froot
Hazard to Others
Posts: 347
Registered: 23-10-2003
Location: South Africa
Member Is Offline
Mood: refluxed
|
|
Self perpetuating magnetic motors, free energy?
Browsing around Youtube there are plenty vids of various magnetic motors that seem to contradict accepted laws of physics. Yes there are plenty hoaxes
but there is the odd video that has my full attention. Look around for yourself if you get a gap.
| Quote: | THIS VIDEO IS AMAZING
Achieving acceleration from just magnets interacting, as appears to be the case here, is truly remarkable. It certainly isn't ready for market; not
close; but it is proof of concept that magnets can provide motive force. That is groundbreaking. |
I thought about this many years ago while I was still in school, I even had drawn up schematics on my idea but ended up chucking the whole thing
because it was imprinted in my mind by others that there is no way that you'll get energy out of a system if you don't put energy in. I am still
sceptical about the 'free energy' concept but I cannot ignore all the interest in it and don't want to be left behind in ignorance.
I don't want this to become a debate about oil companies trying to squash whatever threatens them, all I'm trying to find out is weather these guys
are onto something and weather it is worth exploring. Anyone else here tried to build one of these things?
We salute the improvement of the human genome by honoring those who remove themselves from it.
Of necessity, this honor is generally bestowed posthumously. - www.darwinawards.com |
|
|
not_important
International Hazard
Posts: 3873
Registered: 21-7-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_wheel
The problem with free energy or over unity devices is that they violate the laws of conservation, laws that have part of the foundation of chemistry
and physics for the last two and a half centuries. Either those laws need to be modified, and they've not shown weaknesses, or such devices run on
explicit frauds or self-delusion.
So far it's been the latter, or the a critical examination of the device was not allowed. Some such devices claim to be tapping a new source of
energy, or an old source in a different fashion. If true this would not necessarily be violating know laws, but the claimed effects seem doubtful in
many cases given the simplicity of the devices. That an assemblage of weights, cogs, levers, magnets, and so on, could tap the energy of the vacuum or
convert mass to energy in a controlled fashion seems doubtful, requiring strong proof to be accepted. Strong proof would include allowing
investigators to build an example from plans and instructions, removing the possibilty of hidden sources of power.
For a related example of self delusion see the Dean Drive.
|
|
|
microcosmicus
Hazard to Others
Posts: 287
Registered: 31-12-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: spin up
|
|
Zero-point energy devices are based on just as unsound principles as the other
free energy devices --- they run counter to quantum mechanics, in particular
violate the uncertainty principle. The premise there is that since the ground
state energy of a particle in a potential well is higher than the minimum of the
well, one can extract this energy to run one's motor. Well, that is hogwash ---
you can't have a transition from the ground state to any lower state because
the ground state is the lowest state! Put another way, if you tried to localize
a particle right at the minimum point of the potential, by the uncertainty
principle, it would have to have momentum, hence kinetic energy. You might
allow the particle to have some spread in position to keep down the
kinetic energy. You could even be clever and optimize the amount of
spread so as to have the minimum total (potential plus kinetic) energy
with the result that --- lo and behold --- you would have derived the good
old ground state of your potential well!
|
|
|
bfesser
Resident Wikipedian
Posts: 2114
Registered: 29-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Evidence of energy <strong>loss</strong>:
- making noise
- it's moving in an atmosphere
- it has bearings of some sort
Evidence of energy <strong>gain</strong>:
- ???
Inconclusive:
-guy says it's free energy
-it spins
-admittedly poor lighting (he's hiding something? to be fair, let's say inconclusive)
[Edited on 2/7/08 by bfesser]
|
|
|
12AX7
Post Harlot
Posts: 4803
Registered: 8-3-2005
Location: oscillating
Member Is Offline
Mood: informative
|
|
I would guess he has electromagnets anywhere in the apparatus -- including under the table if necessary. I notice the right side isn't very well
visible at any point in the video.
An alternating, non-rotating field, not phase locked to the rotor, will not start the rotor spinning, but will accelerate it if the rotor is moving.
Depending, it may lock easily (a single-phase induction motor with the start winding disconnected can be hand-started in either direction, given some
angular velocity, a small push usually being enough to get it going), or it may be more fickle, requiring a rather tight phase lock to start (many
"brushless DC" motors, operated open loop, are typical of this). The latter seems to be the case here.
Tim
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
Free energy just defies all common sense to me. First of all, the amount of energy that could possibly be tapped from just a few kg of mass is enough
for free energy to not even be neccesary. Second, if one could produce energy from nothing then, in theory, one could produce an unlimited amount of
mass. Then to take it a step further, anything that can be created from mass or energy could also be created in infinite amounts (eg stars, planets,
black holes, galaxies, wormholes, possibly even new universes). It just makes no sense and it seems to me that this could possibly be detrimental.
If mass could be created from nothing, technically one could fill the entire universe with mass. Yes, that sounds wierd, I know.
