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

[Omega_0]

From: http://www.steorn.com/

"The Waterways will remain open for a further three weeks, until Friday 19th March, due to additional applications from third parties interested in testing Orbo technology."

"Release of calorimetry and other test data â€" being finalised and ready for release soon"


So looks like, its delayed again, and we will see the results in April now (hopefully).

[htert2020]

192 pages.  hmmm...  can any of you guys see this for what it is yet.  perhaps an efficient pulse motor.  any company who says they are not in the business of manufacturing a device of their own invention that would change the world,  something wrong there.  "no thanks,  i dont want to be the richest man on earth"  o/u is out there im sure.  but once again ladies and gentlemen,  steorn does not have it....

I would have to disagree with your assessment. The Steorn Orbo incurs no back-EMF (BEMF) on the input power. This fact alone proves that the device is overunity.

An analogy would be that, if I throw my fist to hit a brick wall, the brick wall smashes into a thousand pieces, but meanwhile, my fist feels absolutely nothing and keeps moving forward indefinitely. In essence, my fist has gained free energy that seemingly came from nowhere. This is what the Steorn Orbo does. The input energy from the battery does not transfer to the output energy of the rotor. And yet, the rotor moves to produce output energy. The input energy is like my fist; the rotor is like the brick wall; the absence of back-EMF is like the absence of any bouncing effect as my fist hits the wall.

I think that Steorn's presentation in the Waterways definitively proves that Orbo is overunity. Unfortunately, it was too technical for a general audience to understand.

I can explain my position further if you would like. I have studied the Orbo concepts and I believe that I have a full grasp on exactly how it produces overunity, to the point that I can build a similar device if I had the time.

[maw2432]

I would have to disagree with your assessment. The Steorn Orbo incurs no back-A (BEMF) on the input power. This fact alone proves that the device is overunity.

An analogy would be that, if I throw my fist to hit a brick wall, the brick wall smashes into a thousand pieces, but meanwhile, my fist feels absolutely nothing and keeps moving forward indefinitely. In essence, my fist has gained free energy that seemingly came from nowhere. This is what the Steorn Orbo does. The input energy from the battery does not transfer to the output energy of the rotor. And yet, the rotor moves to produce output energy. The input energy is like my fist; the rotor is like the brick wall; the absence of back-EMF is like the absence of any bouncing effect as my fist hits the wall.

I think that Steorn's presentation in the Waterways definitively proves that Orbo is overunity. Unfortunately, it was too technical for a general audience to understand.

I can explain my position further if you would like. I have studied the Orbo concepts and I believe that I have a full grasp on exactly how it produces overunity, to the point that I can build a similar device if I had the time.

HTert,

I like your analogy.  Please explain further your ideas.   Fresh ideas are welcome. 
One question,  do you think the rotor of the Orbo really needs to be on "magnetic" almost frictionless bearings?  It makes almost any attempt to replicate very difficult.   

Bill

[Airstriker]

Have you guys seen the latest S2Gen Episodes by JLN ? http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm
For the first time I must say that his explanations and experiments are not right at all.
He says:
"The output coil must be fully EM decoupled from the input coil (no mutual inductance), so this is why the toroïdal coil is used as the input coil and a cylindrical or a flat coil set at 90° as the output coil."
If one coil is decoupled from the second one (toroid coil vs cylindrical one) why is he saying that magnetizing toroid coil directly affects the cylindrical one ??! Doesn't he see that one statement denies the other ?
Also he says:
"The magnet is used only to set the operating point in the MH curve of the toroïdal core. The magnet is not the source of the excess of energy. The ferromagnetic core is used on the highly non linear portion of the MH curve (where the core permeability drops quickly)"
This statement is also wrong. The magnet IS used to set the operating point in the MH curve of the toroïdal core, but the magnet is also the only source of the excess energy here!
When you magnetize the toroid core it's magnetic field is contained totally in the toroid core. So it cannot directly influence (generate electricity) in the cylindrical coil - as he has shown by himself in episode 2!
What is actually happening here is (I'm considering the 2SGen v5 setup):
- During the phase when the toroid is not saturated (no current in the toroid's coil) nearly ALL the magnetic field lines of the magnet go through the toroid core (half of them through the left part of the toroid and half of them through the right side of the toroid). So nearly no magnetic field lines do go along the axis of the cylindrical coil - no or little EMF induced in the cylindrical coil.
- When you saturate the core (current going through the toroid's coil), the magnetic field lines of the magnet don't go any longer through the toroid core. All of the magnetic field lines of the magnet now go from N to S of the magnet but in the plane perpendicular to the toroid's core face. So this time, all the magnetic field lines of the magnet will go just along the axis of the cylindrical coil - thus generating EMF.

