It is valid to think of the products of electrolysis as a medium of energy storage, though. It's like a fuel you have to manufacture at cost, rather than one you can dig out of the ground and sell for profit.
That's still problematic, though, because the global costs only increase when you add the step of storing energy in the form of hydrogen. Right now, you've still gotta burn coal or oil to feasibly generate enough electricity in the first place.
My point is that in order to even release the energy from the water as seen in the video, the guy had to pump an untold amount into it in the form of EMR.
Not when we already know what it is. There are essentially two possibilities here - one is that this is plain old spectroscopy, and he happens to have found a resonant frequency. I'd rule that out because I don't know of any resonances at RF frequencies off hand (RF tends to be the domain of NMR effects which are atomic level).
What he's actually succeeding in doing is finding a frequency (possibly he's not, possibly it's a damn spark-gap type thing) where he induces enough alternating current in the salt-water (remember it's a conductor?) that a little bit of electrolysis takes place, and he's blasting enough energy at it that he can burn some of the resultant hydrogen.
It's a horrendously inefficient way to do electrolysis, but it's not what most people expect and so it seems "reasonable" to say it should be investigated.
Again, the presumption of knowledge. How can you be absolutely certain that there are only two possibilities here?
If someone claims to have discovered something that would go against common sense and scientific experience, and has no peer-reviewed papers behind his discovery, it is good science to be skeptical.
Not when we already know what it is. There are essentially two possibilities here - one is that this is plain old spectroscopy, and he happens to have found a resonant frequency. I'd rule that out because I don't know of any resonances at RF frequencies off hand (RF tends to be the domain of NMR effects which are atomic level).
What he's actually succeeding in doing is finding a frequency (possibly he's not, possibly it's a damn spark-gap type thing) where he induces enough alternating current in the salt-water (remember it's a conductor?) that a little bit of electrolysis takes place, and he's blasting enough energy at it that he can burn some of the resultant hydrogen.
It's a horrendously inefficient way to do electrolysis, but it's not what most people expect and so it seems "reasonable" to say it should be investigated.
Again, the presumption of knowledge. How can you be absolutely certain that there are only two possibilities here?
If someone claims to have discovered something that would go against common sense and scientific experience, and has no peer-reviewed papers behind his discovery, it is good science to be skeptical.
Exactly. It is not good science to claim that his discovery holds no merit and should be discounted out of hand simply because he's so naive as to think it will cure cancer.
IloroKamou on
"There are some that only employ words for the purpose of disguising their thoughts."
If someone claims to have discovered something that would go against common sense and scientific experience, and has no peer-reviewed papers behind his discovery, it is good science to be skeptical.
Exactly. It is not good science to claim that his discovery holds no merit and should be discounted out of hand simply because he's so naive as to think it will cure cancer.
I don't think that's what electricity is doing. He's being skeptical of the claims offered by the guy. It's unrelated to the cancer factor.
MikeMan on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
edited July 2007
electricity is an electrical engineer. He is experienced in all manner of things with regard to chemistry, electricty and all sorts of stuff. There's no presumption of knowledge on his behalf, it's a deduction from what he knows to be a fact about the way water, electiricity and EMF work.
Not when we already know what it is. There are essentially two possibilities here - one is that this is plain old spectroscopy, and he happens to have found a resonant frequency. I'd rule that out because I don't know of any resonances at RF frequencies off hand (RF tends to be the domain of NMR effects which are atomic level).
What he's actually succeeding in doing is finding a frequency (possibly he's not, possibly it's a damn spark-gap type thing) where he induces enough alternating current in the salt-water (remember it's a conductor?) that a little bit of electrolysis takes place, and he's blasting enough energy at it that he can burn some of the resultant hydrogen.
It's a horrendously inefficient way to do electrolysis, but it's not what most people expect and so it seems "reasonable" to say it should be investigated.
Again, the presumption of knowledge. How can you be absolutely certain that there are only two possibilities here?
If someone claims to have discovered something that would go against common sense and scientific experience, and has no peer-reviewed papers behind his discovery, it is good science to be skeptical.
Exactly. It is not good science to claim that his discovery holds no merit and should be discounted out of hand simply because he's so naive as to think it will cure cancer.
Well, Im planning on discounting it just because of the fact it was linked on youtube.
Boy will my face be red when I see cancer-o-matic (just add saltwater!) on the shelves next year.
After all, he wasn't using salt water to cure cancer -- the idea was to have cancer cells take up particles of certain metals, and then heat those metals via radio waves.
I can't remember what the method was for heating the metals (may have been from a much higher frequency part of the EM spectrum), but I've definitely read about this method before. Not the salt water burning part, though. That's all this guy. But as far as I can recall, his idea of using the radio-waves heating up metal particles as a cancer cure is not something that he came up with, but's actually been floating around for a while.
I'm not sure whatever came of it, but I thought I should mention it since people here seem to be calling him crazy for pursuing a method of cancer-fighting which is, IIRC, something that legitimate scientists at university and pharmaceutical labs have been pursuing.
It is valid to think of the products of electrolysis as a medium of energy storage, though. It's like a fuel you have to manufacture at cost, rather than one you can dig out of the ground and sell for profit.
