Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Dr. Mike's Sv Experiment

After a bit of back and forth between Sean and Dr. Mike, which lead to a public approval by Sean for Dr. Mike to publish his experiment, we now have the beginnings of Dr. Mike's Sv Experiment.

Some thought Sean was a bit harsh on Dr. Mike today. There seemed to be some miss communication regarding whether Dr. Mike could publish his version of the experiment. While Sean had emailed Dr. Mike a critique of the proposed experiment, I wonder if Dr. Mike was still expecting a follow up email or communication allowing him to openly discuss the experiment. Once the dust settled, we got our answer from Sean:

Mikes experiment design is his own, he asked my views, I gave them to him, I saw many technical problems with it, if Mike wants to post his experiment, there is nothing that Steorn can or would do about it, other than to comment on the variety of problems that I see with it, although I do now see that Mike is suggesting stainless steel instead of the steel design that he originally mailed to me and posted above, there are lots of issues, I have no problem discussing them in public, IMO the design is not very good, but lets get the issues in the open, but again I do want an explanation of the lapse of memory issues.
While it's always fun to discuss finances and intentions, I prefer physics. The Sv Experiment thread is off to a great start and I'm sure we'll all learn a lot more about magnetic viscosity and Sv in the process.

16 comments:

ben said...

Interesting, simple experiment drmike. I have some reservations though.
Isn't magnetic viscosity going to be a bugger to measure on any kind of simple rig? It's my understanding that it's a tiny effect so isn't all kinds of other stuff going to drown it out?

How similar is this to Seans suggested setup?

15-India-Street said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Thicket said...

The Steorn true believers have been trumpeting their faith that the July demonstration will stun the world and the close-minded scientists with irrefutable proof of Sean’s free-energy claims.

Sean personally has been trying hard to downplay these expectations. He did it in the interview with SteornTracker and he did it again on the Steorn forums.

Quote:
No I mean that a demo is just one event, there will be lots of other more significant events, the demo IMO will just polarize the views of forum members, some will say that it proves fraud, some will say that it proves it real and most will just say that they need more info. So lots of other 'days' after the July stuff.
Unquote:

I believe that Sean knows that the July demo will be unimpressive and inconclusive. Sean feels that very few people will change their minds, and is trying to focus on the future ‘lots of other days’.

Ongoing delays and secrecy allows Steorn to continue collecting investor money. You can expect Sean to drag this out as long as possible so that he continues to get paid well.

Sean can always count on his core true believers. He can feed them plates of kidney beans and convince them that the resulting flatulence is free-energy.

I hope lots of believers go and see the Steorn July farce. Maybe some of them will walk away thinking “is that all there is?” When setting your expectations for the July demonstration, think ‘detailed technical specifications’. We’ve all been down that road before

Thicket said...

@15-india-street

Very interesting information. I hadn't seen the excel spreadsheet before. It fills in some gaps.

What is the source of the spreadsheet? Was it included in the April 2007 Steorn submission to CRO?

The key point remains. Steorn received a large infusion of investor money after their Economist ad in August, 2006, despite Sean's claims to the contrary.

Anonymous said...

Yesterday I wrote,

"If Mike had a plane ticket, I would be far less suspicious of Seans motives in badgering Mike today."

Mike says he has received the tickets.

Credit where credit is due, good job Sean (and apologies CathyC?). Obviously the tickets were sent before yesterdays 'dust up' so that eases some of my suspicion.

Go Mike, and dare I say it, Go Steorn.

If Sean would be so kind as to explain the confusion around the post-August financials, he could even possibly get me back on the fence.

drmike said...

@ben

It's not similar at all - on purpose. I want to ensure I don't violate any NDA.

If Sv is what generates 2200 joules, then it shouldn't be small, should it?

ben said...

@drmike

True enough! He didn't say over what time frame he had extracted 2200J though - maybe it took him a year...

