Sunday, May 6, 2007

Another Account

Another attendee from yesterday's debate appeared today in the forums with their opinion on the debate. This would be much easier if we just got the video!

gillo_100: First Sean got up a gave his presentation which have to say wasn't great a did beat around the bush a bit but here is what I picked up from it. (appologies for any mistakes in my theory and by all means correct me, I don't claim to be an expert this is just what I picked up) There is a phenomenon known as magnetic viscosity into which little study has been carried out, the study that has been carried out has mainly been to try an overcome it as it is a problem in electric motors generators and other such devices. Anyway a couple of years ago steorn discovered by accident that by utilising this magnetic viscosity they could achieve net energy output from a process. This can happen due to the fact that the BH curve(don't really understand this but it can be googled) changes shape with time. It is not really breaking the CoE just modifing it slightly to include a "time invariance".
We've all seen the terms "magnetic viscosity" and "BH curve" thrown around in the forums. It would be great if Dr. Mike or some other expert could write up in laymen's terms what these mean, and how they may or may not apply to over unity. I'm willing to host the writeup here if necessary.

gillo_100 goes on about the first rebuttal:
He based his whole argument aroud the solidity of CoE and concluded by stating that if the CoE is true that Steorn's proposal must be wrong. And that he for one would not allow even a shred of doubt regarding CoE. This attitude from a supposed academic is disgraceful. How can anyone with 100% confidence state that a particular law always applies completely? Answer: they can't.
He also had a few comments about the Question and Answer session at the end of the debate:
As I remember only one question was aimed at the lecturers, asking did either have any previous experience of magnetic viscosity, the point Sean was strongly pushing at this stage, neither had.
And finally:
But what I have learned most from all of this is that they are many who claim to be intelligent but are in fact unbelievably ignorant just because something goes against the grain, this is somthing I really did not expect in an academic environment in modern times.
Thanks gillo_100 for the info and your analysis! Hopefully soon someone will track down the video and share it with the rest of us.


ben said...

I linked to Birminghams magnetic materials online course thign a few times on the forum:

This is an excellent introduction to magnetic materials in general and gives a clear description of BH curves.

SteornTracker said...

Thanks for the link Ben... Maybe I'll learn something today!

Anonymous said...

I also like:

This one shows how various sources of "magnetic lag" change the shape of the B-H curve, and how you can compute losses by integrating the area enclosed by the curve.

It also discusses "excess loss", which seems to be what the Steorn people are really talking about when they say "magnetic viscosity". This is a localized eddy current effect that impedes domain wall motion.

JTerry said...

I think it's important, however, that we do not lose sight of the core Steorn claim. The same claim that the mouth of Sauron Sean has made on behalf of Steorn many times. That claim is, specifically, that Steorn created an actual, real, working "over unity" device that violates the physical laws respecting theromdynamics and conservation of energy.

If it appears that Steorn's little gadget does not do this as seems to be the case from this nice little debate, then Sean should be called on it. He should be faced with his many, many statements making this absurd claim over the past several years in the hopes that he will actually admit he was wrong.

drmike said...

In addition to the others, I like the hitchhikers guide to magnetism:

the chapter on "magnetic interactions in this thesis is also really good:

And if you really want a deep look at things, this thesis is quite interesting:

I especially keep coming back to 1.3.3 Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation

Patience, persistence, truth,
Dr. mike

skeptical said...

As an (interesting) aside! I read yesterday a paper detailing the research done to test "if steel or soft iron exhibited any magnetic viscosity when under the influence of very rapidly changing fields". The test apparatus could measure changes in intervals of 1/100,000 of a second.

The tests were done by Ernest Rutherford in 1895!

Contrast the ability to do such experimenets more than 100 years ago and Sean's claim that it was only becuase of computers that they discovered the initial small anomaly.

Anonymous said...


Is the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert stuff relevant here? It seems like LLG is a really high-frequency (GHz) effect that would get swamped by eddy currents and static hysteresis in the context of motors and generators.

Father Luke Duke said...

"Contrast the ability to do such experimenets more than 100 years ago and Sean's claim that it was only becuase of computers that they discovered the initial small anomaly."
...and how come Steorn had such cutting edge equipment, in that it had only been available in the last 10 years?

What could Steorn, who were fraud prevention and risk mangement specialists (apparently), need with such ultra-sensitive measuring devices and methods? To make a windmill for a camera?!?