subject:"\[Vo\]\: Steorn"

On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Esa Ruoho wrote:

> What is different about an Orbo power cell, and again, we showed a 
> brief example of building, hand-building a very simple cell is that, 
> first of all, it is not an electrochemical device, so there is no ion 
> transfer, there's no electrolyte and so forth.

If the plates charge up repeatedly, that's DC output.  There must be a 
charge-pump effect involved, and a complete conductive path.  The electret 
wax is a resistor, just one with a large value, and it completes the 
circuit through the stack of dissimilar metals, as with any battery or 
capacitor.

Then the question is, is the charge-pump created from chemical breakdown 
of the dissimilar metals, or from something anomalous?  Easy test: treat 
it as a battery, and see how long it takes to run down.  Best would be to 
use very, very thin metal in the construction, so that any "battery 
capacity" would necessarily be quite short.  That would quickly expose the 
anomalous energy output, because the device would keep going way past 
chemistry, way past nuclear.  Or to perpetrate a hoax, use very thick 
metal on purpose, so we mix "anomaly" and "battery" to avoid the 
possibility of genuine testing.

If it's inexpensive piezo energy-harvesting without ceramic and diode, 
then WAY COOL!  Test it by isolating it vibration-free, see if it stops 
working after xx months.  That measures the primary-battery component of 
the total energy output.

> So, in order to demonstrate the fundamental difference between an Orbo 
> power cell and the traditional battery, what we're going to do is 
> short it out, and we're going to leave it shorted out approximately

> 30 minutes, and then demonstrate that the voltage in open-circuit
> immediately bounces back to this 2.5 odd volts.

That's just wrong.

They have to short it out for a time proportional to the internal 
resistance.  If they have, say, 100,000x higher resistance than a normal 
battery, then for an equivalent demo, they'd have to short it out for 
100,000X longer.

With large internal resistance, shorting the battery using this internal 
resistance as a load.  What if the resistance is 10K ohm?  Is it an 
effective test to place a ?10K? resistor across a battery for a half hour? 
Nope, 100K hours would be more like it.

(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300


On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, esa ruoho wrote:

Bill, is that based on what you read on the transcripts? They do state 
that it seems like a galvanic cell but doesn't work like it.


Yes, just the transcripts.   Initially I assumed that it was "Orbo," 
meaning a rotary or vibrating device with coils.


The main signature of a scam would be a large battery, but with very high 
series resistance, so requiring months to measure the amp-hours or to 
intentionally exhaust the cell.


So, no prompt simple method to prove it's just a battery.   Seems perfect 
setup for scammers.


As with CF experiments, we could estimate the total battery-joules based 
on metal mass, plus any joules stored by dielectric absorption, then see 
if the device puts out far, far larger net energy.


With used car dealers, sellers of secret maps to gold mines and of FE/OU 
devices, I assume that they're lying, then look for any evidence of 
honesty.






(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300


On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, esa ruoho wrote:

Bill, here's another claim from Shaun McCarthy:

A: You will never need to charge an ophone


So, just wait to see if it's real.  If Steorn has a sudden reversal, and 
can finally show genuine stuff, then yay, at last!  But if they're 
scammers, then ophone has an obvious function: vaporware, and only there 
to make the orbo box look more legit, so more people lose $1300.


When in doubt, remember the 'first law' of FE/OU hobby, which is never 
reach for your wallet no matter what!  :)


...unless it's to fund the wbeaty cosmic energy extractor(tm)!!




(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300


On Wed, 9 Dec 2015, Bob Higgins wrote:


This motor is certainly not a perpetual motion machine, but it is an
electrostatic motor.  It bears a striking resemblance to a Wimshurst
generator, which could be used as a motor, and also to Jefimenko's
electrostatic motors.  Electrostatic motors are real - the original
demonstration may not have been faked.  The Earth's electric field varies
from 500V/m to >50kV/m and this can be harvested to do work as Jefimenko
showed with his motors (I have an electronic copy of his book somewhere).


Yeah, Jefimenko couldn't get them to turn using balloon-wire antennas, 
until they tried it from the top of a parking garage.   Nearby buildings 
had been acting as a shield, and their balloon-wire wasn't high enough. 
Indoors, the shielding effect is 100%.


Weird: the orbo box (maybe) is based on the same electret-like effect that 
(maybe) is powering the black disk electrostatic motor.   Maybe!   Both 
may rely on insulators actually being large resistors.





Also, here's a cool one below, dunno if it's been discussed:

  Waller motor, electrostatic PM hoax?
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YreCJDvIX2Q




(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-10 Thread Esa J. Ruoho

Here is a new one

https://www.facebook.com/thebatteryisdead/videos/10153398806872672/

"some additional details of the Orbo power cell", Transcribed by Esa Juhani 
Ruoho / esaru...@icloud.com / http://lackluster.bandcamp.com/ 

OK so a lot of people are asking what's the difference between an Orbo power 
cell and traditional batteries. Traditional batteries come in two basic forms, 
what are known as primary batteries, or disposable batteries, which, once you 
have drained the energy, they're disposable, you throw them away - you should 
recycle them. Secondary batteries are the types of batteries that you would see 
in things like your phone or in power-cubes and so forth. Typically Lithium-Ion 
or Lithium-Polymer technology, and the difference is once you've drained the 
energy in them, you can actually re-charge them and replenish the energy. 

What is common between primary and secondary batteries is that the energy 
stored in them - and they are energy storage devices - is stored as a 
electro-chemical process. So, the output of these types of batteries in terms 
of voltage is ultimately defined by the inherent chemistry that it's using.

What is different about an Orbo power cell, and again, we showed a brief 
example of building, hand-building a very simple cell is that, first of all, it 
is not an electrochemical device, so there is no ion transfer, there's no 
electrolyte and so forth. It is based on the electromagnetic field. And the 
second and probably the most difficult to accept aspect of it is that it is an 
energy-generating device rather than an energy-storage device.

What we showed in the clip building the tiny, hand-building the tiny little 
cell, was a cell that had a voltage, an open-circuit voltage of VOC .3 .4 of a 
volt. One of the things that we said as we were building that is that what 
makes it peculiar is that as you increase the surface area, the VOC also 
increases.

So, what we have here is a hand-built version of the same, which is longer and 
wound up a bit like a capacitor, and what we'll demonstrate is that the VOC of 
this which is a simply, longer strips of the same materials, is at about 2.5 
volts, I think in this case, it's about 2.5, 2.6 volts. That would be an 
unexpected result electrochemically, as in, you typically see voltages of 3,7 
volts in Lithium-Ion batteries, 1.2 and so forth, and again, if we unwound this 
and cut this in half we would find that the voltage itself reduced.

Probably the most interesting aspect to demonstrate that the Orbo power cell is 
not a traditional battery is that if you short out a traditional battery for an 
extended period of time, ultimately you drain all or virtually all of the 
electrochemical energy that's stored in it. And so, if you short it out and 
leave it for an extended period of time, remove the short and then measure it, 
you'll find that the voltage is either significantly below it's inherent 
voltage, or if it's left long enough, it will be series. So, in order to 
demonstrate the fundamental difference between an Orbo power cell and the 
traditional battery, what we're going to do is short it out, and we're going to 
leave it shorted out approximately 30 minutes, and then demonstrate that the 
voltage in open-circuit immediately bounces back to this 2.5 odd volts.

So, all that I'm doing here is shorting the positive and negative and as you 
can see on the scope, as expected, we go to zero volts or very close to zero 
volts, about a few milli-volts which is simply the offset of the oscilloscope 
of itself, and we'll leave this running for 30 minutes.

(screen says: (Recorded over 36 minutes))

Ok, so we've had this Orbo power cell shorted out now for I think about 30 
minutes. So, what I'm going to do is remove the short, simply pull the wires 
apart, and what you'll notice is that we're immediately back to our 2.5 volt 
voltage level. What you would expect if this was an energy storage device such 
as a capacitor, is obviously we would've drained the capacitor at this stage, 
it's been 30 minutes in short circuit - or - if it was a traditional 
electrochemical cell, we would see at least some drop-off in voltage, but 
probably after 30 minutes, a very significant drop-off of voltage.

What we're really demonstrating here is that unlike a traditional battery, what 
Orbo really is is an energy generation technology. In terms of what it looks 
like in it's production format, is that we aim for each cell to produce 2 and a 
half volts, and our standard Orbo power-cell is a 5 volt device, so it is two 
of these, professionally manufactured and encapsulated, that produce 5 volts, 
so it's two in series, so again, just to demonstrate that, that if I take the 
product-sized version of this, what you can see is a - just over a five-volt 
output. Again, 5 volt is chosen because our primary target market for this is 
mobile consumer electronics.

In terms of how this type of Orbo power cell is put into a product, what

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

William Beaty  wrote:

> This motor is certainly not a perpetual motion machine, but it is an
>> electrostatic motor.  . . .
>
>

>
> Yeah, Jefimenko couldn't get them to turn using balloon-wire antennas,
> until they tried it from the top of a parking garage.   Nearby buildings
> had been acting as a shield, and their balloon-wire wasn't high enough.
> Indoors, the shielding effect is 100%.
>

That sounds like harvesting energy from radio and TV towers. Hasn't that
been demonstrated? People living next door to towers see effects such as
radiators acting as radios.

You can also harvest energy from high voltage overhead power lines. I
recall reading about the power companies suing people for doing this. That
seems unfair to me. The energy is all going to waste anyway.

Experts say that RF has no effect on health. I hope that is true, but I
wonder about long term exposure, especially for someone living next door to
a radio tower.

Wifi units produce many orders of magnitude less power than radio or cell
phones, yet I still have some concerns about them. The one in my house used
to be installed right where my wife works for several hours a day. I moved
it, partly for that reason. Also to improve reception in the rest of the
house. (It still doesn't work well in some rooms. I wish I could fix that.)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-09 Thread esa ruoho

Yep Jed.
a GSM / EDGE non-smart-phone
Orboost technology licensed to Wicked E-Juices for creation of never-charge  
E-Cig
and a gamecontroller for regular came-consoles
and the OCube for charging smartphones 2-3 times a day or 1 tablet per day.

and.. the one they don't talk about, which is the HephaHeat  water-boiler 
device.

There's a press-release, Jed, for the Orboost Wicked E-Juice E-Cig, 
http://www.wickedejuice.com/content/41-liquid-solutions-prepares-to-bring-the-orbo-never-die-battery-to-market

Liquid Solutions Prepares to bring the Orbo 'never die' battery to market
27 October 2015

Watch the fascinating and always entertaining visionaries from Irish energy 
company Steorn talking about the first commercial implementation of their never 
die energy technology. The founder of Wicked, Killian McGrath, also makes an 
appearance talking about the revolutionary use of these never die batteries 
being developed for e cigarettes.  These new products will be coming on stream 
in the next six months - watch this space. 

Liquid Solutions Prepares to bring the Orbo 'never die' battery to market
Liquid Solutions, the only Irish producer of certified e juice for e 
cigarettes, today announces it has licensed the revolutionary Orbo battery 
technology from Steorn to deliver an e cigarette that never needs charging.

Waterford based Liquid Solutions, the makers of Wicked e-juice, has been 
working with Steorn for the past three years to bring the never-die Orbo 
battery to market. This revolutionary move will allow consumers of e cigarettes 
never to charge the batteries in their e cigarettes again. In three short 
years, Liquid Solutions has created a battery small enough to fit into an e 
cigarette and still retain the self charging properties of Orbo.

Killian McGrath, founder of Liquid Solutions, recognized the impact of Orbo 
when first presented with the technology. The never die battery is the holy 
grail of all mobile device manufacturers. Increasingly people travel with 
energy banks, in-car chargers and charging points in public places.  To replace 
the humble battery with an ever-charged Orbo battery is to revolutionize the 
mobile populace.  Now the vaping community need never worry about charging 
their Wicked e cigarettes. We have a market winner.’

Dublin based Steorn headed up by Shaun McCarthy has enjoyed a roller coaster 
ride since its inception fifteen years ago. Their discovery of a constant 
energy source has attracted worldwide interest and criticism. Tonight (28 
October 2015, 7pm GMT) the company is beginning a series of webinars 
introducing their Orbo never die battery. As part of that process, the 
partnership with Liquid Solutions will be broadcast.

In terms of timing, Liquid Solutions intends having its first Orbo vaping 
products available to the Irish marketplace within the next six months. The 
never die batteries will be available to purchase from www.Wickedejuice.com

.

Ends

For more information, please visit www.Wickedejuice.com

Or contact me...@wickedejuice.com

---
| Esa Ruoho | +358403703659 | http://fi.linkedin.com/in/esaruoho 
 |
| http://lackluster.bandcamp.com  | 
http://lackluster.org  | http://esaruoho.tumblr.com 
 |
| http://twitter.com/esaruoho  | 
http://facebook.com/LacklusterOfficial  
|

> On 09 Dec 2015, at 16:38, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> 
> William Beaty > wrote:
>  
> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
> 
>  
> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
>  
> 
> 
> Also, an e-cigarette?!?
> 
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

William Beaty  wrote:


> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
>
>
> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html


Also, an e-cigarette?!?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-09 Thread Bob Higgins

This motor is certainly not a perpetual motion machine, but it is an
electrostatic motor.  It bears a striking resemblance to a Wimshurst
generator, which could be used as a motor, and also to Jefimenko's
electrostatic motors.  Electrostatic motors are real - the original
demonstration may not have been faked.  The Earth's electric field varies
from 500V/m to >50kV/m and this can be harvested to do work as Jefimenko
showed with his motors (I have an electronic copy of his book somewhere).

So, this device does have vertical extent and will have an environmental
electrostatic field across it.  If made with sufficiently low rolling
resistance, this field may be enough to power the motor.

Bob Higgins

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:06 PM, William Beaty  wrote:

>
> Also, here's a cool one below, dunno if it's been discussed:
>
>   Waller motor, electrostatic PM hoax?
>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YreCJDvIX2Q
>
> It might genuinely operate as shown, if the plastic disk had first been
> "charged" by rubbing with fur.  If true, sell it as a toy!
>
> Or, if fur-rubbing can't provide sufficient energy to spin the wheel,
> instead use dielectric absorption, "capacitor soakage" with a 20KVDC supply
> and wetted metal electrodes (or conductive rubber, for intimate surface
> contact with surfaces of the plastic disk.)  Deeply charge up the plastic
> disk, then add the foil rectangles later.  The "de-sorption" of charge from
> the plastic should re-charge the foil slowly, and run the motor perhaps for
> many minutes, perhaps hours.
>
> The wood in the video would serve as a conductor, so those who build a
> plastic model would fail.   Replications:
>
>  w/6KV supplyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S072ScKjx8s
>
>  Fake, w/#40ga connecting wires
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSydbKEBpQ
>
>  w/VDG  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiqEtigpJaI
>
> Available again are high-volt negative-ionizer blocks, $4 power supplies,
> 6K to 8K VDC, on eBay,   search eBay: anion 12v
>
> I found that these work fine if powered by two 9V batt connected as 18V,
> and only draw excess current at input of 20V and above.  Crank the supply
> down to zero, and the KV output decreases roughly in proportion.  Build a
> many-KV variable bench supply for electrostatics.  Output below 10uA.   I
> haven't tried buying ten for series connection, and rigging up a 100KV
> supply powered by independent floating batteries.
>
>>
>>>  ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
>>> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
>>> beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
>>> billb, amasci com   UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
>>> x3-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
>>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-09 Thread Esa Ruoho

Another Steorn video pops up on Facebook, here's another transcript.



https://www.facebook.com/thebatteryisdead/videos/10153398806872672/


"some additional details of the Orbo power cell", Transcribed by Esa Juhani
Ruoho / esaru...@icloud.com / http://lackluster.bandcamp.com/


OK so a lot of people are asking what's the difference between an Orbo
power cell and traditional batteries. Traditional batteries come in two
basic forms, what are known as primary batteries, or disposable batteries,
which, once you have drained the energy, they're disposable, you throw them
away - you should recycle them. Secondary batteries are the types of
batteries that you would see in things like your phone or in power-cubes
and so forth. Typically Lithium-Ion or Lithium-Polymer technology, and the
difference is once you've drained the energy in them, you can actually
re-charge them and replenish the energy.


