'd be doing how i feel an injustice.

I brought this 'demonstration' of proof of Orbo's OU to your attention, expecting something...definitive. A little more than a fuzzy trace on a scope, anyway. So, to all of you who, like me, thought we'd be seeing something in the way of absolute proof regarding this technology, i can only apologise for keying you up, or raising your hopes, only to ultimately frustrate you with lack of clarity. Sorry.

Even they guy (the replicator guy) in the audience was trying to say the same thing...i was willing him on to 'spit it out' when he said things could have been much simpler and more a definitive demonstration of OU would have been achieved.

Sean took him to mean the design of the Orbo itself, by saying "Orbo is in as simple a configuration as we can get", but i took him to mean the circumstances of the demonstration itself, not the design of the device. I guess he wanted to see the things i wanted to see, things like a actual numbers in and out, or a bank of lights or devices that couldn't be powered with the battery alone, or...well, more than we saw anyway.

I understand they are being cagey about their device and it's effect due to commercial considerations, but surely something more should have been done today..something more tangible.

As they have said, this is not being aimed at the general public, but developers to reorganise and restructure into a viable commercial product that will then be available to the public.

So as far as 'snake-oil' goes, they are not targeting the guy in the street and my view is that companies and corporations are are lot less susceptible to the smoke and mirrors that go hand in hand with a fraudulent technology. And if they are not..they don't last long.
Apparently, companies are waiting in line to take a stab at development.

Does this mean that Orbo does or doesn't work as advertised?

My position is that we now know nothing more than we did a few days ago. So..we still don't know one way or the other, and the waiting game continues.

You may have noticed a glimmer of light amongst the dark though, as you heard from the horses mouth, that until the end of the month, ANYONE can go along to their office, bring your own test gear (meters, scopes and so on) and play with one of the Orbo's...which is a remarkable offer, if they are indeed pulling a fraud..

I'm still undecided, but disappointed.

Thanks to most of you for your constructive contributions to this thread.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Thank you for your posts TeslaandLyne,

Interesting stuff contained therein!

If i'm being totally honest though (and i'm proud to say, i invariably am), that a fair amount of the theoretical information went right over my head.

I've saved the pages from your links and will add it to my reading material list.

Thanks, i've been an admirer of Tesla since i first read about him and his altruistic ideals.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Gigantic FAIL.

Great 5 year fraud. If they could count the extra energy this attracted from people laughing at it and somehow bottle it up, they might come out even. LOL



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


Yeah spiky, I hear you.
I have to go over
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
and
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
today if I can.

I just came back for the JJT date, 1893:


In reiteration, another Thomson—J.J. Thomson—had claimed to have mathematically developed the theory of moving tubes of force (Phil. Mag, xxxi [1891], p. 149). For his Recent Researches in Electricity and Magnetism (1893, p. 13), his hypothesis was the “the aether is a storehouse of mechanical momentum”,


I think it was available for online purchase and then not.
Perhaps too rare a book.

The problem with all the searching is that there is too much story
when you find it and how does it apply.

Good free energy hunting.
If the UFO exists and man made then free energy must exist.
So goes the hunt.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 


Blimey TarzanBeta,

You're as deep as i am! I don't often see someone else who thinks on similar lines to myself, not in 'normal' life anyway.
That's not to say, i think i'm any better or any worse than the next person, just occasionally think differently.

I do say though, that i find it surprising that most people, even those that are 'categorised' as possessing a high IQ, would go from cradle to grave never having considered ANY of the points in your post.

Having mentioned IQ, i have a theory, that unless a person is born with a physical or developmental problem in the correct formation of their brain in the womb, all people everywhere have an equal or very nearly equal capacity for intelligence or IQ.

Only social, cultural and environmental influences, coupled with ALL of our body's sensory input from the point the brain is considered 'formed' in the womb, right onward throughout life, are a cause of 'measurable' changes among different people..but anyway, most readers will be nodding off or reaching for the mouse if i meander any more. Maybe a topic for another day.

Wow, where to begin?

Infinity! There's a topic and a half!

I like to think of it like this; Ask yourself, as a mental exercise, to think of the past..of history. Most people i'd imagine, would see Wagons and settlers or tanks and fighters duelling, or medieval knights, and so on.

OK, now think back further into the past. I would expect people to see things like Ancient Egypt, religious lands, Sumer, and classical Greece and so on, then further still..dinosaurs, cave people and the rest.

Further..The Earth, pictured mentally as a fiery globe, meteorites crashing and pounding it. Then think of what the 'Big bang' might have been like..a light speed rush of everything, everywhere whizzing past, it's shape becoming smaller and tighter, diminishing into a minute point of blinding light, then...nothing. Not even the black of space.

