Perpetual Motion Machine? Discussion. Plans + theory.

[weEvil]

Here is the general design of the Perpetual Motion Machine I found:

This actually looks like it makes some sense. Look at the drawing. Notice how the wheel magnets always spin and attract the bar magnets? Its like linear magnetic acceleration.

While I don't believe in Perpetual Motion since I have had alot of schooling, this makes me less skeptical because:

1. The inventor lays out the plan. There is no motive, no con-artist wanting funding or money... etc.

2. It makes some logical sense to me. This design at least.

Please tell me why this design is flawed if you can find reasons for thinking so. I'm going to read the info on the site and see if there is anything that can disprove the perpetuality of this design.

BTW, this was designed by a dude called overconfident. Credit goes to: http://www.steorn.com/forum/comments.php?D...9687&page=1

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

just saw this on engadget

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/05/perpetu...n-machine-isnt/

[phkninja]

one flaw inthe above is the circular magnets at the top of the device. If set up correctly the magnets should act like in the diagram and only go one way, but in reality they will go both directions, clockwise at one time and counter-clockwise another because they will react with the magnets on the spinning disk and force themselves to spin.

Another problem is that you must firstly cause the enter disk to spin by pushing it, otherwise the magbets will allreact aainst each other and keep the device stationary. All forces cause in the magnetic fields will cause the top magnets to move and the disk to move. But because their is no direction forced at the beginning (unless acted upon from an external source) half the magnets will move one way, half the other and will cancel all circular momentum.)

If im wrong in this them tell me, but as far as im aware this is the case. The problem seen so far with all designs of "perpetual motion machines" has been, the energy put in to startthe reaction usually is greater than the energy given out. In this case the magnets must exert a fource greater than the frictional forces on the wheel to allow it to turn, then you must ensure the top magnets can only revolve inone direction (which still wont stop the magnets from revolving asyncronously and stopping the turning motion)

[Idontwantspam]

Well, I haven't had time to think about it too much, but it seems to me the force of the magnets would just cause the wheel to stop in one place.

Also, a perpetual motion machine is theoretically impossible unless you can completely and entirely eliminate all friction, otherwise some of the energy will eventually be lost to the friction and the machine will stop, as energy cannot be created nor destroyed, thus there would be no way for the energy sapped by friction to be replaced.

[ricktendo]

Didn't the Mythbusters bust this one?

[PC_LOAD_LETTER]

Didn't the Mythbusters bust this one?

nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MythBusters_episodes

[weEvil]

one flaw inthe above is the circular magnets at the top of the device. If set up correctly the magnets should act like in the diagram and only go one way, but in reality they will go both directions, clockwise at one time and counter-clockwise another because they will react with the magnets on the spinning disk and force themselves to spin.

What if you fix the spinning magnets against the main wheel?

So the small magnets are small gears, and the wheel is one big gear. This would prevent that. But it would have a huge increase in friction.

[DigeratiPrime]

while it is seemingly possible to make a machine that will output more energy than was input it will in fact be stealing energy from either the environment or some component of the machine. in this example the machine requires input energy and then acts like a fly wheel accelerated by magnets, the problem is the magnets are inputting a limited amount of energy and will eventually need to be replaced.

[weEvil]

while it is seemingly possible to make a machine that will output more energy than was input it will in fact be stealing energy from either the environment or some component of the machine. in this example the machine requires input energy and then acts like a fly wheel accelerated by magnets, the problem is the magnets are inputting a limited amount of energy and will eventually need to be replaced.

Don't magnets naturally deteriorate anyway?

[Andromeda43]

There are several (two anyway) "perpetual motion" machines now running in museums in the US. One is in Chicago at the Museum of Science and industry and the other one is in Tampa.

Both 'machines' are of the pendulum type and seem to run forever without any input of energy. But the truth is that they draw their power from the earth itself (gravity) combined with the centrifugal force of the earth acting on the 'machines'.

The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but only converted from one form to another.

In all of our current "machines" such as cars or electric motors, the input power is greater than the output work, because of energy lost as heat from 'Friction'.

In order for the 'motor' in the diagram to even work, the magnets on the outer ring would have to be switched on and off to push the permanent magnets in a given direction. (an induction motor, like many used in our homes)

Leaving them on all the time, they would want to pull the bar magnets toward them and then hang on to them. There would be NO rotation.

I see nothing in that diagram to indicate a power gain.

Just a thought

B)

[ricktendo]

The mythbusters did! bust this.

[phkninja]

Andromeda- Although they are working without input now, using the very law you quote on conservation of energy, there had to be an original input of energy to cause the pendulum to swing. if you hang a pendulum it will stop dead on its axis, an external force must cause them to rotate before they can gain enogh energy to keep themselves going.

[DigeratiPrime]

Ah I remembered what I wanted to mention last time, for those interested check out the Casimir effect (particularly the reversal of) and vacuum energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/06/1212259

Basically a way has been discovered to potentially steal the zero point energy from the vacuum of the space time continuum.

[weEvil]

In order for the 'motor' in the diagram to even work, the magnets on the outer ring would have to be switched on and off to push the permanent magnets in a given direction. (an induction motor, like many used in our homes)

Leaving them on all the time, they would want to pull the bar magnets toward them and then hang on to them. There would be NO rotation.

That's why they are spinning and not in place.

Why I am asking about deterioration of the magnet is:

Let's say the machine does work as per the diagram. But instead of 'free' energy, its stealing power from the magnets.

So in reality you buy these super strong magnets from the factory which are produced with thousands of kilowatts of energy, you put it into the device and it gives out a few thousand kilowatts of energy. You think its free, but in reality its a different type of battery-like device. Ultimately, powered by coal (from the electricity generating plant)

Could this be possible?

Edited January 9, 2008 by brucevangeorge

[Zxian]

Friction, Friction, Friction. It's the problem with everything in the world, and the reason why perpetual motion machines are wonderful mental masturbation, but not much more. Ultimately, this all comes down to the second law of thermodynamics, which some lobbyists tried to remove from the education system a while back.