What is common between primary and secondary batteries is that the energy
stored in them and they are empty storage devices - is stored as a
electro-chemical process. So, the output of these types of batteries in
terms of voltage is ultimately defined the inherent chemistry that it's
using.


What is different about an Orbo power cell, and again, we showed a brief
example of building, hand-building a very simple cell is that, first of
all, it is not an electrochemical device, so there is no ion transfer,
there's no electrolyte and so forth. It is based on the electromagnetic
field. And the second and probably the most difficult to accept aspect of
it is that it is an energy-generating device rather than an energy-storage
device.


What we showed in the clip building the tiny, hand-building the tiny little
cell, was a cell that had a voltage, an open-circuit voltage of VOC .3 .4
of a volt. One of the things that we said as we were building that is that
what makes it peculiar is that as you increase the surface area, the VOC
also increases.


So, what we have here is a hand-built version of the same, which is longer
and wound up a bit like a capacitor, and what we'll demonstrate is that the
VOC of this which is a simply, longer strips of the same materials, is at
about 2.5 volts, I think in this case, it's about 2.5, 2.6 volts. That
would be an unexpected result electrochemically, as in, you typically see
voltages of 3,7 volts in Lithium-Ion batteries, 1.2 and so forth, and
again, if we unwound this and cut this in half we would find that the
voltage itself reduced.


Probably the most interesting aspect to demonstrate that the Orbo power
cell is not a traditional battery is that if you short out a traditional
battery for an extended period of time, ultimately you drain all or
virtually all of the electrochemical energy that's stored in it. And so, if
you short it out and leave it for an extended period of time, remove the
short and then measure it, you'll find that the voltage is either
significantly below it's inherent voltage, or if it's left long enough, it
will be series. So, in order to demonstrate the fundamental difference
between an Orbo power cell and the traditional battery, what we're going to
do is short it out, and we're going to leave it shorted out approximately
30 minutes, and then demonstrate that the voltage in open-circuit
immediately bounces back to this 2.5 odd volts.


So, all that I'm doing here is shorting the positive and negative and as
you can see on the scope, as expected, we go to zero volts or very close to
zero volts, about a few milli-volts which is simply the offset of the
oscilloscope of itself, and we'll leave this running for 30 minutes.


(screen says: (Recorded over 36 minutes))


Ok, so we've had this Orbo power cell shorted out now for I think about 30
minutes. So, what I'm going to do is remove the short, simply pull the
wires apart, and what you'll notice is that we're immediately back to our
2.5 volt voltage level. What you would expect if this was an energy storage
device such as a capacitor, is obviously we would've drained the capacitor
at this stage, it's been 30 minutes in short circuit - or - if it was a
traditional electrochemical cell, we would see at least some drop-off in
voltage, but probably after 30 minutes, a very significant drop-off of
voltage.


What we're really demonstrating here is that unlike a traditional battery,
what Orbo really is is an energy generation technology. In terms of what it
looks like in it's production format, is that we aim for each cell to
produce 2 and a half volts, and our standard Orbo power-cell is a 5 volt
device, so it is two of these, professionally manufactured and
encapsulated, that produce 5 volts, so it's two in series, so again, just
to demonstrate that, that if I take the product-sized version of this, what
you can see is a - just over a five-volt output. Again, 5 volt is chosen
because our primary target market for this is mobile consumer electronics.

[Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread William Beaty



Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!

 
http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
 http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
 http://steornnews.com/
 https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/







 ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
billb, amasci com   UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
x3-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700

Re: [Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

2015-12-08 Thread Esa Ruoho

Hi Marcus! Sure!

I know at least two organizations who are going to purchase one. One is in
Australia, and another is in Finland. The Finns have a crowdfund project.
https://mesenaatti.me/en/steornin-ikiliikkujatekniikan-tutkimusprojekti/ <-
I'm trying to get in to record the electromagnetic fields + activities of
both of the devices, the Ocube and the Ophone. I hope they'll sound juicy
enough to be made electronic music out of.


On 2 December 2015 at 16:14, Marcus Winckers  wrote:

> Hey Esa,
>
> I see  that you, like me, are interested in the Cube.  I  am planning on
> buying one  later in the day if possible. My christmass present for
> myself.  Shall we keep in touch and exchange thoughts and experiences?
>
> Marcus Winckers
> Utrecht
> Netherlands.
> Op 29 okt. 2015 07:38 schreef "Esa Ruoho" :
>
> If you guys like the internets more, the transcript is mirrored here:
>> http://freeenergy.news/steorn/steorn-o-cube-webinar-full-transcript/
>>
>>
>> On 29 October 2015 at 02:17, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the
>>> 28th October 2015.
>>>
>>> If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
>>> the video is at http://orbo.com/
>>> --
>>>
>>> Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to
>>> the first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial
>>> technology ... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to
>>> demonstrate the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we
>>> want to just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that
>>> we've taken over the last fifteen years.
>>> ---
>>> Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
>>> got into this crazy company.
>>> Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because,
>>> what happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
>>> technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
>>> it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
>>> So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
>>> technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
>>> listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
>>> it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
>>> that conversation was.. ahm..
>>> Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
>>> Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
>>> proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
>>> said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
>>> of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
>>> was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
>>> was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
>>> him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
>>> what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
>>> on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
>>> side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
>>> was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
>>> "Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."
>>> 
>>> Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years
>>> defending your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background
>>> about Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
>>> Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
>>> and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
>>> lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
>>> you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
>>> Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
>>> fraud..
>>> Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
>>> Shaun: And then one day..
>>> Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
>>> magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
>>> Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a
>>> mistake, depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
>>> We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
>>> putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
>>> something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
>>> money.
>>> ---
>>> Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
>>> realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
>>> I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
>>> and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
>>> realized that

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread William Beaty


On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, Terry Blanton wrote:

Sorry, Bill, Shaun (Sean) McCarthy just announce that they won't be
available until late January.


DON'T BUY!   Seriously.

Steorn appears to be making Volta's mistake.  (Or, it's a devious hoax 
based on Volta's mistake.)


Alessandro Volta believed that voltaic-pile batteries were free-energy 
devices, and would last forever.  He called it "electrification by 
contact."  (As opposed to his detractors' chemistry-driven theories.)


The "dry piles" of DuLuc and Zamboni appeared to support this, since they 
provide microwatts for centuries.  WHen using high-resistance electrolyte 
and such a low power-drain, it's nearly impossible to measure the amp-hour 
rating of Dry Piles by running down the battery to zero.  Dry Piles use 
paper as a solid electrolyte.


The mistake is in believing that insulators are insulating.

No, insulators are actually just electrolytic conductors of high 
resistance.  If we use carnuba/beeswax "electret wax" to form a battery, 
it will only supply power until the dissimilar metals provided by the 
electrodes are exhausted.   (Well, in theory only one plate will be 
destroyed during normal batt operation.)


So, wanna make a "Volta hoax?"

Then use a large mass of metal (lots of fuel, high amp-hours,) and use 
high-resistance solid electrolyte which prevents anyone from rapidly 
extracting kilojoules and exhausting the battery within hours.


Then include a "no repairs" clause, so when their extremely expensive and 
perfectly conventional battery stops working, nobody can complain.


---

Also, here's a cool one below, dunno if it's been discussed:

  Waller motor, electrostatic PM hoax?
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YreCJDvIX2Q

It might genuinely operate as shown, if the plastic disk had first been 
"charged" by rubbing with fur.  If true, sell it as a toy!


Or, if fur-rubbing can't provide sufficient energy to spin the wheel, 
instead use dielectric absorption, "capacitor soakage" with a 20KVDC 
supply and wetted metal electrodes (or conductive rubber, for intimate 
surface contact with surfaces of the plastic disk.)  Deeply charge up the 
plastic disk, then add the foil rectangles later.  The "de-sorption" of 
charge from the plastic should re-charge the foil slowly, and run the 
motor perhaps for many minutes, perhaps hours.


The wood in the video would serve as a conductor, so those who build a 
plastic model would fail.   Replications:


 w/6KV supplyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S072ScKjx8s

 Fake, w/#40ga connecting wires https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSydbKEBpQ

 w/VDG  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiqEtigpJaI

Available again are high-volt negative-ionizer blocks, $4 power supplies, 
6K to 8K VDC, on eBay,   search eBay: anion 12v


I found that these work fine if powered by two 9V batt connected as 18V, 
and only draw excess current at input of 20V and above.  Crank the supply 
down to zero, and the KV output decreases roughly in proportion.  Build a 
many-KV variable bench supply for electrostatics.  Output below 10uA.   I 
haven't tried buying ten for series connection, and rigging up a 100KV 
supply powered by independent floating batteries.







On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:29 PM, William Beaty  wrote:


Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!


http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
 http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
 http://steornnews.com/
 https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/







 ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
billb, amasci com   UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
x3-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700





(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread Terry Blanton

Sorry, Bill, Shaun (Sean) McCarthy just announce that they won't be
available until late January.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:29 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>
> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
>
>
> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
>  http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
>  http://steornnews.com/
>  https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
> beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
> billb, amasci com   UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
> x3-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread esa ruoho

Bill, is that based on what you read on the transcripts? They do state that it 
seems like a galvanic cell but doesn't work like it.
Also, other claims seem to be:
1- the materials are piezoelectric / receptive to ambient energy
2- not RF / energy harvesting, their layered metal thingies work inside a 
faraday cage.

---
| Esa Ruoho | +358403703659 | http://fi.linkedin.com/in/esaruoho 
 |
| http://lackluster.bandcamp.com  | 
http://lackluster.org  | http://esaruoho.tumblr.com 
 |
| http://twitter.com/esaruoho  | 
http://facebook.com/LacklusterOfficial  
|

> On 09 Dec 2015, at 08:06, William Beaty  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, Terry Blanton wrote:
>> Sorry, Bill, Shaun (Sean) McCarthy just announce that they won't be
>> available until late January.
> 
> DON'T BUY!   Seriously.
> 
> Steorn appears to be making Volta's mistake.  (Or, it's a devious hoax based 
> on Volta's mistake.)
> 
> Alessandro Volta believed that voltaic-pile batteries were free-energy 
> devices, and would last forever.  He called it "electrification by contact."  
> (As opposed to his detractors' chemistry-driven theories.)
> 
> The "dry piles" of DuLuc and Zamboni appeared to support this, since they 
> provide microwatts for centuries.  WHen using high-resistance electrolyte and 
> such a low power-drain, it's nearly impossible to measure the amp-hour rating 
> of Dry Piles by running down the battery to zero.  Dry Piles use paper as a 
> solid electrolyte.
> 
> The mistake is in believing that insulators are insulating.
> 
> No, insulators are actually just electrolytic conductors of high resistance.  
> If we use carnuba/beeswax "electret wax" to form a battery, it will only 
> supply power until the dissimilar metals provided by the electrodes are 
> exhausted.   (Well, in theory only one plate will be destroyed during normal 
> batt operation.)
> 
> So, wanna make a "Volta hoax?"
> 
> Then use a large mass of metal (lots of fuel, high amp-hours,) and use 
> high-resistance solid electrolyte which prevents anyone from rapidly 
> extracting kilojoules and exhausting the battery within hours.
> 
> Then include a "no repairs" clause, so when their extremely expensive and 
> perfectly conventional battery stops working, nobody can complain.
> 
> ---
> 
> Also, here's a cool one below, dunno if it's been discussed:
> 
>  Waller motor, electrostatic PM hoax?
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YreCJDvIX2Q 
> 
> 
> It might genuinely operate as shown, if the plastic disk had first been 
> "charged" by rubbing with fur.  If true, sell it as a toy!
> 
> Or, if fur-rubbing can't provide sufficient energy to spin the wheel, instead 
> use dielectric absorption, "capacitor soakage" with a 20KVDC supply and 
> wetted metal electrodes (or conductive rubber, for intimate surface contact 
> with surfaces of the plastic disk.)  Deeply charge up the plastic disk, then 
> add the foil rectangles later.  The "de-sorption" of charge from the plastic 
> should re-charge the foil slowly, and run the motor perhaps for many minutes, 
> perhaps hours.
> 
> The wood in the video would serve as a conductor, so those who build a 
> plastic model would fail.   Replications:
> 
> w/6KV supplyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S072ScKjx8s 
> 
> 
> Fake, w/#40ga connecting wires https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSydbKEBpQ 
> 
> 
> w/VDG  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiqEtigpJaI 
> 
> 
> Available again are high-volt negative-ionizer blocks, $4 power supplies, 6K 
> to 8K VDC, on eBay,   search eBay: anion 12v
> 
> I found that these work fine if powered by two 9V batt connected as 18V, and 
> only draw excess current at input of 20V and above.  Crank the supply down to 
> zero, and the KV output decreases roughly in proportion.  Build a many-KV 
> variable bench supply for electrostatics.  Output below 10uA.   I haven't 
> tried buying ten for series connection, and rigging up a 100KV supply powered 
> by independent floating batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:29 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
>>> http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
>>> http://steornnews.com/
>>> https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
>>> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
>>> beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
>>>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread Esa J. Ruoho

Http://freeenergy.news/steorn-webinar-ii-orbo-products-full-transcript/ 
Here is a transcript i wrote for webinar#2 of Steorn Orbo

And webinar#1 is at 
http://freeenergy.news/steorn/steorn-o-cube-webinar-full-transcript/ 

Sent from some iDevice. Written by Esa.

> On 09 Dec 2015, at 01:29, William Beaty  wrote:
> 
> 
> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
> 
> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
> http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
> http://steornnews.com/
> https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
> beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
> billb, amasci com   UW Chem Dept,  Bagley Hall RM74
> x3-6195 Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Orbo cube phone-charger ~$1300

2015-12-08 Thread esa ruoho

Bill, here's another claim from Shaun McCarthy:

A: You will never need to charge an ophone
Q: Why? What’s the reason behind it?
A: Orbo is a completely new type of battery based on the electric field rather 
than traditional batteries that are based upon chemical release of energy.