That's still problematic, though, because the global costs only increase when you add the step of storing energy in the form of hydrogen. Right now, you've still gotta burn coal or oil to feasibly generate enough electricity in the first place.
My point is that in order to even release the energy from the water as seen in the video, the guy had to pump an untold amount into it in the form of EMR.
After all, he wasn't using salt water to cure cancer -- the idea was to have cancer cells take up particles of certain metals, and then heat those metals via radio waves.
No, the cancer part is extra retarded.
To summarize, his plan is to use "nano particles certain metals which microwaves can heat up, and inject them into the body where they will be attracted to cancer cells, and then pass microwaves through those cells to heat up the metal and kill the cancer cells".
Problems:
1) Microwaves heat up all metals, not just certain metals.
2) Why would these nano particles of metal be attracted to all and only cancer cells? Magic?
3) If we have something that is attracted to all and only cancer cells, fuck microwaves. Just use it as a delivery system for targeted chemicals.
4) These nano particles of metal have to be smaller than the cancer cells to be taken up by them. Which means the microwaves we'd heat them up with would have to have correspondingly small wavelengths, way way way into the microwave range. Wavelengths that small have shitty propagation, so you'd need to up energy levels high to make it through all the tissue layers to get to the cancer cells - and cook the guy you're treating in the process.
The microwave cancer treatments that legitimate groups seem to be pursuing are longer wavelength, lower energy, no magic metal particle stuff.
After all, he wasn't using salt water to cure cancer -- the idea was to have cancer cells take up particles of certain metals, and then heat those metals via radio waves.
No, the cancer part is extra retarded.
To summarize, his plan is to use "nano particles certain metals which microwaves can heat up, and inject them into the body where they will be attracted to cancer cells, and then pass microwaves through those cells to heat up the metal and kill the cancer cells".
Problems:
1) Microwaves heat up all metals, not just certain metals.
Um, I'm pretty sure they said radio waves. Lower frequency and all that.
2) Why would these nano particles of metal be attracted to all and only cancer cells? Magic?
You're right. Certainly no one in the world has experience with drug delivery systems to get medicine to our cells. That's what Jesus is for.
3) If we have something that is attracted to all and only cancer cells, fuck microwaves. Just use it as a delivery system for targeted chemicals.
I'm pretty sure that's been considered as well. I think one of the proposed benefits of using metal nanoparticles was that the metals would not have any effect whatsoever on surrounding cells, whereas toxins might.
4) These nano particles of metal have to be smaller than the cancer cells to be taken up by them. Which means the microwaves we'd heat them up with would have to have correspondingly small wavelengths, way way way into the microwave range. Wavelengths that small have shitty propagation, so you'd need to up energy levels high to make it through all the tissue layers to get to the cancer cells - and cook the guy you're treating in the process.
The microwave cancer treatments that legitimate groups seem to be pursuing are longer wavelength, lower energy, no magic metal particle stuff.
Isn't this guy using radiowaves as well? The microwave bit is just from that crackpot "nick2" or whoever who's just some random dumbass posting about stupid shit with no affiliation with the actual inventor in question. I believe in the news segment they mention that he's using radiowaves.
And I'm almost positive that what I read about involved metal particles as being the source of the heat.
But even if his ideas are slightly different, it still goes to show that he's probably not as crazy as people were eager to make him seem.
electricity is an electrical engineer. He is experienced in all manner of things with regard to chemistry, electricty and all sorts of stuff. There's no presumption of knowledge on his behalf, it's a deduction from what he knows to be a fact about the way water, electiricity and EMF work.
Actually I mostly do physical chemistry type things. My explanations offered are based on well established scientific principles. The issue I have with Illormu is he's saying "we should have more investigation", and well, that's the crux isn't it? These guys never have an interest in trying to publish in any form how they've done something, but crucially for some reason what they claim holds more weight then any counter-explanation offered on the extremely limited evidence.
There's a very good reason the HHO gas people (aka Brown's gas aka H2 and O2 in the same bottle) never tell you the process for "patent" reasons. It's so when they break a Mass Spec they can throw up their hands and so "but we made it from just water! New compounds!" while ignoring whatever metals or anything else they might add.
Regarding magic metals though:
Funnily enough there is an area of research on cancer treatments related to this. The idea is that there's a section of the EM spectrum between 600 - 1100nm commonly referred to as the "tissue window" where skin is relatively permeable to light of these wavelengths. The idea is you synthesize nanoparticles with a plasmon resonance absorbance closely matching somewhere in this region, and functionalize them so they will be uptaken by cancerous cells (or accumulate around them etc.)
By irradiating with a very intense pulse of laser light at these frequencies you can induce enormous heating of the particles to the point that they will "explode" and either destroy the cancer, or in more esoteric implementations (I don't think there's too much work going on in this) they'll crack open and drop out a cargo a cytotoxic chemicals.
Do you know what the difference between a radio wave and a microwave is?
Radiowaves are lower frequency than microwaves.
And on nanoparticles this means they will not be absorbed in any capacity. Nanoparticles absorb from typically in the microwave region up to deep ultraviolet, dependent on size.
