Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM  (Read 1197901 times)

billmehess

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #255 on: December 22, 2009, 05:40:48 AM »
Thats what I have been saying K4zep, replace the battery with a cap. Sean will never do this he is well aware of the fact that the device will stop and the charade will be over with. He is hopeing that showing some sort of device appearing to be creating an OU condition will allow the investor dollars to keep pouring in.
It's ALL smoke and mirrors!!
All the talk about how Orbo (rhymes with horrible) could be working is all nonsence.
Like I have said it's simple a battery running a motor.

Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #256 on: December 22, 2009, 06:22:15 AM »
Electronics 101:  V = Q/C.

In this case, Q = ((starting charge) - (current x time to run motor) + (current x time from the energy return))

If the energy returned from the Steorn motor is greater than the energy required to run it, the cap voltage will go up.

If the energy returned from the Steorn motor is less than the energy required to run it, the cap voltage will go down.

A capacitor is essentially 100% efficient in absorbing the energy returned from the motor whereas a battery is not 100% efficient.  Therefore a capacitor would be a better energy source for demonstrating a self-runner than a battery.

It's not the same as a battery, it's better than a battery for this application.

MileHigh

Too bad your fancy equations don't factor in radiant energy, or even acknowledge that it exists.


It's not the same as a battery, it's better than a battery for this application.
MileHigh

I'll take Bedini's word over yours any day, yes Bedini, a person who actually builds and experiments.

k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #257 on: December 22, 2009, 06:39:35 AM »
Thats what I have been saying K4zep, replace the battery with a cap. Sean will never do this he is well aware of the fact that the device will stop and the charade will be over with. He is hopeing that showing some sort of device appearing to be creating an OU condition will allow the investor dollars to keep pouring in.
It's ALL smoke and mirrors!!
All the talk about how Orbo (rhymes with horrible) could be working is all nonsence.
Like I have said it's simple a battery running a motor.

I agree, until he shows it running on a cap with no voltage drop and/or a net gain in the cap or battery, it is what it is.

billmehess

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 359
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #258 on: December 22, 2009, 06:40:27 AM »
There has been no defenitive proof that "radiant energy" exists. Its all mump jumbo, as far as Bedini goes none of his work has shown to be even close to valid. If his claims were provable he would have picked up his Nobel prize years ago. Show me one example where any of his claims have been validated by legit
science.
In the search for OU there has grown a tremendous lore of unprovable and unsubstantiated work. Where's the working units, where's the proof!
Is this really to much to ask for?

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #259 on: December 22, 2009, 06:59:04 AM »
Freezer:

You can't just "pluck 'radiant energy' out of thin air" to advance your argument.  Sean says that more power is being returned to the battery by the return wire that connects to the battery.

Actually I did do the experiments.  I made the measurements that show that the energy in a pulse discharge from an inductor is less than or nearly equal to the battery energy that energized the inductor in the first place.  That means that Bedini's "radiant energy" is B.S.  I read his 1984 "Kromrey Convertor" 15-page treatise and I almost puked from how little sense he made when discussing electricity and batteries.

So why don't YOU do the experiments.  Hook up any Bedini motor or Joule Thief or whatever your favourite flavour of pulsing inductor circuit you want and measure the power supplied by the battery compared to the power you get from the pulsing inductor.  In all cases you will find the output power is less than the input power, and you produce heat.  The output power plus the heat will equal the input power.  "Radiant energy" is just a buzz word to get you excited and induce you to believe in something that's not there.  You can prove for yourself that it is not there if you really want to.

MileHigh

IceStorm

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #260 on: December 22, 2009, 07:40:37 AM »
Too bad your fancy equations don't factor in radiant energy, or even acknowledge that it exists.


I'll take Bedini's word over yours any day, yes Bedini, a person who actually builds and experiments.

You should listen to what MH said to you but don't trust anybody , even if its your best friend. Your only best friend here is your data from experiment, everything else don't contribute to any of your advancement because it can mislead you. Take ANY scope who are able to do Math function(integral over CMEAN, not only MEAN) and do the integral of what go out VS what go in. The reason you need to do the integral over a CMEAN its because from cycle to cycle the value can change and the cycle time too, that cause a Bias effect, so since its not symmetrical only CMEAN can work.

Keep track of all your data, only data can show you what realy happen. If you don't have a oscilloscope who are able to do math function, buy one, best investment you will ever make.

