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

[gravityblock]

@Airstriker:
Regarding the coil orientation in JLN's video, you're right. They only used this orientation in the first Orbo demo. However, the motor did work in said demo. What I'm wondering though is if the effect is the same. They are also claiming that the CEMF in an open loop coil won't be representative of a powered/saturated coil, so I don't really know what this tells us about JLN's measurements.

@gravityblock:
I don't know why you'd even want a field collapse without "cutting" the wires? It's just the inverse action of building the field in the first place. The energy you put into the coil to build the field will be recovered when the field collapses. This isn't a bad thing. If you eliminate this you'd effectively destroy energy and we wouldn't want that. Also, as it's just the inverse action to building the field you'd never be able to build the field in the first place if somehow metglas shields the field in the core from the wire. I think their first demo even showed the inductive kick-back pretty clearly.

Well, you need to research metglas a little better.  I also said it would be a huge bonus if we could capture the BEMF.  The field is built outside of the core in the wire.  The field dissipates inside the core because it doesn't release the flux.  It is a one way door.  The door only opens one way, it doesn't swing both ways. 

It doesn't destroy the energy.  Not capturing the BEMF in a traditional motor doesn't destroy the energy, lol.  It returns to the infinite source.  The energy gain in inductance is due to pulling energy in from the infinite source due to manipulating time frames.

You get more net mechanical energy out of the system than the electrical energy that went into the system, but yet you still complain about not being able to recover the energy from the pulse.  Some people will never be satisfied.

It took pages of rebuttal just to make a point that it could be possible for the field to dissipate inside the core without cutting the wires to induce a BEMF.  The concept may be understood now, but I'm not sure it is even accepted. You really think an OU device is going to have the same properties, principals, and behavior as a traditional under unity device?

I will give you something to think about though.  Why do you think they showed the inductance test first?  There was a good reason.  Why do you think they have generator coils on the Orbo if the pulse could be recaptured?  It should be able to self run without the generator coils if the pulse could be recaptured and it had a net gain in mechanical energy.

They're keeping things simple and they have their setup at the bare bones to avoid suspicion.  This means they would have eliminated the generator coils if they could have replaced the generator coils with recapturing the pulse or at least demo it without the generator coils.

I'll almost bet less than 10% of the BEMF is induced in the Orbo weather you like it or not.  I am sure some flux will escape the metglas core after power is cut and induce a BEMF, but in a perfect material it would not happen.

Only time will tell.  Let's just wait and see what we learn after all of the demo talks are over and what is learned from the replications.  No need in getting ahead of ourselves here, but I have a feeling this will be heavily talked about down the road.  There are more important things to be talking about right now.  Just my thoughts and opinions.


GB

[Airstriker]

@Airstriker:
Regarding the coil orientation in JLN's video, you're right. They only used this orientation in the first Orbo A. However, the motor did work in said A. What I'm wondering though is if the effect is the same. They are also claiming that the CEMF in an open loop coil won't be representative of a powered/saturated coil, so I don't really know what this tells us about JLN's measurements.

@gravityblock:
I don't know why you'd even want a field collapse without "cutting" the wires? It's just the inverse action of building the field in the first place. The energy you put into the coil to build the field will be recovered when the field collapses. This isn't a bad thing. If you eliminate this you'd effectively destroy energy and we wouldn't want that. Also, as it's just the inverse action to building the field you'd never be able to build the field in the first place if somehow metglas shields the field in the core from the wire. I think their first demo even showed the inductive kick-back pretty clearly.

That's my man !

gravityblock you are telling such a bullshit that my ears are gonna explode righ now!! Stop it please as I don't have time and energy to learn you some basic physics. Whatever you're gonna say right now, I'm just skipping your posts ;/

What I'm gonna loose my energy on, is to explain the no BEMF effect in the original ORBO machine. This will in fact answer your question i0n. However, first I need to draw some pictures and as I'm kind'a lazy this will take some time. So stay tuned and please don't go back with some bullshit theories.