The next functional step is a remarkable feat of nano-engineering. Each PEBBLE carries a photocatalyst . When stimulated by a light source through a micrometer-sized fiber-optic probe inserted into the skull, the photocatalyst converts oxygen into a so-called singlet state, which effectively “bleaches†and destroys nearby cells. The PEBBLEs are inert and harmless until the light is turned on. Used in combination with MRI imaging, one could now kill cancer cells at will, while tracking the effectiveness of the treatment with imaging.
My bad, the research was using much higher-frequency EM waves than radiowaves.
Still, the fact that this guy's method of reasearch is at least based on some legitimate science means that he's probably just overly optomistic, or a little dim. Not crazy.
Do you know what the difference between a radio wave and a microwave is?
Radiowaves are lower frequency than microwaves.
And on nanoparticles this means they will not be absorbed in any capacity. Nanoparticles absorb from typically in the microwave region up to deep ultraviolet, dependent on size.
Yeah. I see that now that I went and looked it up again. But, like I said -- my whole point here was just to question the immediate characterization of the "inventor" as a crazy person.
The next functional step is a remarkable feat of nano-engineering. Each PEBBLE carries a photocatalyst . When stimulated by a light source through a micrometer-sized fiber-optic probe inserted into the skull, the photocatalyst converts oxygen into a so-called singlet state, which effectively “bleaches†and destroys nearby cells. The PEBBLEs are inert and harmless until the light is turned on. Used in combination with MRI imaging, one could now kill cancer cells at will, while tracking the effectiveness of the treatment with imaging.
My bad, the research was using much higher-frequency EM waves than radiowaves.
Still, the fact that this guy's method of reasearch is at least based on some legitimate science means that he's probably just overly optomistic, or a little dim. Not crazy.
It's always based on "some" legitimate science. The point is the moment they touch it, don't publish their methods and make claims without evidence it becomes illegitimate.
Like I said, the trick is always to find some effect people don't normally expect when you talk about "process X". Even though you're still doing process X by an unusual means, it let's you convince people you're actually doing "magic process Y".
Do you know what the difference between a radio wave and a microwave is?
Radiowaves are lower frequency than microwaves.
Microwaves are an ill-defined term for certain wavelengths of radio waves. Bitching that "this dude said he's using microwaves but the other guy said he's using radio waves" is retarded, because they're the same fucking thing. He'd have to be using wavelengths in the microwave range to do what he wants to do.
It's always based on "some" legitimate science. The point is the moment they touch it, don't publish their methods and make claims without evidence it becomes illegitimate.
Like I said, the trick is always to find some effect people don't normally expect when you talk about "process X". Even though you're still doing process X by an unusual means, it let's you convince people you're actually doing "magic process Y".
I agree, and by no means do I think that this guy has somehow achieved "over unity" (man, I had a friend who used to talk about that shit. He's not my friend anymore. He's not anyone's friend anymore. I cut him).
I was just objecting to his characterization as a crazy person. He's more likely just a stupid person.
Do you know what the difference between a radio wave and a microwave is?
Radiowaves are lower frequency than microwaves.
And on nanoparticles this means they will not be absorbed in any capacity. Nanoparticles absorb from typically in the microwave region up to deep ultraviolet, dependent on size.
Yeah. I see that now that I went and looked it up again. But, like I said -- my whole point here was just to question the immediate characterization of the "inventor" as a crazy person.
No, the fact that this guy thinks he's found an over unity energy source means he's off the charts crazy. The fact that he's cobbled together some gibberish that kinda sorta sounds like something real scientists are interested in means nothing.
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
After all, he wasn't using salt water to cure cancer -- the idea was to have cancer cells take up particles of certain metals, and then heat those metals via radio waves.
I can't remember what the method was for heating the metals (may have been from a much higher frequency part of the EM spectrum), but I've definitely read about this method before. Not the salt water burning part, though. That's all this guy. But as far as I can recall, his idea of using the radio-waves heating up metal particles as a cancer cure is not something that he came up with, but's actually been floating around for a while.
I'm not sure whatever came of it, but I thought I should mention it since people here seem to be calling him crazy for pursuing a method of cancer-fighting which is, IIRC, something that legitimate scientists at university and pharmaceutical labs have been pursuing.
Micro-bubbles, IIRC - drug-coated bubbles that are burst with radio-waves to target-apply anti-cancer drugs, etc.
EDIT: NVM. you were talking about something different.
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
Hmm interesting. This one gentleman is saying that the Steorn device could work and do a fair amount of work if they stumbled across a technology that whomever he is affiliated with (i'm assuming some kind of government thing) has been working on for years.
He first says:
"Now, it just happens that not all systems are time symmetric in their operation, and we know this from Quantum mechanics. This is especially true, when the path of motion consists of more than one entity. So, a word of caution - do not blindly accept the COE before assesing the motion over one whole cycle. And this will be the reason why Steorn will not make the workings of their device visible to anyone, not to Dr. Mike, not to anyone else.
