Ohhh, Sian.
EcoWatts "free energy" device rebuffed, BBC falls for it
Ohhh, Sian.
Relevant Posts
- Steorn redux: more mad "scientists" tout free energy gadget (56 days ago - 132 Comments)
- Steorn teases with a reveal date: Friday, April 13th (215 days ago - 44 Comments)
- Steorn's Orbo "free-energy" machine demonstrated! (130 days ago - 319 Comments)
- The Engadget Interview: Sean McCarthy, CEO of Steorn (117 days ago - 248 Comments)
- British Government to study health effects of WiFi (28 days ago - 66 Comments)
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Irwin @ Nov 10th 2007 8:56PM
the media has always been pretty fucking dumbass
Blackstar @ Nov 11th 2007 2:29AM
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
loci @ Nov 11th 2007 6:40AM
it was only a few months ago, engadget was getting all excited and giving daily (advertising) updates on the free energy of "steorn"
kettle pot black
Josh @ Nov 10th 2007 9:05PM
wow.
JDizzle @ Nov 10th 2007 11:04PM
It just works!
ethana2 @ Nov 11th 2007 2:35AM
But only, of course, on their hardware...
Hey, that sounds familiar. Ah yes...
so where's the mach/BSD kernel and 'trusted' platform module?
dataminer49er @ Nov 10th 2007 9:11PM
Blast those laws of thermodynamics!
Smudded @ Nov 10th 2007 9:17PM
I think you guys put a bit of a slant on this. He says that he doesn't think it violates existing laws of thermodynamics. He just says that he doesn't know WHY they're getting the measurements they do. This is a very different approach from Steorn who claims to be making more energy than is put in. I think you guys should seriously revise this article.
Smudded @ Nov 10th 2007 9:19PM
Of course I'm not saying they should be taken extremely serious due to their history, but come on. You're bashing them a bit more than you should be.
BigD145 @ Nov 10th 2007 9:48PM
They need to be bashed and then castrated. These folks are part of the reason why science isn't taken seriously enough.
Smudded @ Nov 10th 2007 11:29PM
Why though? This guy didn't say his device defied any existing laws. He said that through a chemical process induced by electricity they produced heat. So what? If they're wrong about being able to commercialize or it doesn't work, that will eventually be brought to light. If people are stupid enough to invest money into their project, that's their fault. I'm just saying, these guys seem to be very different from the folks over at Steorn.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Nov 11th 2007 3:41AM
If more energy is coming out than going in, either the device is consuming itself, or it's violating the laws of physics.
#2 is impossible.
#1 would mean the device would wear out (rather quickly if it has any significant amount of extra output) and thus selling it as a heater would likely be fraud.
Ed @ Nov 10th 2007 9:26PM
They're worse than steorn.
peter @ Nov 10th 2007 9:53PM
actually, i'll laugh my ass off to see you engadget criticism wrong. why you stereotypes always against revolutionary ideas? if they are wrong, they will be proved wrong theres no question about it. But what if they did make it ? I see those brits trying to make a difference, and what have you people done ? neg opinions
Josh L @ Nov 10th 2007 10:59PM
You're right, the lack of media attention given to obviously fake Free Energy devices in America is terrible. We'll get right on that, let me just phone up CNN and FOX.
sk8rpro @ Nov 11th 2007 3:58AM
You know, peter, it's interesting you should criticize Engadget for criticizing something that is scientifically impossible.
For something to come from nothing just doesn't happen. On the one hand the "CEO" claims on the contrary, but at the same time he can't explain how it works. If a company creates something, and spends time and energy researching it, but can't explain how it works, it's a marketing gimmick for the gullible.
Don't worry, you're not alone. I was hoping to believe it, too. :)
Richard @ Nov 10th 2007 10:00PM
...and that is why run positive AND/OR negative controls. No matter the source, the meters should have been tested before and during the experimental test on controls. If they were, it would have shown faulty, before the experimental test. The fact that they made such an error, and it was supposedly discovered after the fact makes one wonder, about the experimenters.
Experimental design is not all that hard.
Charlie Bedgood @ Nov 10th 2007 10:06PM
haha thats what they get
Spencer @ Nov 10th 2007 10:10PM
This is exactly why you bloggers can't be afforded the same credibility as the mainstream media! Here is a company with a questionable history presenting a technology of scientific improbability and instead of unquestioningly accepting it, you waste the reader's time with scepticism! Any good news producer knows that facts have no place in the public's mind, and until you get a handle on that, you'll never be more than penny-ante upstarts!
kuade @ Nov 10th 2007 10:24PM
You watch way too much "mainstream media" you are just offended because Engadget called you stupid.
Mecharine @ Nov 10th 2007 10:45PM
kuade, you dont seem to understand satire.
ethana2 @ Nov 11th 2007 2:40AM
Did you know that inability to comprehend satire and sarcasm is an actual symptom of paranoid schizophrenia?