---
| Esa Ruoho | +358403703659 | http://fi.linkedin.com/in/esaruoho 
 |
| http://lackluster.bandcamp.com  | 
http://lackluster.org  | http://esaruoho.tumblr.com 
 |
| http://twitter.com/esaruoho  | 
http://facebook.com/LacklusterOfficial  
|

> On 09 Dec 2015, at 08:06, William Beaty  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, Terry Blanton wrote:
>> Sorry, Bill, Shaun (Sean) McCarthy just announce that they won't be
>> available until late January.
> 
> DON'T BUY!   Seriously.
> 
> Steorn appears to be making Volta's mistake.  (Or, it's a devious hoax based 
> on Volta's mistake.)
> 
> Alessandro Volta believed that voltaic-pile batteries were free-energy 
> devices, and would last forever.  He called it "electrification by contact."  
> (As opposed to his detractors' chemistry-driven theories.)
> 
> The "dry piles" of DuLuc and Zamboni appeared to support this, since they 
> provide microwatts for centuries.  WHen using high-resistance electrolyte and 
> such a low power-drain, it's nearly impossible to measure the amp-hour rating 
> of Dry Piles by running down the battery to zero.  Dry Piles use paper as a 
> solid electrolyte.
> 
> The mistake is in believing that insulators are insulating.
> 
> No, insulators are actually just electrolytic conductors of high resistance.  
> If we use carnuba/beeswax "electret wax" to form a battery, it will only 
> supply power until the dissimilar metals provided by the electrodes are 
> exhausted.   (Well, in theory only one plate will be destroyed during normal 
> batt operation.)
> 
> So, wanna make a "Volta hoax?"
> 
> Then use a large mass of metal (lots of fuel, high amp-hours,) and use 
> high-resistance solid electrolyte which prevents anyone from rapidly 
> extracting kilojoules and exhausting the battery within hours.
> 
> Then include a "no repairs" clause, so when their extremely expensive and 
> perfectly conventional battery stops working, nobody can complain.
> 
> ---
> 
> Also, here's a cool one below, dunno if it's been discussed:
> 
>  Waller motor, electrostatic PM hoax?
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YreCJDvIX2Q 
> 
> 
> It might genuinely operate as shown, if the plastic disk had first been 
> "charged" by rubbing with fur.  If true, sell it as a toy!
> 
> Or, if fur-rubbing can't provide sufficient energy to spin the wheel, instead 
> use dielectric absorption, "capacitor soakage" with a 20KVDC supply and 
> wetted metal electrodes (or conductive rubber, for intimate surface contact 
> with surfaces of the plastic disk.)  Deeply charge up the plastic disk, then 
> add the foil rectangles later.  The "de-sorption" of charge from the plastic 
> should re-charge the foil slowly, and run the motor perhaps for many minutes, 
> perhaps hours.
> 
> The wood in the video would serve as a conductor, so those who build a 
> plastic model would fail.   Replications:
> 
> w/6KV supplyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S072ScKjx8s 
> 
> 
> Fake, w/#40ga connecting wires https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfSydbKEBpQ 
> 
> 
> w/VDG  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiqEtigpJaI 
> 
> 
> Available again are high-volt negative-ionizer blocks, $4 power supplies, 6K 
> to 8K VDC, on eBay,   search eBay: anion 12v
> 
> I found that these work fine if powered by two 9V batt connected as 18V, and 
> only draw excess current at input of 20V and above.  Crank the supply down to 
> zero, and the KV output decreases roughly in proportion.  Build a many-KV 
> variable bench supply for electrostatics.  Output below 10uA.   I haven't 
> tried buying ten for series connection, and rigging up a 100KV supply powered 
> by independent floating batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:29 PM, William Beaty  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Phone charger version.Heh, buy a bunch as xmas gifts!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2015/12/steorn_taking_orders_for_ocube_preorders.html
>>> http://boingboing.net/2015/12/08/free-energy-for-sale-steorn.html
>>> http://steornnews.com/
>>> https://www.facebook.com/Orbo-217496297671/timeline/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) 
>>> William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
>>> beaty, chem washington edu  Research Engineer
>>> billb, amasci com   UW Chem

Re: [Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

2015-12-02 Thread Marcus Winckers

Hey Esa,

I see  that you, like me, are interested in the Cube.  I  am planning on
buying one  later in the day if possible. My christmass present for
myself.  Shall we keep in touch and exchange thoughts and experiences?

Marcus Winckers
Utrecht
Netherlands.
Op 29 okt. 2015 07:38 schreef "Esa Ruoho" :

> If you guys like the internets more, the transcript is mirrored here:
> http://freeenergy.news/steorn/steorn-o-cube-webinar-full-transcript/
>
>
> On 29 October 2015 at 02:17, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
>> Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the 28th
>> October 2015.
>>
>> If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
>> the video is at http://orbo.com/
>> --
>>
>> Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to
>> the first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial
>> technology ... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to
>> demonstrate the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we
>> want to just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that
>> we've taken over the last fifteen years.
>> ---
>> Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
>> got into this crazy company.
>> Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because,
>> what happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
>> technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
>> it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
>> So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
>> technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
>> listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
>> it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
>> that conversation was.. ahm..
>> Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
>> Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
>> proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
>> said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
>> of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
>> was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
>> was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
>> him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
>> what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
>> on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
>> side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
>> was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
>> "Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."
>> 
>> Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years defending
>> your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background about
>> Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
>> Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
>> and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
>> lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
>> you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
>> Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
>> fraud..
>> Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
>> Shaun: And then one day..
>> Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
>> magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
>> Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a
>> mistake, depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
>> We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
>> putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
>> something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
>> money.
>> ---
>> Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
>> realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
>> I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
>> and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
>> realized that yous were doing some interesting stuff, but it's been
>> enjoyable seeing the progression over the years, and, you know, we're
>> really, really really interested in what's going on, ahm, you know..
>> Shaun: And you.. You see all the lads from Steorn, outside and about, in
>> and out of there, these lads that just (heard) about every provocation and
>> word and insult in the world, they're called conman, scam-artist, and so
>> on, you've seen them at their most vulnerable. Honestly what do you think
>> of them?
>> Alex?:  I've never seen them worry, I've never seen them. I like them,
>>

Re: [Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

2015-10-29 Thread Esa Ruoho

If you guys like the internets more, the transcript is mirrored here:
http://freeenergy.news/steorn/steorn-o-cube-webinar-full-transcript/


On 29 October 2015 at 02:17, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the 28th
> October 2015.
>
> If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
> the video is at http://orbo.com/
> --
>
> Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to the
> first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial technology
> ... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to demonstrate
> the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we want to
> just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that we've
> taken over the last fifteen years.
> ---
> Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
> got into this crazy company.
> Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because, what
> happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
> technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
> it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
> So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
> technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
> listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
> it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
> that conversation was.. ahm..
> Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
> Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
> proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
> said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
> of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
> was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
> was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
> him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
> what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
> on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
> side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
> was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
> "Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."
> 
> Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years defending
> your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background about
> Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
> Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
> and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
> lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
> you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
> Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
> fraud..
> Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
> Shaun: And then one day..
> Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
> magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
> Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a mistake,
> depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
> We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
> putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
> something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
> money.
> ---
> Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
> realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
> I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
> and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
> realized that yous were doing some interesting stuff, but it's been
> enjoyable seeing the progression over the years, and, you know, we're
> really, really really interested in what's going on, ahm, you know..
> Shaun: And you.. You see all the lads from Steorn, outside and about, in
> and out of there, these lads that just (heard) about every provocation and
> word and insult in the world, they're called conman, scam-artist, and so
> on, you've seen them at their most vulnerable. Honestly what do you think
> of them?
> Alex?:  I've never seen them worry, I've never seen them. I like them,
> genuinely like, I know yous all, right down to Max, I've played poker with
> so many of yous, we've shared so many late nights, and I remember telling
> my friends, you know, we're also in business, and I said, this guy doing
> mad stuff with magnets, like, you know, and yeah.. Yous are operating in,
> you know, this crazy environment, and, when we, you know, when we
> eventually -- when you actually turned

[Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

2015-10-28 Thread Esa Ruoho

Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the 28th
October 2015.

If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
the video is at http://orbo.com/
--

Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to the
first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial technology
... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to demonstrate
the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we want to
just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that we've
taken over the last fifteen years.
---
Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
got into this crazy company.
Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because, what
happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
that conversation was.. ahm..
Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
"Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."

Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years defending
your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background about
Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
fraud..
Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
Shaun: And then one day..
Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a mistake,
depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
money.
---
Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
realized that yous were doing some interesting stuff, but it's been
enjoyable seeing the progression over the years, and, you know, we're
really, really really interested in what's going on, ahm, you know..
Shaun: And you.. You see all the lads from Steorn, outside and about, in
and out of there, these lads that just (heard) about every provocation and
word and insult in the world, they're called conman, scam-artist, and so
on, you've seen them at their most vulnerable. Honestly what do you think
of them?
Alex?:  I've never seen them worry, I've never seen them. I like them,
genuinely like, I know yous all, right down to Max, I've played poker with
so many of yous, we've shared so many late nights, and I remember telling
my friends, you know, we're also in business, and I said, this guy doing
mad stuff with magnets, like, you know, and yeah.. Yous are operating in,
you know, this crazy environment, and, when we, you know, when we
eventually -- when you actually turned around and said that we could have
one of these boxes in the pub for a while, I mean, I was just cackahoop
when I saw.. When I heard that, and I mean, you know, not.. Partly I was
wondering what the hell it is, but the other part of it is just really
really interested at being involved with something so revolutionary..
--
Shaun: Ok, Pat, so, you have hustled

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-16 Thread Teslaalset

Orbo is basically a solid state refinement of what John Bedini has been
claimed for decades.
Remarkable that there is so limited scientific discussion on the key
principle of their patent: rapidly switching core permeability while a coil
carries current.

Since core permeability relates to inductor value and inductor value is
proportional to the energy an inductor holds, while carrying current,
rapidly switching coil core permeability rapidly changes the amount of
energy a coil holds.
Of course it takes energy to change core permeability but there may be a
time related overshoot in permeability change that could be harvested. It
may take significantly less energy to change core permeability than the
delta energy the related coil undergoes.

In the case of Orbo, according their patent, they use a Metglas toroid
shaped core to rapidly change the permeability of the air gap between two
ferrite cores. Metglas requires very little energy to saturate and has very
little core losses. Core losses of ferrite cores are also quite low.

The potential energy gains are small however, which could make a small
battery charger the ideal target application.
Larger power generation requires too much core material and copper to make
it economical feasible at this stage. The Watts/Kilogram ratio is currently
too low.

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Craig Brown <cr...@overunity.co> wrote:

>
> According to a newspaper article last year sometime Steorn received a few
> million more Euros investment from their shareholders and other investors
> in the company. They don't seem to have any issue with funding, especially
> as they seem to be close to the finishing line at long last.
>
> The Orbo PowerCube is approx 9cm x 9cm, has no moving parts and can
> trickle charge mobile phones and the like from a single USB port on the
> device. They have recently been floating packaging ideas around and had
> also hired brand and internet consultants who are the ones I believe who
> came up with the new logo, so I think we could be seeing the first product
> hit the market by the end of the year - maybe a lot sooner.
>
> See one of my reports on this:
> http://freeenergy.news/steorn/pub-launch-for-steorns-orbo-powercube/
>
> Craig
>
>  Original Message 
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:
> From: Analog Fan <analogit...@yahoo.com>
> Date: Wed, September 16, 2015 11:25 am
> To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>
> On Friday, September 11, 2015 2:59 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson
> <orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> >What I find interesting is that throughout all of these years the company
> apparently hasn't gone belly up. Despite all of its prior... how should I
> say this... spectacular failures, how is it possible for Steorn to continue
> to stay afloat?
>
>
> Steorn raised at least ten million euros from investors. According to
> http://moletrap.co.uk/forum/, Steorn's investors are primarily Irish
> farmers, not known for their physics knowledge. This is supported by
> documents e.g. http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411
> where three directors named to the board list their occupation as 'farmer'.
>
>
> Gullible investors can sustain a company for many years (cf Rossi, BLP,
> EEstor, Rohner et al)
> >What comes next? Can somebody please pass the popcorn my way?
>
> I am sure those farmers aren't passing any popcorn.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-16 Thread David Roberson

Does this type of energy generation require a residual flux be present from an 
exterior source such as leakage from the AC power network?  Also, can the 
system be positioned in any direction that results in a null or change to the 
energy level generated?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Teslaalset <robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2015 4:37 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:


 
Orbo is basically a solid state refinement of what John Bedini has been claimed 
for decades.   
Remarkable that there is so limited scientific discussion on the key principle 
of their patent: rapidly switching core permeability while a coil carries 
current.   
  
   
  
  
Since core permeability relates to inductor value and inductor value is 
proportional to the energy an inductor holds, while carrying current, rapidly 
switching coil core permeability rapidly changes the amount of energy a coil 
holds.   
  
Of course it takes energy to change core permeability but there may be a time 
related overshoot in permeability change that could be harvested. It may take 
significantly less energy to change core permeability than the delta energy the 
related coil undergoes.   
  
   
  
  
In the case of Orbo, according their patent, they use a Metglas toroid shaped 
core to rapidly change the permeability of the air gap between two ferrite 
cores. Metglas requires very little energy to saturate and has very little core 
losses. Core losses of ferrite cores are also quite low.   
  
   
  
  
The potential energy gains are small however, which could make a small battery 
charger the ideal target application.   
  
Larger power generation requires too much core material and copper to make it 
economical feasible at this stage. The Watts/Kilogram ratio is currently too 
low.

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-16 Thread Teslaalset

Those are valid questions that maybe point to the source of surplus energy
that ORBO claims to have.
The energy gain due to permeability switching has to have a source. This
may very well be external (electro) magnetic fields indeed.
Smart design should be able to make it direction independent.

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:46 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Does this type of energy generation require a residual flux be present
> from an exterior source such as leakage from the AC power network?  Also,
> can the system be positioned in any direction that results in a null or
> change to the energy level generated?
>
> Dave
>
>

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-16 Thread David Roberson

It would make the product more believable if it borrows energy from existing 
external magnetic fields.   The complexity of building a device that escapes 
all possible major nulls might be too difficult to cope with.  I have a feeling 
that they restrict this somewhat to save device cost.  Of course, I am assuming 
that the external field supplies the energy.

A constant valued steady external magnetic field should not be capable of 
supplying energy by itself other than during the initial application of that 
field.  I suppose we are going to have to obtain one of these beasts to figure 
out exactly how it operates.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Teslaalset <robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2015 11:40 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:


 
Those are valid questions that maybe point to the source of surplus energy that 
ORBO claims to have.   
The energy gain due to permeability switching has to have a source. This may 
very well be external (electro) magnetic fields indeed.   
  
Smart design should be able to make it direction independent.   
  
   
   


On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:46 PM, David Roberson  <dlrober...@aol.com> 
wrote: 
 
  Does this type of energy generation require a residual flux be present 
from an exterior source such as leakage from the AC power network?  Also, can 
the system be positioned in any direction that results in a null or change to 
the energy level generated?
 
 Dave

RE: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-15 Thread Craig Brown

According to a newspaper article last year sometime Steorn received a few million more Euros investment from their shareholders and other investors in the company. They don't seem to have any issue with funding, especially as they seem to be close to the finishing line at long last.The Orbo PowerCube is approx 9cm x 9cm, has no moving parts and can trickle charge mobile phones and the like from a single USB port on the device. They have recently been floating packaging ideas around and had also hired brand and internet consultants who are the ones I believe who came up with the new logo, so I think we could be seeing the first product hit the market by the end of the year - maybe a lot sooner.See one of my reports on this:http://freeenergy.news/steorn/pub-launch-for-steorns-orbo-powercube/Craig

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:
From: Analog Fan <analogit...@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, September 16, 2015 11:25 am
To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>

On Friday, September 11, 2015 2:59 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

>What I find interesting is that throughout all of these years the company apparently hasn't gone belly up. Despite all of its prior... how should I say this... spectacular failures, how is it possible for Steorn to continue to stay afloat? 

Steorn raised at least ten million euros from investors. According to http://moletrap.co.uk/forum/, Steorn's investors are primarily Irish farmers, not known for their physics knowledge. This is supported by documents e.g. http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411 where three directors named to the board list their occupation as 'farmer'.

Gullible investors can sustain a company for many years (cf Rossi, BLP, EEstor, Rohner et al) 
>What comes next? Can somebody please pass the popcorn my way?

I am sure those farmers aren't passing any popcorn.

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-15 Thread Analog Fan

On Friday, September 11, 2015 2:59 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
 wrote:

>What I find interesting is that throughout all of these years the company 
>apparently hasn't gone belly up. Despite all of its prior... how should I say 
>this... spectacular failures, how is it possible for Steorn to continue to 
>stay afloat? 

Steorn raised at least ten million euros from investors. According to 
http://moletrap.co.uk/forum/, Steorn's investors are primarily Irish farmers, 
not known for their physics knowledge. This is supported by documents e.g. 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411 where three directors 
named to the board list their occupation as 'farmer'.

