Is Steorn totaly dead or have they planned a comeback?

[FunkyJive]

Double-post deleted (accursed slow browser - sorry)

[FunkyJive]

Hi b0rg13

There were once video's of the device in action, on the Steorn website, obviously careful not to reveal the inner workings of the device. Interestingly however, these videos and all other supplementary information have since been removed - on the basis that it should not encourage further public scorn !?  Whilst this may be true, I'm not so convinced.

I recall that Steorn's stated aims were to capitalise on their IPR but not to monopolise it, presenting an opportunity for entrepreneurs to license the technology for which they would then have the opportunity to commercially exploit their designs in any way they saw fit. To do so however would have required patent protection over the idea for Steorn to have any such enforeceable claim over it.

This business model I believe was considerably short-sighted, given the potential impact that it would have had on the global community had it demonstrated merit. However, having applied for patent(s), this would have been made available for scrutiny (as with all patent applications) in affording prevention of disclosure due to military interest and the like, as outlined in my former post.

With the inescapable possibility that this were the case, then there would be very considerable legal restrictions of diclosure upon all parties having knowledge of the invention. This might serve to explain why there has been no further public disclosure - not to mention the original contract of obligation of Steorn members to their investors.

However, with so many other interesting devices revealed on this forum, some showing considerable potential in my view, I don't believe that non-disclosure of the Steorn device would be a significant block to similar other discoveries now entering the public domain.

There are many aspirant inventors and experimenters around, with varying degrees of understanding and capability, and suffice to say that I'm personally keeping a watchful eye on discoveries that may... just may... develop their own momentum that would be quite impossible to quell. Also, with many of the published designs being relatively cheap to construct and experiment with, I have little doubt that some of the more recent sign-ups to the forums, proving themselves to be highly sceptical whilst suggesting that experimenters should not "waste" their money on un-proven (though highly interesting) devices, could themselves be those MIB's that I spoke of.

Rest assured that many will be highly disturbed at the potential alone for any such experimentation showing promise, and actively trying to discourage early interest in the subject is possibly the only means left to them - apart from jeopardising public demonstration. Nevertheless, the global interest and effort expended in proving or disproving the achievability of Over-Unity is likely far greater than could ever be expected of a sceptical scientific community funded by government grants.

If Over-Unity should ever prove to be unquestionably demonstrable, I believe that the time and resource shared amongst modern experimenters, and global forums to unite them, would suggest that the world shouldn't have much longer to wait   


All the best,

FunkyJive.

[Bessler007]

FunkyJive,

The day there isn't the possibility of "undiscovered science" is the day the scientist can retire.  Most thinking people realize that's not happening any time soon.

It is entirely possible to argue that since Steorn failed to keep its self imposed obligation of release in 2008 there is something not quite right.  It's an entirely legitimate perspective to suspect a huge publicity hoax like the radio show "Invasion of the Earth" from an idea that if it were true would be more than just "undiscovered science".  It would require the rewriting of physics.

That would really piss my bosses off.  They'd have me working overtime.

Bessler007, mib

. . .
This therefore has to be considered amongst the many other possibilities as to the events surrounding the failure of the device just at the worst possible time, the retention of any IPR to speak of, and the prevailing silence with respect to their invention. For those amongst us prepared to accept the possibility of hitherto undiscovered science and keeping an open (though objective) viewpoint, it's not possible to argue that their invention was a sham simply because if it worked we would have seen or heard something before now.
. . .

All the best,

FunkyJive.

[FunkyJive]

Hi Bessler007

I agree with your sentiments on both the possibility of "Undiscovered science", and contrasting arguments either way in respect of Steorn and the apparent demise of their project.

You acknowledge the "possibility" of undiscovered science and therefore the watchful interest in it from both camps, particularly as once the world was round as otherwise we would all fall off, to be followed by an understanding of planetary movements and the notion of gravitational effects upon planets and a spherical earth.

With an emergence of some modern discovery offering over-unity (or wider demonstrable merit of such devices perhaps already in existence), then there will certainly be losers in the game - financially and otherwise. This however would extend beyond the "bosses" but also of ordinarily people with jobs that depend on such bosses.

I've therefore no particular desire to see anyone lose out for the aforestated reasons, but with over-unity an inescapable possibility (many would argue "probability") I also believe that trying to maintain the suppression of such ideas has a limited time-span.

Global economies would falter in due course, with the eventual wider acceptance of proven free energy, but this would be indicative of man's inherent greed and ability to self-distruct as we're all witnessing already. However, I also believe that blame for any such situation would fall upon the shoulders of those that have perpetrated depency upon themselves and fossil fuels - itself a finite resource, engineering society's losers over many years from a time just prior to the industrial age. Modern times may not have been originally predictable or intentional, though perfectly evident to those in the modern age who should now be looking forward rather than backwards.

We're certainly heading for a global shift in thinking and living practice either way, though free energy in perpetuity for all must surely be the best and only way - given that there's little choice otherwise. However, the biggest loser in such a scenario would be the monopolistic greed of "the few" that most of us have witnessed for many years, and the celebrations of "the many" to their ultimate demise 


All the best,

Funkyjive.

[Bessler007]

Hello Funkyjive,

I must not have been clear.  I never acknowledged the "possibility" of undiscovered science.  I stated its absolute certainty.

Points based on what was known compared to what is known supporting the change in scientific knowledge aren't overly valid as I see it. 

Resolution (of what we see at the infinitesimal and infinite) is increasing.  Increased understanding is the consequence of increased perceptions.  Where we used to guess and speculate we can now know by seeing or measuring.

Sorry for the confusion.

Hi Bessler007

I agree with your sentiments on both the possibility of "Undiscovered science", and contrasting arguments either way in respect of Steorn and the apparent demise of their project.

You acknowledge the "possibility" of undiscovered science and therefore the watchful interest in it from both camps, ...


All the best,

Funkyjive.