Forever running magnet motor?

Hey, I'm no Edison worshipper either.

I'd accept as plausible that Edison may have been able to fabricate outlandish claims that seem to have originated from Tesla in order to discredit him (or his memory), but if it really was Tesla claiming the things he appears to have done then he was somewhere between wrong and flat-out nuts at some stages of his life.

I don't even care is Tesla ripped off other people's ideas or inventions. If he developed them from impractical theories or prototypes into commercially viable products then he was a damn good engineer. However, credit where it is due and no more. If one man working out of a hotel room claims to have created a complete theory of gravity and a death ray and >80 years later the world's best minds have neither find any evidence of his having done so, nor managed to produce an equivalent, despite monstrous advantages in technology, resources and knowledge, then it becomes incredible unlikely the original claim was true. Just look at Fermat's Final Theorem. We just arbitrarily decide that at some point something is unlikely enough to be considered impossible.

izeman said:

Punx0r said:

Never bother to examine the details of anyone's information if they are presenting such a device as they are fundamentally impossible (violating the most basic laws of physics) and can safely be dismissed out of hand as a scam or a dream.

Click to expand...

you are not right. who knows maybe it's magic unicorn horn dust??? or some tinker bell poo that makes it turn? you shouldn't call something nonsense before you considered all solutions!!

Click to expand...

Maybe it's based on the same science as this? Naaaaaaaaaaaaaah. Can't possibly be true. NOT in a million years. http://www.magniclight.com/MagnicLight/index.php/en/
http://campyonlyguy.blogspot.com/2013/12/magnic-light-review.html

No, because if that light is not battery powered (or some other storage source), then it is still taking power from the wheel, even if it isn't much, to operate.

If you were to turn the bike upside down and spin the wheel, it'd spin down faster than normal as teh light takes momentum from the wheel and converts it to electrical power.


The motor under discussion in this thread supposedly would run forever, presumably also while doing work, without external energy input, and that isn't anything like what the light does.

amberwolf said:

No, because if that light is not battery powered (or some other storage source), then it is still taking power from the wheel, even if it isn't much, to operate.

If you were to turn the bike upside down and spin the wheel, it'd spin down faster than normal as teh light takes momentum from the wheel and converts it to electrical power.


The motor under discussion in this thread supposedly would run forever, presumably also while doing work, without external energy input, and that isn't anything like what the light does.

Click to expand...

Uh, Magnic Light uses eddy currents, to power the light. Magnetic motors work on the same principle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ23gmS3KHY

The magnetic motor actually uses a small electrical source to get the magnets to rotate past the coils. The inventor, Yildiz, has not master a suitable controller. That is why the high speed rotation won't stop and not useful.

There are actually several US and international patents on the controller. Of course, there are other replication attempts. http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Replications_of_the_Perendev_Magnet_Motor

In one of the other u-tubes, Yildiz went into a closet to reboot the motor. He re-spaced the magnets relative to the coils.

My ears enter in deep pain whenever i hear infinite energy, but lets skip that part. Basing my thoughts in THE VIDEO ONLY, by video only i mean the footage itself, i have several reasons to belive its a scam: 1)poor footage, such a big found as "infinte energy" would attract lots midia, resulting in good footage. 2) Absolutely no iterviews, which kind of professor/inventor would let his research be spread without his face/speech on it? 3) Doesn't seem like a university, for me it seems like its just a exposition where companies can show off whatever they want to.

Now lets talk a little bit about the physics involved. Average Joe thinks that if a magnet produces a certain force, its producing energy, but a force without any displacement is nothing more than a force, no work is produced, no energy is produced. So a magnet can't produce energy by itself. There are lots of physical issues concerning "infinite energy".

I've seen some solid aplications of magnets to produce nearby friction-free "bearings" to be used in generators, such as wind turbines. That is a good appliance. Unless i can do it myself, i'm not beliving in infinite energy.

mateusleo said:

My ears enter in deep pain whenever i hear infinite energy, but lets skip that part. Basing my thoughts in THE VIDEO ONLY, by video only i mean the footage itself, i have several reasons to belive its a scam: 1)poor footage, such a big found as "infinte energy" would attract lots midia, resulting in good footage. 2) Absolutely no iterviews, which kind of professor/inventor would let his research be spread without his face/speech on it? 3) Doesn't seem like a university, for me it seems like its just a exposition where companies can show off whatever they want to.

Now lets talk a little bit about the physics involved. Average Joe thinks that if a magnet produces a certain force, its producing energy, but a force without any displacement is nothing more than a force, no work is produced, no energy is produced. So a magnet can't produce energy by itself. There are lots of physical issues concerning "infinite energy".

I've seen some solid aplications of magnets to produce nearby friction-free "bearings" to be used in generators, such as wind turbines. That is a good appliance. Unless i can do it myself, i'm not beliving in infinite energy.

Click to expand...

It only looks like "infinite" energy, because of the manner in which the current through the coils interact with the magnets. Your ears will feel much better, if you divorce the resultant "perpetual" mechanical motion from the coil/magnet interaction.

I've actually seen the motor work, in person. The controller is the real challenge.

