Can I hear your thoughts on Perpetual Motion?

Just to let everybody know that another dreamer as entered. perpetual motion machines have been on my mind since I was 23 years old and I am now 57. I feel that these machines are possible and within the next ten years I will see one of these machines working. I have a lot of idea's in my head and the more I study about them on the Internet the more idea's I have. Like the guy that posted about the battery less flashlight. I have been thinking on that line for over two month's. On another site a guy was talking about using buoys in a tank. My idea was the same but just a different way of doing it. I could go on and on with the different ways to design these machines to work. If we can post these idea's then maybe another can come along and add something to it in order to make it work.

Some times I ask myself a question. If I made a working perpetual machine that would run off it's on power and power other machines. Would I patent it. Would someone pay me to keep it a secret or else! or would I give it to the world so everybody could benefit from it. I hope if the time comes I will give it to the world so no one man, company or government will be able to control it.

I am 31 and thinking about them since i was 21, i thought i thought to much. guess it will never stop will it...

anyways, I think perpetual motion dosnt exsist by definition. BUT, you i think its possible to make something run for a very long time with out stopping, just not forever.

My thoughts on perpetual motion?

Perpetually disappointing...

I would like to know if any of you were around between 1968 to 1972 and read a article in Popular Mechanics . A Canadian inventor designed a engine that delivered around 300 HP. the engine run off the same gas over and over. I forget all the details but I think he said it worked something like air conditioning. It would compress highly expansible gas. The gas would be released in the chambers or (something of that nature) and push the cylinders or (something of that nature) down and then it would recirculate back through the compressor and go through the cycle again. I waited and waited to read a update to the article. there was never a followup. This is another idea that I will always wonder about. Did someone buy is invention and store it for a later date or just destroyed it or did he just get missing and no one ever heard of him again or what

a possibility is one ive been fooling around with recently
that its the oposing force of the magance driving it along

Had a couple of ideas,

one is similar to that magnet arrangement. I think (going on first post here only, so apologies if someone else has said this already) that it'll work best with the magnets arranged so that they are repelled one way then the other way.

So if there is a wheel then another wheel surrounding it, with magnets affixed to each wheel (in arrangements I haven't tested) so that one wheel is fixed and the other can rotate - the idea is that it keeps on going forever (however long the magnets last, which is ages) because it keeps being repelled in one direction, then the opposite direction, so one of the wheels is constantly rotating back and forth.

Another one is based on how a swing will keep going if you are on it and shift your weight accordingly. So if you ever sat on a swing at a park, when you are on outswing you have your legs straight out and on the backswing you fold them under by bending your knees. So basicly a copy of that using weights and hinges that shift back and forth.
So you would drop the arm (that is like the swing) and as it gets to the outswing limit it'd need to have a weight so attached that part of it hinges back for the backswing, and when that reaches its limit on the backswing then the weight would need to hinge back out straight as it returns to the outswing. I doubt that one'd be too practical for an actual power source but it could certainly be done, as the existing park swing example serves to illustrate. ie - it shows that such a thing as perpetual motion exists.


Also it (the magnet machines) reminds me of the Lutec ( a thread that mentioned it I just replied to in 'board business' forum ),

www.lutec.com.au...

impossible

energy is lost through any movement

unless you attempt to produce perpetual motion in a vacuum without gravity, solar wind, and all the other forces of the universe, it won't work.

kinetic energy
n.
The energy possessed by a body because of its motion, equal to one half the mass of the body times the square of its speed.

Science
kinetic energy (ki-net-ik)

The energy an object has because of its motion.


Medical
kinetic energy
n.
The energy possessed by a body because of its motion, equal to one half the mass of the body times the square of its speed.


Electronics
kinetic energy

Energy associated with motion.

And for the most part;

potential energy
n.
The energy of a particle or system of particles derived from position, or condition, rather than motion. A raised weight, coiled spring, or charged battery has potential energy.




potential energy
What you're searching for Find potential energy
www.Energy9275.com


Science
potential energy

The energy an object has because of its position, rather than its motion. An object held in a person's hand has potential energy, which turns to kinetic energy — the energy of motion — when the person lets it go, and it drops to the ground.


Medical
potential energy
n.
The energy that exists in a body as a result of its position or condition rather than of its motion.

