Steorn Orbo: canceled

Holy snakeoil Batman, The Steorn Orbo exhibition has been canceled. According to a press release by Steorn CEO (and lead shyster) Sean McCarthy, the company "will explore alternative dates for the public demonstration." Yeah, right. If the heat from the lights was really an issue for the on-site built device, why didn't they: 1) turn off the lights, or 2) fly in the so-called working "free energy" device from Dublin? After all, they still have 9 days left to exhibit. Lame.

[Thanks, Marc O. and Arthur D.]

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 7:15AM]

The classic con.

Make outrageous claims

Offer to exhibt - gain hype

'Have diffulculties' - gain even more hype

Take the money and run.

[Kave @ Jul 6th 2007 8:01AM]

Wait.... are you trying to tell me they may be lying?

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 8:19AM]

Sadly yes, its ok though 'cos i've still got my shares in Infinium Labs.

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:29AM]

Oh dude, but Infinium Labs made that sick looking lapboard. did that even make it to the market?

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 8:44AM]

erm...yes...I've got one and ill sell you it for $1800. I'll even throw in free Orbo everlasting batteries

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:47AM]

Nice, you got yourself a deal. But seriously did that thing come out? And if so, good, bad?

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 8:58AM]

Seriously? No.

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 9:02AM]

That sucks, the lapboard actually looked like a decent idea, unlike the Phantom.

[Mike @ Jul 9th 2007 11:28AM]

http://dispatchesfromthefuture.com/2007/07/video_of_qa_sean_takes_it_on_the_chin.html

[Ceejay @ Jul 6th 2007 7:18AM]

This disappoints me to no ends....

[Paul @ Jul 6th 2007 7:24AM]

Shocked! I am shocked I say!

[hq @ Jul 6th 2007 7:27AM]

soon there will be an announcement that the demonstration of orbo takes places the same day when Duke Nukem:Forever is going to be released :-P

[chaz @ Jul 6th 2007 7:29AM]

man, i have been watching the streams avidly all morning and nothing has been going on, i hoped to see some geeks trying to get this thing to work - me and my workmate had even contemplated going down there to see it in person, but looks like this has ended up being more dissapointing than waiting for the next series of lost to be ready.

chaz

[Jon @ Jul 6th 2007 7:29AM]

Looks like they're busy trying to fix the problem!
mms://wm.Astream.net/steorn4

[prouted @ Jul 6th 2007 7:31AM]

This is very disappointing !!! Actually, this is a real waste of energy ;)

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 7:35AM]

Man, I've been watching all night hoping that this thing would come together. I really hope these issues are real and not something to cover up a failed or faked product. I have hope, mainly because I WANT this to work.

I don't think it's a money scheme though, they weren't open to public investments so...We'll see what happens.

Besides I'd like to rub it in engadget's face for calling them shyters if it does, in fact, end up working.

[chaz @ Jul 6th 2007 7:40AM]

i doubt engadget will be the only people using terms such as shysters regarding this, talking something up and then saying it dosnt work cos of the heat of some 12v downlighters 10ft away seems a little hard to swallow - i mean, when did magnets start being horribly affected by slight heat, i'm pretty close to some lighting now and i can assure you that i am anything but hot - its freakin freezing here in london at the moment... well not freezing but for our summer it is.

chaz

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 7:50AM]

No, I definitely hear where you and engadget are coming from. It seems weird that they could in fact blame it on such a thing, but like I said this was one of the most honest set ups and it seems too public to be a pre-thought scam. Like I said, no third party investments or private testing etc. I just can't imagine someone would be willing to put their face and name behind a product if they knew it was a scam all along.

Honestly only time can tell, but I think it would be kind of harsh to not want this to work, ya know? It's like someone saying they have a cure for aids or something and everyone flat out calling them a liar before we can really say otherwise. As far as we know, this device hasn't been disproved, so I can still hold onto a little light in the matter. Until it's proven wrong, there's no point in being against it, they aren't raking in cash from it, they have everything to lose. Hell, these guys are getting threats. This better work or they're as good as dead, heh.