Gullible investors can sustain a company for many years (cf Rossi, BLP, EEstor, 
Rohner et al) 
>What comes next? Can somebody please pass the popcorn my way?

I am sure those farmers aren't passing any popcorn.

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-12 Thread David Roberson

Looks like snake oil to me.

Dave

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Sep 11, 2015 10:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:


 
  
   
It's probably explained here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3JogbHX8yo

RE: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

The video can be found at the following link:

 

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/05/06/announcement-demonstration-of-steorns-n
ever-die-orbo-power-cube-battery-in-dublin-pub-starting-friday/

or

 

http://tinyurl.com/oqkfp3x

 

Just scroll down a couple of screen fulls.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Some of this info is almost a month old, but still... First I've ever heard
about it.

 

It would appear STEORN may soon be getting ready to market a cordless
charger for your cellphone. Gets its energy from... who knows.

 

http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News=article=3650

 

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/08/18/another-potential-energy-breakthrough-s
teorns-orbo-synergy-or-siphon-greg-daigle/

or

http://tinyurl.com/ptsx9qs

(There's a short video clip here. More on that later.)

 

There's a photo of a red device that can fit rather awkwardly in your hand.
One gets the impression the device is pretty close to being ready to be
boxed and sold commercially to the public. Personally, I don't like the
design layout, the aesthetics. It's red and (to me) appears to be in the
shape of a hockey goalie mask. Looks to me like a bloody skull with a USB
inlet in the middle where the nostrils would be placed. Circled are "+" and
"-" characters where the eyes would be, and the word "ORBO" is where the
teeth would be. Personally, I would have sent the ghastly design back to the
rapid prototype department for another redo. And perhaps it has. As-is, the
contraption gives me the impression that it would take up a lot of
unnecessary real-estate on my already cluttered desk. 

 

There is also an interesting video of what I presume is a pre-commercial
prototype demo ORBO power box designed to charge cell phones.  The prototype
has reportedly been extensively test driven is at Slattery's Pub in Dublin,
which is "...well known to be the favorite social establishment of Steorn's
CEO Shaun McCarthy."

 

Slattery's Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/slatterys.pub/posts/778493042246379

 

Ending on a humorous note, in the video at Slattery's someone with a voice
that sounds like Shaun McCarthy explains how to ORBO device works. Someone
off camera asks how the box is powered? "Powered by Guinness", the
Shaun-like voice quips. Whether the voice is really Shaun or not is pure
speculation on my part. ORBO or not, I think I would like to visit
Slattery's just for a Guinness! That's product placement for you.

 

The saga continues...

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Jed Rothwell

Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson  wrote:

> One gets the impression the device is pretty close to being ready to be
> boxed and sold commercially to the public.
>
That is my impression from the announcement. I doubt this device is real,
and I doubt we will ever hear of this again, but suppose for the sake of
argument it is true. As I said before about others who pursued this
strategy, such as Rossi, this is a supremely stupid thing to do. It will
cost a great deal of money and waste a lot of time. It may end
catastrophically, if one of the units malfunctions.

There is no need to sell anything to the public, or to produce more than a
handful of gadgets. Ten should be enough. Find ten experts at places like
Georgia Tech who express interest in testing them. Give them the gadgets
with a one month time limit. The expert has to test it and write a report
in one month, or return the gadget. After a month or so you have 10 reports
from experts showing that the gadget is real. With that in hand you can get
10 more experts, or 100 more. Soon everyone in the world will believe the
claim and you can then collect billions dollars in contracts to manufacture
them or in investment capital.

There is no need to involve the public, or to mass produce anything. These
steps would actually be counterproductive.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Jones Beene

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 

 

Ø  It would appear STEORN may soon be getting ready to market a cordless
charger for your cellphone. Gets its energy from... who knows.

 

Given the lack of technical acumen at Steorn, and given that are showing a
commercial product (at a Pub, of course) which they do not have the skill to
design or produce, it is almost certain that they are repackaging someone
elses product. They could be repackaging ADGEX technology, especially since
the Russian/Aussie company showed a similar recharger  before the
flashlight.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VYC8K77MSc
 =1

 

A possible scenario is that neither ADGEX or Steorn have found an actual
breakthrough - other than advanced energy storage, which infringes on
someone elses IP. Barium titanate is amazing stuff, but it is well covered
in patents. It could also be have a few inherent risks (as we have discussed
here).

 

I have one of the miracle flashlights on order, but they saying that it
will not ship for a month or two, so it is probably a scam as well  or at
best an advanced capacitor, or Batt-Cap. Which is okay.

 

In short, there is a good possibility that someone (ADGEX) wants to avoid
the little problem of patent licensing or cannot afford liability insurance
 but is ready  to ship a simple produce which implements barium titanate or
graphene technology, or both together  so as to market in an early product
which stores much more energy than expected. 

 

There are not too many ways to proceed to market, if you know that you are
infringing on established IP  and the flashlight, or the cell phone
recharger are useful products which will bring in enough dollars to fight
off the first round of legal challenges.

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Frank Acland

Not sure, but this is the latest T-shirt design, from CEO Shaun McCarthy's
Facebook profile:

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/11896090_10153129810703977_2701005192849534586_n.jpg?oh=98d0448fa86fc22274063d089c6d744f=56A41575



On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:

> Jones, always presenting the Vort Collective with the perception of the
> quintessential cynic spiced with a well-researched conspiratorial slant!
> And Jed, countering much of that spice with a more practical no-nonsense
> POV. Both POVs, I find valuable.
>
>
>
> Agreed, the probability that this latest episode will pan out is about as
> likely as discovering a patch of land south of the South Pole - to
> paraphrase a saying Dr. Robert Park coined while expressing his adamant
> disbelief for the existence of hydrinos.
>
>
>
> Fortunately, it costs me nothing to keep watching the continuing saga
> unfold from the Peanut Gallery. What I find interesting is that throughout
> all of these years the company apparently hasn't gone belly up. Despite all
> of its prior... how should I say this... spectacular failures, how is it
> possible for Steorn to continue to stay afloat? I confess, during weaker
> moments I find myself speculating that the outfit must have deliberately
> orchestrated a number of well-publicized failures just to shake the
> competition off of their tail while continuing to perfect their
> super-secret product line behind closed doors. In all honesty, I serious
> doubt that line-of-thought. Just too damned conspiratorial for my own blood.
>
>
>
> What comes next? Can somebody please pass the popcorn my way?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Steven Vincent Johnson
>
> OrionWorks.com
>
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>



-- 
Frank Acland
Publisher, E-Cat World

RE: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Jones, always presenting the Vort Collective with the perception of the 
quintessential cynic spiced with a well-researched conspiratorial slant! And 
Jed, countering much of that spice with a more practical no-nonsense POV. Both 
POVs, I find valuable.

 

Agreed, the probability that this latest episode will pan out is about as 
likely as discovering a patch of land south of the South Pole - to paraphrase a 
saying Dr. Robert Park coined while expressing his adamant disbelief for the 
existence of hydrinos. 

 

Fortunately, it costs me nothing to keep watching the continuing saga unfold 
from the Peanut Gallery. What I find interesting is that throughout all of 
these years the company apparently hasn't gone belly up. Despite all of its 
prior... how should I say this... spectacular failures, how is it possible for 
Steorn to continue to stay afloat? I confess, during weaker moments I find 
myself speculating that the outfit must have deliberately orchestrated a number 
of well-publicized failures just to shake the competition off of their tail 
while continuing to perfect their super-secret product line behind closed 
doors. In all honesty, I serious doubt that line-of-thought. Just too damned 
conspiratorial for my own blood.

 

What comes next? Can somebody please pass the popcorn my way?

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

OrionWorks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread mixent

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Fri, 11 Sep 2015 19:15:44 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>To confuse matters, the supercapacitor (sometimes called ultracapacitor) is 
>electrochemical like the battery but with extreme capacitance at low voltage 
>(~1.2 v) dictated by chemistry. These bridge the gap between the old 
>electrolytic capacitors and one-time batteries. The SC store more energy and 
>tolerate many more discharge cycles but are larger in size per unit of energy. 
>The EEStor device has much higher voltage (up to 2000 v) and on paper looks 
>superior to any SC or the lithium ion battery by a factor of 2-3, but the 
>developers cannot demonstrate this in a working product. 

Of course not. They put a high resistance material with low dielectric constant
in series with a material with high dielectric constant, and expect that the
high voltage will appear across the high dielectric substance, which of course
it doesn't. It appears across the low dielectric constant material, leaving only
a much lower voltage across the high dielectric constant material, and
consequently much less energy stored than they anticipated.

Common sense dictates that had the whole voltage (which exceeds the breakdown
voltage of the high dielectric constant material) actually been across that
material, then it would have shorted internally. Were that not the case, then
there would have been no initial need for the series placement of the materials
in the first place.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Daniel Rocha

It's probably explained here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3JogbHX8yo

Re: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread mixent

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Fri, 11 Sep 2015 19:15:44 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Plus  we should remember that capacitors technically do not store 
>charge Instead, charge is segregated and transported via the external 
>circuit as EMF and stored as energy in the electric field between the plates 
>but not as charge on the plates. To charge a capacitor is not to store 
>actual electrostatic charge - but to use circuits to store energy in a 
>dielectric using electrons as charge carriers. In short, we are adding 
>information and control, in order to hybridize the battery of tomorrow.

I'm fairly sure this is wrong. Capacitors do indeed store charge on the plates.
The effect of the dielectric is to make the plates appear as though they were
closer together than they actually are. IOW each plate "feels" the other more
strongly than the separation distance in vacuum would imply.

If no charge were stored, then no current could flow.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:STEORN in the news again:

2015-09-11 Thread Jones Beene

From: Frank Acland 

… this is the latest T-shirt design, from CEO Shaun McCarthy's Facebook profile:

 “The battery is dead”

Which is News to a genuine entrepreneur like Elon Musk. Yet, it is true that 
semantics is blurring the distinction between battery and capacitor, or between 
those two and the fuel cell. This effectively relegates the only the lowly 
alkaline battery to the throw-away garbage it has become. 

Eventually, higher performance batteries (which used to be call “betteries” in 
the heyday of EEStor) will be engineered to have greater and greater 
capacitance for a number of reasons and the dividing line will disappear – but 
maybe not the old name. The SC (supercap) or BatCap (which is different from 
the SC) and advanced systems which use graphene to complement ion charge 
carriers are moving towards hybridization. Hopefully, this is what ADGEX (or 
maybe Steorn) has accomplished. But don’t hold your breath.

Even PhysOrg cannot keep it all straight –still calling the SC device a 
“battery”
http://phys.org/news/2014-09-greater-capacity-batteries-smaller-devices.html
To confuse matters, the supercapacitor (sometimes called ultracapacitor) is 
electrochemical like the battery but with extreme capacitance at low voltage 
(~1.2 v) dictated by chemistry. These bridge the gap between the old 
electrolytic capacitors and one-time batteries. The SC store more energy and 
tolerate many more discharge cycles but are larger in size per unit of energy. 
The EEStor device has much higher voltage (up to 2000 v) and on paper looks 
superior to any SC or the lithium ion battery by a factor of 2-3, but the 
developers cannot demonstrate this in a working product. 

To complete the semantic muddiness, Supercaps have “pseudocapacitance” which 
can be achieved by Faradaic electron charge-transfer with or without redox 
reactions. Going further, pseudocapacitance can be combined with a superior 
dielectric to give the best of all worlds, arguably including high voltage. 
Plus – we should remember that capacitors technically do not “store charge” 
Instead, charge is segregated and transported via the external circuit as EMF 
and stored as energy in the electric field between the plates but not as charge 
on the plates. To “charge a capacitor” is not to store actual electrostatic 
charge - but to use circuits to store energy in a dielectric using electrons as 
charge carriers. In short, we are adding “information and control,” in order to 
hybridize the battery of tomorrow.

Also, there is a small but necessary amount of charge separation that 
establishes the open circuit voltage across any battery. The point being that, 
despite semantic difficulties, a hybrid device will emerge, combining the best 
features of a range of storage devices - and the actual name we give it will 
probably remain the same = battery. Shaun should change his message:

The battery is dead. Long live the battery !

Using both ions and electrons as charge carriers is an advantage, but what 
about self-recharging? Can that little trick be a function of sequentially 
oscillating both polarities of charge carrier? Where would the excess energy 
come from? It is clear that the SC has a hysteresis-like memory and appears to 
self-charge, but that feature cannot be used to do real work and invalidate the 
2nd Law. 

Or … not yet… but when a device has massive capacitance, it is metaphorically 
like a hundred mile deep crater. It can effectively draw in  a flow of external 
energy which otherwise seems to be too weak. Background energy seems weak 
because there is usually no “sink”… yet ambient heat will be extremely robust 
when you can engineer a zero degree kelvin heat sink !

Self-charge for net gain is far from proved, but in a way – it is easier to 
rationalize than LENR, and certainly more useful as a practical expedient. If 
ADGEX starts shipping these eternal lamps, demonstrating a valid energy anomaly 
– then everything changes no matter what AR may do with the ECat … that seems 
to be the bottom line.

[Vo]:STEORN news: THE IRISH TIMES - Self-charging battery causes a stir in Dublin pub test

2015-05-14 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Enjoy:

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/self-charging-battery-causes-a
-stir-in-dublin-pub-test-1.2211622

 

http://tinyurl.com/kcvvcqa

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

svjart.orionworks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:Steorn, Recalescence, and thermal gain in Ni-H

2014-07-02 Thread Jones Beene

This foundry video from Shaun has been making the rounds as his indication
of something happening at Steorn:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=1015002268977set=vb.644973976type
=2theater

There is an interesting side note here, if you watch the previous iron pour
to the right-front of the present pour, in the video. What you see is
recalescence, which is a reheating effect of cooling - in essence, cooling
is converted into heating and this is a known phase-change reaction that has
killed thousands of foundry workers going back to the start of the iron age.

One further piece of the puzzle of thermal gain in Ni-H can be related to
recalescence via spin-coupling - and this relates to a known mechanism for
converting cooling into heat - via the latent heat of crystallization. We
have discussed recalescence several times before. It is controversial
because of the fatality at SRI ... and Brian Ahern's argument that
recalescence was to blame.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg11242.html

Without revisiting that particular episode, there is a stronger case to be
made for recalescence with hydrogen loaded nickel instead of either
palladium-silver or carbon steel. The phenomenon is a good fit if it were
found to produce thermal gain due to reversible phase change between BCC and
FCC, which would happen over-and-over again around the Curie point. The
ultimate source of energy would then be in question and could even be
non-nuclear - possibly related to Dirac nanomagnetism in a way which we
have touched on before.

The reheating phenomenon occurs with phase change of iron - but
austenite-phase nickel, especially when compounded with CNT or loaded with
protons, or both, is a candidate for the anomaly at far lower temperature
than with iron. BTW the anomaly is not known to be gainful in the steel
industry, but until someone actually looks at thermodynamics in that
context, gain could have escaped detection. 

The suggestion for a recalescence mode of operation which is relevant to the
Rossi effect is a bit counter-intuitive. First, the active material must be
heated by external means above the critical temperature, which is slightly
higher than the Curie point, and then allowed to cool. Recalescence then
raises the temperature back up to near the critical temperature, at which
point a small bit of energy from outside must be reapplied in the next
iteration, following which it is allowed to cool once again, during which
cycle it once again anomalously reheats. If there is net gain, then very
little external heat needs to be applied or an auto-heat mode must be
controlled.

