The last time we heard from
Steorn, the company had just joined a long line of optimistic but doomed
people and
companies unable to actually demo free-energy tech when put the test -- and although the Orbo didn't actually do anything, CEO Sean McCarthy
promised us that we'd eventually get a working demo with physical access to the device. Well, it's over a year later, and Steorn's back -- with no demo in sight. Shocking! Instead, the company's selling SteornLab testing equipment to other organizations working on
magic fairy-power rotary and magnetic systems, and it's also got plans to sell something called "ZeroF passive magnetic bearings" later this year -- we'd assume ZeroF means "zero friction," which is nicely impossible and totally in line with basically everything Steorn stands for. To convince you that this isn't all an elaborate sham, Steorn's also setting up the "SKDB," a knowledge base containing all the secrets of the Orbo, which will initially be open to 300 engineers and then sometime later to the general public. This, of course, sounds like an elaborate sham. Here's a hint, guys -- instead of the cheesy video of people sitting around talking about the Orbo, maybe shoot a video of it actually producing more power than it uses. Or, you know, admit the truth. Whatever works for you.
[Thanks, Yury]
posted Feb 4th 2009 5:03PM
I like how his little logo sticker on the floor is all crooked and wrinkled.
A quality outfit for sure.
:)
it represents the upsetting of science.
Sean McCarthy seems like a nice guy, and I'm sure the media isn't being very forgiving for his (admittedly) failed attempts, but I, for one, would really like to see this guy succeed.
He can't succeed. Are you familiar with potential energy?
"like to see"
I know all about Potential Energy having studied it greatly in University, and I know what you are saying, what I meant is that I would like to see this guy become known for something. I suppose I should have phrased my comment better.
But to be fair to him, the earth was once flat ;-)
I'm not sure why - but I love your picture Derry.
Just saying.
Thanks! It took me hours to do in photoshop, but since I'm new to Photoshop, you can tell from the pixels its not real.
The earth hasn't been thought to have been flat since Aristotle. In 330 BC. And in any case, contemporary science is orders of magnitude more rigorous today than it has been at any other time in history.
I've taken the liberty of uploading this for you http://bayimg.com/image/canfoaabg.jpg
Here you go, Poof. He's know as a liar and a cheat.
Why the HELL are you wishing good upon this fool? He's either so deluded that he cannot face reality, or a flat out scam artist. Neither are worthwhile traits.
I'd rather have the pony. You know... Something real :)
Derry, I'd like to see him succeed too. But even if we put aside our current understanding of physics, he's go no excuse for not demoing anything yet.
If he's confident in the orbo, he must have seen it working. And if he's seen it working, why couldn't he show someone else? I know they have reasons for their peculiar demoing strategy, but surely just showing it to a few influential people would be a good start.
"he's go no excuse for not demoing anything yet."
I totally agree with you here, in the video at the read link one of the guys says "You have to see it working." Then why haven't they shown us?
Also as for the "influential people" there are a lot of different people from a scientific background in the aforementioned video (Note: it is the "Orbo 2009 Launch" video I am referencing) but I'm not sure any of them could be considered influential, at least on a Worldwide scale.
He could be better than Ghandi, but it isn't going to make the laws fo physics magically can for him. There is no such thing as energy from nothing and there is no such thing as zero friction. No matter what they do, no matter what they try.
I'm not at all convinced that a "free energy" "magnetic" generator will ever work, but there is definitely some phenomena that many over the last 50 years have stumbled upon... There are many stories about this, and NOT all of them are from random cranks..
I can't find the link, but there was an engineer who although not making "free energy" claims basically had a generator setup in which applying a load to the generator did NOT generate the resistive EMF that usually occurs and instead actually accelerates the generator. Whatever he had was reviewed publicly by a princeton physicist who acklowedged they had a weird phenomena on their hands.. There was an article about it in a big peer-review journal.. Need to track down the link..
So Derry, what did you major in at 'University'? Was it 'Bachelors' or 'Masters'? And where is 'University'? Is it in 'State' down by the 'River'?
