Over 100% Efficient Energy Production

just got this off an RSS news feed. story

Steorn, a company based in Dublin, is claiming to have stumbled across a new way of producing energy from the interaction of magnetic fields. They have formally challenged the scientific community to test this. Over 900 have accepted the challenge of validating the technology.

you can register to receive the results of the tests as soon as they're done. http://www.steorn.net/

this could either be a major breakthrough, or send the company down the pan.

we'll see soon enough.

Looks cool, nice find Anubis-- I've also registered.

If it indeed works, then it's gotta be amazing, and the results would be awesome.

906 scientiests have expressed interests in that technology-- and that's 2 days since they challenged them.

I'll put $20 on the notion that when it works it will be publicly discredited and removed from all news outlets.....making us all believe there was an "accident", a "failure", or "misconstrued evidence", "incorrect assumptions of a scientific breakthrough", "quack scientists", etc.

That's my 2 cents, the cynic forever.

;-P But It'd be nice to see it work

for everything I've ever learned, I know in my head that it is impossible.

but they knew it too. and for three years they've been working on this, and on why.

but yeh, it may be discredited. and that'll be completely game over for the company, and probably all the technicians/scientists there.

Job interview: "yes I worked on the 100%+ efficient energy source" [laughed and slams door in your face].

:chuckles to self:

*hears echoes of Tesla's wireless energy that was "lost and "discredited"*


hmm.....I smell sumthing.....

I've also spent couple of minutes reading their forums, so many people think like they're "scamming", and don't trust this...

But we'll see. I, personally, think that it CAN be done, just not sure that they've indeed found out the way how to do it.

simple laws of physics say it can't. but then what are laws without loopholes. .

I know that, but as you said you can never know. The idea sounds interesting AND as we advance NEW things gonna be discovered... so this'd be one of it- but somewhat doubt it, but after hundreds of years, it's very highly more possible.

Just think about, A.E. also "changed"/revolutioned the psysics already once... so now maybe this guy will change again some of the basic rules.

Rules are meant to be broken. A long time ago they KNEW the earth was flat.

Now we KNOW you can't "make" energy.

Years ago they KNEW that there was nothing left to be invented.

Now we KNOW that's not true.

Agree with pyro here, this is how we advanced until know, so it's TIME for ANOTHER rule to be broken...

I don't believe it. Unlike what they claim it would violate the conservation of energy. There always has to be source for any energy. Claims like this have been made for over a hundred years. Nobody has proven their claim yet.

The hard apart about such claims is duplicating the original conditions. When so called evidence comes from sloppy science or incomplete or misunderstood theories then that only muddies the water.

There seems to be an exception to the conservation of energy. Energy does seem to be borrowed for a short time under certain high energy reactions. It appears to borrowed from empty space itself. It is only for a short time and it always is paid back. However this has nothing to do with the mentioned claims since nobody has figured out any way to make use of this exception.

Yeah, but humans have been asking questions for more then a hundred years.

Science had advanced enough until the 19th century to even tackle such a basic question.

Scientific laws are not really laws. They are just the framework that defines our current understanding of the universe. The reason they are accepted and called laws is that they define things that set the boundaries of how our universe appears to work. Breaking them would invalidate our current understanding of how the universe works. That is not a matter to be taken lightly.

No, but ignorantly trudging on with the notion of "we're right, there's no changing that" is just as bad.

I agree with MisterEd
It would violate the conservation of energy and there always has to be source for any energy.

? Could they have tapped into a energy soruce that already existed and redirected it or used the by-product to "create" the desired work?