I don't know, maybe I'm thinking too much into this but it just seems like total bullshit to me. I just think it's funny that all of these supposed
"free energy" machines have been created but none of which can be reproduced and none of them have served mankind in any way. I will believe it when
I see proof. That's the bottom line.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
chemrox
International Hazard
Posts: 2961
Registered: 18-1-2007
Location: UTM
Member Is Offline
Mood: LaGrangian
|
|
There's a kind of techno-enthusiast that are not scientists and don't know any science. My tax guy is one of these and he's stopped bringing me the
stupid shit he buys into. This one is right up his alley. It's like the Second Law is for conformists; it's optional for the truly daring. Same
with Quantum Mechanics and Stat mechanics. "Wetter water" cures aids, etc, etc. If you're unscupulous enough you can take these guys to the
cleaners. I can't and besides I don't have the time for that kind of crap. Free energy or nearly free energy is achievable-I'm convinced. It's
still out of reach because we have so much invested in the fossil fuel economy. I think very soon an efficient way to exploit solar will be found and
that's about as free as it gets.
"When you let the dumbasses vote you end up with populism followed by autocracy and getting back is a bitch." Plato (sort of)
|
|
|
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
Posts: 1554
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Suspicious
|
|
I'd have to say extracting energy directly from mass would be the the closest to free energy. I mean, it might as well be "free" because there is so
much available. Once we figure out a way to make energy from say, hydrogen, even a small net gain would be profitable. Once we can induce fusion
with less energy than it creates and control it, there's all the energy we would need for the forseeable future, IMO.
Near free energy. That's the key word. Free energy is impossible, near free is not.
Free energy sounds like something an omnipotent god would possess.
"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any
question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and
that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think,
free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
|
|
|
bfesser
Resident Wikipedian
Posts: 2114
Registered: 29-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by chemrox
Free energy or nearly free energy is achievable-I'm convinced. It's still out of reach because we have so much invested in the fossil fuel economy.
I think very soon an efficient way to exploit solar will be found and that's about as free as it gets. |
Don't forget about geothermal. I think geothermal is immediately more promising. The technologies already exist, and we don't have to wait around
for the perfection of 'artificial photosynthesis'. And I hate to say that, as a chem major... feels like heresy.
[Edited on 2/8/08 by bfesser]
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Back in the 80s I knew a guy who thought he could talk a good game about an anti-gravity device, as propulsion for a flying saucer, he was also a UFO
nut. He knew just enough buzzwords from freshman physics to sound halfway convincing to gullible slogheads who he smoked weed with and who had never
taken freshman physics. He wanted to propel ball bearings around in a tube with rectangular shape and radiused corners, arguilg that the vectors
would, if the bearings were heavy enough and moved fast enough, cancel out gravity. Go figure.
Today in Bangkok there is an elderly American known to me and to SSgtHazMat, who also thinks he has an antigrav device, and who is always nagging his
friends for investments so he can continue building it. I do not know his "desig" theory and don't want to. His obsession appears symptomatic of
serious brain cell destruction brought on by chronic alcoholism and an overdose of pussy hair in his diet.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
bio2
Hazard to Others
Posts: 447
Registered: 15-1-2005
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
......Don't forget about geothermal. I think geothermal is immediately more promising. .........
Back in the late 70's and early 80's several geothermal test wells were drilled into MaunaKea volcano on the island of Hawaii. Many millions were
spent and high pressure steam was available at reasonable depths. Near the summit of MaunaKea steam vents at the surface in many places.
Anyway, there was a big dispute amongst the locals and
the companies trying to permit some commercial size
wells.
A "volcanologist" came out against the development citing
the "depletion" of the natural resource as being a bad
thing although it seems most would consider this as good
given the periodic mini eruptions with subsequent loss
of property.
The local Hawaiians opposed the idea saying that their
volcano god "Pele" would be angered and after a few more years the whole idea was more or less abandoned and
the test wells were capped.
Makes one wonder what the real reason/agenda was, "closed ignorant minds" or the fact that the local utility is diesel powered combustion turbines
that deliver some of the most expensive power on the planet. Needless to say the utility, which is privately owned, also made some of the highest
profits on the planet given their "markup" allowed by the PUC.
Sure seemed like a great idea at the time yet was buried
by the system in control.
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Fortunately there are lots of other volcanos in the world.
Nor is geothermal energy limited to locations "blessed" with vulcanism, it is merely more accessible there.
Anyway this is rather OT as geothermal is not free energy in the sense of this thread. Geological forces, as far as I know, do obey the laws of
physics and chemistry.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
DerAlte
National Hazard
Posts: 779
Registered: 14-5-2007
Location: Erehwon
Member Is Offline
Mood: Disgusted
|
|
Self perpetuating magnetic motors, free energy? The only thing that is self perpetuating in this world is endless credulity. This post can only appeal
to members of this forum who believe in Madness and not Science.
As pointed out above, by not_important and Microcosmicos, the conservation of energy and Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle guarantee it. Let me
paraphrase:
Conservation of energy: There is no free lunch.
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle: Just when you thought you were going to eat your free lunch, it was whisked away.