The Curie point and critical temperature in alloys are two different
phenomena of energetic phase change. They could be connected at a
fundamental level which is not appreciated now, especially when a proton
conductor is involved, since protons provide the mobility which would be
needed to balance the thermodynamics on a knife's edge. The Curie point is
the temperature in which ferromagnetic materials become paramagnetic and
critical temperature is the temperature at which alloys undergo a
micro-structural change to austenite or gamma phase (crystallization). With
iron this phase is a non-magnetic allotrope which has caused dozens of
deaths in steel mills due to the surprisingly strong reheating effect (which
happens on cool-down, so it is unexpected).

Basically when falling below the critical temperature, there is enough
latent thermal energy (which seems to magically appear) to allow the BCC or
body centered cubic structure (aka pearlite) to expand and reorient,
allowing carbon atoms to move into an ordered crystalline structure, forming
the face centered cubic structure, austenite. If this can happen with carbon
in regular steel, and in nickel stainless steel with no carbon, then there
is the suspicion that with in nickel/CNT, the effect could be enhanced by
the increased strength of the CNT - which would be resisting phase change as
well as proton loading. For the Rossi effect, one can imagine that this is
repeatable in a cyclical progression so long as too much heat were not
removed.

SIDE NOTE and reality check: I have to laugh at the above - on reread. It is
essentially using a Steorn video to validate the Rossi experiment. LOL. Is
there any less convincing way on earth to validate any experiment ?

Jones


attachment: winmail.dat

Re: [Vo]:Steorn, Recalescence, and thermal gain in Ni-H

2014-07-02 Thread Bob Cook

Jones wrote:


One further piece of the puzzle of thermal gain in Ni-H can be related to
recalescence via spin-coupling - and this relates to a known mechanism for
converting cooling into heat - via the latent heat of crystallization.


Jones:


How does the latent heat of crystallization transfer real heat to a matrix of 
Ni via spin coupling?  What is the source of energy on subsequent cycles?  to 
accomplish a newly crystalized condition  in the Ni.


Bob










Sent from Windows Mail





From: Jones Beene
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎July‎ ‎2‎, ‎2014 ‎7‎:‎41‎ ‎AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com





This foundry video from Shaun has been making the rounds as his indication
of something happening at Steorn:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=1015002268977set=vb.644973976type
=2theater

There is an interesting side note here, if you watch the previous iron pour
to the right-front of the present pour, in the video. What you see is
recalescence, which is a reheating effect of cooling - in essence, cooling
is converted into heating and this is a known phase-change reaction that has
killed thousands of foundry workers going back to the start of the iron age.

One further piece of the puzzle of thermal gain in Ni-H can be related to
recalescence via spin-coupling - and this relates to a known mechanism for
converting cooling into heat - via the latent heat of crystallization. We
have discussed recalescence several times before. It is controversial
because of the fatality at SRI ... and Brian Ahern's argument that
recalescence was to blame.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg11242.html

Without revisiting that particular episode, there is a stronger case to be
made for recalescence with hydrogen loaded nickel instead of either
palladium-silver or carbon steel. The phenomenon is a good fit if it were
found to produce thermal gain due to reversible phase change between BCC and
FCC, which would happen over-and-over again around the Curie point. The
ultimate source of energy would then be in question and could even be
non-nuclear - possibly related to Dirac nanomagnetism in a way which we
have touched on before.

The reheating phenomenon occurs with phase change of iron - but
austenite-phase nickel, especially when compounded with CNT or loaded with
protons, or both, is a candidate for the anomaly at far lower temperature
than with iron. BTW the anomaly is not known to be gainful in the steel
industry, but until someone actually looks at thermodynamics in that
context, gain could have escaped detection. 

The suggestion for a recalescence mode of operation which is relevant to the
Rossi effect is a bit counter-intuitive. First, the active material must be
heated by external means above the critical temperature, which is slightly
higher than the Curie point, and then allowed to cool. Recalescence then
raises the temperature back up to near the critical temperature, at which
point a small bit of energy from outside must be reapplied in the next
iteration, following which it is allowed to cool once again, during which
cycle it once again anomalously reheats. If there is net gain, then very
little external heat needs to be applied or an auto-heat mode must be
controlled.

The Curie point and critical temperature in alloys are two different
phenomena of energetic phase change. They could be connected at a
fundamental level which is not appreciated now, especially when a proton
conductor is involved, since protons provide the mobility which would be
needed to balance the thermodynamics on a knife's edge. The Curie point is
the temperature in which ferromagnetic materials become paramagnetic and
critical temperature is the temperature at which alloys undergo a
micro-structural change to austenite or gamma phase (crystallization). With
iron this phase is a non-magnetic allotrope which has caused dozens of
deaths in steel mills due to the surprisingly strong reheating effect (which
happens on cool-down, so it is unexpected).

Basically when falling below the critical temperature, there is enough
latent thermal energy (which seems to magically appear) to allow the BCC or
body centered cubic structure (aka pearlite) to expand and reorient,
allowing carbon atoms to move into an ordered crystalline structure, forming
the face centered cubic structure, austenite. If this can happen with carbon
in regular steel, and in nickel stainless steel with no carbon, then there
is the suspicion that with in nickel/CNT, the effect could be enhanced by
the increased strength of the CNT - which would be resisting phase change as
well as proton loading. For the Rossi effect, one can imagine that this is
repeatable in a cyclical progression so long as too much heat were not
removed.

SIDE NOTE and reality check: I have to laugh at the above - on reread. It is
essentially using a Steorn video to validate the Rossi experiment. LOL. Is
there any less convincing way on earth to validate any experiment ?

Jones

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-13 Thread jwinter

On 11/13/2011 2:57 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
I have a print-out of Steorn's report dated Oct. 31, 2008. At the
moment I can't locate the pdf file, but I downloaded it from their
website two or three years ago, and the name Mr. Rice does not appear
in this report. The title is _Asymmetry and Energy in Magnetic
Systems_. It includes ten diagrams and five graphs and describes four
experimental configurations:

1) symmetric and linear MH
2) asymmetric and linear MH
3) symmetric and non-linear MH
4) asymmetric and non-lnear MH
Only the last configuration showed an anomaly. Dr. Quack Pot's
analsysis seems to discount the symmetric/asymmetric parameters since
they aren't mentioned in your summary.
This is not the report that QuackPot discussed. I gave the link to that
one in my original email. It is still there. You could have simply
clicked on it and downloaded it. Here are the links in full rather than
hidden as an underlined word:

http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/
And the paper in question is to be found at:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/jm-rice-report-28april-2008.pdf

If you look at this second link and chop the file name from it:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/
then you will find a short list of papers that Steorn have released.
The one you are talking about I believe is this one:

http://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems-rev-1.0.pdf

http://www.overunity.org.uk/showthread.php?869-Steorns-PM-Orbo-Asymmetric-Non-linear-MH-setup
Actually it is obvious from the net energy result obtained of 0.564 mJ
per revolution that if it was an energy gain then CLaNZeR's little
armature with its low bearing losses should have self run and spun its
head off without any effort.

Quackpot (as did I) pointed out that it is most likely the sudden field
reversal in close proximity of a conducting surface that produces the
energy loss, and this only happens in certain situations. In Steorn's
case they noticed that this situation was brought about by means of an
asymmetric and non-linear MH arrangement.

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-13 Thread Harry Veeder

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 3:27 AM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:

On 11/13/2011 2:57 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:

I have a print-out of Steorn's report dated Oct. 31, 2008. At the moment
I can't locate the pdf file, but I downloaded it from their website two or
three years ago, and the name Mr. Rice does not appear in this report. The
title is _Asymmetry and Energy in Magnetic Systems_. It includes ten
diagrams and five graphs and describes four experimental configurations:
1) symmetric and linear MH
2) asymmetric and linear MH
3) symmetric and non-linear MH
4) asymmetric and non-lnear MH
Only the last configuration showed an anomaly. Dr. Quack Pot's analsysis
seems to discount the symmetric/asymmetric parameters since they aren't
mentioned in your summary.

This is not the report that QuackPot discussed. I gave the link to that
one in my original email. It is still there. You could have simply
clicked on it and downloaded it. Here are the links in full rather than
hidden as an underlined word:
http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/**9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_**
Bombshell_Documents_**Validating_Orbo/http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/
And the paper in question is to be found at:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/**papers/jm-rice-report-28april-**2008.pdfhttp://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/jm-rice-report-28april-2008.pdf

If you look at this second link and chop the file name from it:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/**papers/ http://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/
then you will find a short list of papers that Steorn have released. The
one you are talking about I believe is this one:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/**papers/asymmetry-and-energy-**
in-magnetic-systems-rev-1.0.**pdfhttp://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems-rev-1.0.pdf

In this paper the anonymous writer has been very careful not to specify
whether the net energy result that was obtained in your fourth case
(asymmetric and non-lnear MH) was a net energy gain or a net energy loss.
Isn't that remarkable? The very thing that any reader would want to know,
indeed the only question of significant (billion dollar) interest, and they
are very careful with their wording not to give the game away! Moreover
they do not include enough information in the paper for an intelligent
reader to be able to work it out (Unlike Rice's report for which is easy to
determine that it is an energy loss). There is no mention (that I can find
with a superficial reading) in this paper of any difference in rotating the
armature in one direction compared to the other. There is also a very
careful and complete replication of this configuration - with no suggestion
of any energy gain ever to be had - by CLaNZeR at:
http://www.overunity.org.uk/**showthread.php?869-Steorns-PM-**
Orbo-Asymmetric-Non-linear-MH-**setuphttp://www.overunity.org.uk/showthread.php?869-Steorns-PM-Orbo-Asymmetric-Non-linear-MH-setup
Actually it is obvious from the net energy result obtained of 0.564 mJ
per revolution that if it was an energy gain then CLaNZeR's little armature
with its low bearing losses should have self run and spun its head off
without any effort.

Quackpot (as did I) pointed out that it is most likely the sudden field
reversal in close proximity of a conducting surface that produces the
energy loss, and this only happens in certain situations. In Steorn's case
they noticed that this situation was brought about by means of an
asymmetric and non-linear MH arrangement.

Sorry I have tried to read the Rice paper by opening it my browser but it
only displays the first few pages. When I dowload it and try to open it
all I get is an error message.

I was eagerly following clanzer's replication of Steorn's PM orbo but he
got distracted by other work and never posted any decisive results as you
can see on the last page of the discussion @ the link you provided.

It is true that the PM orbo was not affected by the direction of
rotation. I recalled incorrecly that the direction of
rotation claim applied only to the eOrbo.

Harry

[Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread jwinter

On 11/12/2011 11:50 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
I think Steorn stumbled upon a real anomally but they erred in
assuming that measurement alone was sufficient to demonstrate the
reality of energy creation.

Since there seems to still be some belief around here that Steorn
stumbled upon a real anomaly, I feel that I should point out some
recent postings that may have gone unnoticed.

Also since Mary Yugo has just joined us (and very welcome you are Mary,
with your sharp mind and tongue to match), who took a lot of interest in
the Steorn affair in the early days - I am sure she will appreciate this
information, if not already aware of it.

About a month ago Steorn released four apparently significant supporting
documents to Stirling's news service (www.pesn.com) which were reported
on here
http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/.
PESN was not allowed to post the actual documents or reveal the authors
names, but it turned out that one of the documents (a pretty important
one it seems describing measurement of the Steorn Effect in detail)
was found to be available on Steorn's website here
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/jm-rice-report-28april-2008.pdf!
Anyway sometime later someone calling themselves Dr Quack Pot picked
up on this paper and wrote some comments on the results reported in it
(see comments after the PESN article) which make pretty revealing
reading! To save people having to chase the links and read through the
discussions, here is a summary of the facts as I understand them.

The available document is a Consultant Engineer's (John Rice) report
describing energy balance measurements made on an Orbo mechanism while
it was displaying the anomaly. In each case the torque is measured as
a function of angular position, in some cases using a step, stop and
measure method, and in other cases the torque is sampled during
continuous rotation.

One of the measurements (chart 5 orange curve) shows the torque
resulting from the interaction between a fixed (stator) permanent magnet
and a soft ferrite core rotated on an armature (rotor) in its vicinity.
Since we know that this interaction is always attractive, this allows
the sign of the torque to be determined. Another measurement (chart
4259 red curve) shows the torque between the same fixed magnet stator
but with a permanent magnet on the rotor. The sign of this curve
indicates that that the force between the permanent magnets was
primarily repelling. A third measurement (chart 4259 blue curve) then
shows the result of having the soft ferrite and the permanent magnet
stuck together and rotated together on the armature.

(PMferrite effect) + (PMPM effect) = (PM(PM+ferrite) effect)
But this is not what is measured! Using the first measurement as a null
calibration, the energy balance from the second measurement is very
good, while the energy balance from the third shows a highly significant
(~1 mJ per rev) discrepancy.

So there we have it - the Steorn Anomaly!

But the million dollar question is of course, was it an energy gain or
an energy loss! What was the */sign/* of the discrepancy. With some
simple logic and knowing the sign of the torque, it is very easy to
determine that what was measured was an energy /*loss*/!!! Orbo
technology is a method of turning mechanical energy into heat using
magnetic interactions! WOW!

So here you have at last the key to understanding the amazing puzzle of
the Steorn $75k challenge, the SPDC excitement and discussions, the
scientific jury, the Steorn 300 engineering companies, the SKDB
investors, etc, etc, etc! An amazingly long lived buzz of discussion
and activity and money changing hands, all resulting from a simple sign
error that seems to have only very recently been noticed! (Of course
Steorn must have made the error way back before their challenge of 2006,
and then induced John Rice to repeat and document the same error in 2008).

I am guessing that this Rice report might have been made available to
the SPDC (under NDA, maybe someone could confirm or deny that?), almost
certainly to the Jury, and more recently to the engineering companies
and SKDB, and finally after no more gain was to be had from it, it was
(maybe a month or so ago) released to the public. How is it possible
that out of all the investigators provided with this report, not one
bothered to check the sign of the well documented anomaly. That is now
the biggest puzzle! Someone should update Wikipedia to reflect this
additional information!

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread Terry Blanton

WOW!  That's much stupider than the Sprain measurement error.

Thanks, I feel much better now.

T

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread Harry Veeder

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:09 AM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:

On 11/12/2011 11:50 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:

I think Steorn stumbled upon a real anomally but they erred in assuming
that measurement alone was sufficient to demonstrate the reality of energy
creation.

Since there seems to still be some belief around here that Steorn
stumbled upon a real anomaly, I feel that I should point out some recent
postings that may have gone unnoticed.

About a month ago Steorn released four apparently significant supporting
documents to Stirling's news service (www.pesn.com) which were reported
on
herehttp://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/.
PESN was not allowed to post the actual documents or reveal the authors
names, but it turned out that one of the documents (a pretty important one
it seems describing measurement of the Steorn Effect in detail) was found
to be available on Steorn's website
herehttp://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/jm-rice-report-28april-2008.pdf!
Anyway sometime later someone calling themselves Dr Quack Pot picked up
on this paper and wrote some comments on the results reported in it (see
comments after the PESN article) which make pretty revealing reading! To
save people having to chase the links and read through the discussions,
here is a summary of the facts as I understand them.

The available document is a Consultant Engineer's (John Rice) report
describing energy balance measurements made on an Orbo mechanism while it
was displaying the anomaly. In each case the torque is measured as a
function of angular position, in some cases using a step, stop and measure
method, and in other cases the torque is sampled during continuous rotation.

One of the measurements (chart 5 orange curve) shows the torque resulting
from the interaction between a fixed (stator) permanent magnet and a soft
ferrite core rotated on an armature (rotor) in its vicinity. Since we know
that this interaction is always attractive, this allows the sign of the
torque to be determined. Another measurement (chart 4259 red curve) shows
the torque between the same fixed magnet stator but with a permanent magnet
on the rotor. The sign of this curve indicates that that the force between
the permanent magnets was primarily repelling. A third measurement (chart
4259 blue curve) then shows the result of having the soft ferrite and the
permanent magnet stuck together and rotated together on the armature.