Cold fusion is the true next leap in energy production for mankind and it will change everything. We just need to get around the whole 'physics' thing.
@loosely_coupled -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perepiteia
"But to be fair to him, the earth was once flat ;-)"
That's actually a good analogy Derry.
Steorn claiming to have developed a zero friction device is scientifically the equivalent to claiming that the earth is flat.
@ Asha:
The mans name is spelt GANDHI.
I studied at Trinity College, Dublin. http://tcd.ie
B. A. Theoretical Physics (4 years)
B. A. Chemistry with molecular modeling (4 Years)
B. A. I. Electronic Engineering (4 Years*)
B. A. I. Computer Engineering (4 Years*)
*This was a joint program. I took it at the same time as Theoretical Physics. I dropped out of Chemistry with Molecular Modeling after 1 year
Who doesn't want him to succeed?
I would love for the conservation of energy to have a loop hole. It would certainly solve a great number of problems. Hell we don't even have a very good means of extracting the energy around us currently. Imagine if we could easily convert all matter to energy directly.
I doubt he's going to deliver but I certainly would like to be wrong.
Tesla tech??? (Not the car company :)
Which is worse, me wasting my time commenting on such a ridiculous topic or this guy's involvement in such an outfit without obviously taking physics 101? His t-shirt really ought to say "Pleasing Magicians" or something along those lines.
The logo under his picture is made out of paper. This is probably his Mom's garage.
Too much coffee makes you not able to write...
Have they not made any money out of this scam yet?
@ Ethan - "Have they not made any money out of this scam yet?
Well, yes; but in unconventional ways. They have raised development capital from a number of sources - private investors, and (I think) the Irish government. The development capital has ostensibly been used for research into the design and development of the product; although no product has ever been successfully demonstrated.
They have not filed a patent, nor have they sold any product or even the rights to a product.
The money has also undoubtedly been used to pay the salaries of McCarthy and others who are employed by the corporation. Draw your own conclusions.
I'd love to see this come to fruition, but then I'd also like a car made out candy that could drive me to the moon. It just ain't gonna happen.
He has a stupid face too.
90% of Irish men look like this. Trust Me.
Wait...if you were to achieve absolute zero, will you get zero friction?
Only if you can find a way to repeal the laws of quantum mechanics along the way. Trust me on this, I may or may not be a quantum mechanic.
In an absolute vacuum, theoretically you can achieve zero friction, but interacting with anything outside the vacuum or any kind of load, mechanical, magnetic or otherwise will introduce friction. Additionally, in a gravitational field there will be gravity drag, because the top of the device is farther from the earth's center of mass than the bottom of the device and the differential will eventually slow it down. This is the same reason that eventually the rotational speed of the earth will slow to the point where one side always faces the sun.
This violates fundamental Newtonian physics, the laws of thermal dynamics and common sense. These guys are either frauds or stupid beyond belief. I think it's the former, because I have a hard time believing someone could be that stupid. On the other hand, look at the ratings for American Idol...
Before anyone starts talking about how "everyone gives these guys a hard time" and "free energy might be possible, we just don't know it yet" and so on, please just don't. If conservation of energy is broken, all of science is out the window. I mean, science is always nebulous and constantly changing by its very nature but there are certain things that are held as sacred by the scientific community and conservation of energy is one of them.
In reality you just have to say prove it and forget about it till he proves it. Science has been blown to smithereens many many times through the years. Look at special and generally relativity to be a modern day example. That was less then(actually now that I think it a little more than) a hundred years when the ideas were proposed. So, yeah hes probably wrong but if hes right... We'll just have to start testing it.
http://bayimg.com/image/canfoaabg.jpg
Please look at this.
Ditto that. Non-scientists and even high-school/undergrad educated scientists often seem to underestimate how fundamental in nature [in both senses] conservation laws are. Conservation of energy isn't a law like Newton's theory of gravity that is waiting for some better approximation like Einstein's, which in turn will one day be refined; nor is it just something that physicists strongly believe in nor even the result of detailed specifics of laws of motion or of gravity. It's derived from the most fundamental assumptions we make about the way the universe works.
