1. “..but is not a perpetuum mobile, ..”

It is not?
Let me quote from Steorn’s claim: “Orbo produces free, clean and constant energy – that is our claim. By free we mean that the energy produced is done so without recourse to external source. By clean we mean that during operation the technology produces no emissions. By constant we mean that with the exception of mechanical failure the technology will continue to operate indefinitely.”
That, to me (and many others) is the DEFINITION of a perpetuum mobile!

2. “.. we don’t understand yet how forces like magnetism work at a level past the subactomic ..”
What are you talking about? EVERYTHING on a scale smaller than the atomic scale is, by definition, subatomic. What do you mean by PAST subatomic?

3. “.. phase 3 will show us that all current laws still apply, ..”
That contradicts what ‘these guys’ themselves have to say about that: (from their claim:) “.. The sum of these claims for our Orbo technology is a violation of the principle of conservation of energy, perhaps the most fundamental of scientific principles. The principle of the conservation of energy states that energy can neither be created or destroyed, it can only change form..”

4. “.. I guess we’ll go through a dark period before we become enlightened..”
You mean, just like the enormous world chaos after we introduced steam, electricity and nuclear power?

About this free energy thing, John… you’re right! We people are NOT getting it. Ever.

This machine really works, but is not a perpetuum mobile, because those don’t exist and they never will. What this machine does is use the force generated by magnets to make another round magnet spin. (Orbit)
So there is nothing mysterious about it, and it doesn’t create energy out of nothing. It just uses magnetic force. If you try to put two magnets together at the same poles you have to put in energy to counter the magnetic force. What powers this magnetic force? Is energy being created out of thin air to create this magnetic force? No, a magnet just makes spacetime flow around it naturally. And that flow can be used to move antoher magnet. These guys just found a configuration in which that motion can be sustained by the gained momentum. Free, clean, endless.
The simple fact is that we don’t understand yet how forces like magnetism work at a level past the subactomic. I think that phase 3 will show us that all current laws still apply, but that we should try to learn how magnetism really works.

Only problem of course is that unstable countries exporting oil and gas will go into civil war because they will go bankrupt in a matter of years. Just imagine Russia not exporting oil and gas anymore. Millions of people unemployed and without money. Or gasstations only selling sandwiched, because we don’t need fuel anymore… I guess we’ll go through a dark period before we become enlightened.

I believe Sean is talking about their attempts to build a device which moves in a rotational fashion, like a electric motor, rather than the stop/start type of device they claim to have now.It’s very hard to follow all the thread over at their forums.

I DO agree with you, however, that there are, in fact, MANY physical phenomena that cannot be explained with Newtonian physics.

Fortunately, we DID make at least SOME progress since 1727 and can now explain, predict and manufacture far more things than what was possible in Newton’s time .. with Newtonian physics.

Since I’m not an RF-engineer, rather than proving you wrong, I will follow the more skeptical method: Show me!
You claim you can extract free energy (defined as getting more energy out of something than was put into it) by means of resonant circuits of a certain design.
Fine!
Since you make the claim, the burden of proof rests upon you.
Show me! And remember, there’s an enormous incentive for you to indeed show me a working device: it’s going to make you filthy rich!

But let me make a prediction here too, concerning your question “And isn’t the energy that is driving the magnets bigger than the one transmitted???”: I predict that you will find that the answer to this question is “No”.
But again, it’s up to you to prove your claim.

EXAMPLE:
You have built an AM transmitter with an output of one half a watt. Under ideal conditions this would cover easily a diameter of some 10 kilometers on level ground with a good aerial.
We now have a little guy who has just built himself an old fashioned crystal detector set, strung up an aerial and connected some old fashioned high impedance headphones.
What happens is our little fellow can hear, after tuning in to the broadcast, what is being said.
No big deal you say. Quite correct, this technology has been around for a long time. In fact so long that hardly anyone remembers how it worked.
Well, for one, a crystal detector as described does not have its own power source. All the energy necessary to drive the set is derived from whatever radiated energy the aerial can drag in.
But it very really transfers enough energy to two electromagnets to vibrate two diaphragms made of steel to vibrate the adjoining air to the point where it becomes possible to listen to the broadcasted sound, even after the carrier frequency has been stripped away.
So what, you say, its all simple stuff. We know all about radio broadcasting an such.
But do we?? What happens if we put two more detector circuits up?
Well nothing really they will hear the same stuff, if they are built properly.
Alright what about ten thousand or a million or so.
Same thing, as long as they are in range there is no reason why each one of these circuits would not perform the way the others do. And what about the transmitter?
What about the transmitter? There is no way any radio receiver can put a load onto a radio transmitter.
Are you trying to tell me than a single little transmitter with about half a watt output is capable of moving millions of membranes by millions of electromagnets without losing any energy?? And isn’t the energy that is driving the magnets bigger than the one transmitted???
Well duuuuhhhhh, I don’t know about that.
This is where science is stuck in its own debris. It has been known for a long time that traditional Newtonian concepts do not apply to resonant circuits of certain designs. No-one in the hallowed halls of academia is prepared to admit it though and you can get into a lot of trouble just pointing out the discrepancies to the wrong people as I have found out on a number of occasions.
Fact is that the behavior of certain resonant circuits cannot be explained with Newtonian physics. There also appears to be a net gain of energy in those circuits which becomes more pronounced the closer we get to perfect harmony. Harmony with precisely what is anyone’s guess.