It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

did a norwegian man create true perpetual motion?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2008 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I just watched this program called "A machine to die for, the quest for free energy" and what a great program.

But the important thing was that in it a Norwegian man who is an artist seemed to have create a never ending perpetual motion machine.

I mean the entire program was about dismissing and showing why other devices were misleading. But when it came to this device (a beuatiful thing at that) they couldnt dismiss it.

SO my take is that it is true perpetual motion.

Anyone hear differently or your guys opinions?

www.abc.net.au...

[edit on 8-12-2008 by Desolate Cancer]




posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   
I'm gonna have to look for more info on this guy and the sculpture that he made. We're taught in school that perpetual motion cannot exist because it doesn't obey that Laws of Thermodynamics. If this sculpture truly exhibits perpetual motion; the consequences would be world-changing to say the least.

I've found a couple pics on the sculptor's website. His name is Reidar Finsrud.

Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3

More pics and a small video demo at this link

[edit on 9-12-2008 by zephyrs]

[edit on 9-12-2008 by zephyrs]



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   
There is a long history of PPM - almost all of them are scams that don't work.

however - Finsrud is an odd one, it's been talked about for ages over on PesWiki.

another one that may or may not work is being developed by Irish company Steorn.

Third law of thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created or destroyed - and I believe that, however with magnetic interactions, I think it's possible that energy is being extracted somehow from another source, so even though it looks like 'overunity' (energy out > energy in), it's probably not.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 07:28 AM
link   
It looks as it's using the swinging pendulums to provide a little help on keeping the ball in motion. I noticed the springs and counter weights in the background of the pics. A little tweaking and you can see how it becomes counterbalanced for just a partial weight of the ball.

This is interesting in that the ball rolling around the track will produce heat which takes energy from the machine. Eventually, this has to be accounted for. it may take days, weeks, or months, but it will add up. Everything would start running slower until it just stops.

This could be easily checked under controlled conditions with timing the speed of the ball after the machine is in operation and then measure the speed again in a day or so, or even a week later. Perpetual motion, no change in speed. Any change, it will stop.

I wouldn't necessarily call it perpetual motion, but it is interesting.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 07:36 AM
link   
I have never heard of this machine or its inventor but it looks like his PPM machine has been rotating since 1996. Strange that its not in the world news years ago. Norway is the richest oil pumping country in the world, maybe thats why?



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 


why is this even debatable? there is nothing scientific or mathimatical that proves perpetual motion. never has been.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 


why is this even debatable? there is nothing scientific or mathimatical that proves perpetual motion. never has been.



Because if you can't achieve it then you don't have the equation for it. When it's achieved then the equation can be discovered.

If we never had seen light, then how would we know what the speed of light was through math or science?



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Waldy
 


it's been rotating since 1996?! bugger me that's a long time.

is it still going round at the same speed?

is it powering anything, or is it just perpetual?

I would imagine that adding some kind of drive to power something would slow down the speed of the ball, and it would eventually stop.

didn't I read somewhere that he has to give the pendulum a bit of a push every once in a while to keep it going? - or was that just an urban legend?



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Crastney
 


I was just reading a bit more about it and it was ready in 1996 after 12 years of building and its been running ever since. The metal ball is 1kg and rotates one circle every 4 seconds, it has never slowed down.

The funny thing is that the inventor isnt even sure how it works himself, he thinks it is a combination of the pendulum swings and the magnets...so there is no formula yet, this machine has to be reverse engineered by a team of engineers, it has so much potential.

Picture of the rotator.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Waldy]



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
As a pHD physics graduate I can tell you that perpetual motion is NOT possible. You could get as close as you like to a machine that ran forever with no additional energy input, but it would stop - sure as damn it. It would just be very efficient.

Perpetual motion violates all three of the first laws of thermodynamics. If these were incorrect then the world would look incredibly different.

