Free energy magnet motor

[eamarquardt]

I can see why the calloway v gate magnet motor doesn't work because of the energy requirement to lift the stator magnet up past the lock up point but what about this one. http://youtu.be/vUcWn1x3Tss I can't see any reason why this one wouldn't work other than because of friction. I've searched you tube and I didn't see this set up anywhere. I'll keep looking, I would really like to see this particular set up.

Friction dooms all "perpetual motion machines". The energy put into the machine to get it going eventually gets dissipated as heat. Even if the machine were "friction free" if you pulled any energy out of the machine (such as driving a generator) the machine would slow down and eventually stop as the energy was pulled out of the machine/system as electricity.

You just gotta have faith. 2,603,257 living physicists can't be wrong.

Cheers,

Gus

I'm just tryin to keep an open mind. The 2nd law of thermodynamics has been broken once before. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2 ... roken.html I know that friction would play a big role in this and any other device but in this one you have attraction and repulsion working at the same time and moving in the same direction. It would be nice to actually see this particular configuration to know for sure.

Quote from linky above: "But the new experiment probed the uncertain middle ground between extremely small-scale systems and macroscopic systems and showed that the second law can also be consistently broken at micron scale, over time periods of up to two seconds".

In short, two seconds does not a perpetual motion machine make.

In addition, if your sample size/volume is very small (as in the experiment) the statistics involved get a bit "weird" due to the small number of "doo dads" involved (sometimes one must use "technical terms"). According to the article 100% predictable but not entirely applicable to the world we normally function in (another of the article's quotes: "Thankfully this probability is so small it never happens on human timescales" and human sized proportions).

Simply put, a perpetual motion machine aint gonna work.

Cheers,

Gus

[LDK]

Hey Gus ,

For some reason I just knew you would respond again. I didn't say it would or that it wouldn't!!!! I just said I'm gonna keep an open mind!!! I just said I wanted to see that particular set up. I don't act like I have all the answers like some people do

[jss06]

These are not Perpetual motion machines. They are constantly having energy fed into them from the permament magnets. So they are not breaking any physical laws. That being said. I would be curious as to the amount of energy you could get out of the device. The fact that they speed up means more power is going in then is being used by friction. But is that power usable? That is the question.

Obviously stronger magnets and a larger drum would produce more torque. It will be interesting to see if anyone can build a practical motor using this technique.

[eamarquardt]

Hey Gus ,

For some reason I just knew you would respond again. I didn't say it would or that it wouldn't!!!! I just said I'm gonna keep an open mind!!! I just said I wanted to see that particular set up. I don't act like I have all the answers like some people do

Ah, come on now! Open mind? When you perfect your "perpetual motion machine" and solve the world's energy problems, lemme know. I and every living and past physicist want to come see it and congratulate you on your keeping an "open mind" and doing what no scientific team ever has been able to do.

If your true goal was to elicit multiple replies from me, YOU WIN! I love a good bicker, bun fight, or discussion. There is, however, no prize. Actually you caught me on an exceptionally good day. No opiates for me yesterday!!!!!!!! "Please sir, can I have some more (no opiate daze)".

Just for the record, I made up the number of living physicists just to see if anyone would question it. Gottcha!!!!!

Cheers,

Gus

[LDK]

Hey Gus ,

For some reason I just knew you would respond again. I didn't say it would or that it wouldn't!!!! I just said I'm gonna keep an open mind!!! I just said I wanted to see that particular set up. I don't act like I have all the answers like some people do

Ah, come on now! Open mind? When you perfect your "perpetual motion machine" and solve the world's energy problems, lemme know. I and every living and past physicist want to come see it and congratulate you on your keeping an "open mind" and doing what no scientific team ever has been able to do.

If your true goal was to elicit multiple replies from me, YOU WIN! I love a good bicker, bun fight, or discussion. There is, however, no prize. Actually you caught me on an exceptionally good day. No opiates for me yesterday!!!!!!!! "Please sir, can I have some more (no opiate daze)".

