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

[billmehess]

Everybody needs to calm down here, frustration is at a all time level!!!
Let's be objective and take a look a the Steorn saga based on reality:

Steorn takes out big add in the Economist spending 50,000 (euro or $) claiming to have invented a device that will solve all the worlds energy needs. This is wonderful everyones excited. Who would do this unless they really had something. Show us more!!!
And the investor money rolls in.

Steorn established independent group to validate their claims. Accountability and independent validation. This sound better and better! And the investor money rolls in.

Steorn announce first open display of Orbo- We can hardly wait! .And the investor money rolls in.

Whoops!! Orbo melts down due to heat from camera lighting- What? And the investor money rolls in.

Group investigating Orbo say " no over unity here" . What's going on here? Steorn and evidently everyone else pays no attention to this. And the investor money rolls in.

Steorn announce second demo. This is great they fixed the problem. All is forgiven. Were all excited. And the investor money rolls in.

Second demo is a battery running a small motor. Oh-oh, but for some reason that is ok. Because a zillion pages are spend on this site talking about coils.
OU is a very simple concept- more out than in. In this case more voltage x amperage out than voltage x amperage in. But again for some reason this has been all but ignored.
Omnibus once said I would only be happy if there was no battery in the system. Sounds right to me, has there been any absolute proof showing that the battery is charging up. Even if it is we all know that a battery showing a higher voltage can be due simply to  electrolyte stirring.
If they have OU replace the battery with a cap, if they have OU then loop it back into the system to  keep it running. And the investor money rolls in.

OK I am waiting for there next demo of there all magnetic Orbo. When is that going to occure-I'm really excited here. And the investor money rolls in.
6,000,000 million Euro or $ and counting

[Omnibus]

@billmehes,

As far as I can see, everything shown by Steorn thus far proves they have OU. Unfortunately, as I said earlier, they are too much ahead of everybody in terms of equipment to prove it independently. It isn't enough for OU to be proved to just demonstrate a spinning rotor in this kind of demo. Many have shown that and certain other aspects of the eOrbo performance but that's not enough to conclusively replicate Steorn's OU claim. I won't be amazed if many other rigs such as the founding Adams motor, Paul Sprain's motor etc. would also show conclusively OU had they been studied at the level of sophistication Steorn does it.

Unfortunately, it's true, however, that the zealous activists and their sycophants will resist it till the end if devices such as eOrbo aren't shown to be self-sustaining. Scientific method, science and its criteria have long been abandoned by these circles and we see that unfortunate fact in many other aspects in what passes as science nowadays, not only regarding OU.

That doesn't mean we should abandon the scientific method even if a self-sustaining device isn't readily available as proof. Like I said, sadly, none of the attempts to replicate eOrbo have shown the necessary data to sustain Steorn's OU claim and blame that mainly on the lack of proper equipment. Yes, it's cheaper to show a self-sustaining device but is much more difficult to make such rather than easily make an eOrbo replica with a battery and prove OU with sophisticated expensive equipment. Making eOrbo is easy, proving eOrbo being OU is the difficult part.

[billmehess]

Hi Omnibus

Why is it so difficult for them to proof their claim, It is a lot like the term " a little bit pregnant" you either are or you are not.
Are you saying that they have demostrated OU but we do not have the necessary equipment to verify that?
It would be so simple for them to proof their claim.
I bow to your knowledge of these things but I consider myself a very grounded individual and they simply do not make any sence.
Our comments will soon be all for naught as I am sure soon there will be another 500 pages of coil building, off topic , and endless confusing scope shots.
This is always the way of things.

[gmeast]

Hi all,

This may be specifically off topic and may also be a 'buzz-kill' but ....

Steorn might very well have OU.  I had (until recently) been following a 'Top Ten' list of FE efforts ... no names here ... just because.  There is a common thread and everyone knows what that thread is.  It's built on some pretty anomalous behaviors be it in coils, magnets, materials or something.  These anomalous behavior(s) always involve varying degrees of measurement difficulty (usually extreme degrees).  It is because of this latter characteristic that folks are able to make careers out of their unfinished business ... out of their "discoveries" claimed all along to be a 'gift' for all of humanity.  An example is a particular motor that once hit the headlines - Some Great Motor.  Websites, forums and builder groups sprung up around it to "TEACH" the principle.  But the inventor has a patent(s) and defends it.  No one uses this technology.  No one has perfected the technology ... what's the point?.  No one can commercialize it but many books are sold yet the public does not benefit and never will.

What about another.  This one is actually VERY REAL, having been independently verified by many the world over.  It's LENR, LANR, and other names (does Cold Fusion ring a bell? CF).  Since it's clumsy announcement in 1989 it has become the career builder for many researchers (and career buster for the original pioneers: P & F).  This promising energy technology, I fear, has gone the way of Hot Fusion. Hot Fusion gets $billions annually in funding across the globe only to support university research bureaucracies.  Cheap (relatively radiation-free) Fusion Power has been only 30 years away for the last 50 years .. and likely will remain so.  I fear the same fate for LENR, LANR, CF.

BOO HOO

Hi Omnibus

Why is it so difficult for them to proof their claim, It is a lot like the term " a little bit pregnant" you either are or you are not.
Are you saying that they have demonstrated OU but we do not have the necessary equipment to verify that?
It would be so simple for them to proof their claim.
I bow to your knowledge of these things but I consider myself a very grounded individual and they simply do not make any since.
Our comments will soon be all for naught as I am sure soon there will be another 500 pages of coil building, off topic , and endless confusing scope shots.
This is always the way of things.

[Airstriker]

@airstriker

why don't you start a new thread ?  like "reasons steorn replications don't work" , or "bad steorn replication experiments measurments",  just shut the fuc* up here! PLEASE!

or show some of your experimental evidence for anything you espouse! 

lol
sam

1. I never said they don't work.
2. What doesn't "work" is yours (and many people's here) understanding of what you see.
3. Experiments already provided by exnihiloest (but deleted in the related thread by the moderator)
4. Who are you to tell me to shut up? I will when I decide to and actually I've already decided. No sense to loose my free time to commit anything to the subject if these words are being deleted just because they present a different point of view than yours "gods". I've got much better things to do.