Please read a book on introductory physics

Punx0r said:

Please read a book on introductory physics

Click to expand...

Yes. They all seem to be promulgating a common disconnect between mechanical work and magnetic work.

This

BikeSoupUSA said:

Uh, Magnic Light uses eddy currents, to power the light. Magnetic motors work on the same principle.

Click to expand...

And the eddy currents are caused by *motion of the wheel*, which is powered by forward motion of the bike. Thus, the lights are powered via whatever is used to push the bike forward, be that gravity (downhills), pedals, motor, tailwind, etc.

If the lights don't make much drag it just means they dont' consume very much power, and are likely very efficient, but they still use power from an external source, unless they have their own battery or other power generator inside them, which itself would be owered from some original source that has to be externally replenished.

The magnetic motor actually uses a small electrical source to get the magnets to rotate past the coils.

Click to expand...

And thus it cannot be "forever running", without an external power source. Most especially, it can't ever do any work, and this isn't a useful "motor", without an external power source that provides a bit more power than is actually needed to do the work itself (because of inefficiencies in the conversion process, friction, etc).

It's the same with all of these devices--they are just like everything in the universe: they require some external power source to get them to do something, and continual input to keep them doing something. Without power input they stop doing something (even if they are really low friction and take a long time to run down).




Something to note is that anytime anyone claims some sort of perpetual-motion device, they either cannot or will not demonstrate it in a way that can be completely and totally verified by any unbiased outside source that wishes to do so. Videos are almost always either too blurry to see what's going on, or don't show the whole setup, are not continuous (edits/cuts), actively hide things (going into closets/other rooms to actually hide things or actions), etc. Public demonstrations get cancelled due to "technical difficulties", etc. This generally indicates deliberate fraud, or cover-up of known failure to make it work due to lack of knowledge of what's going on.

But really it's because there is no way to make something like that work without an external power source of some kind that provides more energy in than you can take out.

I've long since lost count of all these people and inventions trying to do this--many of them begin by genuinely thinking they've got something new, and either fading away when they realize their mistake(s), or continuing to promote it for whatever reason, and covering up their mistakes deliberately by hiding them or actively falsifying the results and refusing to let anyone that wishes to to come in and examine the equipment, instrument everything, and test it themselves to see what's going on. And/or they refuse to publish their results in extreme detail so that anyone that wishes to can duplicate the equipment and results.

So I no longer believe any of the claims, videos, etc., until the equipment and results are duplicated worldwide (which is pretty unlikely unless the fundamental way the universe works changes).

So I no longer believe any of the claims, videos, etc., until the equipment and results are duplicated worldwide (which is pretty unlikely unless the fundamental way the universe works changes).

Click to expand...

Perhaps a Magnetic Motor Build ES thread might satisfy you?

BikeSoupUSA said:

So I no longer believe any of the claims, videos, etc., until the equipment and results are duplicated worldwide (which is pretty unlikely unless the fundamental way the universe works changes).

Click to expand...

Perhaps a Magnetic Motor Build ES thread might satisfy you?

Click to expand...

If anyone makes a permanent magnet motor work in a way that shows over-unity, I will personally give them deathbike, my 2014 SR, and the DP1e Palatov as tiny tokens of my appreciation in honor of the greatest achievement in human history.

If anyone makes a permanent magnet motor work in a way that shows over-unity, I will personally give them deathbike, my 2014 SR, and the DP1e Palatov as tiny tokens of my appreciation in honor of the greatest achievement in human history.

Click to expand...

If a magnetic motor could be build, would your deathbike, SR, and Palatov have any value?

BikeSoupUSA said:

If anyone makes a permanent magnet motor work in a way that shows over-unity, I will personally give them deathbike, my 2014 SR, and the DP1e Palatov as tiny tokens of my appreciation in honor of the greatest achievement in human history.

Click to expand...

If a magnetic motor could be build, would your deathbike, SR, and Palatov have any value?

Click to expand...

Unless it's got the capability for high power output, I would assume it's roll would be more in the form of a onboard charger keeping a battery pack topped off.

Before you spend much efforts worrying about working EV's though, consider saving the effort to apply towards solving how to cheat thermodynamics.

Permanent magnet can be confusing because it kinda looks like they can do work by lifting a lump of iron, or repelling each other (which in space could leave them shooting apart and travelling a great distance). There's plenty of debate on the subject on physics forums, but the conclusion is that they cannot do work. Part of the issue is how most of us define "work" as force x distance, but from doing a little reading this isn't always true.

The way water swirls down a drain could be an energy input to sustain a magnet motor. Perhaps you would need to levitate something using permanent magnets to form a truly fluid bearing. Or suspend magnetic particles in a fluid and try to get that to swirl. The moon has been pulling the tides around for ages, so that could also be an energy source to tap. Just to win the prize like. It would never power anything.


I shall mount an expedition to the pole and set up a 'hook-a-duck' stall to investigate if anyone wants to fund me lol

Jan Christian said:

There are many things through time which is considered impossible but today is normal. For example the cold fusion devise from Rossi. Almost everybody thought it was a scam but now it may turn out to be real: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/191754-cold-fusion-reactor-verified-by-third-party-researchers-seems-to-have-1-million-times-the-energy-density-of-gasoline

Click to expand...

