STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[mondrasek]

I think this is well said.  Here's another way to look at that  dynamic resistance.  As the magnets begin to spin past the toroid, there is a large magnetic attraction between the magnets and the toroid that must be broken, or the magnet will reverse and stick at that point.  When the coil is energized, the magnetic lines of force attracting the magnets to the toroid must be broken and redirected inside of the toroid.  I think it is likely that this magnetic interaction requires energy -- energy that would not be reflected in the I^R heating measurement.

I have to agree.  So I await one of two things:  1)  Demonstration of a self runner to prove this wrong, or 2)  Calorimetry (or any other measurements) that conclusively prove this right.

[neptune]

@Woopy . With due respect Sir , The use of magnetic recording tape was MY idea originally . Credit where it is due , please .

[Omega_0]

I think this is well said.  Here's another way to look at that dynamic resistance.  As the magnets begin to spin past the toroid, there is a large magnetic attraction between the magnets and the toroid that must be broken, or the magnet will reverse and stick at that point.  When the coil is energized, the magnetic lines of force attracting the magnets to the toroid must be broken and redirected inside of the toroid.  I think it is likely that this magnetic interaction requires energy -- energy that would not be reflected in the I^R heating measurement.

You must understand that I^2*R losses start only after the pulse hits the top, before that these are negligible. At the rising edge all the energy goes into alignment of spins, and if I'm not wrong Steorn is taking this into account and this energy is not being subtracted.

I don't think you can call the opposition to current during the rise as "resistance" in parallel, it is impedance, and lasts only for the rise time, which is just a few usec. A little bit of energy is again wasted as heat in the core during spin alignment but most of it can be recovered back, and cannot be called a loss.

If steorn is smart, they will calculate the R from V and I on the fly, instead of an ohmmeter. Temperature is also a factor, R increases as the coil heats up.

IMO, the problem is not theoretical, only a good replication will solve it.

[lumen]

I guess I just don't get the problem.
If every pulse through the coil, draws the same current at the same voltage whether there is a magnet present or not and whether there is a moving magnet present or not, then no other conditions exist.

If the resistance changed or the current changed or anything changes, it will show on the scope.
After the years of testing this, Steorn surely would have found any problem by now, if it existed, and abandoned the concept.

Unless I am missing something on their videos?

[mondrasek]

I guess I just don't get the problem.
If every pulse through the coil, draws the same current at the same voltage whether there is a magnet A or not and whether there is a moving magnet present or not, then no other conditions exist.

If the resistance changed or the current changed or anything changes, it will show on the scope.
After the years of testing this, Steorn surely would have found any problem by now, if it existed, and abandoned the concept.

Unless I am missing something on their videos?

I have to say I am completely of the same mind. 

I have not seen anything to disprove Steorn's claim.  But I admit I do not completely understand all the post of those that have presented such "proof". 

I have also, unfortunately, not seen anything (demo, replication, etc.) that fully corroborates their claim.

And so I wait. 

I'd like to do more, but I do not see the point in expending funds that I currently cannot claim as "expendable" (right now).  If I did, I'd be more "in the weeds" with those who are doing experiments.

Where are the reports from those who have been trying to replicate?  What are your results, positive or negative?  Please provide your observations and data!

M.