Specifically: if you accept that the laws of physics are symmetrical in space -- that is, the laws themselves don't change regardless of where you are or which way you are facing -- and make just about no other assumptions about what the detailed laws are, you will deduce the conservation of energy. This relationship is so deep that whenever somebody proposes a new theory (for example, refining General Relativity to try to make it consistent with quantum theory), just about the first question to ask is, "does it conserve energy?". If it doesn't, assume the theory has a problem.
This fundamental nature of conservation laws wasn't well understood until long after the principle itself was empirically observed, and unfortunately students seem to be taught about conservation the way it was discovered -- as a practical observation -- rather than the way we now understand it, as a fundamental deduction.
Darry.. You seem to be missing "Make shit up", and if it does not work "Blame it on the lights" as part of your chart.
Why does everyone spell my name Darry... or was that you on the other thread about a week back too?
Anyway, I totally agree that that was ridiculous and casts a lot of doubt, but i'm just trying to keep an open mind. I have not seen the device, so I can't ridicule it. It's like Microsoft people bashing mac's without trying them, or whatever.
It's more like if you told me you were an antelope and I assured you that you were definitely not an antelope and in fact you were a human. While I could keep an open mind based on the fact that I've never seen you or spoken with you, there is really no need to because there is no way you're an antelope.
@Carl - Just being facetious, but even you say the conservation of energy "derived from the most fundamental assumptions we make about the way the universe works". It's not entirely beyond the realms of possibility that those assumptions are fundamentally wrong :p
Derry.. Sorry about that. I'll keep an open mind to some extent. But when some promises, then does not deliver, and promises again, well, how much of an open mind do you have before it just becomes foolish? There's a difference between having an 'open mind' and hitting yourself in the head with a brick, because maybe, the next brick will not hurt.
Why not reuse the hot air this man gives off?
Because it's been tried and failed by Archer Quinn. Several times more hot air than Sean.
Archer Quinn...I miss the good 'ol days (rants and explicatives)
I do love hearing about this stuff. It's like a little nugget of crazy fiction in my otherwise slightly boring news feed.
Well, now, zero friction is possible. Superfluids are to friction what superconductors are to electricity.
I find it hard to believe his company created even one revolutionary technology, let alone two.
some guy in a garage isn't going to discover that... the testing set up alone is millions. There are ways to achieve what these guys are trying to do, but they're mostly related to solar/wind/geothermal power. These guys aren't scientists and are trying to figure out "logic puzzles" not do science...
Then again Edison proved that brute-force sometimes wins. He didn't invent the idea of electricity in a filament, he just brute forced thousands of combinations until he found one that worked.
Maybe ZeroF actually stands for "Zero Function"
If Steorn's magnetic devices actually run, they are clearly converting an energy source.
Since we are a firm that has been working in this arena of science and have produced both mechanical and solid-state devices that produce more energy out than in, we have concluded magnetic systems can convert vacuum energy, otherwise known as the Zero Point Field.
We do not expect anyone with scientific or engineering background to believe this is possible - before independent laboratory validation takes place. We are currently in touch with three respected laboratories interested in testing our technology.
A few articles on our website may be of interest to skeptics. The most recent, Zero Point Energy, is a good introduction. Another is entitled Perpetual Commotion.
When generators are in the market included will be Demonstration Devices for universities and later toys. Kids will explain how these "impossible" machines function. No batteries required.
Stop playing with that shit, or we'll have to send Gordon in!
Gordon! Get away from the beam!
You use these words "Zero Point Field". I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
Look, the definition of "Zero Point Field" is that it's the lowest possible energy state of the vacuum. If it were possible to extract energy from that field, the field itself would be left in a lower energy state than before. Lower, that is, than the lowest possible energy state... see the problem? I don't believe not just because your claim defies the laws of physics, but also because it defies the laws of logic. The only place that works is on "Stargate".