Or, you believed all those incredible credit card offers and took 17 of them. You felt rich for a while as you spent all that dough and amazed your
neighbors, the Jones. Then the bill collector came…
Forget it. Cold fusion, and all other myths like that. The only ‘free’ energy is that generously donated by the Sun, but the Sun is footing the
bills at the cost of its own mass and increasing its entropy.. Solar energy includes wind power, tidal power and hydro. Geothermal, fossil and nuclear
energy are all donated by mother earth.
The case of biofuels is interesting – the energy source is again solar... A report from Princeton, mentioned in the news today, pointed out that
‘global warming’, or rather a net increase in ‘greenhouse gases’, would actually result from large scale development of growing crops for
this purpose. Not as ‘green’ as the Greens thought! However, the real motivation for such projects is not to please the Greens but rid ourselves
of the tyranny of 3rd world oil producing nations.
Der Alte
|
|
|
JohnWW
International Hazard
Posts: 2849
Registered: 27-7-2004
Location: New Zealand
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Sauron
Fortunately there are lots of other volcanos in the world.
Nor is geothermal energy limited to locations "blessed" with vulcanism, it is merely more accessible there.
Anyway this is rather OT as geothermal is not free energy in the sense of this thread. Geological forces, as far as I know, do obey the laws of
physics and chemistry. |
Geothermal energy contributes a substantial amount of New Zealand's electricity generation, with bores being drilled, and water injected to be heated
and drive steam turbines, in the volcanic lakes district in the central North Island. This area, noted for its active volcanos, geysers, volcanic mud
pools, etc. is supposed to have the thinnest crust of any area of continental-type rocks in the world. Indonesia and Iceland are other countries in
which geothermal energy makes a substantial contribution to electricity generation.
That being the case, I cannot understand why it is not tapped in all islands of Hawaii that have active vulcanism, or at least hot rocks that are at
easy drilling depths, especially the Big Island which is most active. Besides, because of its high rainfall and steep elevation, the mountains
exceeding 14,000 feet or 4,200 meters, there should also be ample potential on the Big Island for hydroelectric power generation from dams or
fast-flowing rivers.
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
In Thailand, "popular grassroots" opposition to hydroelectric projects is actually organized and funded by French and US companies hoping to sell LWRs
(nuclear light water reactors) to Thailand for power generation. Thailand's power plants presently are coal and oil fired. Thailand also imports a lot
of cheap electricity from Laos which has rich hydroelectric generation capacity way beyond its internal needs. The price of electricity in Thailand is
4X that in Laos. And no, it wasn't the stooges of the Vietnamese who built the Laotian hydroelectric system.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
microcosmicus
Hazard to Others
Posts: 287
Registered: 31-12-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: spin up
|
|
While there may be only one geothermal plant in Hawaii, the situation in the continental
U.S. is much better --- there are a lot of geothermal plants in the West. the most being
in California. According to the Department of Energy, the U.S. produces more geothermal
power than any other country but, unfortunately, the geothermally produced electricity
is a drop in the bucket compared to total energy usage (Americans are notoriously
power-hungry):
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/
https://cfwebprod.sandia.gov/cfdocs/GPI/
http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/renewable/ge...
http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/re_geothermal.htm
Also note that according there are 58 new geothermal plants being built, so it
seems that more use will be made of geothermal energy in the U.S. in the future.
As long as this discussion has taken a turn from the better from flaky schemes to more
scientifically sound energy sources, let me throw out my pet alternative energy idea
(but quitte likely flaky in some other way) --- a chain of
windmills and tidemills in the Carribean and Gulf of Mexico. As anyone who has listened to
weather reports in North America knows, that is quite a windy place in autumn! As a
measure of the energy scales involved, a hurricane produces power on the order of a
terawatt. To be sure, I am not proposing trying to use a windmill in a hurricane, rather
extract energy from the strong winds which are not yet hurricanes. Given that these storms
follow a certain course, one could pick a spot where there are strong winds and
the tropical storms are just forming or in their early stages. Thinking more Quixotically,
maybe with enough windmills, one might be able to extract enough energy from the
winds so they form weaker hurricanes.
[Edited on 9-2-2008 by microcosmicus]
|
|
|
PHILOU Zrealone
International Hazard
Posts: 2893
Registered: 20-5-2002
Location: Brussel
Member Is Offline
Mood: Bis-diazo-dinitro-hydroquinonic
|
|
Free energy is what is states, you have an open energy source and you use it freely...Sun, wind, light, exhaust heat, ground for electricity, sea
moves, magma heat, ...
Following the Systemic (science of all systems):
The source is not/never in contradiction with any law of physic or chemistry. The only problem is where you put the limits of the system...I can watch
at an electric supplied motor and say hey it is a selfsustaining perpetual motion system...especially if I don't take in account the external source
of electricity via the wire and the electric fabric, the heat losses in the wires, ...If I take all the system in account (the universe) no single law
is corrupted and you see that the energy you use is simply a tiny quantity of what is involve to produce it...most of the energy is lost before you
get it. Free energy is simply garbage energy used and recollected intelligently!
PH Z (PHILOU Zrealone)
"Physic is all what never works; Chemistry is all what stinks and explodes!"-"Life that deadly disease, sexually transmitted."(W.Allen)
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