The secret has nothing to do with magnetic viscosity, which was just a misleading track to waste members time. The principle of operation can be explained in no more than a few lines. Steorn caught some big fish in their SPDC, and they think that since no one came out with a good description of their device, there is no way their technology leaks out of anywhere. But, the biggest fish is still out, and the secret of converting potential energy into useful work may not come out from Steorn after all!"
than goes on to say:
"Steorn claims to generate energy from nowhere, and even to destroy it. This is utter non sense. Such statements can only do harm to themselves, and to the serious researchers in related fields of study. Just because they are unable to detect the energy powering their device does not mean it is getting it from nowhere. Claiming overunity is very different from saying that COE does not apply. COE can be easily invalidated if it is misapplied to an open system which 'looks like' a closed system. I say 'looks like' because that's usually the case with the class of machines Steorn has stumbled upon.
These machines are real, even though Steorn's scientific claims are stupid, but perhaps the stupid claims were an easy way to attract the required attention. I have personally studied the theory of operation of this class of devices, and testing of such (working) prototypes during the past few years. Of course, you demand proof, otherwise I'm no better than an artist.
For this purpose, the presence of Dr.Mike at the demo may prove very useful, and interesting indeed.
So here is the deal.
I will hereby state a few predictions, which as far as I know have not been released by Steorn regarding their device. I'm not an SPDC member, so I cannot know if such information has ever made it to members under NDA, but I find this highly unlikely. If Dr.Mike is given enough access on the demo unit he will be able to prove me right in a few days from now, and you will be sure that I know exactly what I am talking about, and that Steorn's device is surely not the only or first such working model in existence today. If he finds I am wrong, then probably Steorn's device is a fake, which is still unlikely, even though I find it quite impossible for anyone to stumble on the concept by coincidence, without the correct background theory.
ok Mike, I hope you read this. I am assuming Steorn has by now advanced its work enough to put a continuous self sustaining rotating model so that it will make testing easier for you. I also suppose you can electronically log the rotational velocity with time. Use optical or magnetic sensors, as you will not be able to machanically couple your system to the device. If they present you with a stop-go mechanism, I'm sure you will know how to adapt your test procedures.
Prediction number 1:
The device will slow down in the time close (within +- few minutes) to astronomical noon. The amount of change in rotational speed will depend on the model, but should be enough for you to detect in your data logs. This change will not be due to any change in ambient temperature.
Prediction 2:
If you are given access to the internal synchronising mechanism (you will recognise this as soon as you see it), you will confirm to us, that shifting the synchronisation angle, will change the direction of the rotation of the device. At midpoint of the angle extremes, the device will behave as a closed system, obey COE, and behave 'normally', that is, will not overcome external friction. On the extremity angle settings, if the device is started in the wrong direction, an external 'extra' braking force will be noticed.
Prediction 3:
The moving part is not a magnet.
Prediction 4:
Whatever the number of components inside, the device will always have 3 special positions."
And finally:
""Steorn claims 0.5 W/cm3, can you confirm that?"
Whilst I have no direct access to what they are doing, I think I am able to answer your question.
The quoted unit of 0.5W/cm3 is usually referred to as specific power density, sometimes it's quoted as W/gramme. Some manufacturers like to cheat a little bit, in that they state the power density, but not the energy density. To have the full picture of the performance of your energy source, the manufacturer should supply you a graph plotting the specific power vs specific energy, sometimes referred to a discharge performance curve. The energy density of these devices depends on various parameters, but it actually boils down to the time taken for the device to accelerate to its terminal velocity. At low velocities, such as at start up, these units cannot even be mechanically connected to anything more than their own bearings, otherwise they won't even bulge. So, a fair power rating would be the continuous power output at which the device can be kept running at a constant speed, but I am afraid, this figure would scare potential investors.
As with most things, nothing is ideal in real life. Some energy sources are good at giving short powerful bursts of energy, others are good at giving long term moderate energy levels. For example, a battery that can only be discharged relatively slowly will be inappropriate for a rapid discharge, of the order of a few minutes. Specific power relates the maximum power achievable from the energy source per unit weight or volume of the source, and this is what Steorn has quoted.
Now, comparing Steorn's value to my own, it is clear that their value was measured using a mechanism in which all available energy was dumped into the measuring equipment in one short burst. This was probably done during the measurements of their initial start-stop version. So,the value of 0.5W/cm3 for a portable unit, might well be realistic, but not useful for any practical purpose in which a continuous power is required. Compare this to one of those supercapacitors which some guys put in parallel with their car's audio equipment to help during short bursts of power consumption.
Steorn's marketing might have been mislead with this figure, or intentionally assumed it was a continuous power rating, enabling them to extrapolate their claims to the more 'attractive' everyday's comodities like mobile phone or laptop battery replacement, which I find irrelevant to such technology. These statements are false, at least with what they have in hand. Not to mention the 550hp super extrapolation.
No I'm not one of the 8, I intentionally left my position at the university 10 years ago, to chase my own research work, so I am no longer affiliated with any university, and have never had any kind of communication with Steorn. However the fact that I gave you more clues than Steorn has given out during the past months added up all together (=almost nothing), might lead you to a better interpretation of the facts, than the one you just implied."
Probably crackpot ramblings, but any mention of Quantum anything and secret tech gets my pulse going.
If you want to read the whole conversation, feedback and the like go here:
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
I just do not know. Magnets because most people don't really understand them, so you can say things like "but a magnet lifts the same weight by doing no work!" And I think everyone loves frequencies just because they come up in sci-fi a lot.
