« Previous post
Next post »

July 6, 2007

Steorn: Too Hot Today For Free Energy, Please Come Back Later

Michael Arrington

50 comments »

So much for the much hyped Steorn demo - after getting the world all jazzed up for a quick rewrite of the laws of physics the other day (they promised to break the fundamental law of conservation of energy by creating new energy from nothing), the public demo was cancelled. The reason, Steorn says, is that “excessive heat from the lighting in the main display area” caused technical difficulties and the demo had to be called off “until further notice.”

I’m all for turning the world upside down and coming up with free sources of new energy that have zero downside (no emissions, no fossil fuels, no nothing). But you’ve got to actually come through with a product when promised. I’m deadpooling these guys, but give them credit for the sheer audacity of their stunt. We’ll revisit later.

  • Sphere It

This entry was posted on Friday, July 6th, 2007 at 1:59 pm and is filed under Company & Product Profiles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Christopher Finke

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:20 pm

    *Now* has zero credibility? They had zero credibility from the moment that they claimed they could make something from nothing.

  2. Kewtr

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:23 pm

    I went by earlier today to see what the reason was, and lighting? Come on, at least blame a magnetic anomaly from power wiring around there, or something to slightly keep the possibility of a story alive. I really couldn’t believe a company creative enough to defy physics would use that one.

  3. website copywriter

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:32 pm

    They could blame it on bad lighting all they want, but people are actually waiting for them to follow through, so they kind of have to step up. Otherwise there won’t be any credibility to begin with at all.

  4. Cody Robertson

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:33 pm

    Randi published something about this in his Swift magazine..

    http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-0.....rn.html#i1

    Amusing to say the least

  5. Tom

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:35 pm

    Actually, I find the lighting explanation pretty plausible — magnets can demagnetize when heated, and studio lights can certainly get things hot (esp. things in clear plastic enclosures).

    The free energy claims are ludicrous, of course, but I bet these guys are earnest about them. I’m sure there’s just some aspect to the contraption they’ve built that they don’t understand (IANAPhysics major, but I’ve heard some plausible-sounding accounts involving the seemingly-unchanging magnets’ energy eventually being consumed by the apparatus).

  6. Greenman

    July 6th, 2007 at 1:50 pm

    Energy is unlimited and free. Everyone wants to make a dollar thats why we pay top dollar for it. Those who control the Energy have the Power. Imagine how different the world would be if energy was free. How would you control people? The world was amazed when the light bulb was made! No one ever thought such a thing was possible. Anything is possible if you really want to make it happen.

  7. aw

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:04 pm

    If you look at the work of a old guy named Tesla you will discover that the bloke was powering stuff with his radiant energy antenaes. Also look at a modern day genius in Yoshiro Nakamatsu. Dr. Nakamats y powers his downtown Tokyo compound totally off grid using many green sources. End of green rant.

  8. Bemmu

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:12 pm

    I thought TechCrunch mentioning this company was a joke, now I’m not so sure anymore.

  9. Richard Carter

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:14 pm

    Can’t believe you wasted bandwidth on these chaps, Mike. Check out the Second Law of Thermodynamics on Wikipedia some time.

  10. dumbfounder

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:16 pm

    @Greenman

    I really wish it was possible for you to be smart. See, not everything is possible.

  11. mike

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:18 pm

    As a (kinda) ex-physicist of sorts I’m of course aware of energy conservation, entropy, etc. So something from nothing feels wrong, is wrong, runs contrary.

    But…surely the entire point of ‘laws’ in the sciences is that they are there to be challenged. That’s the whole way of discovery. We’d still be sitting here believing the earth was the centre of the universe if humankind hadn’t challenged the status quo.

    The argument “you can’t have a perpetual source of energy…because it breaks a law” doesn’t hack it for me.

    Having said that, they need to put their money where their mouth is and demonstrate the technology in serious scientific conditions.

  12. Paul

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:20 pm

    God, It’s embarrassing being Irish and watching a company! Please, don’t give them another minute of free advertising… Paul.

  13. Hoax Supreme

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    Con artists come and go. Gullibility is the constant.

  14. Pat Phelan

    July 6th, 2007 at 2:38 pm

    @ Paul
    Couldn’t agree more
    Glad we got ourselves out of the deadpool, wouldn’t want to be in the same room as this shower any day.

  15. Paddy O'Donnell

    July 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm

    Trust the Irish to use their gift of bs-ing..I mean gift of blarney, to cook up an elaborate hoax.

    q: how do you an Irishman is bullshitting you?
    a: his lips are moving.

  16. Gabu

    July 6th, 2007 at 3:33 pm

    Trying to figure out the etymology of “STEORN.”