So as you can see the magnet does more than just setting the operating point of the toroid core!

Going further the experiment performed by JLN at episode 7 does not really make much sense. What he is actually measuring there is the output of the system alone. Not the input/output. What he really should measure, is the energy input during the magnetisation phase BUT the energy input to the toroid's coil! Then he can compare the input vs output.
Also note, that he in fact can also capture back the energy contained in the toroid - during the demagnetisation phase - as at the moment he is not utilizing that energy at all. This will simply make a very efficient device and for sure a self runner should be possible.

Do you guys agree with my point of view ? If so, can somebody write him an email to answer this post ? (Edit: already done that)

[htert2020]

HTert,

I like your analogy.  Please explain further your ideas.   Fresh ideas are welcome. 
One question,  do you think the rotor of the Orbo really needs to be on "magnetic" almost frictionless bearings?  It makes almost any attempt to replicate very difficult.   

Bill

Hi Bill,

Before I explain anything, first let me say that I am not a physicist. I am only a software engineer. However, I have been studying electrical concepts and I also had straight A's in all my college physics courses.

Incidentally, to understand Orbo physics requires little more than second-year college physics knowledge. That is why I am suprised at how most public criticisms of Orbo come from a lack of knowledge of Orbo's physics. Steorn's demonstration in the Waterways wasn't really necessary to prove that Orbo is overunity. All that is necessary to prove Orbo's overunity is an explanation of the physics concepts. For, once I understood the physics concepts, I instantly knew that Orbo was overunity -- without having to see any demonstrations anywhere. Steorn could have rigged the demo, for all I care. On knowing the concepts, it wouldn't really matter to me.

So let me elaborate on the fist-and-brick-wall analogy with another analogy that is more accurate. A battery can be compared to a 100-pound bowling ball elevated at 50 feet in the air. When you connect a wire between the terminals of a battery, you release the electrons as they race from one terminal to the other. This is analogous to the bowling ball falling toward the ground from its initial elevation. Essentially, the bowling ball is converting its potential energy into kinetic energy.

But what happens if the bowling ball hits the top of a giraffe's head during its downward journey to the ground? Obviously, some of the kinetic energy of the bowling ball is transferred to the giraffe's head (ouch!). Since the bowling ball loses some kinetic energy, its speed temporarily diminishes for a split second. Then the bowling ball continues its journey until it reaches the ground. When it reaches the ground, it hits the ground with a loud thud. The thud is the bowling ball transferring kinetic energy into the ground. So all of the kinetic energy of the ball has been lost to the environment.

Compare that to the electrons flowing between terminals of a battery. Imagine an electron to be the bowling ball. The voltage of the battery is like gravity -- it is a force. The electron "falls" toward the "ground" terminal. As the electron "falls", it gains kinetic energy. However, during its journey, it may "hit" something... not a giraffe's head, but something else that can absorb some of its kinetic energy, thereby slowing down the electron. This slowing down of electrons is what engineers call "Back EMF", which I mentioned in my previous post. After "hitting" something, the electron continues "falling" toward the "ground" terminal. Along this journey, the electron may "hit" multiple things, each time transferring some of its kinetic energy to the environment. Finally, the electron "hits" the "ground" terminal and releases its remaining kinetic energy as heat. If during the journey, the electron had never hit anything, then it will hit the ground terminal with a very loud, super thud -- which is the overheating of the battery due to short circuiting. I should also mention that all throughout that journey, the voltage force continuously accelerated the electron as the kinetic energy steadily increases and the potential energy steadily decreases. At the end of that journey, the electron has maximum kinetic energy and minimal potential energy. If the electron hadn't hit anything along its journey, then all of that saved kinetic energy goes into slamming into the ground terminal at a super speed to cause heating of the battery.