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 7:59AM]

"don't think it's a money scheme though"

They've already recieved over £3million euros ($4million) in investments.

"this device hasn't been disproved"

Thats because there isnt anything to disprove. They've not released any information about it or demonstrated it. There was a good article on ZDnet about them which said:-

"it's pseudoscience. They don't have to have a theory for it to be science — in fact, it's clear that they don't — but that doesn't matter. Build a box. Show it working. That's enough. Hans Christian Ørsted showed electromagnetism in 1820 and it wasn't fully explained until James Clerk Maxwell's masterwork nearly 50 years later — but it was all science

It wouldn't even cost them that much. If they'll send me the plans, I'll build one. Having built it, I'll convince myself that it does produce more energy than it takes in — which will take a glass of water, a resistor, a thermometer, a couple of test meters and some basic mathematics, all of which I already have. I shall then get on the train to Cambridge and refuse to leave until the nice people at the Cavendish take a look at it."

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:13AM]

Yeh, well you're coming at it like I'm stating the Orbo to be fact. I'm defending my hope in the product, not the product itself. I also said third party investments, you know, people that aren't a part of the project in some form. They aren't taking "the people's" money is what I mean. The only money invested is from the companies that would lose the money themselves working on it.

I think the best thing to do is wait until it has been fully tested by scientists and they have come to a final conclusion. No one knows for sure what's going on, not some dude on the internet (you, and myself) nor a website publication. Is it against the law of physics?; hell yes, but so weren't so many things in the past. We also used to be the center of the universe....

So, I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm not saying I'm right. I'm saying, I HOPE they aren't full of it. That's all.

[Stephen @ Jul 6th 2007 8:27AM]

In early stage companies (or late stage companies in terminal decline desperate to find some revenue) the game is persuading existing investors to give a little more. That is what this is. Be willing to demonstrate, thus gaining some kudos, and then be able to point to unexpected failure, with some scientific waffle as an excuse. You need to think of the calibre of investor in Ireland at the moment. There's a UCD prof on record (see Utube) as saying that he was asked by a friend about this company a while ago because he had an investment opportunity, punting in about 250k. The prof told him to go elsewhere. A 20 man company if its careful is burning about 100k/month. You need 5 fools to keep you afloat another year.

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:34AM]

Good point, still I'm just sitting on hope, I do believe there is a huuuge possibility that this is in fact a scam. I never ruled it out. Just like we all kinda hope Duke Nukem Forever is actually coming out, cause we're all sick of low res 10x10 "screen-shots" of walls, or whatever it is they tell us.

[Xavier Gill @ Jul 6th 2007 8:36AM]

We all hope that something like this could be true, but the problem is that these guys are con artists. Whether their motive is money, fame or art is irrelevant. They are doing ireperable damage to people doing genuine scientific research and causing more harm than good. That is why its important that they are called 'shysters' etc.


ps
"We also used to be the center of the universe"

It's pretty ridiculous to compare the first law of thermodynamics to Geocentrism

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:46AM]

I was just making the point that things in science change at a ridiculous rate, but if you feel the need to take offense, by all means. I'm having a good time. :)

I was once told that there is no such thing as fact as we do not know the basis of life. When we think we know for sure, we're wrong.

I could say I know that grass will be green tomorrow or that my pinky will reside on my hand and not my, eh eye or something, but I simply cannot know 100% for sure. He was also insane, but it is a valid point. Nothing is set in stone, and nothing is permanent.

Except of course the energy from this fabulous device...

[DorianGray @ Jul 6th 2007 10:58AM]

@Chad Beaulieu

I just wanted to add a philisophical aside to what you've been saying. I agree with you that it seems like people in every epoch seem to think they have a lock on universal truths. Science right now has 'natural laws' which are immutable. Scientific theories have become doctrine.