So you may be able to fool non-scientists with buzzwords and hand-wavy references to virtual particles and Heisenberg uncertainty and other spooky quantum mechanicy stuff... but those of us who actually know what these words mean know you're bluffing.
Extracting energy from a Zero Point Field isn't just impossible, it's an oxymoron.
"We do not expect anyone with scientific or engineering background to believe this is possible - before independent laboratory validation takes place. We are currently in touch with three respected laboratories interested in testing our technology."
How about people that don't live in fantasy land? Will they be able to understand or believe?
This is so tired.
Just be sure not to invert the polarity of the neutron beam, and everything will be fine.
there is a better chance of a flux capacitor sending a DeLoren to 1955 that you guys extracting usable energy for a zero point field.
Go talk to clueless venture capitalists and quit clogging up the Internets with your drivel.
Oh, and patents in this regard don't mean shit, in response to your post below. A patent doesn't have to actually function to become a patent, you know.
Mark, nice list of 'specific goals for 2008' you have on your website. How's that been going? http://magneticpowerinc.com/goals.html
One of the weirder things about this field is that people feel the need to list possible applications of their free energy device - your 'vehicle to grid' ideas etc. If you really have a device that creates free energy, aren't your only concerns going to be what to do with all the money, and how to avoid getting carpet-bombed by the oil industry?
@CraigJ
"there is a better chance of a flux capacitor sending a DeLoren to 1955 that you guys extracting usable energy for a zero point field."
Personally I r=think chances are equal. Although, 1955 will be reached, after this project is successsful.
"A patent doesn't have to actually function to become a patent, you know."
Actually, patents that supposedly take on Laws of thermodynamics, they have to do that for even being considered. They have decided to not to give any credibility if their patent app deals in this field, and they are not demonstrating a working prototype.
ROFL:
Epic Troll.
Zero Friction bearrings? How about magnetic fields...?
Zero friction bearings is not impossible and has been in production for years. They use them in Large maglev Vacuum Turbo pumps. But, the passive part may be difficult. maglev turbo pumps use a lot of electronics to maintain balance during rotation. the system uses mechanical bearings untill about 10k rpm. Then the rotor is magnetically levitated to allow the pump to run at upwards of 36k RPM. I was a field service engineer for Acatel/adixen working on these. look up the ATH1600M.
@Seth. Is the rotor spinning in a vacuum? even so, there will be drag from the magnetic levitation field, or that field will be used to provide the rotational force. either way there is friction. a lot less than mechanical bearings, to be sure, but not zero.
Drag... friction... whatever you want to call it, its always there. You can't create a perfect vacuum, you can't completely avoid gravity. Start something spinning, and it will stop. It. will. stop. Magnetic bearings are not magic, they are just really good bearings. Really good bearings which consume a fair amount of energy, by the way.
Unless the armature has no mass, the inertial property of the rotor's material will pose some sort of "drag" on rotation.
Is this Archer Quinn v2?
No V1
I'm all for giving people a chance to explain a new discovery, but all this juxtaposed showmanship doesn't inspire a lick of confidence. Oh - and if you're trying to develop alternate energy sources, let's not start by attacking conservation of energy. Start small (you know, like exceeding the speed of light or modifying Newtonian dynamics), then work your way up. Or just go ahead and invent time travel - that would be a FANTASTIC way to "Upset Science" if you think about it. Either way is better than this.
Claiming that you can violate conservation of energy is almost as ridiculous as claiming that a self-replicating, information-based lifeform can arise spontaneously from non-replicating, non-information-based nonliving matter.
For those that do not believe energy can be extracted from the Zero Point Field
February 03, 2009
Jovion Corporation Gets Patent for Zero Point Energy Extraction
Jovion Corp is trying to extract energy from the reservoir of “zero point energy” using Casimir cavities. One proposed device would generate up to 21.5 kilowatts of heat from sugar cube sized device. The heat would need to be captured and converted to electricity. Micro-gap thermal photovoltaics could match up well for this application to convert 50% or more of the heat to electricity. NOTE: This is a funded company that is a technology spinoff of research from the University of Colorado.