[Jimboot]

Hi jimboot,

My motor is running well on D cell with gen coils and lasts a long time but not OU yet. My ferrite cores just aren't going to cut it so it seems like the consensus at the moment is to go for metglas cores so that is probably the way to go.

Using a small screwdriver you can test for which side of the Jaycar vain switch has the magnet in it. You can also get the small UGN503 hall sensor from Jaycar which is cheaper. This also works well but you will need a seperate 6V battery pack and I have found that it can directly switch the gate of a mosfet well enough on it's own for this motor.

Regard,

Ossie

Thanks mate - off to Frankston Jaycar in the AM:)
Ordered my metglass toroids earlier.

[gravityblock]

What I'm gonna loose my energy on, is to explain the no CEMF effect in the original ORBO machine. This will in fact answer your question i0n. However, first I need to draw some pictures and as I'm kind'a lazy this will take some time. So stay tuned and please don't go back with some bullshit theories.

If you have a CEMF then you will have a BEMF.  If you don't have a CEMF then you won't have a BEMF.  You can't have one without the other and if you don't have one then you don't have the other.  This is basic physics, Newtons Third law and you haven't learned it.

Like I said in my previous post, there are more important things to be talking about at the moment.  This will be heavily talked about after all of the demo talks are over.  Let's just wait and cross this bridge down the road if we need to, and I'm sure we will.  Besides, your a little cocky and arrogant.  You think you know it all.  You say I'm B.S, you tell me to get sleep, you tell me to stop with the B.S theories, etc.  Lol

You're closed minded and limited in your thinking process.  Just get over it and move on, you're not the brightest crayon in the box and for you to think you are is laughable.

GB

[exnihiloest]

...
The problem is your test does not show CEMF. The field generated by the coil is matained only in the core and the external fields mainly enter the core at a point perpendicular to the core.
Because of this, the field from the coil that is matained in the core, can never exert 100% of it's CEMF into the external field.

"The field generated by the coil is matained only in the core" is a wrong assumption when the core has not a uniform permeability along the circles inside the coil.
The coil is geometrically toroidal. This implies symmetry. In a classical view this symmetry is also assumed for the magnetic properties. The permeability of the core is supposed to be uniform and it follows that the flux lines perfectly circle inside the toroid: the flux is also toroidal, thus it is closed inside the core.

Under the effect of the external field from the magnet, this toroidal symmetry is broken. Of course the geometrical shape of the toroid core is the same, but if we look at the magnetic properties, we do not see a toroid because of lack of constant permeability along the core because of not toroidal saturation.

Indeed we have to remember that the saturation is the result of all superposing fields, i.e. not only that one from the pulsed coil (which is perfectly toroidal) but also this one of the magnet (which is not toroidal and induces assymetry in permeability along the toroid).
Thus it is as if we had a magnetic circuit with sections of low permeability and ultimately with open sections. If you look at an open section of a magnetic circuit, you see the field lines expanding in the space around. They no longer follow the narrower magnetic channel of high magnetic permeability. It is what happens in Steorn toroid core: the field lines of the pulsed coil expand outside of the toroid around the lowest permeability sections, in order to maintain the full flux that pass through the higher ones.

In a symmetrical manner, the field lines from the moving magnet penetrate the toroid core through the sections of lower permeability, follow the sections of higer permeability, and emerges again from sections of lower permeability, looping outside the toroid core. Naturally this induces emf in the coil.
We have a conventionnal interaction between magnet and coil, thanks to the magnetic flux linking the toroid core to the magnet. The flux amplitude is equal to the flux in the highest permeability sections of the toroid minus the flux in the lowest ones.
No mystery, no paradox, not OU, all is well explained by the physics laws. The only unusual thing but perfectly explained, is the way in which Lenz's law applies because the flux variation through the coil depends also on the permeability change. But it is not new. Magnetic parametric devices were already built in the 19th century. The physicists team having check the device last year and concluded there was nothing anormal were perfectly right. All tests I carried on confirm the facts.