Where'd you get tesla coil from? While that seems somewhat more plausible, when I saw it I just timed the amount he had each light on and calculated how many Wh it would actually have consumed (turns out that if you really pushed it you could do it with a AA battery).
But a tesla coil actually makes a lot of sense as well. Ah the mysteries of life!
EDIT: 007 is an entropykid level conspiracy nut. I followed their forums for like 6 months before getting bored and distracted (video games seemed like a better use of my time so I resubbed to EVE).
EDIT 2: Also Dr Mike seems to be actually a real EE guy. How he keeps going I just do not know.
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
Probably something to do with tinfoil. And as for you lot bleating about 'why aren't the scientists taking him seriously', you clearly have no idea how the scientific method works in practice. Here's a clue: if he had any scientific reputability, he'd have been published in a journal and not reduced to making magic shows on FUCKING YOUTUBE.
The Cat on
0
Options
Apothe0sisHave you ever questioned the nature of your reality?Registered Userregular
electricity is an electrical engineer. He is experienced in all manner of things with regard to chemistry, electricty and all sorts of stuff. There's no presumption of knowledge on his behalf, it's a deduction from what he knows to be a fact about the way water, electiricity and EMF work.
Actually I mostly do physical chemistry type things. My explanations offered are based on well established scientific principles. The issue I have with Illormu is he's saying "we should have more investigation", and well, that's the crux isn't it? These guys never have an interest in trying to publish in any form how they've done something, but crucially for some reason what they claim holds more weight then any counter-explanation offered on the extremely limited evidence.
So, the point being that you're even more qualified than I gave you credit for.
How dare you presume to know what you're talking about in your field of study. What would the world come to if everybody did that?
How dare you disparage tinfoil! Without it numerous laboratory experiments would fail! And what would I use as a handy solder protector? Not tinfoil? MADNESS!
Probably something to do with tinfoil. And as for you lot bleating about 'why aren't the scientists taking him seriously', you clearly have no idea how the scientific method works in practice. Here's a clue: if he had any scientific reputability, he'd have been published in a journal and not reduced to making magic shows on FUCKING YOUTUBE.
While I tend to keep an open mind regarding scientific progress, I am wont to agree with Cat.
However, I would remind him that a lot of great science has been deliberately suppressed for numerous reasons throughout history.
I don't wear any tinfoil yet, but just to be on the safe side, I keep a roll of it handy...
Eindrachen on
People seem to think that by posting in threads and agreeing with other people they are changing the world. They are not. They are posting in threads online. The universe will not be altered by forum threads, even those which are very wry. Being outraged online is a form of entertainment, and refreshing a thread to receive a hit of consensus packs the thrill of genuine activism without requiring any sweat.
Tycho, 4/11/07
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
The common man has no interest in knowing what these are or mean and these assholes use them to confuse and gull people into believing their bullshit theories.
The science of it is just confusing enough for most people to be apathetic about understanding it, but easy enough to reference for people to identify what the big picture means.
Probably something to do with tinfoil. And as for you lot bleating about 'why aren't the scientists taking him seriously', you clearly have no idea how the scientific method works in practice. Here's a clue: if he had any scientific reputability, he'd have been published in a journal and not reduced to making magic shows on FUCKING YOUTUBE.
While I tend to keep an open mind regarding scientific progress, I am wont to agree with Cat.
However, I would remind him that a lot of great science has been deliberately suppressed for numerous reasons throughout history.
I don't wear any tinfoil yet, but just to be on the safe side, I keep a roll of it handy...
Examples, please. Particularly examples where it was shown only in suspiciously framed videos and no precise details of it's operation were given.
Probably something to do with tinfoil. And as for you lot bleating about 'why aren't the scientists taking him seriously', you clearly have no idea how the scientific method works in practice. Here's a clue: if he had any scientific reputability, he'd have been published in a journal and not reduced to making magic shows on FUCKING YOUTUBE.
While I tend to keep an open mind regarding scientific progress, I am wont to agree with Cat.
However, I would remind him that a lot of great science has been deliberately suppressed for numerous reasons throughout history.
I don't wear any tinfoil yet, but just to be on the safe side, I keep a roll of it handy...
I tell ya man, even with the peer-review system in place, all kinds of crap manages to get published, which is why I consider anything on the level of this stuff to be truly irredeemable.
The Cat on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
Now, Now, they might not be crazy fucks. They may be greedy bastards, preying on the stupid.
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
I just do not know. Magnets because most people don't really understand them, so you can say things like "but a magnet lifts the same weight by doing no work!" And I think everyone loves frequencies just because they come up in sci-fi a lot.
Where'd you get tesla coil from? While that seems somewhat more plausible, when I saw it I just timed the amount he had each light on and calculated how many Wh it would actually have consumed (turns out that if you really pushed it you could do it with a AA battery).
But a tesla coil actually makes a lot of sense as well. Ah the mysteries of life!
Magnetic fields are all perpendicular and shit. Right hand rule? You expect people to understand that?
That news story is so silly. A Stirling engine running on nothing but salt water (oh, and MASSIVE EM FIELDS). The radio waves were powerful enough to light up the fluorescent bulb, it seems so silly to focus on the salt water when you were dealing with those. That might make for a cool magic trick, though.
