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

[Omega_0]

i spent the day building and playing with Naudin's s2Gen experiment. I've written up some of my initial thoughts, here:

http://freeorbo.wordpress.com/2010/02/21/ive-made-free-energy-steorn-is-right/

I think you got it very well when you said:
The energy coming out of the pickup coil is not coming from the battery.

That is the key point here, that many are missing. Input is decoupled from the output, so whatever energy you see at the output is for free. This is essentially steorn's claim. (and only an opinion of mine, as I can't support it at present)

I'm currently doing drop tests with various cores and turns of wires and it is also my experience that an air gap helps. The exact air gap is very important parameter.

When the strong neo magnet is touching the coil (minimum gap) , it "captures" the nearby domains and no amount of current will release the magnet, because these hijacked domains don't respond to the field from the coil. When you increase the gap, the magnet drops. Now it hold the nearby domains lightly and current in the coil can do its stuff.

If you increase the gap too much, the magnet will not attract sufficiently, so you can see that there is a sweet spot here. I was wondering why there is such a big air gap in both steorn's and clanzer's setups. Now it is clear.

Note that the torque is produced only during a brief moment when the magnet enters the influence of the core uptill TDC. So the torque is very very tiny. It is so small that it barely takes the rotor far enough to attract next magnet. This explains why you need friction free rotor.

My PC fan rotor failed miserably to overcome the losses. I'm building a new rotor now.

[Magluvin]

I think you got it very well when you said:
The energy coming out of the pickup coil is not coming from the battery.

That is the key point here, that many are missing. Input is decoupled from the output, so whatever energy you see at the output is for free. This is essentially steorn's claim. (and only an opinion of mine, as I can't support it at present)

I'm currently doing drop tests with various cores and turns of wires and it is also my experience that an air gap helps. The exact air gap is very important parameter.

When the strong neo magnet is touching the coil (minimum gap) , it "captures" the nearby domains and no amount of current will release the magnet, because these hijacked domains don't respond to the field from the coil. When you increase the gap, the magnet drops. Now it hold the nearby domains lightly and current in the coil can do its stuff.

If you increase the gap too much, the magnet will not attract sufficiently, so you can see that there is a sweet spot here. I was wondering why there is such a big air gap in both steorn's and clanzer's setups. Now it is clear.

Note that the torque is produced only during a brief moment when the magnet enters the influence of the core uptill TDC. So the torque is very very tiny. It is so small that it barely takes the rotor far enough to attract next magnet. This explains why you need friction free rotor.

My PC fan rotor failed miserably to overcome the losses. I'm building a new rotor now.

We can look at it as if the energy in the pickup coil does not come from the battery, only directly. If it wasnt for the battery, the pickup coil would get nothing

Mags

[Omnibus]

We can look at it as if the energy in the pickup coil does not come from the battery, only directly. If it wasnt for the battery, the pickup coil would get nothing

The excess energy in the pickup coil does not come from the battery. Do you get that part?

[Omega_0]

If it wasnt for the battery, the pickup coil would get nothing

Mags

Of course, it would get nothing.
The battery is just sitting there doing its thing, it is not generating energy.

Then what is generating the energy in the pickup ? where is the prime mover ? Whatever is giving this energy out is giving it for free. The battery is causing this source to give up its energy, the battery is not the source.

Do you see it now ? Its a bit tricky but you should see it.

[Omnibus]

Steorn have really brought the research in OU to new heights. As you can tell from my recent posts I'm really enthused by what I see is going on there. I really wish people like @Omega_0, @telsaalset, @mondrasek, @MrEntropy and several other are listened to more and are somehow funded to bring about quality replication. The unfortunate reality is that some avid, zealous activists are overwhelming the internet with their stupidities, assisted by some really laborious stupid people. That deliberate and in some cases unconscious clogging of the discussions with gibberish and activist venom is really unfortunate and, together with the lack of proper equipment with the majority of the researchers, is the hope for the enemies of OU to swamp the research in this field.

Another unfortunate circumstance is that Steorn while offering super high quality scientific research are bound by their business agenda. Let us be perfectly clear, the superb experimental results Steorn are presenting is of no immediate practical or business interest. I'd be amazed if even the most far-sighted businesses would buy licenses from them because the very essence of OU is anti-business. The's why, although viable, OU has been suppressed throughout centuries to begin with. There's no reason that businesses would react differently nowadays.

Thus, practically minded, utilitarian technicians and people expecting eOrbo to cut their home utility bills should pay only cursory attention to the discussion because they will be disappointed. This isn't for them right now. This discussion has far-reaching scientific conclusions and only people who understand this can really appreciate what's going on can really benefit from this conversation.

I continue to insist that everything that has been going on throughout these last decades (all pulse motor OU proposals, solid state electroniocs OU proposals etc.) should now be explored according to the high scientific standards Steorn is setting with their endeavor. I can't emphasize it more strongly that this is the only way to separate wheat from the chaff in the OU research and eliminate the enormous waste in the net suffocating the legitimate OU research.

The ultimate goal, prior to seeking practical application, is to establish OU as a mainstream scientific fact recognized by the academia. That goal cannot be reached by just constructing spinning motors but by presenting high quality experimental data obeying the high standards of science.

Of course, there cannot be anything more killing in this respect than demonstrating a spinning gravity or magnetic motor without any energy input. That's a very daunting engineering task, however. On the other hand, we cannot deny science and its methods and careful, quality study of easily reproducible and simpler in engineering terms motors or solid-state devices such as Paul Sprain's or the clones of Adams motors (such as Bedini's and eOrbo) would be equally as good. As of now, Steorn are the only ones (even Naudin isn't up to the task so far) really on the right track in this respect. Unfortunately, like I said, they are way ahead of everybody else who would allow themselves to even dabble in the OU field (involvement of well-endowed mainstream labs is out of the question) and that really stands in the way of the so much needed independent verification by independent third parties.