What does everyone think about Steorn's claim?

Question

I believe it has great potential if they are indeed being honest. However, that potential can be good or bad. This free energy may be used for water purification, waste processing, agriculture, and transportation (including space travel). Or it may be used to develop a bomb the likes of which the world has never seen.

Do you think Steorn is being honest?

What do you think would happen if free energy turns out to be a reality?

Answer 1

Scientific jury still out on firm's claim it produces 'free energy'
From:ireland.com
Friday, 18th August, 2006



A small Dublin-based company is seeking 12 scientists to verify its claims that it has developed technology that produces "free energy".

If the company's claims - which it admits go against the basic principles of physics - are proved to be true, it says the technology could lead to the creation of infinite amounts of clean, free and constant energy. However, scientists are dubious about the technology.

Steorn says the new technology allows for substantial amounts of excess energy to be created through a particular system for constructing magnetic fields, and that it could be used to enable the development of mobile phones that do not have to be recharged, and fuel-free cars.

The chief executive of Steorn, Seán McCarthy, said yesterday the technology emerged three years ago during attempts by the company to develop renewable methods of generating CCTV cameras.

During the development phase, he said, it was noticed that significant amounts of excess energy were being created, but that it was not being drawn from another source.

The company is taking out a £75,000stg (€110,200) full-page advertisement in the issue of the Economist magazine that appears today, seeking scientists from around the world to form an independent jury to test its claims. The 12 chosen scientists would be fully funded by the company. Steorn says the results - whatever they reveal - will be published worldwide.

Mr McCarthy says most scientists the company had asked to examine the technology had simply refused to do so. Those who did investigate the technology had drawn the same conclusion as the company, he said, but did not wish to disclose their findings publicly.

The company needs such public disclosure to bring the technology to market.

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

He pointed out that he had not seen the details of Steorn's claims.

"They may be finding a more efficient form of energy conversion," he suggested.

"But I can say free energy is impossible . . . the laws of conservation of energy must apply. They must be getting the energy from somewhere."

Answer 2

Free energy scams are common. They usually take one of two approaches to make money. (1) many small takes like "send up $20 for the DVD explaining all", or (2) a few big takes where they attract investors. The second is more ambitious and requires carefully cultivating enough credibility to bilk a few dumb rich people. If played right, it can be very profitable. I won't give any examples because one strategy often taken to cultivate credibility is to discourage criticism with lawsuits.

Answer 3

They said their invention takes a small amount of mechanical energy as input and outputs energy in excess of this.

I think they incorrectly measured their energy input ...that's why none of the "validating" scientists publically proclaimed it to be true.

I also think they advertised this in the Economist rather than a scientific journal so some knee-jerk investors would buy their company before their claims could be falsified.

Answer 4

I would caution you to use healthy skepticism - aside from violating the laws of thermodynamics, why wouldn't the company patent their technology first? Why go about it this way?