I like the wireless electricity thing better, especially given that it's the real deal.
I can't be the only one who is completely confused by all of this babble.
I apologize on the behalf of all of us mere peons who are not electrical engineers
Well there's two ways to approach this;
one is to shrug and keep rollin', which you gotta do alot anyways 'cause you can't know everything about everything.
The other is to look up the terms being thrown around and try to get a handle on what's going on.
It is nice to be able to tell a crackpot from a legit researcher without having to take someones word for it though, just for the next time someone tries to sell you somethin'
just sayin'
ALocksly on
Yes,... yes, I agree. It's totally unfair that sober you gets into trouble for things that drunk you did.
Its not like I was investing myself in the concept, I know enough to accept real innovations as it comes to me from the "scientific community" at large.
I generally accept that if a theory works out its going to be independently tested and get the exposure it deserves, and then I get to hear about it and say "hey thats cool"
Its just a little hard to cut through all the presumption from the experts. Not knowing how some of this stuff works doesn't make you an idiot or anything.
Posts
My point is that in order to even release the energy from the water as seen in the video, the guy had to pump an untold amount into it in the form of EMR.
If someone claims to have discovered something that would go against common sense and scientific experience, and has no peer-reviewed papers behind his discovery, it is good science to be skeptical.
Exactly. It is not good science to claim that his discovery holds no merit and should be discounted out of hand simply because he's so naive as to think it will cure cancer.
I don't think that's what electricity is doing. He's being skeptical of the claims offered by the guy. It's unrelated to the cancer factor.
Well, Im planning on discounting it just because of the fact it was linked on youtube.
Boy will my face be red when I see cancer-o-matic (just add saltwater!) on the shelves next year.
After all, he wasn't using salt water to cure cancer -- the idea was to have cancer cells take up particles of certain metals, and then heat those metals via radio waves.
I can't remember what the method was for heating the metals (may have been from a much higher frequency part of the EM spectrum), but I've definitely read about this method before. Not the salt water burning part, though. That's all this guy. But as far as I can recall, his idea of using the radio-waves heating up metal particles as a cancer cure is not something that he came up with, but's actually been floating around for a while.
I'm not sure whatever came of it, but I thought I should mention it since people here seem to be calling him crazy for pursuing a method of cancer-fighting which is, IIRC, something that legitimate scientists at university and pharmaceutical labs have been pursuing.
Yeah, I was agreeing with you.
No, the cancer part is extra retarded.
To summarize, his plan is to use "nano particles certain metals which microwaves can heat up, and inject them into the body where they will be attracted to cancer cells, and then pass microwaves through those cells to heat up the metal and kill the cancer cells".
Problems:
1) Microwaves heat up all metals, not just certain metals.
2) Why would these nano particles of metal be attracted to all and only cancer cells? Magic?
3) If we have something that is attracted to all and only cancer cells, fuck microwaves. Just use it as a delivery system for targeted chemicals.
4) These nano particles of metal have to be smaller than the cancer cells to be taken up by them. Which means the microwaves we'd heat them up with would have to have correspondingly small wavelengths, way way way into the microwave range. Wavelengths that small have shitty propagation, so you'd need to up energy levels high to make it through all the tissue layers to get to the cancer cells - and cook the guy you're treating in the process.
The microwave cancer treatments that legitimate groups seem to be pursuing are longer wavelength, lower energy, no magic metal particle stuff.
Um, I'm pretty sure they said radio waves. Lower frequency and all that.
You're right. Certainly no one in the world has experience with drug delivery systems to get medicine to our cells. That's what Jesus is for.
I'm pretty sure that's been considered as well. I think one of the proposed benefits of using metal nanoparticles was that the metals would not have any effect whatsoever on surrounding cells, whereas toxins might.
Isn't this guy using radiowaves as well? The microwave bit is just from that crackpot "nick2" or whoever who's just some random dumbass posting about stupid shit with no affiliation with the actual inventor in question. I believe in the news segment they mention that he's using radiowaves.
And I'm almost positive that what I read about involved metal particles as being the source of the heat.
But even if his ideas are slightly different, it still goes to show that he's probably not as crazy as people were eager to make him seem.
Do you know what the difference between a radio wave and a microwave is?
Actually I mostly do physical chemistry type things. My explanations offered are based on well established scientific principles. The issue I have with Illormu is he's saying "we should have more investigation", and well, that's the crux isn't it? These guys never have an interest in trying to publish in any form how they've done something, but crucially for some reason what they claim holds more weight then any counter-explanation offered on the extremely limited evidence.
There's a very good reason the HHO gas people (aka Brown's gas aka H2 and O2 in the same bottle) never tell you the process for "patent" reasons. It's so when they break a Mass Spec they can throw up their hands and so "but we made it from just water! New compounds!" while ignoring whatever metals or anything else they might add.
Regarding magic metals though:
Funnily enough there is an area of research on cancer treatments related to this. The idea is that there's a section of the EM spectrum between 600 - 1100nm commonly referred to as the "tissue window" where skin is relatively permeable to light of these wavelengths. The idea is you synthesize nanoparticles with a plasmon resonance absorbance closely matching somewhere in this region, and functionalize them so they will be uptaken by cancerous cells (or accumulate around them etc.)