Besides, I was thinking of in the real world as opposed to in ‘Steorn world’. Is “magnetic viscosity” not the mechanism of hysteresis/anomalous loss in transformers? In a slow cycling rig like the pendulum one you designed I don’t think you’re going to see anything that can be reliably attributed to magnetic viscosity. Fair enough as a demonstration that magnetic viscosity is no big whoop, but be prepared for Sean to claim you have no idea what you’re doing!

Apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick and you’re measuring something completely different from what I think you’re measuring.

Kent said...

drmike, reading some of those posts, it seems like sean's starting to try to tarnish your image.

I think this is probably damage control. When you disprove something, he'll refer back to all these other posts calling your memory selective, or dishonest. trying to show you were out for untruthful reasons.

Be Careful.

Kent

Kent said...

@ben

if the 0.5w/cm^3 is correct, you can determine the fastest pace that 2200 joules could be extracted. I'm at work right now, so I can't do the math, but its a pretty easy calculation.

Kent

drmike said...

@ben

It is similar to what Steorn is doing, but not close enough to get any ideas on how to create OU from it.

I was just talking to an EE here at work, and we both realized that the pendulum will get a push after it passes center that should equal the push it got coming in, so the net effect should be zero. Except for Sv! So I think it does measure Sv directly, but it may take some data analysis after the fact to dig it out.

nleseul said...

drmike:
You will all be happy to know that I have received tickets to London (and back) for the July demo (and 2 days before).

So nyah, Mr. Anonymous! :-P

ben said...

@kent

But we have no idea how big it is...

@drmike

Definitely, I'm not arguing that the setup won't have a hysteresis loss (exhibit magnetic viscosity) - just that this loss will be tiny!
I'm not sure that it's a big enough effect to be resolvable in any kind of simple rig of this kind. I might be entirely wrong though.

Do you have a handle on how big an energy loss you're looking for? (order of magnitude)

drmike said...

@ben

Should be on the order of 10% of the bearing loss. It's near the end that the biggest difference is seen - with just plain bearing loss things slow down uniformly. With the magnets you get an abrupt halt when the energy in the pendulum can't overcome the field strength.

As for how much energy that really is, I haven't thought about it yet.

Father Luke Duke said...

"It's not similar at all - on purpose. I want to ensure I don't violate any NDA."
---
I see what you are trying to do - but doesn't it make it potentially rather pointless? It's just when it doesn't show what Sean wants it to show he'll just go "well, that's because it's nothing like our set up blah blah blah".

Thought to be honest, I am at a loss as to what Sean thinks it proves. He keeps going "remember, this is showing a known effect". Well if the effect is known, then it clearly doesn't violate COE. I also can't see how you get from there to perpetual motion...

All respect to you Dr Mike, you are doing a great job.

Anonymous said...

Dr Mike
You are wasting your precious time. It's not going to change anything, except fuel the debates. Sean WILL NOT accept your results giving this or that reason. You are not dealing with an honest, fair and straightforward man here.

Sean is almost like a bully, somewhat criminal minded and manipulative. If he's got a tech for free unlimited energy, only god can save this world. Lol....

meta said...

"Dr Mike
You are wasting your precious time. It's not going to change anything, except fuel the debates. Sean WILL NOT accept your results giving this or that reason."

Does not matter what Sean thinks, or anyone thinks. Who cares!

"Thinking about" is fine and necessary, but at a certain point comes the time to think in one hand and spit in the other, and see which one gets full. The science will speak for itself, let the chips fall where Nature dictates.

Finally we are getting down to some real science. I am quite bored with the pointless flame wars,the theological,UFOlogical,theoretical,
epistimological,and other diversions.

No doubt drmikes experiments will fuel the debates, but at least there will be something real to debate about, no matter what the outcome of the experiments.

As I see it, this is not about proving anyone wrong or right, this is about seeing if what Sean reports can be reproduced. Also, it is about observing the fundamentals of Sv.