The energy balance in each case is obtained by subtracting frictional and
gravitational effects (measured during calibration runs), and then
integrating the remaining magnetic interaction torque over a complete
revolution - which of course gives net energy gained or lost per revolution
(see chart 4260). In a linear system one would expect that
(PMferrite effect) + (PMPM effect) = (PM(PM+ferrite) effect)
But this is not what is measured! Using the first measurement as a null
calibration, the energy balance from the second measurement is very good,
while the energy balance from the third shows a highly significant (~1 mJ
per rev) discrepancy.

So there we have it - the Steorn Anomaly!

But the million dollar question is of course, was it an energy gain or an
energy loss! What was the *sign* of the discrepancy. With some simple
logic and knowing the sign of the torque, it is very easy to determine that
what was measured was an energy *loss*!!! Orbo technology is a method
of turning mechanical energy into heat using magnetic interactions! WOW!

Even if it is a loss, why is one direction better at turning motion into
heat?

Conventional theory predicts the same loss.

Harry

So here you have at last the key to understanding the amazing puzzle of
the Steorn $75k challenge, the SPDC excitement and discussions, the
scientific jury, the Steorn 300 engineering companies, the SKDB
investors, etc, etc, etc! An amazingly long lived buzz of discussion and
activity and money changing hands, all resulting from a simple sign error
that seems to have only very recently been noticed! (Of course Steorn must
have made the error way back before their challenge of 2006, and then
induced John Rice to repeat and document the same error in 2008).

I am guessing that this Rice report might have been made available to the
SPDC (under NDA, maybe someone could confirm or deny that?), almost
certainly to the Jury, and more recently to the engineering companies and
SKDB, and finally after no more gain was to be had from it, it was (maybe a
month or so ago) released to the public. How is it possible that out of
all the investigators provided with this report, not one

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Even if it is a loss, why is one direction better at turning motion into
 heat?

 Conventional theory predicts the same loss.

Everyone believes the repulsive force should be the same as the
attractive force between magnets; however, the repulsive force is
always less.  Here is a handy calculator to demonstrate this:

http://www.magnetsales.com/Design/Calc_filles/PullAndPushBetween2DiscMagnets.asp

I think this might be what led to Steorn's confusion.

T

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread Harry Veeder

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Even if it is a loss, why is one direction better at turning motion
 into
  heat?
 
  Conventional theory predicts the same loss.

 Everyone believes the repulsive force should be the same as the
 attractive force between magnets; however, the repulsive force is
 always less.  Here is a handy calculator to demonstrate this:


 http://www.magnetsales.com/Design/Calc_filles/PullAndPushBetween2DiscMagnets.asp

 I think this might be what led to Steorn's confusion.




Since the magnets are moving in a loop, asymmetrical differences between
replusive and attractive forces cannot explain the anomaly. The
anomaly only appeared in the presence of soft ferrite magnet.


harry

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread jwinter


On 11/13/2011 1:39 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Even if it is a loss, why is one direction better at turning motion 
into heat?

Conventional theory predicts the same loss.
This is a good question because I have heard the same claim - that of an 
energy discrepancy which is different if you rotate it in one direction 
from the other.  Unfortunately we have no information or measurements on 
what configuration produces this effect and so we can only guess.  
However I am so sure that it is not anomalous, that I can't be bothered 
taking the time to think it through properly and prove it.  But I will 
wave my hands around to show that it is, at least in principle, possible.


I believe the main reason for the energy loss in the case described in 
Rice's report, is that, because of the anisotropy of the ferrite in the 
rod (or because it is a long thin rod and not a sphere), the field in it 
flicks very suddenly from one direction to the opposite direction.  I 
think that these sharp transitions with overshoot are what is seen in 
chart 4251 at about 130 degrees and 150 degrees when the torque is 
monitored continuously while being rotated.  Remember that in this case 
the ferrite is glued hard against the conducting surface of a neo magnet 
- which means that these sudden changes of magnetization direction will 
induce significant Eddy current losses in the close conducting surface.


This effect is non-linear - in the sense that if you were to cycle the 
structure through the same field changes but ensure that it happens 
slowly and not by a positive feedback avalanche mechanism, then you 
would not loose nearly as much energy as the same cycle with the sudden 
switch.


So the question is, is there a method of arranging permanent magnets and 
anisotropic ferrite in such a manner that if you cycle it in one 
direction, then the ferrite flips its magnetization in an avalanching 
manner, whereas if rotated the other direction, then the magnetization 
changes smoothly and without sudden flips.  I would guess that there is, 
although I must admit that it is not obvious how it might be arranged 
with a single moving part.  It would certainly be easy with two moving 
parts.  But the effect is certainly possible to achieve in principle, 
and I don't want to spend time proving whether it can be done with a 
single moving part when we don't even know if that is what has been done.

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Bombshell - Orbo was all a sign error!

2011-11-12 Thread Harry Veeder

Jwinter,
I have a print-out of Steorn's report dated Oct. 31, 2008. At the moment I
can't locate the pdf file, but I downloaded it from their website two or
three years ago, and the name Mr. Rice does not appear in this report. The
title is _Asymmetry and Energy in Magnetic Systems_. It includes ten
diagrams and five graphs and describes four experimental configurations:

1) symmetric and linear MH
2) asymmetric and linear MH
3) symmetric and non-linear MH
4) asymmetric and non-lnear MH

Only the last configuration showed an anomaly. Dr. Quack Pot's analsysis
seems to discount the symmetric/asymmetric parameters since they aren't
mentioned in your summary.

Harry

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:09 AM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:

On 11/12/2011 11:50 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:

I think Steorn stumbled upon a real anomally but they erred in assuming
that measurement alone was sufficient to demonstrate the reality of energy
creation.

Since there seems to still be some belief around here that Steorn
stumbled upon a real anomaly, I feel that I should point out some recent
postings that may have gone unnoticed.

About a month ago Steorn released four apparently significant supporting
documents to Stirling's news service (www.pesn.com) which were reported
on
herehttp://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/.
PESN was not allowed to post the actual documents or reveal the authors
names, but it turned out that one of the documents (a pretty important one
it seems describing measurement of the Steorn Effect in detail) was found
to be available on Steorn's website
herehttp://www.steorn.com/orbo/papers/jm-rice-report-28april-2008.pdf!
Anyway sometime later someone calling themselves Dr Quack Pot picked up
on this paper and wrote some comments on the results reported in it (see
comments after the PESN article) which make pretty revealing reading! To
save people having to chase the links and read through the discussions,
here is a summary of the facts as I understand them.

The available document is a Consultant Engineer's (John Rice) report
describing energy balance measurements made on an Orbo mechanism while it
was displaying the anomaly. In each case the torque is measured as a
function of angular position, in some cases using a step, stop and measure
method, and in other cases the torque is sampled during continuous rotation.

One of the measurements (chart 5 orange curve) shows the torque resulting
from the interaction between a fixed (stator) permanent magnet and a soft
ferrite core rotated on an armature (rotor) in its vicinity. Since we know
that this interaction is always attractive, this allows the sign of the
torque to be determined. Another measurement (chart 4259 red curve) shows
the torque between the same fixed magnet stator but with a permanent magnet
on the rotor. The sign of this curve indicates that that the force between
the permanent magnets was primarily repelling. A third measurement (chart
4259 blue curve) then shows the result of having the soft ferrite and the
permanent magnet stuck together and rotated together on the armature.

So there we have it - the Steorn Anomaly!

So here you have at last the key to understanding the amazing puzzle of
the Steorn $75k challenge, the SPDC excitement and discussions, the
scientific jury, the Steorn 300 engineering companies, the SKDB
investors, etc, etc, etc! An amazingly long lived buzz of discussion and
activity and money changing hands, all resulting from a simple sign error
that seems to have only very recently been noticed! (Of course Steorn must
have made the error way back

[Vo]:Steorn: New Validation Tests?

2011-09-30 Thread Harry Veeder

I didn't follow the recent discussion of Steorn on vortext. Was this Sept. 14 
2011 report from PESN the trigger?
Harry
 
Steorn Drops Four Bombshell Documents Validating Orbo

The Dublin based, Irish free energy company Steorn, has allowed PESN to view 
and report on four documents written by third party scientists and engineers 
that appear to validate the Orbo overunity technology.
 
http://pesn.com/2011/09/14/9501914_Steorn_Drops_Four_Bombshell_Documents_Validating_Orbo/

[Vo]:Steorn loses CPC

2011-04-12 Thread Jones Beene

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411

Sean - the chief pub crawler at Steorn seems to have heard the 'last call'

Re: [Vo]:Steorn loses CPC

2011-04-12 Thread Esa Ruoho

What's a CPC

2011/4/13 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net

  
 *http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411*http://www.scribd.com/doc/52869096/Steorn-B10-20110411

 Sean – the chief pub crawler at Steorn seems to have heard the ‘last call’

Re: [Vo]:Steorn loses CPC

2011-04-12 Thread Terry Blanton

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote:
 What's a CPC

A Guinness sink hole.

T

Re: [Vo]:Steorn loses CPC

2011-04-12 Thread Esa Ruoho

Aw FFS..


On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote:
  What's a CPC

 A Guinness sink hole.

 T

RE: [Vo]:STEORN publishes info on the original PM Orbo

2010-04-07 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Stephen sez:

 On 04/06/2010 09:21 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
  This may already have been pointed out here, but it would appear that
  Steorn has finally published additional information on their PM
  configuration. The
  original demo... you know... The demo that failed spectacularly
  several years ago.
 
  http://www.steorn.com/orbo/pm/
 
  There are two PDF files.
 
 
http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf
  http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf
 
 
  I always wondered what happened to the PM configuration, and why did
  they switch from PM to EM. It puzzles me that Steorn appears to have so
  many different OU configurations that they are playing around with
 
 So many?
 
 What makes you think they have *any* ?
 
 They've never demonstrated anything which was over unity, or even close
 to unity.  The PM configuration flat-out didn't work, and the EM
 configurations consume *far* more power than they generate.
 
 
  , from
  Electromagnetic, Solid State, to Permanent Magnet designs.


Guess I should have included the word claimed ;-)

I'm interested in whether anyone would like to critique to two PDF reports
of claimed Steorn OU. Charts and graphs included. Lots-o-Charts  Graphics
always gives the appearance of authenticity! ;-)

Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:STEORN publishes info on the original PM Orbo

2010-04-06 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

This may already have been pointed out here, but it would appear that Steorn
has finally published additional information on their PM configuration. The
original demo... you know... The demo that failed spectacularly several
years ago.

http://www.steorn.com/orbo/pm/

There are two PDF files.

http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf
http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf


I always wondered what happened to the PM configuration, and why did they
switch from PM to EM. It puzzles me that Steorn appears to have so many
different OU configurations that they are playing around with, from
Electromagnetic, Solid State, to Permanent Magnet designs.

Steve

---
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN publishes info on the original PM Orbo

2010-04-06 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence



On 04/06/2010 09:21 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
 This may already have been pointed out here, but it would appear that Steorn
 has finally published additional information on their PM configuration. The
 original demo... you know... The demo that failed spectacularly several
 years ago.

 http://www.steorn.com/orbo/pm/

 There are two PDF files.

 http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf
 http://www.steorn.com/images/magnetic-torque-measurement-system.pdf


 I always wondered what happened to the PM configuration, and why did they
 switch from PM to EM. It puzzles me that Steorn appears to have so many
 different OU configurations that they are playing around with

So many?

What makes you think they have *any* ?

They've never demonstrated anything which was over unity, or even close
to unity.  The PM configuration flat-out didn't work, and the EM
configurations consume *far* more power than they generate.


 , from
 Electromagnetic, Solid State, to Permanent Magnet designs.

 Steve

 ---
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 www.OrionWorks.com
 www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:Steorn Returns

2010-04-01 Thread Harry Veeder

New promotional video:
http://www.steorn.com/

New data on the older permanent magnet Orbo and the newer electric Orbo:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/

Seems they are also building a solid state-Orbo.

Harry
PS. If Steorn has achieved what they claim, then perhaps CF also works by 
side-stepping CoE.



  __
Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. 
Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at 
http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Returns

2010-04-01 Thread Harry Veeder

Yes today is april 1st, but since most people would dismiss Orbo as either a 
joke or scam or a case of self-delusion then it seems like a smart move to 
anounce it today.


Harry



- Original Message 
 From: Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 1:59:15 PM
 Subject: [Vo]:Steorn Returns
 
 New promotional video:

 http://www.steorn.com/

New data on the older permanent magnet Orbo 
 and the newer electric Orbo:

 target=_blank http://www.steorn.com/orbo/

Seems they are also 
 building a solid state-Orbo.

Harry
PS. If Steorn has achieved what 
 they claim, then perhaps CF also works by 
side-stepping 
 CoE.



  
 __
Make your 
 browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. 
 Optimized 
 for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at 
 href=http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/; target=_blank 
 http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/


  __
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Returns

2010-04-01 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax


At 01:59 PM 4/1/2010, Harry Veeder wrote:
New promotional video: http://www.steorn.com/ New data on the older 
permanent magnet Orbo


Where. Not the video!

There is some data, though, linked from the orbo page, 
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/eorbo/5-calorimetric-tests.aspx


Let's say that this is less than impressive. Sure, if the power input 
were constant, but was it? They say it was, but what that turns out 
to mean is that the voltage and current were set up to be constant. 
How? Not easy, you know. Orbo switches the power, and with no 
rotation, in some positions there would be constant current, and in 
some, there would be none. Which conditions was the control? Not 
rotating, no switching, so ... what's the voltage and current?


I suspect this is a variation on the earlier claims that nobody 
particularly believed.


What we have in the experimental run is a chart showing heat 
generated relatively steadily over time. In the control, the rotor 
held stationary (in what effing position? Or was this what they meant 
at the first, that they used an independent power supply to supply 
power to the control? Let me assume that. But how did they do it? In 
the operating orbo, the square wave, at rise and fall, could be a 
complex waveform, they would have difficulty matching the timing and 
current. It's tricky, but it could be done, and they didn't talk at 
all about how they did it. And this is the core of the run: was the 
input *power* the same?


It is indeed, their claim: that rotation is free energy, and how fast 
the rotoer is moving is independent of the power input.


But, remember, they use ultralow friction bearings, apparently 
because the effect is small. How big is the effect they are seeing?


Well, the control raises the temperature of the box about 1 degree in 
2000 minutes, that's at 3.8 watts, they claim.


The orbo raises the temperature an additional 0.3 degree in the same 
time. Because the graphs are *roughly* linear, the heat is 
accumulating reasonably well, not much being lost. So the power being 
generated is about 1 watt. That's huge, in fact, they would not 
need ultra low friction bearings, I believe. So what gives?


The most likely explanation here is that the operating orbo is 
consuming more power, and that is precisely what they have not 
demonstrated. They could do it by various means. They've elected not 
to go there, simply to claim that they matched the power, but by 
unspecified means.


What are they doing? It's obvious: they are selling access to the SKDB.

The solid state orbo? It's in an early stage of development. 
Haven't worked out the bugs yet, but, don't worry it is part of 
the SKDB so you can see for yourself. For how many Euros?


Look, folks, if cold fusion were like this, I'd never have become 
interested. They have not shown *anything* that is truly interesting, 
so far. The calorimetric test is based on an assumption that they 
input power is the same to the two orbos, the rotating and the 
stationary one, but that is precisely the claim that they didn't 
demonstrate in January.


Do they present any evidence showing that the input power is the 
same? Nope. Just their unsupported statement.