QED.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 08:37 AM
link   
yes indeed Dutty, but this thing has been going for 12 years, and apparently it's still going at the same speed - 1 rotation every 4 secs.

that to me sounds perpetual.

[edit on 9-12-2008 by Crastney]



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Reidar Finsrud is an artist who lives in a little city called Drøbak in Norway:


Reidar Finsrud is today counted by many as one of the worlds most versatile artists.

He works within the majority of thinkable formats and techniques.
Painting, drawing, graphic and sculpturing. He does lectures at many topics, and has held his own art school since 1975. He's been through the fields of new and modern thinking, especially around technical inventions and industrial design.

The technical insight of Mr. Finsrud is shown throughout machines like his handmade grand scaled graphic printing press, and all the machinery in context with his own techniques of casting. The now world known Finsrud Perpetual Mobile from 1996, came as a climax in the line of his numerous technical constructions.

www.galleri-finsrud.no...




The Perpetuum Mobile is first and foremost a piece of art, and Finsrud says that it is expected to live "until it gnaws itself to pieces, sometime in the future".
www.galleri-finsrud.no...


[edit on 9/12/08 by ziggystar60]



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
I highly recommend watching the film "a machine to die for, the quest for free energy"

But here is a google vid of the machine running, they dont provide much explanation on how it operates, like they do in the film but still can see its mechanisms.

In this vid they say he needs to stop it to clean it i think, or at least they say he needs to clean it with this paper.

video.google.com...



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
That is not perpetual -

Perpetual = forever

This is just very very efficient. One of the original drivers behind a search for such a machine is to find something that could be used to drive machines - to be useful.

Hook this thing up to anything - a generator, etc etc and it would stop in minutes.. seconds even!

Simple physics below:

1) Perpetual motion means it runs forever with only original energy input.

2) Is this a 'perfect machine' - i.e. no friction or anything else. Even the effect of gravity alone - no matter how small means this is NOT a perfect machine, thus it expends energy. (Are you seriously telling me this thing is mass-less an not subject to gravity?)

3) If it's expending energy - yet still runs 'forever' it requires infinite energy to do so.

4) Was the machine started with infinite energy?

5) No.

QED



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Dutty_Rag
 


yeah ok, ok, you debunked this totally. The machine has only been running on gravity and magnets for 12 years and is still going. Maybe we should wait another 100 or 200 years before looking into ways to use this?

Thing is this is as close to perpetual as we have ever gotten and you cant even admit it is an achievement.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Sorry but there's a big difference between recognising an achievement and entitling a post 'Did Norweigian Man Create Perpetual Motion Machine' - perhaps it should be called 'Well done to Norwegian man for keeping machine running for 12 years' and thus avoid the sensationalism.

This is NOT perpetual motion, although it's a great achievement in terms of engineering (if true of course and I don't think we have enough evidence to conclusively say so - for all you know, someone has been giving this thing a nudge everyday to keep things moving).

Maybe someone should be looking into the tech in order to create more efficient mechanical devices for industrial/commercial use - but they certainly shouldn't - and might I add - aren't looking into perpetual motion applications.

Do you also believe it's possible to travel faster than the speed of light? Or perhaps have negative gravity? Or even violate the uncertainty principal. Proposing perpetual motion is as much an affront to science as any of these things.

Show me the science and I'll take it all back and agree with you. Saying 'but this thing has been going for 12 years' isn't an answer. So what? It's not so remarkable - it's not unexplained or fantastic - it's just a very efficient machine.

Similar achievements would include bearings that have lasted in ships propellor assemblies for 1000 times longer than they were expected to - or tungsten light bulbs that have lasted for decades - I believe there is a 70 year old light bulb still working in some guys house. These are just along the same lines.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Well, perpetual motion is not a big deal really, Newton's first law enables it, any body will stay in a condition of motion , until n unless disturbed by a force .... and so on.

Most of the matter in this universe is in a state of perpetual motion, nothing is at rest.