    Do you think it’s an anagram of “NO REST,” an allusion to the notion of a perpetual motion machine?

    Any thoughts would be appreciated — I could be WAAAAAAYYYYYYYY off base here, it might just be a non-English word that I don’t know!

    Gabu

  17. Gabu

    July 6th, 2007 at 3:36 pm

    UPDATE: just read a post that noted, “Its an old Norse word that means, ‘to lead and to guide.’” Anyone confirm this?

    Gabu

  18. Choch B

    July 6th, 2007 at 3:38 pm

    Michael- Surely your web 2.0 mindset and rules to not apply to something as important as science: “But you’ve got to actually come through with a product when promised.” This is not some fickle website similar to those you write about everyday, this is science and is probably best left to the scientists, not the bloggers who know nothing of the technology.

  19. Joe Mordetsky

    July 6th, 2007 at 3:47 pm

    All I know is that I was so disappointed after hearing that. When I first read about orbo I had a sudden (albeit childish) hope that the world was about to change and I was on the cusp of it while reading about it in this blog. I visited their site, googled all the news on them I could etc, etc.

    To hear that it’s probably all hooey is a total Bummer. Big bummer.

    I hope they aren’t bsing and that it is in fact the real deal.

    I want to believe.

  20. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:02 pm

    Didn’t they think of having a backup!
    All this money and time and all they have is a single assemblage of scrap tubing and pexiglass? No backup unit….no spare parts…no contingency plan!

  21. jvp

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:17 pm

    Can’t they just turn the lights off?

  22. Slappenstance

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

    Maybe they should’ve tested in the demo room before announcing to the world that were going to demo. There’s a idea.

  23. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:21 pm

    From the looks of the assemblage and the delicacy of the design, the problem could be anything from geomagnetic fluxes or “ley lines” in that area.
    Could even be static charge buildup from the dry air conditioning system the local environment.
    In any case, It isn’t very scientific if you only have ONE of these systems on the planet to reproduce the effect.
    Certainly, they must have another replica of the system somewhere…..don’t they…don’t they?

  24. Ron M

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:31 pm

    Michael,

    So that you’ll look like a real genius, you should launch “EnergyCrunch” as soon as possible. We have already been displacing insufficient supplies of oil with natural gas (LNG), and coal and nuclear are already starting to boom.

    We need a lot better coverage of cleantech companies (sexier, like how you present Web 2.0) and you’ll be doing the world some good. What do you think?

  25. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    JVP, I think they will turn off the lights, if the investors haven’t done so already.
    How’s that saying go…you can always fool the investors but you can’t fool Mother Nature.

  26. Finiki

    July 6th, 2007 at 4:53 pm

    omg!. Will you start ‘deadpooling’ universities and their experiments next?!

  27. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 5:04 pm

    My guess is that if the demo system didn’t work that it would be obvious to have a second system flown in within hours. Problem is, no mention of doing so occurred indicating there is no second system.
    Certainly, a major tenant of science is that an effect should be independently verifiable and repeatable to be scientifically viable. No second system to fly in, no science. Its back to stoking coal just as before.

  28. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 5:08 pm

    Finiki, If we all would stick to the scientific tenant above, we wouldn’t be blaming the lights.

  29. Papito

    July 6th, 2007 at 5:47 pm

    Same deal for universities and their experiments. Do the experiments but verify by the scientific method….remember the “Cold Fusion” thing in the 80s?

  30. Maz

    July 6th, 2007 at 6:24 pm

    I’ve been following this story for months. I was hopeful that they weren’t pulling a stunt for publicity. It really sucks too because I’ve been trying to explain to people what Seorn was trying to do, and getting nothing but crap from my friends. Now that the demonstration failed to produce any proof of concept I’m disappointed and look like a total schmuck for even beginning to believe this technology was possible. I still believe that someday we will find a way to harness the powers of the universe for free and clean energy, but it looks like we’ll have to wait even longer.

    As for the heat from the lights screwing up the experiment… I suppose it could happen. But why not be PREPARED for things like that, or run the experiment in the dark with LED lights???? Sounds like Seorn wasn’t exactly prepared for this demonstration. They stated they would be lifting weights with the energy machine, but they brought or built one that would only spin. Just do us a favor and don’t make promises of things in public and then under-deliver on those promises.

    Goodluck to Seorn in the future if they turn out to not be “full of it”.

  31. Tom

    July 6th, 2007 at 8:59 pm

    Anybody knows where the light switch is?

  32. Doug

    July 6th, 2007 at 9:00 pm

    Apparently the bearings in the demo broke under stress, perhaps from the heat of the lights.

    This actually makes perfect sense, since “it’s all ball bearings nowadays.”

