Unlimited Power battery in Dublin

KTRIC

Just heard an artical on the radion this morning about some company in Dublin claiming to have invented a power source (battery or motor) that doesn't need to be charged. They claimed that it could be the end of charging your mobile phone or topping up the gas in your car.

Did I just imagine this ?? or can someone back me up with a link or news article.

Gilgamesh

soemthing in the politics forum about it as well

All the info you need here

TomCo

I don't believe it,

"In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"

chillywilly

dont have access to the politics forum nixmix:cool:

chillywilly

chillywilly wrote:

dont have access to the politics forum nixmix:cool:

Here's my post from last night so:

Tomorrow see's an Irish company launch in their own words:

"a technology that produces free, clean and constant energy.

This means never having to recharge your phone, never having to refuel your car. A world with an infinite supply of clean energy for all."

Who are they and what is it all about? Well watch this video and register at this site

Because of the difficulties they have come across getting the technology publicly validated the gauntlet has been thrown down to the academic community. There is a full page add in tomorrow's Economist requesting anyone from the scientific community to test the technology.

It works with magnets and is an incredibly clever piece of technology that will finally allow us to throw off the burden of oil and all the associated bs that goes with it. Bye bye energy politics, hello freedom.

More info:
Our Technology and the Laws of Physics

Steorn’s technology produces free, clean and constant energy. This provides a significant range of benefits, from the convenience of never having to refuel your car or recharge your mobile phone, to a genuine solution to the need for zero emission energy production. It also provides a secure supply of energy, since the components of the technology are readily available.

The technology is in a constant state of development. The company has focused for the past three years on increasing power output and the development of test systems that allow detailed analysis to be performed.

Steorn’s technology appears to violate the ‘Principle of the Conservation of Energy’, considered by many to be the most fundamental principle in our current understanding of the universe. This principle is stated simply as ‘energy can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change form’.

Steorn is making three claims for its technology:

1. The technology has a coefficient of performance greater than 100%.
2. The operation of the technology (i.e. the creation of energy) is not derived from the degradation of its component parts.
3. There is no identifiable environmental source of the energy (as might be witnessed by a cooling of ambient air temperature).

The sum of these claims is that our technology creates free energy.

This represents a significant challenge to our current understanding of the universe and clearly such claims require independent validation from credible third parties. During 2005 Steorn embarked on a process of independent validation and approached a wide selection of academic institutions. The vast majority of these institutions refused to even look at the technology, however several did. Those who were prepared to complete testing have all confirmed our claims; however none will publicly go on record.

In early 2006 Steorn decided to seek validation from the scientific community in a more public forum, and as a result have published the challenge in The Economist. The company is seeking a jury of twelve qualified experimental physicists to define the tests required, the test centres to be used, monitor the analysis and then publish the results.

Steorn has decided to publish its challenge in The Economist because of the breadth of its readership. "We chose it over a purely scientific magazine simply because we want to make the general public aware that this process is about to commence and to generate public support, awareness, interest etc for what we are doing."

The_Conductor

I guess thats enthalpy out the window then? "Energy may be neither created or destroyed, but may be transformed from one form to another". Vis- conservation of energy- would be interested to see what they are up to........

If something sounds too good to be true- inevitably it is......

Does the fact that 90% of the scientists offered the job of evaluating their particular contraption, turned down the job offer not ring alarm bells with anyone?

smccarrick

smccarrick wrote:

Does the fact that 90% of the scientists offered the job of evaluating their particular contraption, turned down the job offer not ring alarm bells with anyone?

I would imagine that is down to two things. One being academic arrogance in the belief that the laws of thermodynamics cannot be broken therefore why spend time on looking at a system that should not work. The other being aware that in the past people have attempted scams in this field before.

The method Steorn are going about it though is clever,get the academics to guarantee that they have to publicise the results if they do sign up to validate the technology. Thereby no academics can back down once they see it is real.

loyatemu

their website is 100% PR and marketing, 0% science.

it's a scam.

The_Conductor

Our technology has been independently validated by engineers and scientists - always off the record.........

Curious isn't it....
They were not able to get anyone to verify it "on the record"...

Charlatans.....

TomCo

It's all over ESB corp mail this morning, so someone's taking notice.

Ciaran500

TomCo wrote:

It's all over ESB corp mail this morning, so someone's taking notice.

Any insider info?

TomCo

Not really, scans of the story in all the different newspapers it was published in and a consensus thats its probably a load of ****e but what if its not

Think they'd show me their magic machine if I dropped down to them?

joe_chicken

This reminds me, I really must get the patent down for my time machine and Lead-To-Gold wand

My friends say they work....

Quick Batman, to the news stands.... Hopefully it'll still be a slow news day when I get there

Ruu_Old

Moved from AH.

The_Conductor

What is this doing in the Dublin City forum?

BendiBus

smccarrick wrote:

What is this doing in the Dublin City forum?