This heating is exactly what Sean McCarthy from Steorn means when he says that virtually 100% of the input energy goes toward joule heating and heat losses. This means that virtually zero percent of the input energy goes toward moving the rotor! Because in a conventional electric motor, the electron would "hit" something along its journey, thereby transferring some of its kinetic energy somewhere else. That something is the "Back EMF" that is caused by the rotor magnets moving in front of the stator coil. Engineers also call the "Back EMF" the "load" of the circuit.

Since a Steorn Orbo has absolutely zero back-EMF, the electrons flow along as if there was no load. So no kinetic energy is lost from the electron. It just simply maintains its speed -- whereas in a conventional motor, the electron would have lost speed and kinetic energy due to the back-EMF. In the Orbo, the saved kinetic energy (which is major savings, by the way) is then used to power other things. If there's nothing else in the circuit, the saved kinetic energy goes toward heat losses to the environment -- whether at the ground battery terminal or through the resistance along the wire. After all, that saved kinetic energy must go somewhere. That saved kinetic energy can also be used instead to power -- let's say -- a generator, maybe? Get the idea? And then the generator can feed the energy back to the battery to recharge it. Meanwhile, the rotor gets away with free energy.

In a conventional electric motor, the electron energy that would otherwise have been saved by Orbo is transferred instead to the rotor through the back-EMF. That balances the equation for satisfying the "law" of conservation of energy. But in an Orbo, the saved energy can go toward other things along the battery circuit. It can power other loads -- a generator, for example. Virtually 100% of the rotor energy is free energy that came from seemingly nowhere. Of course, you can then use some of that rotor energy to power another generator, or to power a load of your choice, or even to power another Orbo! There is no reason why you can't connect the same input battery circuit to multiple Orbos. If you connect the input battery circuit to two Orbos, you'll double the output energy, which is completely free. Want to triple the output energy? Connect three Orbos. And the battery power would not be drained in any way. The input battery circuit maintains its original energy.

Now, if you want, I can explain exactly why the Orbo has zero back-EMF, as it is a key concept. (Or someone else here can take the ball and explain it, too) Understanding the back-EMF phenomenon requires second-year college physics knowledge. But even a student of college physics may still not get why the Orbo has no back-EMF. The secret is in the shape of the stator coil. It is a circular toroid. If your're curious, I can explain that as well.

Anyway, I'll answer your question...

One question,  do you think the rotor of the Orbo really needs to be on "magnetic" almost frictionless bearings?  It makes almost any attempt to replicate very difficult.   

In my opinion, you won't need near-frictionless bearings. Think of the friction as just another load. The free energy actually comes from the rotor magnets. Obviously, if you want the rotor to power something practical, like a generator, the kinetic energy available to drive the generator will be less, if you have high friction at the bearings. Steorn used very low friction bearings (magnetic, I believe) in order to show maximum output energy as detected by the pickup coil. With high friction, less energy would be available to the pickup coil. The pickup coil is like a generator, except that its main purpose is to sense the power and current of the output circuit, and forward that information to the oscilloscope for all the skeptics to see.

If you're building an Orbo replication, just be aware that as the bearing friction increases, less energy would be available to drive any load that you wish to attach to the rotor's output energy. If the bearing friction is infinite, then theoretically, all of the rotor's output energy goes into frictional heating -- but still, that frictional heating represents free energy that seemingly came from nowhere, if you account for the preserved energy of the battery circuit.

The nature of your question leads me to guess that you don't fully understand yet how Orbo produces overunity and free energy. Unless you understand the science, it's going to be very difficult for you or anyone to replicate it. For one thing, you wouldn't know the measurements to make in order to confirm that your creation is really overunity. However, I'm available to help if you should need it. Actually, I'm thinking about replicating it myself, but I'm not sure if I should spend my valuable time doing it. Perhaps if I team up with someone, I might consider it.

By the way, replicating the Orbo requires a high level of precision because the toroidal stator coils must be perfectly round, not too thick, and perfectly positioned in relation to the rotor magnets in order to cancel out all EMF forces so that the total EMF forces due to the magnets is as close to zero as possible. That's why Sean McCarthy compares building the Orbo to building a high-precision hard drive. However, with gentle hands, dedication, and perhaps good measurement tools, it can theoretically be done "in your garage", so to speak.