Just for the record, I made up the number of living physicists just to see if anyone would question it. Gottcha!!!!!

Cheers,

Gus

OMG!!! Are you for real!!!

[rowerwet]

there is a close-to-perpetual motion machine out there, google the "johnson motor", the usual "the big oil/car/energy companies took it over and won't build it" story, just like Stanley Myers, and others. and yet you can buy the plans for $50 from someone, there is a yahoo group dedicated to the johnson motor and it is one of those " johnson was able to make one that ran for two years" but everyone who has claimed to make it work drops off the face of the earth, and the rest are trying all kinds of ways to recreate some of the hard to get and rare components needed to make one.
Stanley Myers figured out how to power a car on water. Then died from some odd kidney or something problem after the oil co's stole the patent. Once again you can't buy his device but you can make one. I worked with a guy who claimed to have made one and gotten his F250 stake bed to some ridiculous mpg. He claimed the guts of it is computer controlled water cracker, but instead of a constant current (the downfall of any water cracking setup) it used a square wave pulse of electric energy at exactly the freequency that caused water molecules to hit their harmonic frequency, thus not causing you to put more energy in than you will get out.
Of course if this is true there is still one bad side, burning hydrogen in concentrated amounts eats metal (my dad worked on the space shuttle engines, they had to be gold plated inside as gold is not very reactive) so your engine would be eating it self from the inside out. The meyers set up will only work with non-fuel injected engines as the electronics won't allow the mixture to work correctly with the extra hydrogen.
the Stanley Myers tech is not the "brown gas" hydrogen generating stuff, another odd mileage booster, that relies on a chemical reaction to give off hydrogen.
Good luck with any and all of it, even if the oil/car/energy companies are sitting on it, I don't think they would be able to make it work as well as is claimed.

[eamarquardt]

there is a close-to-perpetual motion machine out there, google the "johnson motor", the usual "the big oil/car/energy companies took it over and won't build it" story, just like Stanley Myers, and others. and yet you can buy the plans for $50 from someone, there is a yahoo group dedicated to the johnson motor and it is one of those " johnson was able to make one that ran for two years" but everyone who has claimed to make it work drops off the face of the earth, and the rest are trying all kinds of ways to recreate some of the hard to get and rare components needed to make one.
Stanley Myers figured out how to power a car on water. Then died from some odd kidney or something problem after the oil co's stole the patent. Once again you can't buy his device but you can make one. I worked with a guy who claimed to have made one and gotten his F250 stake bed to some ridiculous mpg. He claimed the guts of it is computer controlled water cracker, but instead of a constant current (the downfall of any water cracking setup) it used a square wave pulse of electric energy at exactly the freequency that caused water molecules to hit their harmonic frequency, thus not causing you to put more energy in than you will get out.
Of course if this is true there is still one bad side, burning hydrogen in concentrated amounts eats metal (my dad worked on the space shuttle engines, they had to be gold plated inside as gold is not very reactive) so your engine would be eating it self from the inside out. The meyers set up will only work with non-fuel injected engines as the electronics won't allow the mixture to work correctly with the extra hydrogen.
the Stanley Myers tech is not the "brown gas" hydrogen generating stuff, another odd mileage booster, that relies on a chemical reaction to give off hydrogen.
Good luck with any and all of it, even if the oil/car/energy companies are sitting on it, I don't think they would be able to make it work as well as is claimed.

Please. Gus

[LDK]

It's alive again!!

[GuitarPhotog]

These are not Perpetual motion machines. They are constantly having energy fed into them from the permament magnets. So they are not breaking any physical laws. That being said. I would be curious as to the amount of energy you could get out of the device. The fact that they speed up means more power is going in then is being used by friction. But is that power usable? That is the question.

Obviously stronger magnets and a larger drum would produce more torque. It will be interesting to see if anyone can build a practical motor using this technique.