Electronics
potential energy

Energy that has potential to do work because of its position relative to others.




WordNet
Note: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.
The noun potential energy has one meaning:

Meaning #1: the mechanical energy that a body has by virtue of its position; stored energy
Synonym: P.E.




[edit on 20-6-2006 by Allred5923]

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Allred5923]

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Allred5923]

Perpetual motion cannot exist in its litteral defenition. However, one could argue that vacuum energy holds plenty of potential.

Vacuum energy is a theorised energy that exists in the "total vacuum" of space. Think of it as a standard level of energy everywhere, and this level is not a zero. If you could tap into this form of energy, you might have a sort of perpetual motion machine going. However, though this vacuum energy is free, it will still be used up by the machine, which goes against the defenition of perpetual.

Still, it will seem like the machine keeps going on its own without aid, and that's good enough
Now the hard part is figuring out how to do it.

Originally posted by ProveIt
Perpetual motion cannot exist in its litteral defenition. However, one could argue that vacuum energy holds plenty of potential.

Vacuum energy is a theorised energy that exists in the "total vacuum" of space. Think of it as a standard level of energy everywhere, and this level is not a zero. If you could tap into this form of energy, you might have a sort of perpetual motion machine going. However, though this vacuum energy is free, it will still be used up by the machine, which goes against the defenition of perpetual.

Still, it will seem like the machine keeps going on its own without aid, and that's good enough

Now the hard part is figuring out how to do it.

Perpetual motion: an old dream

Since Antiquity humans have has been fascinated by the motion of the stars in the celestial sphere. They hoped to imitate this motion and build a machine that would run forever without using an external force, such as wind or flowing water. Many believed that rotation is an intrinsic property of the wheel. Even the Polish astronomer Copernicus believed that anything round -- according to him the perfect shape -- would rotate by itself.

One of the early attempts to build a perpetually turning wheel can be found in a Sanskrit manuscript of the fifth century. It describes a wheel with sealed cavities in which mercury would flow in such a fashion that one half of the wheel would always be heavier than the other half; supposedly this would keep the wheel running. Around 1235 the French architect Villard de Honnecourt devised a wheel based on a similar principle. An odd number of hammers pivot around their attachment points on the wheel. Because one half of the wheel always has a larger number of hammers than the other half, the wheel would keep turning. These devices existed in theory only, since any actual machine of this type fails to operate.

It was during the Renaissance that engineers became seriously interested in building a machine that would produce power continuously. They were inspired by the large number of windmills and water wheels that were then in use. The concepts were simple: A water wheel drives a pump that continuously pumps up the water that runs the wheel into an elevated reservoir, or a windmill actuates giant bellows that drive the windmill.

Many other designs made their appearance. Some were systems in which water would keep flowing endlessly. Others were complicated mechanisms. In one type, steel balls roll down an inclined plane. The inclined plane pivots when the ball reaches its end. This motion then actuates a mechanism that brings the ball back to its beginning position on the inclined plane.

The first to formulate precisely why such perpetual-motion machines could not work was Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who in his "Essay on Dynamics" stated that energy could not be created out of nothing. Although Leibniz's idea was not paid much attention, by the end of the 18th century most scientists had concluded that perpetual-motion machines could not work. The Paris Academy decided to reject any proposals for perpetual-motion machines. All such devices neglect the loss of power to friction within the parts and often other factors that prevent functioning. Notwithstanding, inventors continue to propose perpetual-motion machines right up to present.

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Allred5923]

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Allred5923]

I'd forgotten a couple of salient points,

when I mentioned about the back and forth movement of the magnets I should have said that what I mean is 180 degrees one way, then 180 degrees the other way, so that it is repelled at a six o' clock angle.

This therefore cannot work on an rpm basis - it was actually an idea to make use of the motion for generation of a current.

Again, I still haven't read through this properly so this could be redundant, I'm thinking that to get the magnets to run continuously what is needed is mechanical adjustment of the magnet placing while the (motor) is in operation, that would take a fair bit of testing out or a very lucky guess - or a genius in geometry and magnetism. To stop the motor running out of rpms the magnets need to move slightly so the attraction-repelling is kept up to the same amount of force continuously.