...and it may not !
Those " independent 3rd party" Reviewers were the same supporters who have been promoting Rossi's ideas for years.!
Rossi is a bad example to site in any new energy debate.

I think it's a bad example to cite in any argument except one titled "fraud or delusional fool?"

The burden of proof always lies with the person making the claim and the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence must be to justify it.

The exact opposite is the case with those making wild claims of perpetual motion/over unity/cold fusion. They provide no evidence at all, allow no inspection, test, verification or replication and expect the world to take them on their world. Very much like a con artist or cult leader.

Firstly the terms like 'free energy' 'perpetual motion' have been coined so as to help dissuade and debunk any clue to the true nature of things and the pursuit thereof.
It's such a ridiculous label no wonder people like to stay close-minded.

But for those that use these excuses or quote our 'laws' of thermodynamics and such, let me remind you that we don't know shit.
We have no idea what makes up 90+% of all matter, what keeps your hand from going thru your coffee cup.
They still haven't figured out the correlation between microcausm and macrocausm.
To claim our very limited understanding of these things is unrefuteable or unimprovable is idiocy.

There's a quote out there like 'magic and witchcraft is just science that is not understood yet'

And besides, people that are interested in these things would be happy with just improvements, not eternal energy. It's such an uphill battle though when not only the general public are blind sheep, but the shepards- and the gatekeepers- do not desire these improvements unless they fit into the system of control.

One day I hope we all get to see truly 'free' energy- a perfect eternity is what that would be.
Until then let's be constructive and not close-minded as others dare to dream, which will without a doubt at least lead to slow improvements in the potential for quality of life thru tech, (with the balanced opportunity of increased destruction of course- because we are not perfect, nor is the world) as we've been seeing all along.

I love the idea of simplifying the art of manipulation of nature into cleaner and greener. Magnets, gravity, solar, all are virtually untapped still- mark my words.

My layman's arguement for "close to 'free' energy": There is unlimited potential for improvement- look at the energy a few atoms can give off for atomic power (not condoning it, it's unnecessarily dangerous)- Although not free, how can one argue improvement is not possible in light of that?

Also this is dumb, but I've never heard a logical answer: With fukishima style reactors, the weak point has been shown that loss of power (mainline, batteries, and generators failed) is catastrophic.

Why would the loss of power at a POWERPLANT be a problem?
Why can't the damn reactor use some of it's own power to maintain cooling until mainline is back up for a safe shutdown? Seems ridiculous, but I havn't found a valid answer.

Etrike, I think my post from 13th December answers all your points.

As someone recently stated in another thread: magnets exert a force, they are not a source of energy.

Also, cold fusion isn't in the mainstream! It's not anywhere, if it is even possible!

Punx0r was right on with his statement.
The default stance is the rejection of the claim until provided supporting proof and peer replication.

Apologies, I meant 16th Dec.

The MIT link appears to be a series of lectures on the subject of cold fusion. I have no problem with the idea of a lecturer reviewing the research that has been done and examining the theoretical side of it and speculating on what might be possible in the future. Lot of things are researched on the chance they might come good and it'd be a good teaching exercise regardless. I'm not saying cold fusion is impossible (I don't know enough about the physics behind it to even speculate). Nailing down hot fusion might be a good idea first

Mainstream
the ideas, attitudes, or activities that are regarded as normal or conventional; the dominant trend in opinion, fashion, or the arts.
---
How is cold fusion mainstream? And why does mainstream = correct to you?
The idea might be mainstream science fiction, but successful cold fusion is still hypothetical.

From the description of the lecture(s) it seems they're examining the various claims and looking at the theory behind the whole subject. I would say that means there's at least one professor at MIT who thinks the subject is worth looking at. I have no problem at all with that but I wouldn't take it is confirmation that cold fusion is legit, today. I remember attending a "fun" physics lecture at school based on the science seen in Star Trek

Something that jumped straight out of the Wired article was:

[/signed a licence agreement with an un-named South Korean company after a year of due diligence. The deal, described as being worth 'millions of dollars' in Pure Energy Systems News, licenses the Koreans to manufacture cold fusion units, with production and installation in 2014.

The plan is to use reactors powered by Brillouin's cold fusion technology to replace existing boilers in a conventional power station.
quote]

Well, 2014 has passed, so where are the results from these commercial cold fusion reactors? It's all hard to believe. Replacing the boiler in a commercial power station with another conventional boiler would almost certainly be a project that required more than a year to plan, implement and fine-tune.

There has been an established "scientific method" for research for a very long time. You do your properly designed experiments, get your results and publish them in peer-reviewed journals. Other scientists pick over your work looking for mistakes, then they reproduce them. If different experimenters keep getting the same result then there's a good chance the original claims are correct. When you don't see that process being followed you have to ask why. The answer is invariably that someone has something to hide. The best case scenario is unethical researchers bowing to commercial interests, otherwise the only answer is incompetence or deceit.

Click to expand...