Okay, I read the whole report more carefully. They say that the input 
power to the control unit was maintained to be the same as the input 
power to the operating orbo. They don't say how the input power to 
the operating orbo was determined except


the full operation of an Orbo-based system where the energies were 
measured at the input point to the calorimeter.



Then with a separate power supply, they establish the same energy 
input. How? Calculated power? Is the operating power constant? That's 
tricky to measure, and I've never seen any demonstration where they 
were actually measuring it.


For the purpose of this experiment, both of the power sources 
mentioned above were considered to be a complete measurement of the 
power. The power into the calorimeter was calculated by measuring 
the current and the voltage for both the Orbo-based system and the 
optical sensor. The measurements were recorded with a Digital 
Phosphor Oscilloscope, and as such, energy measurement was derived 
and maintained at a constant 3.8W.


Calculated. Sample rate? Makes a difference!

Impressive unless you look inside the horse's mouth and notice the 
missing teeth.


I'd be more impressed if a method of measuring true input power were 
used. Using a power supply, using low-sample rate measurement of 
voltage and current, and calculating power, doesn't cut it.

[Vo]:Steorn Proves OU

2010-01-31 Thread Terry Blanton

Well, er, not to me.

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkKPfhQgEVk

The generator coil is shorted; but, he claims the step function
represents energy.  The input pulses are also shown; and, Sean also
calls these energy.  I am totally confused (which is likely the
intent).

Energy is measured in watt-seconds; but, McCarthy does not explain the
scope traces in adequate detail to verify this is what he measures.

Shorting the generator coil makes no sense.  Why not have a 1 Ohm
precision resistor so that you can measure current and voltage.  You
could then show (in 4 channels) current and voltage in against current
and voltage out.

Since this is a digital scope, you could provide CSV tables with this
data so that anyone can run the numbers.

T

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Proves OU

2010-01-31 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence



On 01/31/2010 01:33 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
 Well, er, not to me.
 
 Here's the video:
 
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkKPfhQgEVk
 
 The generator coil is shorted; but, he claims the step function
 represents energy.  The input pulses are also shown; and, Sean also
 calls these energy.  I am totally confused (which is likely the
 intent).

My, my.  Remember the Newman slogan:

   SPEED IS POWER

If you can't show power out is greater than power in, well, show
something else and claim you've proved your point.

So, for Sean, step functions are energy.

'Nuff said.


 
 Energy is measured in watt-seconds; but, McCarthy does not explain the
 scope traces in adequate detail to verify this is what he measures.
 
 Shorting the generator coil makes no sense.  Why not have a 1 Ohm
 precision resistor so that you can measure current and voltage.  You
 could then show (in 4 channels) current and voltage in against current
 and voltage out.
 
 Since this is a digital scope, you could provide CSV tables with this
 data so that anyone can run the numbers.
 
 T

Re: [Vo]:Steorn Proves OU

2010-01-31 Thread Harry Veeder

- Original Message 
 From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, January 31, 2010 1:33:50 PM
 Subject: [Vo]:Steorn Proves OU

 Well, er, not to me.

 Here's the video:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkKPfhQgEVk

 The generator coil is shorted; but, he claims the step function
 represents energy.  The input pulses are also shown; and, Sean also
 calls these energy.  I am totally confused (which is likely the
 intent).

 Energy is measured in watt-seconds; but, McCarthy does not explain the
 scope traces in adequate detail to verify this is what he measures.

The above url links to part 1.
I heard him say in part 2 the output trace is the integral of (I^2)*(R) with 
respect to time.

part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPaE78qnXks
part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY-IZby6lIY

Harry

 Shorting the generator coil makes no sense.  Why not have a 1 Ohm
 precision resistor so that you can measure current and voltage.  You
 could then show (in 4 channels) current and voltage in against current
 and voltage out.

 Since this is a digital scope, you could provide CSV tables with this
 data so that anyone can run the numbers.

 T

  __
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot 
with the All-new Yahoo! Mail.  Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail 
today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY



On 01/25/2010 12:23 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
 Big splashy advert screens are being displayed at steorn.com
 
 Sounds like they intend to deliver the final punch line this coming
 Saturday, Jan 30
 
 we shall see...
 

For the record, here are my predictions regarding the likely outcomes:

-- They burn out a wheel bearing and cancel the demo, like ol' Tilly
(substitute appropriate part for wheel bearing), and like Sean did a
couple years back.

-- They do another demo of a motor using an external power source
(battery, or other similar device) and then, through calculations and
measurements, claim to have shown overunity.  Others dispute the
calculations, measurements, and claim.  This is, of course, the most
popular approach by perpetual motion machine salesmen.

-- They demo a part of a motor -- a coil, say -- and take certain
measurements which they claim prove that it's over unity in some way.
They're selling knowledge, not devices, so this seems like a good
possibility.

-- They come up with something I haven't thought of, which none the less
leaves the situation ambiguous, with honest skeptics unconvinced.
(Pathological skeptics will never be convinced, of course.)

And a very UNlikely outcome:

-- They demonstrate what they claim is a self runner but don't let
anyone inspect it carefully enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt
that it's for real.  Steorn has never pulled stunts like this in the
past, and I don't expect them to start now.  (As far as I know every
device they have ever demonstrated in public has been real -- only
their claims are dubious.)

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.


 Regards
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 www.OrionWorks.com
 www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson

Additional noise:

http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,100567,10014947o-2000331777b,00.htm

Exerpt:

In the past, Sean has said that the Orbo will manage this to the tune
of 3:1 - in other words, churning out three watts for every watt of
input. The Saturday demo, our sources confide, will be less dramatic -
if they can hit 120 percent, or 1.2 watts out for 1 watt in, it'll be
a success.

---

Needless to say, as Stephen has already conjectured the calculations
Steorn may use to arrive at OU are likely to be subject to differing
interpretations. ;-)

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY



On 01/25/2010 02:01 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
 Additional noise:
 
 http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,100567,10014947o-2000331777b,00.htm
 
 Exerpt:
 
 In the past, Sean has said that the Orbo will manage this to the tune
 of 3:1 - in other words, churning out three watts for every watt of
 input. The Saturday demo, our sources confide, will be less dramatic -
 if they can hit 120 percent, or 1.2 watts out for 1 watt in, it'll be
 a success.

Sigh

Either it has been putting out 3:1 or it hasn't.

If it has, why can't they demo 3:1, or rather 2:1 mechanical:electrical?
 (Knock off 100% for the amount of input power converted to heat.)  Have
they forgotten how they used to do it?  ;-)

If it hasn't been putting out 3:1 then Sean's a liar.

Why does anyone still believe in these people?

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Jed Rothwell


A blogger estimates:


The Saturday demo, our sources confide, will be less dramatic -
if they can hit 120 percent, or 1.2 watts out for 1 watt in, it'll be
a success.


If they can hit 120% I believe they could make the thing 
self-sustaining. The overhead from friction and a capacitor is small. 
Very small compared to a heat engine powered by cold fusion would be.


Terry Blanton or some other magnet motor expert can probably tell us 
what the minimum excess would be to allow a self-sustaining gadget.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax


At 12:23 PM 1/25/2010, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:

Big splashy advert screens are being displayed at steorn.com

Sounds like they intend to deliver the final punch line this coming
Saturday, Jan 30

we shall see...


Yup. Unless all their bearings freeze up, the building mysteriously 
catches on fire, or, or.


But assuming that this goes through, it then becomes possible to more 
adequately judge all the previous claims. Does the proof support 
them? Or were they exaggerated, puffery? Remember, Sean has claimed 
2:1 (which is actually 3:1, because the 2 is the claimed excess, as 
I recall.)

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson

From Mr. Lawrence

 Either it has been putting out 3:1 or it hasn't.

 If it has, why can't they demo 3:1, or rather 2:1
 mechanical:electrical?  (Knock off 100% for the
 amount of input power converted to heat.)  Have
 they forgotten how they used to do it?  ;-)

Someone can correct me if I error on the following interpretation but
it's my recollection that Sean stated something to the effect that the
configuration currently on demo at the Waterfront has allegedly only
been measured to generate a modest OU of 1.2.

I believe these other OU claims Sean has inferred, some allegedly up
to 3:1, were measured from different experimental devices not
currently being demonstrated to the public. I seem to recall Sean
saying something to the effect that these other Orbo devices are more
complicated, and as such, their added complexity would have made them
unsuitable for the quick slam-and-dunk dog-and-pony show they wished
to demonstrate to the public.

 If it hasn't been putting out 3:1 then Sean's a liar.

I think that may depend on which device Sean was referring to.

 Why does anyone still believe in these people?

X-Files: I want to believe!

Meanwhile, Mongo just whispered something in my ear: Light bulb!

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY



On 01/25/2010 02:43 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
From Mr. Lawrence
 
 Either it has been putting out 3:1 or it hasn't.

 If it has, why can't they demo 3:1, or rather 2:1
 mechanical:electrical?  (Knock off 100% for the
 amount of input power converted to heat.)  Have
 they forgotten how they used to do it?  ;-)
 
 Someone can correct me if I error on the following interpretation but
 it's my recollection that Sean stated something to the effect that the
 configuration currently on demo at the Waterfront has allegedly only
 been measured to generate a modest OU of 1.2.

Hadn't seen that.  I recall seeing a quote from him which seemed to
imply that Orbo was doing 3:1 (unmeasured, of course!) but I can't find
it now, so maybe I'm wrong.


 
 I believe these other OU claims Sean has inferred, some allegedly up
 to 3:1, were measured from different experimental devices not
 currently being demonstrated to the public. I seem to recall Sean
 saying something to the effect that these other Orbo devices are more
 complicated, and as such, their added complexity would have made them
 unsuitable for the quick slam-and-dunk dog-and-pony show they wished
 to demonstrate to the public.
 
 If it hasn't been putting out 3:1 then Sean's a liar.
 
 I think that may depend on which device Sean was referring to.
 
 Why does anyone still believe in these people?
 
 X-Files: I want to believe!
 
 Meanwhile, Mongo just whispered something in my ear: Light bulb!
 
 Regards
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 www.OrionWorks.com
 www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson

I gotta hand it to those Steorn folks... Their latest advert is both
blunt and dramatic.

Steorn's web site sez:

Final Demo:
PROVING OVERUNITY
Saturday 16.00 GMT
at Steorn.com

---

Barring unforeseen technical difficulties, it is difficult for me to
perceive how Steorn could possibly wiggle their way out of the corner
they seem to be painting themselves into.

But I suspect they will.

One of the few truisms that I've finally begun to Grok inside my thick
skull is the fact that whenever anyone says this is final word on
anything, such declarations mean absolutely nothing.

At present I find myself in sympathy with a lot of Stephen's recent
speculations. I suspect Steorn is likely to demonstrate something new,
something novel about the spinny thing (As Terry recently described
the device as), quite possibly an interesting artifact we haven't seen
yet. But, alas, the new evidence will continue to remain subject to
interpretation.

I sure hope I'm wrong.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax


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?

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Terry Blanton

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Terry Blanton or some other magnet motor expert can probably tell us what
 the minimum excess would be to allow a self-sustaining gadget.


That's like being a pink unicorn expert; but, with Sprain, considering
the conversion losses and other inefficiencies, we calculated about
280% efficiency of the motor was required.

T

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Terry Blanton

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:

 Hadn't seen that.  I recall seeing a quote from him which seemed to
 imply that Orbo was doing 3:1 (unmeasured, of course!) but I can't find
 it now, so maybe I'm wrong.


No, you are correct.  3:1 was the claim, For every watt you put in,
you get one watt of heat and two watts of useable electricity out.

(maybe not exact quote)

T

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Terry Blanton

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:13 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:

 I sure hope I'm wrong.

Me too.  It looks like they have two replicants who have joined the
fray from the most recent piccys on their facebook:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4304018674/

T

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY



On 01/25/2010 03:55 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
 On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:13 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
 svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 I sure hope I'm wrong.
 
 Me too.  It looks like they have two replicants who have joined the
 fray from the most recent piccys on their facebook:
 
 http://www.flickr.com/photos/steornofficial/4304018674/

Replication of **WHAT**??

They're not demonstrating OU (in any visible form), so what, exactly, is
being replicated?


 
 T

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Harry Veeder

- Original Message 
 From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 1:09:10 PM
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

 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.

In the last set of videos, Sean made it pretty clear that it is not part of 
Steorn's mission to build such a device. He expects future developers of orbo 
technology to build one. If he does present a self-runner, he is a liar! ;-)

Harry

  __
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

Re: [Vo]:STEORN: THE FINAL DEMO ... ...PROVING OVERUNITY

2010-01-25 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax


At 07:45 PM 1/25/2010, Harry Veeder wrote:

- Original Message 
 From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com

 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.

In the last set of videos, Sean made it pretty clear that it is not 
part of Steorn's mission to build such a device. He expects future 
developers of orbo technology to build one. If he does present a 
self-runner, he is a liar! ;-)


Or, hey, they managed to find an easy way to do it.

However, self-running is a red herring. What we would want to know 
are these things, which they could easily provide:


The inertia of the rotor, i.e, how much energy it stores at a 
particular rotational speed, so we can understand how much energy is 
stored at a particular RPM level.


How this energy decays (the rotor slows down) in the absence of any 
input, to determine the energy being dissipated in friction or other losses.


How much energy is being supplied from the power supply, which is 
difficult to assess with a battery, but far easier with a capacitor 
bank, which could be designed to emulate the low resistance of a 
battery, avoiding the problems of high current spiking of batteries, 
which could produce spurious results. The capacitor voltage will show 
the rate of energy supply from the capacitor bank, which can be 
calibrated by dumping current through a resistor of known value.


So we can compare the energy being accumulated in the rotor with the 
energy being supplied from the power supply. It is not necessary to 
reach self-running, which might fail even if the system is overunity, 
by not being sufficiently efficient in recovering power from the rotor.


It is also possible to apply an electromagnetic brake, a pickup coil 
that generates current from the motion of the permanent magnets past 
it. If the coil is open circuit, it will not slow the rotor at all, 
but as resistance in series with the coil is decreased, the coil will 
draw  more energy from the rotor and slow it. This can be adjusted to 
keep the rotor at constant speed, thus providing an almost direct 
measure of power being supplied to the rotor by the process. (It 
would only be off by the friction, measured already by the slowing down study).


Then, study of and measurements of voltage and current in the 
toroidal circuit can be performed, and the disposition of the power 
dissipated there determined. How much power is being dissipated in 
the coil and in other circuit elements. How much heat is being generated?


Calorimetry of the whole system would, of course, be of great 
interest. If the rotor is held at constant RPM by a brake as 
described, then the total heat generated should be directly 
correlated to the consumption of power from the capacitor bank, and 
be about the same, unless it is overunity. If it's over unity by a 
factor of two, that would be hard to miss, eh?


The reason for using a capacitor bank is that the voltage provides a 
measure of stored energy, and its decline, that is not dependent upon 
calculations from what may be ridiculously complex waveforms.


The most difficult of all these would be the calorimetry, I assume. 
The rest is trivial. The rest, however, might make the calorimetry unnecessary.


They are presumably not presenting calorimetry data in the final 
demo, as of a few days ago that was still a future project, not a 
done deal, it seems.


The back-EMF claims, which seem reasonable as a first approximation, 
imply that all the energy of the battery is going into heating, in 
the end. So, put a heat sink on the coil, and measure the thermal 
mass of the assembly, which can estimate energy dissipation in the 
coil from differential temperature measurements. Measure or calculate 
heat in the rest of the circuit and add it all up. Does this sum 
correlate well with what is expected from energy drawn from the 
battery? Or is there some missing energy? And, if so, how does the 
missing energy compare with the energy appearing in rotation of the rotor?