It's curious to note and i find it a little ironic, that every single one of us, in our mind's eye can quite clearly picture everything written above, in sequence, even what the potential creation of the universe itself might have been like, but we cannot imagine or picture what 'nothing' is!

Nothing, really 'nothing', cannot possibly be black empty space or darkness as most would immediately picture it to be, because 'black' is a colour. It's a tangible..real thing. Black empty space is something..it's black..it's empty..and it's space, so it's definitely not 'nothing'.

But, while it could be said that we can't know 'nothing', is that because we lack the capacity to know it, or is it that we cannot 'see' it because we have not experienced it in the same way we have with the things we saw in the mental game above?

Before i knew anything at all about Earth history, or the formation of the universe, i would never have been able to perform that mental game. I simply would not have had a reference to work from. I wouldn't know what any of those things looked like, i wouldn't have been able to picture any of it, without any prior knowledge or experience of them. Could this be why we cannot see it? We have no reference point in our minds to be able to start to picture it?

You're right too, about the %'s thing.

I was using the info as a tool to illustrate how little 'experts' actually know about this thing we call the Universe, and hence how little we know about universal physics. But, i agree - you cannot put %'s as a quantity when talking about the infinite! But even putting figure on essentially a guess about something they admit they know mostly nothing about, is ridiculous in itself!

You are really getting headlong into Quantum theory territory, and it's something i need to read more about, but yes, in a quantum universe we are...everything, and so is this keyboard!

I do see where you are going, when you mention energy towards the end of your post, but here we diverge if i'm accurate in getting your drift.

It naturally follows, that if energy is everything, and everything is just energy, then we are all parts of the same thing..all parts of the infinite, all (even this keyboard) parts of..God.

I don't follow any God or gods. Or any organised (or non-organised) religion. So i would disagree with the above, on the grounds that deities are human constructs. Although it's an interesting thought.

Thanks for your post.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Thanks for that,

Yes, either free energy secretly exists, or another technological principle is in operation we have no concept or knowledge of as yet. Maybe a fuel source so efficient and powerful that is unknown to us, but not what you would call 'free energy' or OU, should UFO's (as ET or Terrestrial craft) be genuine..which i happen to believe they are, so too then, must the power source and/or the 'super' fuel source to power them with exist.



[edit on 30/1/2010 by spikey]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by UcantBserious
 


Yes mate, go on, fill your boots up!

I wonder if you would find matter so amusing if you realise how many human beings die through lack of energy related reasons. Or on a more personal level, should the price of domestic electricity rise to 1$ per kWh...oh how we'll all laugh eh?

Thanks for your post.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
I have to say, it actually was pretty much NOTHING like i was expecting.


Really? I actually expected less.



If i was to say i felt a little deflated, i'd be doing how i feel an injustice.


I began this deflated for good reasons. Looks like I made good on my bets.



I brought this 'demonstration' of proof of Orbo's OU to your attention, expecting something...definitive. A little more than a fuzzy trace on a scope, anyway. So, to all of you who, like me, thought we'd be seeing something in the way of absolute proof regarding this technology, i can only apologise for keying you up, or raising your hopes, only to ultimately frustrate you with lack of clarity. Sorry.


Bah! You did great. Thank you for bringing this to the table. You aren't the one who just crapped the bed here. STEORN is the big loser of this thread, not you.



I understand they are being cagey about their device and it's effect due to commercial considerations, but surely something more should have been done today..something more tangible.


Something less "ridiculous"?



As they have said, this is not being aimed at the general public, but developers to reorganise and restructure into a viable commercial product that will then be available to the public.


So...for years it was- "we WILL bring you this magical technology, you just have to wait for a long time".

Now it is- "WE already HAVE brought you the technology...you just can't see it in a way that really works yet. But it IS there, trust us...you just gotta wait for an even longer time".

Hmmm...anyone sensing the BS here?



Apparently, companies are waiting in line to take a stab at development.


And who says this? The same guys telling us they just delivered us Orbo technology? I wouldn't go signing any checks on that claim just yet. Lord forbid, it may be a complete lie or something. Just guessing though.



Does this mean that Orbo does or doesn't work as advertised?


More like- Doesn't really exist?



My position is that we now know nothing more than we did a few days ago.


Weird...and this is right after the unveiling presentation to the human race. Seems like that should have clued us in on something...anything...but nope, still bogus.

Funny how that works.



You may have noticed a glimmer of light amongst the dark though, as you heard from the horses mouth, that until the end of the month, ANYONE can go along to their office, bring your own test gear (meters, scopes and so on) and play with one of the Orbo's...which is a remarkable offer, if they are indeed pulling a fraud..


