Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Interview With Dr. Mike

Here is a link to the conversation I had tonight with Dr. Mike Rosing, our official Steorn skeptic. I've highlighted some of the more interesting bits:

SteornTracker: 485%, there isn't really a way to measure that incorrectly is there?
drmike: Nope. That's a pure fabrication.

SteornTracker: How many papers have they shown you? The one we have mostly heard about indirectly is via your experiment.
drmike: Two, both covering the same topic. One is obviously written for investors, the other for engineers.

SteornTracker: 3 days assembling an already designed and tested demo unit doesn't seem too short of a time, they also claimed to have three of these units
drmike: That's the claim. I don't think so. Why have a lathe in the upstairs shop?

SteornTracker: If you were on the Jury, how long would it take for you to be fed up enough to go public about the situation? Or would you just stay quiet like we've seen so far?
drmike: Good question. I'd probably have given up after 3 months.

SteornTracker: So what do you predict will happen to Steorn over the next few months? Sean has said another demo will take place, do you think he'll try again?
drmike: Yes, I think so. But he'll have it set up in secret and it won't work, so he won't actually tell anyone. In the mean time he'll be hoping the jury gets back to him, but he won't realize he hasn't shown them anything.

SteornTracker: Did Sean talk to you and the SPDC members at all about the transition from the start-stop device to the continuous device? He hinted in April that they were making "progress"
drmike: Nope. He mostly tried to "explain the effect". It was interesting because it was one way communication. Not many people asked questions, and Sean did most of the talking.

SteornTracker: You spent some time in London with EarthTech. They seem like an interesting crowd. What were their impressions of Steorn?
drmike: Mixed. Hal was trying to believe, Scott was trying to help, and Marissa was trying to leave :-)

drmike: So there really is a jury, but so what? They don't do anything, nor are they allowed to see anything.
SteornTracker: What evidence do you have that suggests that?
drmike: Sean said on friday during the public admission of failure of the demo that the jury had not seen a working device yet.

drmike: Scott from EarthTech who is not on the jury, said they got plans and could not reproduce any "over unity" effect.
drmike: So I expect no jury member has duplicated it either.

SteornTracker: You're less in the dark then most of us, and your hypothesis seems to make more sense then the documentary ideas, etc
drmike: I think the observations made while upstairs tell me that it was a one man show. A few engineers with a little skill could have done a much better fake!

SteornTracker: I'm guessing you now would give Steorn less then my .001% chance of having anything, is that correct?
drmike: I started with 10^-25 and I'm at 10^-100 now :-)

Patience, persistence, truth, Dr. mike :-)

In the interview, Dr. mike said he'd be available in the near future for a group chat. Feel free to ask questions here and I'll set up a chat session in the next few days.

11 comments:

skeptical said...

A question that has bothered me. DrMike - did you ever get a chance to sit down with Sean and say something along the lines of "Sean, this isn't OU because .... "? And did Sean reply?

Anonymous said...

quote
drmike: Nope. He mostly tried to "explain the effect". It was interesting because it was one way communication. Not many people asked questions, and Sean did most of the talking.
/quote

Some folk would like it made clear, is drmike speaking for the SPDC or is he just referring to upstairs at kinetica when they were all together?

SteornTracker said...

He was referring to the conversation with Sean that occurred at Kinetica. He and SPDC members were in attendance.

meta said...

@skeptical
I asked this same question in the "The REPORT by drmike" thread.
Crosspost below:

meta:
"I do have a question: You mentioned you understand the flaw in their thought process. Did you discuss this with them? Do they understand do you think? I assume if you did, you agreed to disagree? I request (because of the NDA) merely a simple "yes" or "no"-or "no comment" if NDA requires!"

drmike:
I did not discuss it with them. I realized during the saturday session with the SPDC that the tech report sent to me was the core proof and was meant to convince me that what they had was real. I was an observer, not a participant. I did discuss a lot with Hal and tried to point out why I felt things were being misinterpreted, and I think he will be able to carry those questions further than I ever could."

ben said...

(hairykrishna)

@Quanten (I think you read here sometimes!)

Contrary to what "Ice'D'Bear" says on your 'interaction speed' thread I didn't make up any numbers for speed - Sean did. As I recall the magnet in his thought experiment was travelling at ~2000 m/s from the times and distance given.

drmike said...

"Some folk would like it made clear, is drmike speaking for the SPDC or is he just referring to upstairs at kinetica when they were all together?"

Upstairs, all together, on the saturday.

@skptical - nope. I talked with Hal a lot about why it didn't make sense, and he couldn't make any sense of it either.

Father Luke Duke said...

"Contrary to what "Ice'D'Bear" says on your 'interaction speed' thread I didn't make up any numbers for speed - Sean did. As I recall the magnet in his thought experiment was travelling at ~2000 m/s from the times and distance given. "
----
Very true. I think a rough calculation gave the magnet the same momentum as an artillary shell.

Anonymous said...

Drmike,

If possible, I'd appreciate it if you would revisit the "drmike & overconfident" thread on steorn.com and catch up. I value your thoughts and criticism and there are some new thoughts on the matter.

There might be some topic matter there worth commenting on in your next interview.

Especially, I'd like to hear your reaction to some of the input from user "Cloud Camper". Feel free to email me at any time.

Have fun,
overconfident

Anonymous said...

SteornTracker: If you were on the Jury, how long would it take for you to be fed up enough to go public about the situation? Or would you just stay quiet like we've seen so far?
drmike: Good question. I'd probably have given up after 3 months.


The jury can't comment on the process for a period of three years, it's in the contract. So, unfortunately, a member of the jury who has, for example, given up the process in frustration couldn't go public or tell anyone anything even if they wanted to without violating the NDA.

SteornTracker said...

anonymous, I looked up the exact quote from their contract:

"For a period of three years from the date of termination of this Agreement, the Juror shall not disclose the nature of the effort undertaken for Steorn or the terms of this Agreement to any other person or entity, except as may be necessary to fulfil the Juror's obligations hereunder, save with the prior written consent of Steorn."

I don't know if this would rule out a Juror announcing that they are leaving the jury, or are actively part of the jury, as long as they don't disclose specific details.

Anonymous said...

steorntracker,

That's true, but a jury member couldn't comment on the details of exactly why they left the jury, which would be the point of going public. I mean, they'd have to talk about the specifics of the experience which would have to include the 'nature of the effort undertaken for Steorn'.

The jury's hands are pretty tied when it comes to commenting on the process. Also, most of the jury, being career scientists, would probably not want to commit professional suicide by associating themselves with a free energy device.

It would be very interesting to ask them if any members of the jury have resigned from the process.. I'm sure there has to be at least one.