At 01:09 PM 1/25/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
What we absolutely will *not* see:
-- A true self-runner, which convinces all but the most pathological of
skeptics. Will not happen -- not from Steorn. Not now, not ever.
This includes motors with no external power supply, and motors driven by
capacitors (which are shown conclusively to remain charged during the
run) instead of batteries.
While I've seen no evidence from Steorn that would lead me to
consider the possibility significant, and lots that indicates to me
that it's highly unlikely based on their history, I will now take the
position that overunity is possible in theory, in terms of local
results, not to mention the deeper possibility of error in the
concept of conservation of energy.
What if something about the behavior of magnets and magnetic fields
and ferrite cores and magnetic domains and all that causes some
unexpected phenomenon that releases energy from unknown or
unanticipated sources? Perhaps Steorn discovered an anomaly and in
order to cash in on it, they adopted their approach rather than
simply publishing it. It is not essential to this, at all, that they
understand the anomaly.
But, as I wrote, "highly unlikely." But experiment is king. If the
anomaly is shown, they will have indeed made a major discovery, of an
anomaly, at least, and then is the anomaly worth exploring?
Scientifically, yes, absolutely, until it is explained and the
explanation is proven to be more than just an alternative hypothesis,
and assuming that the anomaly is significant in amplitude, and is replicable.
It is an entirely separate question whether or not there is enough
energy over-unity to be of practical use. Hence demands for a
self-running demo are excessive, as to the ultimate issues, that
transcend whether or not Steorn are scammers, or legally milking
this. But if it is true that there is twice as much energy going into
rotational inertia than into heat, some commercial application, if
only for heating!, would seem possible.
Hence I do, in fact, think that puffery is highly likely, that claims
of Sean for 2:1 are based on extrapolation and imagination, not
actual experiment, properly analyzed. Same thing with the Szabo
motor, which seems quite similar in certain ways.
But, indeed, we will see the next act in this play in a few days.
What rabbit will the author pull out of the hat?