But history has shown time and again that observed phenomena have their limits. "We are the center of the universe" was an observed fact until disproven by better science. "We are the center of the solar system" was again observed and accepted until disproven by better science; by more discrete measurements and better means of analysis.

To assume, yet again, that we understand everything about the universe; that "Natural Laws" are 100% fact, 100% immutable, 100% 100%, is to fall into the same arrogance and short-sightedness that makes ancient science laughable today.

Will science look back 500 years from now and laugh at our ignorance? Only if we insist today that we *know* we're right.

[Vëon @ Jul 6th 2007 11:14AM]

@ DorianGray:

No serious scientist will ever tell you that he thinks our current theories are 100% correct.
However, ever since physics entered the modern age, you'll notice that even though there have been tremendous revolutions in the way we look at the universe, the former theories were never really abandoned. Rather, we just came to realise that they were a good aproximation to reality, but one that failed under more extreme circumnstances (ie, near the speed of light, near absolute zero temperatures, etc.).
My point is, even if our current physical theories turn out to be wrong regarding energy conservation, I can assure you that the violation of the law will only occur on very particular situations, and on a very small scale (one that our best current tech can't detect). It will most certainly *not* be stumbled upon by accident as these Steorn guys claim.

[DorianGray @ Jul 6th 2007 12:14PM]

@Vëon

"My point is, even if our current physical theories turn out to be wrong regarding energy conservation, I can assure you that the violation of the law will only occur on very particular situations, and on a very small scale (one that our best current tech can't detect). It will most certainly *not* be stumbled upon by accident as these Steorn guys claim."

By part of your statement you support my point. I'm not trying ot prove you wrong here, I'm trying to point out that our thinking is similar. As we develop ever more discrete and precise systems of measurement and mathematical models that fit and explain the observations, we can't help but discover "new" scientific phenomena and then develop & exploit technologies based on those discoveries. "New" phenomena that were always there but that were heretofore unobserved and unexploited. Science fiction is filled with devices and technologies that are so far undiscovered, but are being actively or passively researched and are accepted as inevitable rather than pure fancy. Examples include "near-future science fiction" such as room temperature and/or naturally-ocurring monopole magnetism, room temperature superconductivity, anti-gravity and "force" fields, to more fanciful (but taken as a matter of time & engineering) technology including terraforming, faster-than-light travel, inter-dimensional travel, teleportation/apportation, time travel.

And what's to prevent them from stumbling upon it? Microwave technology (as used in your kitchen, not the actual discovery of microwaves themselves) was stumbled upon by a RADAR engineer noticing that his chocolate bar melted when he stood in front of a radar dish. It's quite possible these Steorn folks are a couple of lucky yutzes who stumbled upon something amazing while farking around trying to build a better iPhone headphone magnet or something...

[treetrunk @ Jul 6th 2007 1:12PM]

@DorianGray:

"Stumbling upon" a perpetual motion machine is hardly comparable to discovering that certain frequencies of microwaves can heat food, because there was never anything to suggest you couldn't. There's a heck of a lot of science which says you can't build a perpetual motion machine, so to "stumble upon" a way of doing so would be like accidentally building a car which can go at twice the speed of light!

As Vëon said - in the (I think highly unlikely) event that perpetual motion was found to be possible it could only be under extreme conditions, such as on a sub-micron scale or at close to absolute zero. There's simply no way a bunch of magnets and perspex at room temperature is ever going to do it!

[jason @ Jul 6th 2007 7:52AM]

People have been making these claims for a hundred years now. Most devices have had hidden batteries or other fuel sources, the rest were just like Orbo, non-functional frauds.
Free energy by its very definition is impossible. You just can not get something from nothing. Even at the big bang all the matter in the cosmos already existed, it was just ungodly compact, pun intended.

[Um... @ Jul 6th 2007 7:59AM]

If the heat from the lamps was causing it to break. Why not turn on the central air?