See the entire Press Release at: http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/02/jovion-corporation-gets-patent-for-zero.html
"trying to extract energy"
"One proposed device"
"could match up"
"company"
even so, if you read your own link, you'll see that the patent authors realize that their device obeys laws of conservation of energy. given this admission, consider the following:
extraction of energy from electrons in the zero point field to produce energy yields electrons at a lower energy level. according to the authors, these processed electrons regain their original energy level by being exposed to the ambient environment. this permits an "unlimited" source of energy?
no. it doesn't.
if you keep recycling the same electrons, the amount of energy available in the ambient environment gets smaller. even if we consider just the vibration of electrons, the energy is not free. the apparatus will run until the environment around it becomes so cold that no more energy can be harvested, and the zero point field will have zero point.
get it? i just made a science pun...
@Brett;
Sorry if I'm just being a dumb mechanical engineering frosh again, but wouldn't that mean that you could use the devices as refrigerators? As in; the devices could take the energy/heat from the core of the fridge, then pump that out to other sources?
brett and dramamoose that sounds interesting. That would be the reverse entropy, would it not? Extracting heat from the environment and converting it to other forms of energy would not violate conservation laws. Though I do believe I read in Steven Hawking's book that entropy is not defeatable. I hope Steven's wrong as not only is his theory super depressing (at the end there's nothing left in the universe but heat) but this kind of device would actually be useful. As a fridge that generates power while cooling instead of consuming it. As long as something else somewhere is providing heat to replenish one that is lost (hint: sun) it should be ok.
@dramamoose:
probably. the thing about the behavior of subatomic particles is that energy transfer is often the result of collisions, and these become statistically infrequent as the overall energy level decreases. i'd think that it would be a really inefficient refrigerator.
@andrew:
i don't necessarily think that it's reverse entropy, but that it's catalyzing entropy formation - the device makes it easier for very low energy sources (read: electrons) to be utilized. as the system approaches maximum entropy, it becomes harder and harder to do any productive work. your comment about the sun replenishing the system's energy is spot-on. in a closed system, this type of point-energy apparatus would be useful for trying to "suck up" that last bit of useful energy, but it would become inefficient as the system's entropy reaches its maximum level.
Oh man I had been following this just to see what they were finally going to present. But it looks like they are doing the typical delay with further promises!
Morbo is displeased!!!!!
I remember these guys from a year or so ago stating that after their demo didn't work they were going to invite a whole bunch of top scientists and engineers to review their device. Whatever happened to that plan? Did any scientists or engineers actually see the device working or at least review the supposed technology?
Check out this on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2qCssSnfV8
a
As a scientist, I have to say this has been one of the most fascinating comments sections I've read on Engadget. Regarding the Orbo video, does anyone know if the 'engineers' on the video are actually 'engineers'? (hence the inverted commas). Personally (as a chemist) I would have thought physicists and material chemists would have been more appropriate people to examine testing apparatus and conditions and suggest reasons and possible further experiments which may prove/disprove the theory.
Personally, I believe the engineers are probably actors.
Mke,
We are on the way to achieving the Goals we listed for 2008. I am often overly optimistic, but with a bit of luck they will all be achieved this year and some in the not-too-distant future.
Sounds like loser talk to me.
Go do something productive mate!
I believe you Mark. Keep it up I believe you will be seeing a lot of jaws dropping soon.
I actually started following this Unity device thingy from Thomas A. Bearden who maintains an excellent website at http://www.cheniere.org
There are a LOT of scientists working on this some quietly others openly. If this is not real or doable none of them would have spent time, money and effort into this. As they say nothing is closed to an open mind.
You scientists or smart ass people who just denigrate people should be ashamed at yourself. These guys have not harmed anyone at all but you guys are making a fool of yourself.
