Steorn Orbo: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?


They don't appear to be claiming that it's an environmental source such as the earth's magnetic field.
If they hinted that it had an environmental source less people would dismiss it out of hand.

Let them hook it up to the national grid and make public their net ESB/energy utility bill.
They will not do that of course.
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

They have been advertising (looking for investors) in the back pages of The Economist for a very long time.

If it really worked would they actually have to advertise?
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

I just wish I had more time to contribute to this discussion but I'm too busy here turning lead that i used to make model soldiers with into gold...
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

Well, PR stunt or not is has certainly raised their profile - if you look at their hompeage (and if you believe the figures) a total of 2,266 "scientists" have expressed interest in testing the technology and 26,516 people have expressed an interest in receiving the results.

I would expect all those who supplied an email address to receive an email in the coming weeks outlining all the "other" fabulous products / services that Steorn offer
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

Why don't we just let the scientists who respond to the challenge either confirm or rebut the claims. Whilst the laws of physics as we currently understand accept them state the principle of conservation of energy (something i often indulge in), that does not mean that our understanding will not someday change - commonly accepted knowledge has been proven wrong so often that we should never close our minds.
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

Its amazing that these claims only come out at a time of very high energy prices. Maybe its just that the media only takes an interest in them at such times. I remember in the early eighties two trinity college physics researchers that they had found away to achieve cold fusion. This generated alot of interest at the time but it was later proved not to be.
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

Fair enough but extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and this does not seem to be forthcoming so far. In its ongoing absence it's hardly surprising that anybody with their head even mildly screwed on is somewhat skeptical. As has been mentioned elsewhere rather than advertising in a financial rather than scientific journal and soliciting "scientists" to evaluate their vague claims why not just build a sample/prototype, connect the output to the input and voila - infinite energy! For the moment all the Steorn claims bring to my mind are recollections of Flann O'Brien's De Selby and his mad rules defying "scientific" experiments.
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?



http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/12/3/8 Not Trinity. Utah and Southampton
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

These guys have received a huge amount of press, one comment I saw asked why they didnt hook up the machine to grid and sell electricty back to the network.

There is also speculation it is marketig ploy for the new x-box?
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?

sonnyikea said:
There is one comment on their forums that links the whole thing to an elaborate marketing ploy for the 3rd season of Lost.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough that's exactly what sprung to mind when I saw their demo graphics on RTE news, the one where there are 3 magnets and a ball rotates between them.
 
Re: Claims of "Free Energy" - Real or PR stunt ?


Physical laws tend to be generalised and refined at the extremes of their domains of application rather
than thrown out as just plain wrong.

For example nuclear fission apparently breaks conservation of energy until
one generalises the concept of energy with mass-energy equivalence.
This came from relativity which is itself a correction to Newtonian gravitation.

The old theories still work fine within their domain of application.

E.g. The old definition of energy will do for that branch of Physics called Chemisty No offence to any Chemists
in the house who don't usually concern themselves with the nucleus.

As SineWave alluded to, the claim to free energy doesn't appear to be operating at any physical extreme
which makes it doubly suspect because it would be an unprecedently seismic and disturbing shift in the way
science has advanced up until now.

So there'll be no burning of Physics books at the end of this
 
Re: Steorn Orbo: Anyone know anything about this Dublin Based Company?

Update from Bad Science.

[broken link removed]

 
According to the [broken link removed], the owner of the company is not put off by this:

 
It seem there was some kind of demonstration today and that Feb 1 is a red letter day when "phase I will be launched".

from their website:

......Using a "Victorian Science" approach. It is a technology that has been derived phenomologically [sic]. So that explains it!

 
That is great news! Phenomenological news in fact!

I think that "phenomological" is their own word derived from

"phenos" the greek for seeming, or appearing, but not real.

So phenomological , must mean "appearing logical, but really illogical"

At least they have a sense of humour.


Brendan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register