Best Regards,
IceStorm

« Last Edit: December 22, 2009, 08:01:11 AM by IceStorm »

gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3287
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #261 on: December 22, 2009, 08:09:38 AM »
If a motor runs @ 750rpm for 10 hours with drawing a constant current from a battery, then building a motor that runs @ 750rpm for 30 hours from a same type battery is cop = 3 in mechanical energy gained vs electrical energy expended.

You have gained 3 times more mechanical energy than what the battery is capable of producing.  The additional energy gained was mechanical energy and was expended in the additional 20 hours of mechanical motion instead of being converted to electrical energy. 

If you converted only half of this mechanical energy that is gained (10hrs) into electrical energy, then you have COP = 1 in electrical energy gained vs electrical energy expended with 10 hours of additional mechanical momentum to keep producing this additional energy to keep it above unity.  There is no hidden source of energy being tapped in this system.  The additional source of energy is capturing all of the potential momentum instead of killing it like we've all been doing.

Angular momentum has already been shown to defy gravity, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=545GwnupKAE and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P014jvaB3ic .  As long as the momentum isn't being killed, such as by gravity in this example, then it will continue to defy gravity without slowly falling.  Capture all of the potential momentum in the Orbo or any other device without killing it and it will continue to defy physics.  Gravity in this example is killing the momentum slowly.  In our devices, we kill or don't capture the full potential of the momentum that is available to us by not properly using the magnets and the coils.  Nature is already providing an excess of energy, we just kill this excess energy, lol

GB 

interestedinou

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #262 on: December 22, 2009, 08:11:10 AM »
Hi Stephan,

I have been following the YouTube video #1 from Steorn but pulled my questions on that site as it seems that they give out very little technical information.  The video answers a lot of questions and I suspect your analysis is very correct.  There very obviously is BackEMF and little or no CounterEMF due to the toroidal coil construction. 

I had lots of problems with the design at first as I know that there is virtually no magnetic field external to a close coupled toroid coil and could not figure out how it could drive the rotor.  Finally realized it was simply a Adams motor (I assume everyone knows what a Adams motor is and how it works, if not Google it) with NO CEMF due to the toroid coil design.  It was also immediately apparent that you could recover most of the BEMF to a fast recharge the battery/supply with surprising results. 

IF you put a bridge rectifier across the coil network and drive the coils with a voltage low enough to not turn on the diodes during the pulse  (around 1.4V for a 4 diode bridge or higher if multiple diodes used in the legs of bridge) you then can recover the BEMF back to the battery.  You end up with resistive losses and very short BEMF pulses if diodes are fast enough and battery accepts a fast pulse recharge.  Thus you end up with a very efficient motor, Not powerful but super efficient in its own funny way.  Their estimate of COP around 3 for the power input vs. rotor mechanical output after all is accounted for is probably close and as seen in the Adams motor.  A standard pulse generator only has to make up for the actual resistive losses (10%?), charging losses (20-40%) air drag and bearing losses and you have a OU or super efficient device. A Super Cap should be much more efficient as a power supply than the battery used as there would be no recharging losses in the Cap. 

That they have not been able to utilize a solid state switching device is a puzzle considering the amount of money spend on this device.  There are many switches that have a very low ON resistance, are very fast devices for switching efficiency and fast recovery diodes that should work with no problem.  Anyway, I'm having fun working with this new twist.  It will take time to build one.  When you use NEO's with close coupled fields, the device must be robust to say the least. 

Happy holidays to all,
Ben

Could you please post a simple diagram of that setup?

I'm very interested in learning how to build a setup that recycles flyback current.

How does the flyback current get put back into the battery?


interestedinou

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #263 on: December 22, 2009, 08:14:00 AM »
Freezer:

You can't just "pluck 'radiant energy' out of thin air" to advance your argument.  Sean says that more power is being returned to the battery by the return wire that connects to the battery.

Actually I did do the experiments.  I made the measurements that show that the energy in a pulse discharge from an inductor is less than or nearly equal to the battery energy that energized the inductor in the first place.  That means that Bedini's "radiant energy" is B.S.  I read his 1984 "Kromrey Convertor" 15-page treatise and I almost puked from how little sense he made when discussing electricity and batteries.

So why don't YOU do the experiments.  Hook up any Bedini motor or Joule Thief or whatever your favourite flavour of pulsing inductor circuit you want and measure the power supplied by the battery compared to the power you get from the pulsing inductor.  In all cases you will find the output power is less than the input power, and you produce heat.  The output power plus the heat will equal the input power.  "Radiant energy" is just a buzz word to get you excited and induce you to believe in something that's not there.  You can prove for yourself that it is not there if you really want to.