So, whats the point here ?
The big deal is to extract useful energy from such motion. As soon as you try to extract some energy it stops and the energy gets converted to a 'useless' form , such as heat etc which cannot be fed back again.

The point is that so far no machine can produce useful energy out of nothing, and thats why we have laws of thermodynamics.

There is a catch but, these laws are applicable only to a closed system and so far we don't know whether our universe is a close system. So there is still some hope.....

Universe must have got its energy from somewhere else it wouldn't exist, that source is the ultimate source of energy, we don't know what it is.



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
RockSolid - I kind of disagree. I think the concept of energy and matter etc and all current theories of the universe don't have anything giving the universe energy - it just is - and as hard as this is a concept to grasp as it's not something we are used to comprehending, there is no reason to suggest it's not a possibility.

There is a finite amount of energy/matter in the universe in various different forms which can be exchanged between the forms - simple as. We don't 'use' energy, we just convert it from one form to another.

We burn petrol driving a car up a hill, but if we turn off the engine when we come down, we could use the stored gravitational potential to charge a batter as the wheels are drawn round as it descends etc - that's the key to massively more efficient use of energy - reusing what we have.

And also, I don't agree that most things in the universe are in perpetual motion. To all extents they behave largely as if they are, but forces have no limit in their range. The gravity from a single proton, although minute, still technically effects something at the opposite side of the universe - just very insignificantly. BUT - over infinity - this would slow even the largest body in motion to eventually reverse it's direction (relative to the proton of course - i.e in an external frame, the proton would be pulled toward the other object perhaps).

All these things into account, perpetual motion is not possible, as Newton's Law would only be valid as long as there were no other forces acting on a body - in any real situation - there are ALWAYS other forces unless an object existed in complete isolation in the universe - for example, if all the matter were grouped together so that something could be considered a single body in the universe - there would be no external forces acting upon it.

The universe as a whole could be considered in this way - if it were pushed - on one side, it would continue to move forever - in perpetual motion!



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
RockSolid - I kind of disagree. I think the concept of energy and matter etc and all current theories of the universe don't have anything giving the universe energy - it just is - and as hard as this is a concept to grasp as it's not something we are used to comprehending, there is no reason to suggest it's not a possibility.

There is a finite amount of energy/matter in the universe in various different forms which can be exchanged between the forms - simple as. We don't 'use' energy, we just convert it from one form to another.

We burn petrol driving a car up a hill, but if we turn off the engine when we come down, we could use the stored gravitational potential to charge a batter as the wheels are drawn round as it descends etc - that's the key to massively more efficient use of energy - reusing what we have.

And also, I don't agree that most things in the universe are in perpetual motion. To all extents they behave largely as if they are, but forces have no limit in their range. The gravity from a single proton, although minute, still technically effects something at the opposite side of the universe - just very insignificantly. BUT - over infinity - this would slow even the largest body in motion to eventually reverse it's direction (relative to the proton of course - i.e in an external frame, the proton would be pulled toward the other object perhaps).

All these things into account, perpetual motion is not possible, as Newton's Law would only be valid as long as there were no other forces acting on a body - in any real situation - there are ALWAYS other forces unless an object existed in complete isolation in the universe - for example, if all the matter were grouped together so that something could be considered a single body in the universe - there would be no external forces acting upon it.

The universe as a whole could be considered in this way - if it were pushed - on one side, it would continue to move forever - in perpetual motion!



posted on Dec, 9 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I do agree with the idea that if energy was to be attempted to be extracted from the device ot power say even an led that it will most likely cause the device to stop over a period of time... but even if this isnt perpetual motion it still is very very effecient and its concepts can perhaps be used to stimulate the mind of an engineer/inventor how to make a useful device.

Also what if gravity is used as the source of input energy... i mean we think of gravity as something that holds us back or cause friction... but if we were to change our view of it into thinking it as something that provides downward energy then we can make a device that will provide free energy.

Is this possible?



new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join