[Kave @ Jul 6th 2007 8:05AM]

What I'm more interested in is how this would be a viable energy source? If it breaks from the heat of the lamps, proposing it works at all of course, then the cost of keeping it cool would outweigh the savings.

[VJH @ Jul 6th 2007 8:07AM]

These guys aren't being called shysters because their demo failed, and not because said demo was incredibly hyped. Many advanced prototypes have gone down that path some have rebounded and others have not. But what sets off the BS meter is the fact that in order for their energy device to work it has to violate what we currently understand to be basic laws of nature. For that reason alone, they should have gone to tremendous lengths not only to put their demonstration above reproach but also to make sure that it worked, since the only likely outcome to failing at either was to be branded a fraud. But they did not, and they failed. I think we'd all like to have a source of cheap energy, but it doesn't look like it'll be today with this device.

@Chad, There are plenty of ways to operate a money scheme that isn't open to public investment. Hard to say if it was a con or, like the unfortunate pair of Fleischmann and Pons, a case of over optimistic data interpretation...

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:20AM]

Haha, ya that was a bummer.

Am I correct in understanding that this thing was built on site for the viewing? Not that it really explains it but is it possible they just botched it? Then again why wouldn't they work insanely to get it functioning etc... It's endless really. Like I keep saying only time can tell. And like I also said, these guys are like, gonna get shot if this is a scam :) . So for their sake, let's hope they aren't lying, if they are, someone go ahead and shoot.

[Sma @ Jul 6th 2007 9:11AM]

I think the device its self could work, I just don't think it should really be called "free energy" from my understanding something has to get it spinning first, and once its spinning it spins on its own for awhile, at some point slowing down and needing a "push" again, sort of like a swinging pendulum, but instead of using a weight at the end of an arm/lever it uses magnets that repel eachother. Technically opperating in this fashion is not true "free" energy, being as an amount of energy is put into it to get it started. Though in a sense it is "free" energy, being as that it doesnt require (obviously now) any outside heat, as does just about any other form of power generation, no burning of fossil fuels or anything else, in that respect solar, wind, and hydro(from walling water, waves, or ocean current) power are all "free energy" sources I would think.

[Fibrizo @ Jul 6th 2007 10:22AM]

I think people are confused about "free energy" Energy from ocean, wind etc, would be considered "Renewable energy" and have thier basis from the sun. Geothermal energy is old energy leftover from the formation of the earth. (and possibly nuclear decay depending on which geophysicist you would listen to)

There is so much availible energy in the universe to tap, heck the universe is supposedly made of 70% dark energy. There's also so much quantum energy availible that it exceeds all the nuclear output on this planet in the space between one of these words on your screen. Question is how to harness it. And I don't believe these guys did it.

[scrubbs @ Jul 6th 2007 8:16AM]

The more i think about this, the less i think these guys are cons/sheysters, or even just retards, and the more i think is that there is an artist behind all this.

Think about it. Imagine for a second that this was never a real device, but an art project. We have never seen an art project that was anticipated like this before where people all over the world are tuning in to see it through webcams, people are traveling to london to see this, and so on. Build up hype for years, and then when you do exhibit it, it is at an art museum focusing on the melding of art and technology(think using the internet as a medium for a gallery instead of a brick and mortar). When was the last time an art project was this hyped up and had people all over the internet debating on things like engadget, digg, the JREF forums, and a load of others. I am thinking this was art, and if it was, its genius. He has shown the internet as a medium to showcase some art, and by being professional enough, you can get a whole number of people behind you to believe anything. This is one of the few purported free energy devices to get any press, why? Maybe he just tried real hard to make this thing look viable by providing financial statements, pro looking website, etc etc etc.

So what say you? Genius artist, con artists, or bumbling idiots?

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:26AM]

If it is art...Bumbling idiots. Anything but a working product = death sentence for these guys at this point. Genius art or not, someone is waiting at their houses with a grenade guaranteed. They better be able to take their little device and power their way into a third world country where no one can find them.