MileHigh

Could you please post a simple method of how someone could reclaim flyback current and put it back into the battery?

IceStorm

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #264 on: December 22, 2009, 08:15:34 AM »
If a motor runs @ 750rpm for 10 hours with drawing a constant current from a battery, then building a motor that runs @ 750rpm for 30 hours from a same type battery is cop = 3 in mechanical energy gained vs electrical energy expended.

You have gained 3 times more mechanical energy than what the battery is capable of producing.  The additional energy gained was expended in the additional 20 hours of mechanical energy instead of being converted to electrical energy. 

.......
GB

Its only true if both motor have the same load, without load , the RPM mean absolutely nothing. Rotoverter is a perfect example of that.

Best Regards,
IceStorm

Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #265 on: December 22, 2009, 08:31:11 AM »
So why don't YOU do the experiments.  Hook up any Bedini motor or Joule Thief or whatever your favourite flavour of pulsing inductor circuit you want and measure the power supplied by the battery compared to the power you get from the pulsing inductor.  In all cases you will find the output power is less than the input power, and you produce heat.  The output power plus the heat will equal the input power.

MileHigh

All cases huh?  So I guess you have built every single pulsing circuit that could ever be conceived and tested all these without success?  You are pretty damn good!

"Radiant energy" is just a buzz word to get you excited and induce you to believe in something that's not there.  You can prove for yourself that it is not there if you really want to.

MileHigh

Sorry I don't do debunking, I build to make things work, not to prove things don't work, we have a team of debunkers for that, to tell us how it can't work, how it's not possible, and how it will never be done.  Same with people who said it was impossible to build a rocket and travel to the moon.

gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3287
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #266 on: December 22, 2009, 08:33:56 AM »
Its only true if both motor have the same load, without load , the RPM mean absolutely nothing. Rotoverter is a perfect example of that.

Best Regards,
IceStorm

If both motors have coils with the same load on the battery, then the RPM is relative in both systems and is not absolutely nothing.  A coil is a load on the battery, is it not?  This means both motors in my example have the same load!

GB

IceStorm

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #267 on: December 22, 2009, 08:40:52 AM »
If both motors have the same coils, then it has the same load.  A coil is a load on the battery, is it not?  This means the RPM is relative in both systems and is not absolutely nothing.

GB

No its not a load for the battery, in reality , under NO LOAD , if the coil is a ideal one (no loss) it cost you nothing if you put a sin wave on it, what go in = what come back , its basic electronic for inductor with alternating current. but keep in mind that my example is for a NO LOSS coil , in real world you have lost because of the resistance of the wire but not as large as you think. Its why i said to you that you need a load on a motor to know the power you can extract form it and compare it with another one.

Best Regards,
IceStorm

EDIT : look here , will be a good start for you  to understand inductor http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_3/2.html

gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3287
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #268 on: December 22, 2009, 09:00:17 AM »
@IceStorm,

The inductance of an inductor is comprised of two components. The first is the self-inductance and the second is the intrinsic inductance (some call it the internal inductance).

Classical theory claims Intrinsic inductance is a linear function of wire length and independent of wire diameter. According to the classical understanding of inductance, if we construct two circular loops of wire, both with the same loop shape, but with different wire gauge, then both should have the same inductance. But this is not the case and can be seen in the results below.  Since the thickness of wire does affect the intrinsic inductance, then the classical model for intrinsic inductance is incorrect.  Here is the reference showing classical understanding of inductance is not right, http://www.distinti.com/docs/apoce.pdf in section 1 and 2 of the pdf document.

48 inch       Area (sq. in)       26 AWG wire                22 AWG wire
perimeter                            (Measured)                  (Measured)
shapes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Circle         183                   2253nH                        2055nH
Square       144                   2144nH                        1950nH


Also, the magnetic field around a moving charge is not toroidal or donut shaped as taught.  Simple experiments shows the magnetic field is spherical around the moving charges.  I could go on and on about how classical theory has it wrong and is incomplete also.  Classical theory can't even get the basic stuff right, and simple experiments clearly shows this.

GB
 
« Last Edit: December 22, 2009, 10:14:30 AM by gravityblock »

4Tesla

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
Re: STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM
« Reply #269 on: December 22, 2009, 09:04:13 AM »