Sorry, magnetism doesn't work like that, it isn't a usable source of energy like potential energy (elevation), it doesn't get transformed. For example, transforming magnetic energy into electricity requires the input of mechanical energy to move the magnet, or the wire. But more energy goes in than comes out.

These "free energy" motors with magnets, swinging weights, chains of buckets of water, etc. have been around since the middle ages. And why is it that none have ever succeeded? Physics, that's why. Those pesky laws of thermodynamics, you can't get more out of anything than you put in, so you can never overcome frictional and gravitational losses. And in fact, you can't even get as much out as you put in, so it always runs down. Like the universe... it's running down.

As for keeping an open mind, go ahead and believe anything you want, but don't preach your beliefs here, and don't expect to get rich off any of these schemes, because that's just what they are, schemes.

CP Snow stated the laws of thermodynamics in a nice clear way
1. you can't win
2. you can't break even
3. you can't quit the game

In a link to a previous post, scientists have shown that you can actually break even, on very small scales, for very short periods of time. But that's a long, long way from getting more out than you put into a real mechanical system.

<Chas>

[LDK]

These are not Perpetual motion machines. They are constantly having energy fed into them from the permament magnets. So they are not breaking any physical laws. That being said. I would be curious as to the amount of energy you could get out of the device. The fact that they speed up means more power is going in then is being used by friction. But is that power usable? That is the question.

Obviously stronger magnets and a larger drum would produce more torque. It will be interesting to see if anyone can build a practical motor using this technique.

Sorry, magnetism doesn't work like that, it isn't a usable source of energy like potential energy (elevation), it doesn't get transformed. For example, transforming magnetic energy into electricity requires the input of mechanical energy to move the magnet, or the wire. But more energy goes in than comes out.

These "free energy" motors with magnets, swinging weights, chains of buckets of water, etc. have been around since the middle ages. And why is it that none have ever succeeded? Physics, that's why. Those pesky laws of thermodynamics, you can't get more out of anything than you put in, so you can never overcome frictional and gravitational losses. And in fact, you can't even get as much out as you put in, so it always runs down. Like the universe... it's running down.

As for keeping an open mind, go ahead and believe anything you want, but don't preach your beliefs here, and don't expect to get rich off any of these schemes, because that's just what they are, schemes.

CP Snow stated the laws of thermodynamics in a nice clear way
1. you can't win
2. you can't break even
3. you can't quit the game

In a link to a previous post, scientists have shown that you can actually break even, on very small scales, for very short periods of time. But that's a long, long way from getting more out than you put into a real mechanical system.

<Chas>

(As for keeping an open mind, go ahead and believe anything you want, but don't preach your beliefs here)

Hey Chas

Why don't you just calm down man!!
I had no idea people would go off the deep end on this subject.
Moderators, please delete this thread. I'm so sorry I ever started it!!!!!!!

[jstrubberg]

There aren't any perpetual motion machines.

There aren't any conspiracies to keep a 300 mpg car off the roads.

There is some cool science out there, but if it looks like a quack and smells like a quack, it ain't a rhinoceros.

[Forrest747]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy0UBpagsu8

[GuitarPhotog]

(As for keeping an open mind, go ahead and believe anything you want, but don't preach your beliefs here)

Hey Chas

Why don't you just calm down man!!
I had no idea people would go off the deep end on this subject.
Moderators, please delete this thread. I'm so sorry I ever started it!!!!!!!

I would come down on you the same way if you came here and started preaching religion, any religion. This is a teardrop forum, not an alternative energy forum, nor an educational one where you might come to get an education.

If you "had no idea" why did you post an obviously controversial subject, just to see sparks? That's called trolling on the 'net, and it's not looked on positively.

<Chas>

[madjack]

...enough of this one...at the request of the original poster(and others), this thread is being locked...unless you have proof positive, proof which has been peer reviewed and verified, we have no need to revisit said subject............
madjack