Let me guess. The energy appearing in the rotor is quite the same as 
missing energy in the coil circuit, or indistinguishable from noise 
in the measurements.


It is not necessary to understand the system adequately to calculate 
stuff, what calculations are needed should be simple ones, such as 
rotational inertia from the effect of known energy draw (through a 
pickup coil, for example).


Instead, let me guess. It will be complicated, with calculations 
being asserted as proper and complete, neglecting minor variations. 
Such as the claim that there is no back EMF, based on a display 
that only showed that, sort of, what we'd expect from back EMF could 
not be seen. But which would

RE: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

From Abd:

...

 No, not if they have been careful. Look, you pay to go see a famous
 magician. He lies to you and diverts your attention, and you applaud.
 Is that grounds for criminal action? Marketers lie about their
 products all the time. Can you prosecute them for it?

We applaud a famous magician because we willingly enter into an agreement to
be fooled by such expert trickery. 'We willingly pay money because we EXPECT
to be fooled and be delighted by such slight-of-hand. That is definitely not
the case with Steorn. If it becomes obvious that Steorn attempted to fool
its subscribers... I would imagine pitchforks and tar are in order, and a
personal candygram from Mongo.

 Depends, doesn't it? Puffery is not generally illegal. Fraud is.
 Lying isn't fraud except under narrow circumstances.

Indeed, it certainly does depend.

For me the ultimate question comes down to whether Steorn knowingly and
willing knows or believes that their ORBO technology won't work as
advertised - that it will NEVER work. My argument is that Storn at present
continues to believe that their ORBO technology will ultimately work, if
enough money can be thrown at it in order to resolve a few sticking points.
Other's on this list, others who are far more knowledgeable than I on the
matters of electromagnetism, are not so charitable on this matter. What do I
know! It's possible that they may be right. I just still seems likely from
my POV.



 I'm reminded of Deep Throat's advice: Follow the money. And since we
 are trying to follow where the money might be coming from it seems to
 me that only the true believers who stand to be conned out of their
 money would be companies  corporations who end up purchasing licenses
 in the hopes of building their own energizer bunny. For the most part,
 the admiring and true-believing public are not in a position of being
 fleeced.
 
 Really? What's the disclosure price? It's within range for small
 pockets. Some corporations might toss in what is to them pocket
 change, just in case. All they have to do is keep it looking
 interesting enough.

I agree. But that's not the point I was trying to make. My point was that
Mr.  Mrs. Jane  Joe Public are not the entities Steorn is going after.
Steorn is mostly going after companies, enterprises, corporate entities (big
or small) that might be interested.


...

   I'm more inclined
 to speculate that Stoern continues to envision becoming filthy rich
 from taking a tiny slice of all the profits from the licenses they
 hope to sell.
 
 I doubt it at this point. Maybe at one point, then as it dawned on
 them that it wasn't going to, instead of wasting their momentum, they
 figured out how to sell what they have really found.

Interesting conjecture. In the course of time if that appears to be the
case, Mongo will send candygram.

Prosecutor: At what point did you consciously conclude that your contraption
would not work as previously advertised.
Defendant:  I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that to answer
it would incriminate me.

Oh, wait a minute. This is Ireland! Do they have an equivalent of Taking
the fifth in Ireland?

Regards

Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

RE: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

From Abd:

...


 They are liars. But they were, in this, lying with the truth. That is
 still lying, it's the attempt to create an impression contrary to
 fact. It's highly skillful marketing. To an audience that includes
 some people who might toss in a few million dollars just for fun.

...just for fun? You can't be serious.

Regards

Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread Terry Blanton

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 9:09 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 Oh, wait a minute. This is Ireland! Do they have an equivalent of Taking
 the fifth in Ireland?


It's called taking the litre.

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread Michel Jullian

2010/1/21 OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net:
 My point was that
 Mr.  Mrs. Jane  Joe Public are not the entities Steorn is going after.
 Steorn is mostly going after companies, enterprises, corporate entities (big
 or small) that might be interested.

I think on the contrary that the entirety of their licensing revenue
will be from individuals. If I understand correctly their licensing
model, enterprises will only pay a percentage of their sales of
products implementing the technology. So if the technology doesn't
work they won't pay a cent. Individuals on the contrary pay a flat
fee!

Michel

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread peatbog

 I think on the contrary that the entirety of their licensing revenue
 will be from individuals. If I understand correctly their licensing
 model, enterprises will only pay a percentage of their sales of
 products implementing the technology. So if the technology doesn't
 work they won't pay a cent. Individuals on the contrary pay a flat
 fee!

It would take a lot of individual fees to equal the royalties from
a company like GE. In any case, my guess is that whatever
information they give to people buying a license will soon be all
over the internet.

Their only chance of making money will be from companies who
respect their patents.

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

From Michel:

 My point was that Mr.  Mrs. Jane  Joe Public are not the
 entities Steorn is going after. Steorn is mostly going
 after companies, enterprises, corporate entities (big
 or small) that might be interested.

 I think on the contrary that the entirety of their licensing
 revenue will be from individuals. If I understand correctly
 their licensing model, enterprises will only pay a percentage
 of their sales of products implementing the technology. So
 if the technology doesn't work they won't pay a cent.
 Individuals on the contrary pay a flat fee!

Interesting point, Michel. Let me try to redeem my thoughts on the matter.

Yes, indeed, I agree that anyone, including myself can purchase an
ORBO license - a flat fee. I have no idea what an ORBO license would
cost me, but it's probably more than I would care to spend. But why
would I want to? What could I do with an ORBO license? Tinker away in
my garage after work, hoping to discover an elusive improvement to
ORBO's alleged OU?  Yeah, I suppose that's possible, and some might
actually end up doing just that. But not too many, methinks. Ergo,
very little profit will be generated from the selling of ORBO flat
fee licenses to anyone, be it world renown corporate giants or
indigenous garage inventors. If that is Steorn's actual profit
strategy in regards to marketing ORBO, they would have to be dumber
than a pot of steaming cauliflower. 8-0

Adding to peatbog's recent speculations, t seems to me that Steorn
believes that the real profits would eventually come from the small
percentage of the gross/net sales generated from products implementing
their ORBO technology. If Steorn's ORBO technology is the equivalent
of a pink energizer bunny, such small percentage profits would
eventually turn out to be a floodgate of obscene riches.

This premise assumes that Stoern BELIEVES their ORBO is valid
technology... that Steorn just needs a few of those big spending
corporate entities to buy a cheap (for them) licenses and subsequently
work out a few minor pesky bugs!

Of course, my thoughts on this controversial matter are subject to
change. (I could be wrong.)

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread Michel Jullian

2010/1/21 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com:
 From Michel:

 My point was that Mr.  Mrs. Jane  Joe Public are not the
 entities Steorn is going after. Steorn is mostly going
 after companies, enterprises, corporate entities (big
 or small) that might be interested.

 I think on the contrary that the entirety of their licensing
 revenue will be from individuals. If I understand correctly
 their licensing model, enterprises will only pay a percentage
 of their sales of products implementing the technology. So
 if the technology doesn't work they won't pay a cent.
 Individuals on the contrary pay a flat fee!

 Interesting point, Michel. Let me try to redeem my thoughts on the matter.

 Yes, indeed, I agree that anyone, including myself can purchase an
 ORBO license - a flat fee. I have no idea what an ORBO license would
 cost me, but it's probably more than I would care to spend. But why
 would I want to? What could I do with an ORBO license? Tinker away in
 my garage after work, hoping to discover an elusive improvement to
 ORBO's alleged OU?  Yeah, I suppose that's possible, and some might
 actually end up doing just that. But not too many, methinks. Ergo,
 very little profit will be generated from the selling of ORBO flat
 fee licenses to anyone, be it world renown corporate giants or
 indigenous garage inventors. If that is Steorn's actual profit
 strategy in regards to marketing ORBO, they would have to be dumber
 than a pot of steaming cauliflower. 8-0

Since you have no idea of the cost of the individual license, nor of
how many enthusiasts will buy it, nor of what they can be persuaded to
buy from Steorn after that (Steorn measurement instruments at a
preferential price, maybe?), how can you tell?

 Adding to peatbog's recent speculations, t seems to me that Steorn
 believes that the real profits would eventually come from the small
 percentage of the gross/net sales generated from products implementing
 their ORBO technology. If Steorn's ORBO technology is the equivalent
 of a pink energizer bunny, such small percentage profits would
 eventually turn out to be a floodgate of obscene riches.

 This premise assumes that Stoern BELIEVES their ORBO is valid
 technology... that Steorn just needs a few of those big spending
 corporate entities to buy a cheap (for them) licenses and subsequently
 work out a few minor pesky bugs!

Well not exactly, your premise assumes that the technology IS valid
(what Steorn believes is irrelevant to what will ultimately happen).
Mine assumes it isn't, but whether it is valid or not, they will make
money. I have seen dumber schemes :)

Michel

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

From Michel:

...

 Yes, indeed, I agree that anyone, including myself can purchase
 an ORBO license - a flat fee. I have no idea what an ORBO
 license would cost me, but it's probably more than I would care
 to spend. But why would I want to? What could I do with an ORBO
 license? Tinker away in my garage after work, hoping to
 discover an elusive improvement to ORBO's alleged OU?  Yeah, I
 suppose that's possible, and some might actually end up doing
 just that. But not too many, methinks. Ergo, very little profit
 will be generated from the selling of ORBO flat fee licenses
 to anyone, be it world renown corporate giants or indigenous
 garage inventors. If that is Steorn's actual profit strategy
 in regards to marketing ORBO, they would have to be dumber
 than a pot of steaming cauliflower. 8-0

 Since you have no idea of the cost of the individual license,
 nor of how many enthusiasts will buy it, nor of what they can
 be persuaded to buy from Steorn after that (Steorn measurement
 instruments at a preferential price, maybe?), how can you tell?

I've noticed that neither have you offered any information in regards
to Steorn's flat fee structure. I assume you don't know the answer
either. So, how can you tell? We're both speculating! ;-)

In any case, the economics of Supply and Demand dictate the simple
fact that as the price for a flat fee license increases, there are
likely to be fewer indigenous garage inventors (with meager
pocketbooks) willing to buy into Steorn's ORBO technology. That tends
to leave mostly only the big boys on the block willing to risk
embarking on such endeavors.

 Adding to peatbog's recent speculations, t seems to me that
 Steorn believes that the real profits would eventually come
 from the small percentage of the gross/net sales generated
 from products implementing their ORBO technology. If
 Steorn's ORBO technology is the equivalent of a pink
 energizer bunny, such small percentage profits would
 eventually turn out to be a floodgate of obscene riches.

 This premise assumes that Stoern BELIEVES their ORBO is
 valid technology... that Steorn just needs a few of those
 big spending corporate entities to buy a cheap (for them)
 licenses and subsequently work out a few minor pesky bugs!

 Well not exactly, your premise assumes that the technology
 IS valid (what Steorn believes is irrelevant to what will
 ultimately happen). Mine assumes it isn't, but whether it
 is valid or not, they will make money. I have seen dumber
 schemes :)

You appear to have arrived at a perception that I assume Steorn's
technology IS valid. :\ I did not say that, nor did I mean to imply
it. As I previously stated: [my] premise assumes that Stoern BELIEVES
their ORBO is valid technology. (Granted, I've occasionally expressed
an illogical hope that Steorn's ORBO technology might eventually turn
out to be valid, but that's not what is being discussed here.) IMO,
what matters is what Steorn believes to be true. IMO, it is Steorn's
continued belief in ORBO as a valid technology as being the primary
motivating factor in their future economic plans.

It doesn't matter one whit what I believe.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread peatbog

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:11:03 -0600
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:

 I've noticed that neither have you offered any information in regards
 to Steorn's flat fee structure. I assume you don't know the answer
 either. So, how can you tell? We're both speculating! ;-)

The cost is 419 euros per year. Here are the terms:
http://www.steorn.com/orbo/licensing/

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

2010-01-21 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax


At 01:36 PM 1/21/2010, Michel Jullian wrote:


 This premise assumes that Stoern BELIEVES their ORBO is valid
 technology... that Steorn just needs a few of those big spending
 corporate entities to buy a cheap (for them) licenses and subsequently
 work out a few minor pesky bugs!

Well not exactly, your premise assumes that the technology IS valid
(what Steorn believes is irrelevant to what will ultimately happen).
Mine assumes it isn't, but whether it is valid or not, they will make
money. I have seen dumber schemes :)


The cheap licenses provide no production rights, only 
experimentation, I forget the details that they have disclosed. I'm 
sure that to buy a license of any kind, you must first agree to a 
nondisclosure of the license terms, i.e., a non-disclosure of the 
final non-disclosure agreement, which must be binding, before they 
even send you the complete NDA. they'd be stupid not to do that. 
Otherwise the license terms are out of the bag, quickly.


They will have both big and small customers. The internet is vast and 
what would be insanely small markets can be lucrative now. An ability 
to generate publicity is a very good way to tap this diffuse market, 
and they've been doing that quite well.


To the small customers, they sell the investigational license. Some 
of those in this market will also buy equipment from them.


To the large customers, more profit may come from equipment sales 
than from actual disclosure licensing, and a company will look at 
equipment purchase as an investment. The equipment sales are quite 
legally safe for Steorn, as long as the equipment itself is not represented.


Some of the comments here refer to selling a device that doesn't work 
as advertised. That would variously be puffery or fraud, depending. 
But they are not selling, to my knowledge, devices claimed to work 
for energy production. At most, it seems, they might sell a device 
that is claimed to show some anomaly, and it's quite possible that it 
does. What they believe themselves, personally, about this device is 
not actually legally relevant.


However, if they induce people to directly give them money based on 
lies as to performance, as investors, not merely as purchasers of a 
disclosure, they could be in very hot water. My guess is that this 
has been avoided.


If an NDA is signed, I'm sure it would have a clause that private or 
public comments made by Steorn representatives were to be disregarded 
and only what is included in the NDA as the product being sold -- 
which might be just a core dump of research results -- is legally 
binding on Steorn and represented as truthful and accurate. That's 
very common in contracts: This document constitutes the whole of the 
agreement between the parties and verbal or other representations not 
included herein are not a part of the agreement.


So Sean can claim 2:1 in public until the cows come home, and there 
can be no basis for it at all in the actual evidence to be disclosed, 
and Steorn -- and Sean -- are safe.


Get this: lying, as such, is not illegal. Most subscribers to this 
list are really space aliens, and I'm not yet revealing my secret 
knowledge, because I must protect my sources. However, I need money, 
so if you want the evidence apply for a disclosure license, which I 
will sell to anyone I decide to trust, for the modest sum of $49.95. 
To inquire, use the email address provided with this mail. Skeptics 
welcome. I have also placed the necessary proof in a sealed envelope, 
mailed to an undisclosed friend, so that if anything happens to me, 
it will all be revealed. Space aliens, you better hope I don't have 
an accident, because if so, your secret is out!

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube

Peatbog sez:

 The cost is 419 euros per year. Here are the terms:
 http://www.steorn.com/orbo/licensing/

Thanks for the clarification. The initiation fee is certainly way
too steep for my tastes! Interesting that it's an annual fee. One
assumes that the renewable annual fee is in order to receive key
future developments.

As you have previously speculated, it might seem dubious to assume
that Storn would be able to keep all the garage inventor Robin Hoods
out there from spreading the information wealth throughout the
Internet.

This would seem to conform my previous premise that the only way
Steorn hopes to make any real money would be through a cut in the
profits from the sale of products utilizing technology that uses ORBO
technology. It seems to confirm my suspicion that Steorn is banking on
a belief that their ORBO technology is valid.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:steorn addendum video posted on youtube