They think in very concrete terms or something.
Mile @ Nov 10th 2007 10:19PM
I knew it couldn't be true! PVC is not the material needed for a free energy device. It must be made out of rock that has been mined from at least 5 miles under ground. I know this because 1-4 miles was what I used and failed, but 5 miles is going to work and it kills me that I didn't realize this from the very beginning.
But that's always the way with great science, isn't it?
Andrew Baker @ Nov 10th 2007 10:21PM
Well according the information I see, it's plausible. From what I see no one is claiming they get heat out of nothing. The laws very well might still apply. First off, it's a electro-chemical reaction. you have to be consuming the "secret liquid" in the process. Basic laws of chemistry tell us this is true. The chemical reactions are probably what is creating the heat, not the electricity put into the product. Currently they are only measuring the electricity going into the product, but once you factor in the manufacture and consumption/reload costs of the chemical element, We are looking at a product that no longer "magic". Take a electric start gas stove for example. We can say we use a little electricity to boil water which is a true statment, you inject a little electricity and boom 5 minutes later you have boiling water. However you are also consuming natural gas in the process. that has to be taken into account. If the product really works, it is a chemical/electro reaction, so the heater would have to eventually be replaced. Now the question comes in. Over the life span of the products, install, power, and replace the unit when it finally uses up it's supply of chemical energy, is it cheaper then a standard electric heater? If it is so, then it's still a valid product with an economical benefit. However I can't see a large enough cost savings in a product like this.
ben @ Nov 10th 2007 10:28PM
woot.
neopia9 @ Nov 10th 2007 11:03PM
It's... it's a series of tubes!
ethana2 @ Nov 11th 2007 2:42AM
Oh, man. With the ToS on my internet connection, I don't know if I can laugh at that anymore...
Marty @ Nov 10th 2007 11:20PM
damn, i wish the video was longer so i could see what the trouble was with the old couples.
Renato @ Nov 10th 2007 11:38PM
Interesting...
Andrew @ Nov 10th 2007 11:45PM
o BBC
hardik_k_m @ Nov 10th 2007 11:46PM
what ???
tobin92 @ Nov 11th 2007 12:10AM
How is this even remotely possible?
This would break both the law of conservation of energy or more specifically the the 1st law of thermodynamics.....
chrish @ Nov 11th 2007 12:20AM
I say these guys need to change the water in their bong or buy a new amp meter. Or both.
Rohit Kapur @ Nov 11th 2007 12:33AM
"Because the meters provided weren't working."
lol. . . Classic.
Alex Padilla @ Nov 11th 2007 12:36AM
tag: hoax
lol
Byzil @ Nov 11th 2007 12:56AM
haha wow
silentbob @ Nov 11th 2007 2:27AM
And while some may see them as the crazy ones we see genius. Coz the people, who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do…
Ok ok that was from Apple commercial. The fact is I know people in the industry and there lots of ways to gain more heat than the energy provided at the first place, like cavitational vortex generators. The technology is quite new and it probably will substitute for central heating and gas solutions in the near future if investment would be enough.
kakapo @ Nov 11th 2007 2:47AM
There ain't no free lunch..
You cannot gain energy from a no-existent source!
Now. if Nikola Tesla was involved and there was a transmission of energy going on, I might believe it. But these guys (EcoWatts) are fairly dubious in presentation and reputation.
Hmmmm
ChrisG @ Nov 11th 2007 3:26AM
It runs on the power of imagination. [insert phrases from South Park Imagination Land episode here]
skhawaja @ Nov 11th 2007 4:38AM
video didn't say anything about getting something from nothing - but they're throwing in electricity and getting heat - and the only thing you can do to improve that is to control the output of that heat - the more efficient you are the better it is - I mean we're pretty damn good with electric heaters as it is right now - whatever electricity you are feeding into it becomes heat - what more is there to it?
if you guys really want to wrap your heads around something - take a peek at this okay :)
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/873aae7bf86c0110vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
gotta love it - need one of these in the developing countries instead of nukes
mr. T @ Nov 11th 2007 5:01AM
Reminds me of Full Metal Alchemist...
paul @ Nov 11th 2007 5:44AM
At least Steorn have the bluster to say 'we have created something impossible!'
This guy is just a con artist lying through his teeth to say 'um, we don't know how it's working', and is readying a commercial product (fraudulently) to sell at a huge premium.
This is fraud. Plain and simple, and don't be surprised if the next time you see these guys on TV, it's defending charges in court.
Ethan @ Nov 11th 2007 6:23AM
I will say this; Breakfast is made for idiots, they wouldn't put this on the news at ten or anything. The only thing coming out of thin air though is his logic.
RediJedi @ Nov 11th 2007 6:38AM
This is my first comment. Sorry for the lack of content. I was just trying to create an account.