PURE BS> advertising gimmick, kinda like the "IT" which later became the (i forgot the name of that 2-wheeled stabilized cart)
They write "Steorn has decided to publish its challenge in The Economist because of the breadth of its readership. "We chose it over a purely scientific magazine simply because we want to make the general public aware that this process is about to commence and to generate public support, awareness, interest etc for what we are doing."
They chose not to write a scientific article and submit it to a technical journal for peer review which is the best way to get their technology reviewed, rather than this nonsense of generating a public demand and pressure.
They chose a popular news magazine rather than a scientific journal because they will be exposed more slowly this way. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
Omg. They really built up curiosity with that one! It turned out to be some kind of stupid little scooter. They even had visions of cities being built just to accommodate it. That was a huge let down.
This represents a significant challenge to our current understanding of the universe and clearly such claims require independent validation from credible third parties. During 2005 Steorn embarked on a process of independent validation and approached a wide selection of academic institutions. The vast majority of these institutions refused to even look at the technology, however several did. Those who were prepared to complete testing have all confirmed our claims; however none will publicly go on record.
Sounds like the peers refused to even look at it. So they went to a more public forum to get someone to compel some peers to review it.
They themselves agree it appears to violate the ‘Principle of the Conservation of Energy’, under the laws of physics as we know them. But are we saying that we know everything there is to know about the universe and the laws that govern it?
What's it going to cost to take a look, considering the potential bennefits if it does?
If it doesn't work; it doesn't work and we move on. If it does....
It smells like they are looking for investors more than scientific approval. "If it seems to good to be true it probably is."
They wouldn't need investors if this worked. Once you build one it can be used to generate energy which is in turn sold for cash. Generate enough cash and you build the second to generate more energy for more cash. Kinda like the alfalfa growing in Catch 22.