At 09:02 PM 12/23/2009, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
Esa,
Both vimeo videos came through clean for me. Looks great. Iphone... Good!
If you get the chance, could you personally ask someone like
Tachoman why Steorn didn't design the ORBO demo device around a high
functioning capacitor, as compared to the battery currently used. I
think it would really be interesting to get their "explanation"
recorded and then uploaded to a server like vimeo.
The demonstration didn't have the generator. In other words, it
wasn't a demonstration of the supposed technology that the videos
show as a diagram. They were making no attempt to measure the energy
stored or provided to the rotor. Nothing quantititative at all except
a *claim* that the system was running at 300% efficiency. If it were
that high, one would think it easy to make it self-charge.
I rather doubt it, to say the least. Otherwise why the great concern
for very low friction bearings? You put a generator on that rotor and
it's going to have a lot more drag than any reasonable bearing would
produce, the bearing drag would become irrelevant.
Just a suggestion. :-)
Inquiring minds want to know!
One has to assume that Steorn has been reading skeptical commentary.
Surely many skeptics have also complained about Steorn's use of the
battery. On the surface it seems to be a big strike against Steorn's
claims that the device "proves" it is a functional OU demonstration.
Or has Steorn already given an explanation. If so, can someone
direct me to the source?
I don't really see that they are claiming proof. It's just a showing
of the technology, with hints.
Here is what I derive from the hints and discussion at the Village of
the Banned and elsewhere. Note that I don't have necessarily the
right terminology.
They have a rotor with four permanent magnets arrange at each ninety
degree position, pole outward radially. They have four toroid
electromagnets with a core that will attract the permanent magnets.
When a current flows in the toroid, the core loses its attractiveness
to the permanent magnets. By timing the current flow, they can
preserve the attraction that accelerates the rotor, while eliminating
the attraction that would be a drag.
The issue is how much energy it takes to "turn off" the attraction.
The claim that the energy of the battery is entirely dissipated as
heat is crucial. If that is true, where is the energy accelerating
the rotor coming from?
Note that the battery is *not* creating a magnetic field that is
attracting the permanent magnets, i.e., this isn't the usual electric
motor arrangement. Rather, the battery is quenching the
attractiveness of the toroid core.
I find it fascinating that this seems to be common knowledge or
opinion among those of the Banned. I.e., those who have been closely
following this. It seems that Steorn may have revealed the anomaly
they are talking about. It would be an alleged mismatch between the
energy dissipated in the toriods and the acceleration of the rotor.
The user Alsetalokin on
http://www.moletrap.co.uk/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=552&page=1#Item_0,
who has a YouTube video that shows how a permanent magnet is
attracted to a core, and when the toriod is connected to a battery,
the permanent magnet drops. It makes no difference which way the
battery is connected. Someone here probably can describe this far better.
But I've got, now, an idea of how Orbo is supposed to work. Highly
skeptical, I remain. Here is where I think the problem lies. Yes, the
current in the toroid, while the magnetic field is constant, and
current is constant, is resulting entirely in heat. However, the
inductance of the toroid will resist changes in current. Extra work
is done to set up the magnetic field initially, the field that
neutralizes the attractiveness of the core to the permanent magnets.
That is *not* dissipated as heat, it is stored in the field energy.
I'm way outside my field, so to speak, so please forgive the language
and possible weakness of understanding. But I haven't seen anyone but
Alsetalokin discussing this, and even that was oblique, I haven't
seen an explicit description of the operating technology.