[Stephen @ Jul 6th 2007 3:51PM]

I suspect they are genuine, and genuinely wrong. They probably have something that appears to be OU, but that is in fact not. The likely culprit, as it usually is in these events, and there have been many many people who genuinely think they have something, is inaccurate measurement. The effect they are looking for is usually subtle, and the measurement very complex. There is a huge subculture amongst inventors focussed on this, and these guys use all the right buzz words, but the bottom line is they think they found something, they don't know what it is, and they think it's something other than it is. A part of me feels sorry for them - these guys will never work in technology again. Some ordinary staff who weren't around long enough will be able to pretend they were off travelling the world or something. They are technical Nick Leesons, funny enough another guy living in Ireland (and a guy who seems to be a very decent chap let me add).

[Chad Beaulieu @ Jul 6th 2007 8:56AM]

That's exactly where I'm at. If they are wrong I at least don't believe it was malicious intent. I think they honestly believe they're on to something. I mean, what was their reasoning for stumbling across this again? Something like alternative energy for security cameras?

[John Sawyer @ Jul 7th 2007 2:39AM]

Con artists, but with slight artistic flair. But only slight. Some people haven't followed the activities of companies that do this kind of thing; I have, for decades. Steorn is just another group of people doing it. It always works, for a while--there have always been gullible people who will invest money in a venture where the perpetrators only have to generate a story that sounds good enough to the gullible--the story doesn't have to pass muster with people who are intelligent, well-read, and have some life experience in these matters--that's not the kind of people con artists are trying to bilk.

[strider_mt2k @ Jul 6th 2007 8:26AM]

It looks like people never change.

-and if they do, they quickly change back. :(

[strider_mt2k @ Jul 6th 2007 8:28AM]

-Oh sorry, I also wanted to add that Orbo cares not for your puny Earth Physics.

That is all.

[noodleneck @ Jul 6th 2007 8:51AM]

What a sham. I have magnetic power that once started will continue indefinitely without any additional power needed...o wait, It doesn't work, uh sorry...

[Bamboozil @ Jul 6th 2007 9:11AM]

[IMG]http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q253/bamboozil/OhNoesss.jpg[/IMG]

[suv4x4 @ Jul 6th 2007 9:13AM]

> "We also used to be the center of the universe"
> It's pretty ridiculous to compare the first law of thermodynamics to Geocentrism

Actually it strikes me as a pretty good comparison.

Except it's the other way around: way back when people still believed earth is flat, they believed a lot more in free energy as well. There were perpetual motion machine designs by the thousands. And lots of them patented even.

Reality is harsh though: no free energy, and no center of the Universe :(

But... actually it's not that harsh when you think about it. We're bathing in hundreds of types of energy (geomagnetical power, nuclear power, sunlight power, wind power, foil oil power). All of this becomes power ready for us to use, if we just have the right technology to capture it and convert it.

And having great technology to convert *actual* available abundant energy is almost like free energy! Who'd need energy out of nowhere, if we had so effective sun batteries that could charge your car for 24/7 operation just by sitting in the sun 2 hours daily?

We also have the added benefit the Universe won't collapse unto itself from the weird paradox free energy would create.

[Dave @ Jul 6th 2007 10:40AM]

suv4x4
Sir, I hate to say this, but you are an idiot.
"if we had so effective sun batteries that could charge your car for 24/7 operation just by sitting in the sun 2 hours daily"
Impossible, and not because we don't have the technology but because the energy is not there! Just supposing you had a perfect solar collector 1 meter square, in two hours the most it could get would be 2,732 watts - an amount equivalent to less than a litre of gasoline, enough fuel for no more than a few miles.