By irradiating with a very intense pulse of laser light at these frequencies you can induce enormous heating of the particles to the point that they will "explode" and either destroy the cancer, or in more esoteric implementations (I don't think there's too much work going on in this) they'll crack open and drop out a cargo a cytotoxic chemicals.
Radiowaves are lower frequency than microwaves.
Usually these magical breakthrough websites try to get my money somehow or another.
My bad, the research was using much higher-frequency EM waves than radiowaves.
Still, the fact that this guy's method of reasearch is at least based on some legitimate science means that he's probably just overly optomistic, or a little dim. Not crazy.
Yeah. I see that now that I went and looked it up again. But, like I said -- my whole point here was just to question the immediate characterization of the "inventor" as a crazy person.
Like I said, the trick is always to find some effect people don't normally expect when you talk about "process X". Even though you're still doing process X by an unusual means, it let's you convince people you're actually doing "magic process Y".
Microwaves are an ill-defined term for certain wavelengths of radio waves. Bitching that "this dude said he's using microwaves but the other guy said he's using radio waves" is retarded, because they're the same fucking thing. He'd have to be using wavelengths in the microwave range to do what he wants to do.
I agree, and by no means do I think that this guy has somehow achieved "over unity" (man, I had a friend who used to talk about that shit. He's not my friend anymore. He's not anyone's friend anymore. I cut him).
I was just objecting to his characterization as a crazy person. He's more likely just a stupid person.
No, the fact that this guy thinks he's found an over unity energy source means he's off the charts crazy. The fact that he's cobbled together some gibberish that kinda sorta sounds like something real scientists are interested in means nothing.
If this guy is doing anything new or interesting, then these guys are clearly leaders in the field of extracting power from the Earth's natural magnetic field resonance! See an exciting demo video on youtube here
I like this video. I like it because it highlights my point about doing "process X" in an unusual or obfuscated way, and using to claim "magic process Y". Spot the problems.
Micro-bubbles, IIRC - drug-coated bubbles that are burst with radio-waves to target-apply anti-cancer drugs, etc.
EDIT: NVM. you were talking about something different.
Neat, a tesla coil hoax. Why are lunatics always fascinated with the words "frequency" and "magnetic field"?
He first says:
"Now, it just happens that not all systems are time symmetric in their operation, and we know this from Quantum mechanics. This is especially true, when the path of motion consists of more than one entity. So, a word of caution - do not blindly accept the COE before assesing the motion over one whole cycle. And this will be the reason why Steorn will not make the workings of their device visible to anyone, not to Dr. Mike, not to anyone else.
The secret has nothing to do with magnetic viscosity, which was just a misleading track to waste members time. The principle of operation can be explained in no more than a few lines. Steorn caught some big fish in their SPDC, and they think that since no one came out with a good description of their device, there is no way their technology leaks out of anywhere. But, the biggest fish is still out, and the secret of converting potential energy into useful work may not come out from Steorn after all!"
than goes on to say:
These machines are real, even though Steorn's scientific claims are stupid, but perhaps the stupid claims were an easy way to attract the required attention. I have personally studied the theory of operation of this class of devices, and testing of such (working) prototypes during the past few years. Of course, you demand proof, otherwise I'm no better than an artist.
For this purpose, the presence of Dr.Mike at the demo may prove very useful, and interesting indeed.
So here is the deal.
I will hereby state a few predictions, which as far as I know have not been released by Steorn regarding their device. I'm not an SPDC member, so I cannot know if such information has ever made it to members under NDA, but I find this highly unlikely. If Dr.Mike is given enough access on the demo unit he will be able to prove me right in a few days from now, and you will be sure that I know exactly what I am talking about, and that Steorn's device is surely not the only or first such working model in existence today. If he finds I am wrong, then probably Steorn's device is a fake, which is still unlikely, even though I find it quite impossible for anyone to stumble on the concept by coincidence, without the correct background theory.
ok Mike, I hope you read this. I am assuming Steorn has by now advanced its work enough to put a continuous self sustaining rotating model so that it will make testing easier for you. I also suppose you can electronically log the rotational velocity with time. Use optical or magnetic sensors, as you will not be able to machanically couple your system to the device. If they present you with a stop-go mechanism, I'm sure you will know how to adapt your test procedures.
Prediction number 1:
The device will slow down in the time close (within +- few minutes) to astronomical noon. The amount of change in rotational speed will depend on the model, but should be enough for you to detect in your data logs. This change will not be due to any change in ambient temperature.
Prediction 2:
If you are given access to the internal synchronising mechanism (you will recognise this as soon as you see it), you will confirm to us, that shifting the synchronisation angle, will change the direction of the rotation of the device. At midpoint of the angle extremes, the device will behave as a closed system, obey COE, and behave 'normally', that is, will not overcome external friction. On the extremity angle settings, if the device is started in the wrong direction, an external 'extra' braking force will be noticed.
Prediction 3:
The moving part is not a magnet.
Prediction 4:
Whatever the number of components inside, the device will always have 3 special positions."
""Steorn claims 0.5 W/cm3, can you confirm that?"
Whilst I have no direct access to what they are doing, I think I am able to answer your question.