Yeah, I can see droves of creditable scientists rushing there right now to check out this stunning piece of stellar crap.

If I told the world I was making "magic-cardboard" that could perform household duties like cleaning and cooking, and then just unveiled normal cardboard, I wonder if scientists would then accept my offer to come and check it out.

Eh...I am sure someone will come to play with it...but they will either be denied access, paid to lie, or just end up being called disinfo agents when they come out of there laughing.

Again...just guessing.



I'm still undecided, but disappointed.


I'm decided and got just what I was expecting. Its not so bad seeing things you "expect" happen. The sun rises daily, the moon remains in orbit of the earth, and crack-pots continue to swindle conspiracy kooks and gullible philanthropists.

It is only normal.



Thanks to most of you for your constructive contributions to this thread.


Anytime friend. Thanks for having us, and thanks for your efforts and energies.

Peace.

[edit on 30-1-2010 by Mr Mask]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The fact of the matter is that the first and second laws of thermodynamics are real, not some untested theory; there are complicated machines that make use of them every day, from the engine on your lawn mower to the nuclear reactor powering an aircraft carrier.

Do we know everything about the world? Of course not, but there are certain things of which we are pretty certain, things which are backed up by mountains of evidence, and the laws of thermodynamics are some of those things.

[edit on 1/30/2010 by LiquidLight]



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   


I think the plan was to use opposing engines with the anomalous
atomic gas responses which might be par with other non relativistic
atomic processes.

The ability of Helium nucleus or alpha particle to acquire electrons
and become the Helium atom is sought to be a plasma engine
component as the Papp Engine.

An atomic, molecular, electrical and mechanical ether process must
be sought as the ether proves to be an electrically sensitive mass
of unusual properties.

Assuming the UFO works on voltage to push its way around the ether,
there is little current and thus no power used at all. Moving around
with a plasma engine and voltage in a coil in the UFO sounds free
to me.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by LiquidLight
 


I agree with you. Unless there is superconduction, there are always eddy current losses, heat loss due to friction, etc. And superconduction has to deal with it's own losses.

Who keeps bringing this thread back to life?



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by alttracks
reply to post by LiquidLight
 


I agree with you. Unless there is superconduction, there are always eddy current losses, heat loss due to friction, etc. And superconduction has to deal with it's own losses.

Who keeps bringing this thread back to life?


We all question their motives.
People want to know.
The ET has a probability of existence as much as free energy.
Except free energy does exist and the ET does not.



posted on Jan, 30 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by LiquidLight
 





Originally posted by above
Ok, watched it and i am sorry to say that we the skeptics were correct. The demonstration did not prove anything.

The conclusion was basically "we get out 1/3rd of the energy we put in, plus work so that the conlusion is 108% efficiency". You must have faith since there is no way of measuring the work done by the rotor.

99,9% debunked, fake, hoax, call it what you wish. I seriously doubt anything will come out of this. If something comes, they did a really really terrible job in proving it.


I wouldn't call it debunked quite yet, but I agree that their little demonstration proved nothing. I'll wait for some independent analysis before making a conclusion.


Oh really? I don't understand your reticense.

Which part of


  1. "we get out 1/3rd of the energy we put in, plus work so that the conlusion is 108% efficiency"
  2. "You must have faith since there is no way of measuring the work done by the rotor"


confuses you about their inability to lie straight in bed.

I would think that if there is "no way of measuring the work done by the rotor" then there is no way to determine that "1/3rd of the energy we put in, plus work (that we cannot determine a value for)" is equal to "108% efficiency".



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne

Originally posted by alttracks
reply to post by LiquidLight
 


I agree with you. Unless there is superconduction, there are always eddy current losses, heat loss due to friction, etc. And superconduction has to deal with it's own losses.

Who keeps bringing this thread back to life?


We all question their motives.
People want to know.
The ET has a probability of existence as much as free energy.
Except free energy does exist and the ET does not.


That's sarcasm? I hope so, I can't tell.



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   
How did they come up with the number 108% if they can't measure the work done by the rotor?

And how do they know it is overunity, if they can't measure the work done by the rotor?



posted on Jan, 31 2010 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by masterp
 


I did not mean it is not possible to measure the work done by the rotor. I meant that for a person attending the demonstration there was no way provided to measure it.

They selves claimed they have worked out the work done and that it comes to 108% total.

So they ask you to blindly believe what they say, and pay 419 pounds IIRC to get acces to their developer sites that has all the info how to utilize the technology.




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join