God bless you Mark and may you achieve your dreams.
more @ http://www.steornpower.com/
I would like to take a second to say that this post has some of the most intelligent comments I have seen on Engadget (whether you believe Steorn or not). Good job guys, I actually learned quite a bit from your posts - more than I remember from my high school physics class.
Yeah, maybe someone should email a link to the Steorn guy...
No offense, but there's a disturbing amount of abjectly ignorant dumbasses reading and posting on Engadget. If the guys running the show here ever want to get an idea of their audience demographics, posts generated by a story like this are a good test to see the proportion of people with zero (or abysmally sub-par) technical training. This Orbo garbage defies several of the most inviolable tenets of physics, and the scam-artists responsible for it are making the same grand promises as they were a year ago.
Pick an accredited college or university of your choosing... any one will do. Get a sophomore physics student. Provide them with all the information Steorn has, without hiding crap behind goofy logos or licensing agreements. Give the kid a week. Assuming he or she is not drunk for entire said week, you may not get a clear answer as to what the device IS doing after a week, but I guaran-damn-tee you will get an answer as to what it is NOT doing. It is NOT generating free energy.
I try not to overly criticize people in online forums, since we know where that goes, but seriously... all you people who say we should give these Irish Svengalis the benefit of the doubt are absolute ignoramouses. Completely. Utterly. Naively. Embarrassingly. Stupid. This is not a subjective insult. You are empirically and inarguably stupid. Feel free to call me narrow minded, short sighted, whatever. Your opinions on this mumbo-jumbo concept invalidate any opinion you have, I will assume you do not understand the meaning of words such as "short," "narrow," "mind," "as," and so on.
This thing can not work. It does not work. It will not work. Apply your ludicrously unfounded optimism towards something with an off-chance of success, like curing cancer, or successful universal science education. Heaven knows my optimism around the latter is taking a beating just reading some of the crap posted here.
"You are empirically and inarguably stupid." says a guy named "mrpoo". Nonetheless, spot on.
The relevance of my blog handle to anything escapes me, but I think there was a compliment in there somewhere.
I just found the dichotomy between how you write, and you user name to be humorous. No offense intended. Keep up the good work.
If man were meant to fly, he would have been born with wings.
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
"Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons." -- Popular Mechanics, 1949
"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." -- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.
"But what...is it good for?" -- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." -- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
"640K ought to be enough for anybody." -- Attributed to Bill Gates, 1981, but believed to be an urban legend.
"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." -- Western Union internal memo, 1876.
"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys." -- Sir William Preece, chief engineer of the British Post Office, 1876.
"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" -- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.
"While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially it is an impossibility." -- Lee DeForest, inventor.
"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C', the idea must be feasible." -- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)
"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" -- H. M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927.
"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper." -- Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With the Wind."
"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make." -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.
"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." -- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.
"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." -- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.
"So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got through college yet.'" -- Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and HP interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.
"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this." -- Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads.
"It will be years -- not in my time -- before a woman will become Prime Minister." -- Margaret Thatcher, 1974.
"I see no good reasons why the views given in this volume should shock the religious sensibilities of anyone." -- Charles Darwin, The Origin Of Species, 1869.
"With over 50 foreign cars already on sale here, the Japanese auto industry isn't likely to carve out a big slice of the U.S. market." -- Business Week, August 2, 1968.
"That Professor Goddard with his 'chair' in Clark College and the countenancing of the Smithsonian Institution does not know the relation of action to reaction, and of the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react--to say that would be absurd. Of course, he only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools." -- 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary rocket work. The remark was retracted in the July 17, 1969 issue.
"You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of weight training." -- Response to Arthur Jones, who solved the "unsolvable" problem by inventing Nautilus.
"Ours has been the first, and doubtless to be the last, to visit this profitless locality." -- Lt. Joseph Ives, after visiting the Grand Canyon in 1861.
"Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy." -- Workers whom Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.
"Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." -- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University, 1929.
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." -- Albert Einstein, 1932.
"The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives." -- Admiral William Leahy, U.S. Atomic Bomb Project.
"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value." -- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre.