  33. Michael Arrington

    July 6th, 2007 at 10:10 pm

    hah

  34. Michael Arrington

    July 6th, 2007 at 10:10 pm

    huge bonus points for Fletch quote.

  35. Shambhu

    July 6th, 2007 at 10:15 pm

    Ron at @24 that’s a great idea. I’ve never googled for an “EnergyCrunch” type site. I’m sure Mike could find lots of applicants for that job. If not, I’d do it :)

    It wouldn’t change the world since that’s a matter of politics, but it would be fun reading and nice to see all the ex-physics PhD carpenters coming out of the woodwork.

  36. atanu

    July 7th, 2007 at 1:15 am

    i just looked at the steorn website, and its full of simply meaningless buzzwords, mentioning a track record of developing technologies without any specifics whatsoever. Reads like the SCO press briefings when they started suing all and sundry.
    This line should tell all about them, “Due to the contentious nature of our technology claim the company made a decision that during the process of validation we would seek no further funding”, meaning we’d love some schmucks to pour money into us privately, but whatever we managed has now backfired too because they found out. There’s nothing to validate, because there’s no code.
    I am amazed people are still taken by such blatant frauds.

  37. Umang

    July 7th, 2007 at 3:47 am

    Apparently one is not allowed to file patents for technologies which are in violation of fundamental laws like the law of conservation of energy. :-)
    Or so I remember reading somewhere.

    I’m hunting around to confirm this. If I do, I’ll post it.

  38. wayne lambright

    July 7th, 2007 at 8:06 am

    In a way, I like this companys idea, even though it now looks like a trick. It’s like the lottery, for a buck you get to have big dreams, and I had big dreams in how the world would change with steorn.

  39. Papito

    July 7th, 2007 at 10:29 am

    For all those dreamers and well wishers, remember Regan…….”Trust-but verify!”

  40. Louis-Eric

    July 7th, 2007 at 10:59 am

    Unfortunately for the EnergyCrunch idea, the domain is already owned by… General Mills, makers of famous crunchy cereal-based brain-food.

  41. Conor O'Neill

    July 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am

    Breaking news Mike, we managed to get a first exclusive video review of the Steorn in action. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q_ESdiF2wM

  42. Misery

    July 7th, 2007 at 12:13 pm

    > Energy is unlimited and free.

    Presumably you are a tree as your name suggests. It’s not about it being unlimited, it’s about it being converted to something you can easily use. It’s also not free unless you’re talking solar and air, but you still have to convert it (unless you have a windmill or dry fruit for a living).

    > Imagine how different the world would be if energy was free. How would you control people?

    You would write a religious book. Ironic that the last big release came from the same place as your not-free energy.

    > Anything is possible if you really want to make it happen.

    Are you Yoda or a CEO coach?

  43. ET

    July 7th, 2007 at 12:23 pm

    That’s tenet, not tenant, guys.

  44. asdf asdf

    July 7th, 2007 at 10:29 pm

    asdf asd fasdfasdf asfdasf

  45. ryan scott

    July 7th, 2007 at 11:48 pm

    re: Greenman

    “Imagine how different the world would be if energy was free. How would you control people?”

    Must suck to have no clue how the world works.

  46. Goldfish

    July 8th, 2007 at 8:27 am

    Looks to me like a scam (Doh!) When will people learn that is something is too god to be true then it probably isn’t true? call me a cynic

    http://archives.tcm.ie/busines.....y12884.asp

  47. Papito

    July 8th, 2007 at 10:38 am

    Neils Bohr was correct with the “Copenhagen Interpretation” thing.
    Basically, the wheel did and does turn potentially…until you observe it!

  48. Papito

    July 8th, 2007 at 10:50 am

    This is the way I see the scam work….You make your scheme so convincing to most everyone that sooner or later Big Oil CEOs (who are not scientists) will approach you at the last minute (July 7th) and payoff Steorn to “make” the system apparently fail. Of course, the CEOs too may think the probability is millions to 1 that it would not work but that 1 chance in the millions is enough to them to slip a large sum of cash their way as insurance that it won’t see the light of day.

  49. Renee

    July 9th, 2007 at 12:37 pm

    For the EnergyCrunch concept: there’s tons of blogs about alternative energy, companies and otherwise. One of the best IMO is Worldchanging.org.

  50. Greenman

    July 10th, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    To all the people that think what I said was dumb I guess you guys know everything. I am not backing up the company presented here just thought the concept was really cool. Funny how I seemed to get a big response back and even quoted word for word too. The key to writing is getting a reaction out of the reader for good or bad. I guess I am doing a good job. Never be a closed minded person it can make your life really depressing and dull. Peace

« Previous post
Next post »