A little company on East Wall Road is about to change the future of the world and humankind? The culchies won't like that.

seamus

TomCo wrote:

Not really, scans of the story in all the different newspapers it was published in and a consensus thats its probably a load of ****e but what if its not

Although they claim it's "free" energy, no company in history has ever invented something and then given it away for free.

constitutionus

which brings up another issue. what company or energy concern would invest in this? after all moneys to be made form finite resources NOT infinite ones. you think the ESB want you buying one of theses, sticking it in your back garden and turning off the grid? dont underestimat the power of these lobbies, the guy who invented the jet engine had to go to the states because of the strangle hold roll royce had on prop engine production and they werent going to be fecked about by a guy who didnt even have an engineering degree. poor fecker had to go to the americans in the end and this was at a time when the brits were at war! you think they wouldve jumped at ANY advantage in air travell. imagine what the world would be like if he hadve just tossed in the towel

i'll be open minded on this. after all it costs me nothing and even if it is a scam surely the scientific community should be chomping at the bit to discredit it, unless of course it means they really HAVE been pedling the wrong view of the univerese. last time something like this came up they had to invent dark matter ( what do you mean 90% of the universe is missing?!?) and a multiversal universe to explain how a galaxy capable of supporting life could develop from the big bang (this was to side step the disconcerting notion that they may have just proved god existed seeing as it was more likely than the universe just "happening" to settle in the way it did )
i mean its not as if its the first time they had to address a conflict with classical and modern physics. if memory serves the "atom" literaly means "indivisable" and we all know what a load of bollocks that was. and indeed gave birth to nuclear power.

all things being equal it probably is bollocks, but a true scientist doesnt rule anything out, after all a law is just a law till someone disproves it (though i do love how some high ranking scientist can be as zealot like in their theorys and laws as the most ardent religious nutter ). cant wait to see how it turns out

constitutionus

constitutionus wrote:

all things being equal it probably is bollocks, but a true scientist doesnt rule anything out, after all a law is just a law till someone disproves it (though i do love how some high ranking scientist can be as zealot like in their theorys and laws as the most ardent religious nutter ). cant wait to see how it turns out

Indeed true scientists should keep an open mind. I feel sorry for this guys students:

Dr Cormac McGuinness, a lecturer in the physics department at Trinity College Dublin, said the notion of "free energy" is "impossible", the Irish Times reported.

The_Conductor

Deleted User wrote:

Indeed true scientists should keep an open mind. I feel sorry for this guys students:

Dr Cormac McGuinness, a lecturer in the physics department at Trinity College Dublin, said the notion of "free energy" is "impossible", the Irish Times reported.

What he said is standard physics- "energy may not be created or destroyed, but may be changed from one form to another".......

Its about the very first thing you learn in physics. There is no such thing as "Free Energy"- its the alchemists equivalent of the elixir of life- much talked about but never seen.

BendiBus

constitutionus wrote:

which brings up another issue. what company or energy concern would invest in this?

The big consumers of energy? Chemical & heavy industrial firms. They'd also get to build the machines. Nations with few or no natural resources would also be interested.

I'm convinced by your other points though. I'll remain firmly sceptical but I'd rather see the idea tested and disproved rather than ridiculed and then ignored.

constitutionus

BendiBus wrote:

The big consumers of energy? Chemical & heavy industrial firms. They'd also get to build the machines. Nations with few or no natural resources would also be interested.

I'm convinced by your other points though. I'll remain firmly sceptical but I'd rather see the idea tested and disproved rather than ridiculed and then ignored.

yeah but they'd only get to do em once or when the things get damaged, its not like a car where you'd trade a new one in every few years. it should last forever and theres not as much money in it as in say gas where they get to charge you a connection charge and the like then hike the price up when its on the wane.
dont get me wrong if this works id love to see it developed but if it was to be developed you can bet your arse the main energy concerns would do their level best to put a stop to it. look at it this way, we have some of the best potential energy markets in the world in the form of wave wind and so on .for instance we have territorial waters 4 times the size of the island, we could seed a quater of that ,or an area the size of the island ,with wave power generators . up to and including one for every man woman and child on the island ,yet whats the establishment mentality on our energy needs? lets bring in nuclear:rolleyes:

your right about developing nations though, they'd kill for this and if it did work they'd probably be the first places it'd take off. forcing the rest of us to catch up simply to compete with em. bit like my analogy about the jet engine. rolls royce rulled the roost but had to chuck out all the prop engines when the yanks went transcontinental with jets. they lost millions by forcing that guy to emmigrate

by the way there was an item on the 6.01 news about it so obviously its stirring something up. i hope the scientist climb on board for this, at the very least to discredit it or not

DublinWriter

constitutionus wrote:

all things being equal it probably is bollocks, but a true scientist doesnt rule anything out,

No, but a career academic wouldn't risk his/her precious reputation peer-reviewing something that breaks the first law of thermodynamics.

I haven't looked at their technology yet, but mark it that down through history, pioneers were always seen as being 'crazy'.

"What Sir? Kinescope pictures travelling through the air Sir? I'll throw my top hat at such foolish nonscence Sir!".

Etc...

is_that_so

DublinWriter wrote:

No, but a career academic wouldn't risk his/her precious reputation peer-reviewing something that breaks the first law of thermodynamics.

I haven't looked at their technology yet, but mark it that down through history, pioneers were always seen as being 'crazy'.

"What Sir? Kinescope pictures travelling through the air Sir? I'll throw my top hat at such foolish nonscence Sir!".

Etc...

Yep . In the not too distant past
Strikes me that science is supposed to be built on proofs and not conjecture. It should be debunked on its own merits if that is the case. Mind you undermining one of the Laws of Thermodynamics would cause some serious academic upset.

Blisterman

Well, lets see what the scientests say. If it's really true, it is possibly the greatest invention ever.