"Except it's the other way around: way back when people still believed earth is flat, they believed a lot more in free energy as well. There were perpetual motion machine designs by the thousands. And lots of them patented even."
This is really stupid, there was never a common belief that the world was flat, this is due to a story by Washington Irving and has no basis in fact. The ancient Greeks measured the circumference of the Earth to within a couple of percent, not really a productive exercise if you think the world is flat. There can be no patents from “then” because that time never existed. Also there will be no patents for machines which could never work, any that might have been erroneously issued would have been revoked.

[suv4x4 @ Jul 6th 2007 11:18AM]

"suv4x4
Sir, I hate to say this, but you are an idiot.
...blah blah talk about energy per square meter and gasoline comparison.. "

Thanks, for putting my "let's entertain the thought" hypothetical example under unneeded scrutinity and calling me an idiot.

I've not called investors to invest in my sun batteries though, I'm making my money by doing backend development. Hence, I should be allowed to not be very accurate with those things.

Nuclear power in your car also isn't practical, but yet we have a model where energy is generated in centralized nuclear power plants.

Simply computing the energy per square feet and comparing with gasoline is more idiotic in my mind, considering:

1. the car power generators need not be put on the car as stickers in the first place, and may not even be part of the car

2. you can have a one or two seat vehicles for in-city travel, with much less horsepower than waste much less energy to do the same typical job a current 4-seat sedan does nowadays.

3. the vehicle may use several weaker energy sources together to allow it to always be charged and ready in-time to handle typical load.

[JLTate @ Jul 6th 2007 1:45PM]

Well, watts aren't a unit of energy. A watt is a measure of change of one Joule (the actual SI unit of energy) per second. A kilowatt-hour is also a unit of energy equal to 3,600,000 Joules (1000 watts for 3,600 seconds). At any rate, the average solar output of the sun is about 1,340 watts, which equates to 1.34 kWh (kilowatt-hours) per hour (big surprise!).
A normal gallon of gasoline contains about 131 mega-Joules of energy, or about 36.4 kWh. So, to recoup the amount of energy in a single gallon of gas, you'd need a little over 27 hours of direct sunlight on a one square meter array with no obstructions. But who cares about gasoline? Gasoline engines aren't 100% efficient, anyway, so let's compare this to a real alternative (well, for rich people, anyway).
The Tesla Roadster gets around 200 miles on its' 56kWh battery. If it had 2 square meters of solar cells somehow pointed directly at the sun at all times, it'd recoup the whole battery in about 21 hours of daylight. But how many miles does that net you per hour of charge? About 9.5 miles. So, if you worked within 19 miles of home, and you stayed there at least 2 hours, you'd never have to buy a drop of gas again!
Unfortunately, because reality sucks we're limited to just 12% efficient solar cells, which means that you'd only get 1.1 miles per hour of charge, and honestly, if you live only 2.2 miles from your work, you'd probably be better off saving the $100k by buying a vespa, a golf cart or just walking it. :)

[AtoZ @ Jul 6th 2007 9:24AM]

I would like to hear their excuses which will be presented at 3 PM at Kinatica, London according to their forum:

_________
Folks,

We have had to make the unfortunate decision to defer the public demonstration of our technology that was due to start on the 4th. I am very sorry that we have had to take this decision, I will provide a more detailed explanation of the reasons behind the decision later.

I would like to invite any of the forum members (SPDC or otherwise) who are in London to meet me at 15:00 here in Kinetica, where I will be available to answer any questions.

Very sorry about this, hope to see some of you at 15:00.

Thanks,

Sean
_____

I hope some people will ask though questions why there was no backup, no second attempt without lights on, dimmed lights etc..

Because there are a lot of p*ssed people who made the trip to London.

[Pedro @ Jul 6th 2007 9:35AM]

Well my dear friends, i can tell you guys that i lift weight for free and i never got that much advertisement!!!! Why? :P

Where the hell are my investiments? Where the hell is my money?

Dunno if its a hoax but it looks like someone had a few pints before looking at the orb and then said it was moving without energy... when the truth is that even a rock moves without energy if ur drunk...!!!