The quoted unit of 0.5W/cm3 is usually referred to as specific power density, sometimes it's quoted as W/gramme. Some manufacturers like to cheat a little bit, in that they state the power density, but not the energy density. To have the full picture of the performance of your energy source, the manufacturer should supply you a graph plotting the specific power vs specific energy, sometimes referred to a discharge performance curve. The energy density of these devices depends on various parameters, but it actually boils down to the time taken for the device to accelerate to its terminal velocity. At low velocities, such as at start up, these units cannot even be mechanically connected to anything more than their own bearings, otherwise they won't even bulge. So, a fair power rating would be the continuous power output at which the device can be kept running at a constant speed, but I am afraid, this figure would scare potential investors.
As with most things, nothing is ideal in real life. Some energy sources are good at giving short powerful bursts of energy, others are good at giving long term moderate energy levels. For example, a battery that can only be discharged relatively slowly will be inappropriate for a rapid discharge, of the order of a few minutes. Specific power relates the maximum power achievable from the energy source per unit weight or volume of the source, and this is what Steorn has quoted.
Now, comparing Steorn's value to my own, it is clear that their value was measured using a mechanism in which all available energy was dumped into the measuring equipment in one short burst. This was probably done during the measurements of their initial start-stop version. So,the value of 0.5W/cm3 for a portable unit, might well be realistic, but not useful for any practical purpose in which a continuous power is required. Compare this to one of those supercapacitors which some guys put in parallel with their car's audio equipment to help during short bursts of power consumption.
Steorn's marketing might have been mislead with this figure, or intentionally assumed it was a continuous power rating, enabling them to extrapolate their claims to the more 'attractive' everyday's comodities like mobile phone or laptop battery replacement, which I find irrelevant to such technology. These statements are false, at least with what they have in hand. Not to mention the 550hp super extrapolation.
@couldbe
No I'm not one of the 8, I intentionally left my position at the university 10 years ago, to chase my own research work, so I am no longer affiliated with any university, and have never had any kind of communication with Steorn. However the fact that I gave you more clues than Steorn has given out during the past months added up all together (=almost nothing), might lead you to a better interpretation of the facts, than the one you just implied."
Probably crackpot ramblings, but any mention of Quantum anything and secret tech gets my pulse going.
If you want to read the whole conversation, feedback and the like go here:
http://freeenergytracker.blogspot.com/2007/06/disagreement-even-in-spdc.html
Where'd you get tesla coil from? While that seems somewhat more plausible, when I saw it I just timed the amount he had each light on and calculated how many Wh it would actually have consumed (turns out that if you really pushed it you could do it with a AA battery).
But a tesla coil actually makes a lot of sense as well. Ah the mysteries of life!
EDIT: 007 is an entropykid level conspiracy nut. I followed their forums for like 6 months before getting bored and distracted (video games seemed like a better use of my time so I resubbed to EVE).
EDIT 2: Also Dr Mike seems to be actually a real EE guy. How he keeps going I just do not know.
Probably something to do with tinfoil. And as for you lot bleating about 'why aren't the scientists taking him seriously', you clearly have no idea how the scientific method works in practice. Here's a clue: if he had any scientific reputability, he'd have been published in a journal and not reduced to making magic shows on FUCKING YOUTUBE.
So, the point being that you're even more qualified than I gave you credit for.
How dare you presume to know what you're talking about in your field of study. What would the world come to if everybody did that?
How dare you disparage tinfoil! Without it numerous laboratory experiments would fail! And what would I use as a handy solder protector? Not tinfoil? MADNESS!
While I tend to keep an open mind regarding scientific progress, I am wont to agree with Cat.
However, I would remind him that a lot of great science has been deliberately suppressed for numerous reasons throughout history.
I don't wear any tinfoil yet, but just to be on the safe side, I keep a roll of it handy...
Tycho, 4/11/07
The common man has no interest in knowing what these are or mean and these assholes use them to confuse and gull people into believing their bullshit theories.
The science of it is just confusing enough for most people to be apathetic about understanding it, but easy enough to reference for people to identify what the big picture means.
I tell ya man, even with the peer-review system in place, all kinds of crap manages to get published, which is why I consider anything on the level of this stuff to be truly irredeemable.
Magnetic fields are all perpendicular and shit. Right hand rule? You expect people to understand that?
That news story is so silly. A Stirling engine running on nothing but salt water (oh, and MASSIVE EM FIELDS). The radio waves were powerful enough to light up the fluorescent bulb, it seems so silly to focus on the salt water when you were dealing with those. That might make for a cool magic trick, though.
I like the wireless electricity thing better, especially given that it's the real deal.
I apologize on the behalf of all of us mere peons who are not electrical engineers
Well there's two ways to approach this;
one is to shrug and keep rollin', which you gotta do alot anyways 'cause you can't know everything about everything.
The other is to look up the terms being thrown around and try to get a handle on what's going on.
It is nice to be able to tell a crackpot from a legit researcher without having to take someones word for it though, just for the next time someone tries to sell you somethin'
just sayin'
I generally accept that if a theory works out its going to be independently tested and get the exposure it deserves, and then I get to hear about it and say "hey thats cool"
Its just a little hard to cut through all the presumption from the experts. Not knowing how some of this stuff works doesn't make you an idiot or anything.