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

[broli]

@LarryC
Here's some troll food....

You have a high  end thermometer which should be sufficient. I'm suggesting a simple  experiment :

From the graph, at 41MHz there is 500 times energy  (or is it 5 times ?), so the temperature should be 5 times at 41Mhz  compared to that at 0Hz (DC), at an equal value of Ein = Vin*Iin*Time.
So  simply measure the core temperature for a certain time and capture the  data, once at 41MHz and second at DC. Say at the value of  Ein=10, you  get T1=1500K and T2=300K, you have a good case.

@Omnibus: would it be reasonable to assume that if a controlled test on  dc was performed of same average power calculated through the resistive  part that this would yield the same temperature from a temperature  probe? Since cop is rather high either temperature remains in the same  ball park or is as much as 3 times lower.

@broli,

Of all I'm seeing I have no reason to believe temperature  rise is any different than it would be as expected from the first  Joule's law. In other words, if we have current I passing through  resistance R the heat generated per unit time would be I^2R which will  give rise to a certain temperature. Like I said, however, I'm working on  some developments right now and will get back to you as soon as I get  more results. I'm keeping an eye on the forum but will get more  technical when I get ready.

So LarryC is that enough to calm your senses and have patience?

Oh who am I kidding, I just lit the troll on fire.

[blueplanet]

I did try to contact STEORN's company in Ireland some years ago, but they refused to talk me. Right now, i am more interested in the results, not their controversial theory. If there is any OU in the device, it should not be difficult them to make their device self-running. Have they not  demonstrated a self-running device to the public yet?

[Omnibus]

Your reply is as your OU claims, in accord to the great principle:

"I say it therefore it is the truth"
omnibuzz

No, you're saying that, not I. Don't put words in my mouth.

[Omnibus]

I did try to contact STEORN's company in Ireland some years ago, but they refused to talk me. Right now, i am more interested in the results, not their controversial theory. If there is any OU in the device, it should not be difficult them to make their device self-running. Have they not  demonstrated a self-running device to the public yet?

On the contrary, it is difficult to make a self-sustaining device as any complex engineering effort is. Making a self-sustaining device should not be pushed as a criterion for whether or not OU claims are real. Making a self-sustaining device is a totally different project.

[LarryC]

So LarryC is that enough to calm your senses and have patience?

My problem is not so much with your P=I^2 R. It your use of P = EI where you have negatives signs almost half the time causing the graph to show Omni OU incorrectly.

P = V^2 Z is the correct formula is this case. Z is for a LCR circuit. Where the inductor and capacitor is parallel and the R is in series.


Circuits dominated by inductance reactance has the voltage leading the current.
Circuits dominated by capacitive reactance has the current leading the voltage.
Omni showed the same in his test results.


The capacitive information that I recently posted, predicts that using your current formulas that Omni OU power will be shown using a capacitor only.

The larger the capacitor the lower the frequency to show Omni OU.

If Omni does make this simple test with the correct type capacitor(no polarised electrolytic), he should ramp up the frequency slowly as it will appear like a short to the function generator at some point. Should stop at the same amp's as produced by the 700HZ to compare the results.


Regards, Larry