"There will never be a bigger plane built." -- A Boeing engineer, after the first flight of the 247, a twin engine plane that holds ten people.
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction." -- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872.
"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon." -- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.
Look, unless you already have all of the answers to all of the questions, you should be very wary of saying something can't be done. I'm not saying that you aren't well versed in the "facts" as they have been presented, just keep in mind the the quotes above are from people who were also well versed in the "facts."
You're seriously comparing informed skepticism around Steorn's unfounded (and quite obviously unfoundable) claims with comments around the viability of a cookie store?? Other than the comment around Pasteurs's germ theory, every one of your examples is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. I don't recall the Beatles, Mrs. Fields, Apple, or anyone included in your compendium of disproved quotes, proposing to violate a fundamental tenet of any particular field of science. Kudos to you for devoting an embarrassing amount of time in compiling what you thought were relevant observations. Unfortunately, it was a waste of time.
Let's try another quote, from someone who is pretty worthy of quoting. To paraphrase Wolfgang Pauli: "Steorn's theory is not right. It's not even wrong.'
i'd rather have a unicorn
I am surprised that none of the engineers commenting here have mentioned Foucault's Pendulum. I believe the Pendulum used powerful magnets to compensate for atmospheric friction and the vibration of the cable.
Don't be surprised. We didn't mention it because it is irrelevant. The core concept behind Foucault's Pendulum does not involve magnets. Magnets are used in museum demonstrations of Foucault only to keep the things going all day for the delight of museumgoers. Moreover, they use electromagnets which are alternately energized and disconnected. Electromagnets = energy consumed, there is no relevance to the Orbo horsecrap. You should be no less surprised that the engineers have not mentioned Woolly Willie. I'm pretty sure there's a magnet in that thing too.
@mrpoo:
Right you are. The Smithsonian installation used electromagnets.
Perhaps I should have enclosed the word "engineers" in quotes.
I do enjoy playing devil's advocate ;)
Ok everybody........bricks will be SHAT!!!
What you see CANNOT be unseen!!
Ready?????
Chandler BING!!!!!!!!!!!!! aka Matthew Perry!!!!!!!!!
I'm literally shocked no one has said this earlier.........
Er, zero friction is impossible? How do you guys think a mag-lev train works? Its concievable that Steorn have somehow modified this concept to include magnetic bearings (although not proper ball bearings) that repel both sides and let the inner and outer plates sit on a cushion of magnetism.
Please everybody stop saying zero-friction like it is a reality, and as if it has any relationship to free energy. You want to know how a Mag-Lev train works? It consumes a huge amount of energy to energize and control the electromagnets, and the high speeds involved in Mg-lev produce a tremendous amount of velocity-dependent drag which is on par with the parasitic effect of friction seen in a normal train. Let's imagine that Steorn uses some magical rare-earth magnetic bearings that require no compensation and maintain true non-contact rotation without consuming energy. Practically impossible, but let's grant them that one. Then lets assume they have created a perfect vacuum inside their dingus to keep the whatchamacallit spinning with no aerodynamic drag. OK, that one is really impossible, but we will also grant them this one. So, granting them these two impossibilities, all they have invented is a perpetual motion machine. So now they only need to take their perpetual motion machine and tackle the completely unrelated issue of violating conservation of energy. This frictionless perpetual motion machine will help to reduce the amount of energy input to the system, but in no way does it do anything to enable net energy increase.
For those of you who malign the people on here who express reasoned skepticism around Steorn's claims, please save your vitriol for the charlatans at Steorn who are promoting this mumbo jumbo. They are (or will be) in fact hurting people, much like snake oil salesman, the inventors of credit default swaps, and faith healers. They prey on the weak minded to eventually take their money. The one upside is that if you are totally ignorant, you will never realize that your money was wasted, you will just assume that "more development time is needed" and you will send another check to keep things going.
Steorn - because nothing we invent exists...
for every (minimal energy expended) Steorn article that goes in, we get maximum energy (comments) being generated. I think we are onto something here, just quietly.
In contrast, though, we have a large amount of friction.