It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The patent office will not allow patents on perpetual motion machines as they break the first law of thermodynamics. This states that energy can be changed from one form to another, but cannot be created or destroyed.
A Wells inventor has put together a machine that he claims is the first step in creating free energy from perpetual motion. He says it produces more power than it consumes. But the patent office will not register the design — because if it works, it breaks the laws of physics. The machine, largely created out of leftover bicycle parts and a windscreen-washer motor uses high-powered magnets and a series of flywheels to apparently create energy from gravity.
Because it is claimed it produces more energy than it consumes, it is considered to be a perpetual motion machine which is the holy grail of scientists the world over.
Originally posted by IntegratedInstigator
Doesnt seem to be a very efficient machine with all that wobbling and vibrations... one would think such an unbalanced machine would quickly stop spinning.
Originally posted by BigBruddah
The design just doesn't seem feasible for it to work... But the real problem is that if it does work then why can't they get a patent? Why would they make a machine that uses perpetual motion illegal to build?
Originally posted by choppedbrisket
Could it be that the wobble of the machine is integral in it's performance?
The machine, largely created out of leftover bicycle parts and a windscreen-washer motor uses high-powered magnets and a series of flywheels to apparently create energy from gravity
Originally posted by jude11
So, if I am getting this right, he can get a patent on certain parts but not the whole because...it just doesn't make sense to them. It breaks the law of physics and therefore can't be patented?
This endorses my view that, since the "windscreen washer motor" is stated to use "high-powered magnets and a series of flywheels to apparently create energy from gravity"; then this is similar to a flywheel system which is found on modern buses, wherein when the brakes are applied, the act of "braking", transfers the kinetic energy of the moving bus, into the motion of an on-board flywheel, and this stored energy is then available to provide power to the bus, e.g. lighting, etc. This is an example of regenerative braking on buses. The device therefore appears to be more of an energy transfer one, than a perpetual motion, one. It is using gravity and magnets, to make the rotating mechanism accelerate to quite a high rotational speed, but just as a battery charger requires power delivered OVER TIME, in order to charge the batteries, the relatively small windscreen washer motor presumably "kicks the "magnets/weights" over the highest point of traverse in the rotational cycle, at just the right instant, to speed the device up. I would recommend that the inventor should file a patent application describing the device, but without necessarily CLAIMING that it was a perpetual motion machine. The description can contain a detailed description of the device, and CLAIMS can be formulated, at the time of first filing, or later, but would need to be submitted at no later than 12 months measured from the Priority Date for the submitted patent application. The mechanism could well have something new in it, but, sensibly (I hope) insufficient detail has been exposed in the publicised description given here. When a patent application describing an invention is filed at the UK Intellectual Property Office, it receives a Priority Date, and, in order to attempt to obtain a granted patent on the invention, certain things have to be done at certain times. The patent system is designed to encourage inventors to release their inventions "to the world", and in return, they receive monopoly rights on the use of the invention for a period of time, usually 20 years, measured from the Priority Date. It is always advisable to file a patent application describing an invention, BEFORE PUBLICISING IT, because prior publication, in ANY FORM (e.g. television, radio, the Internet, magazine, verbal presentation to the public) would prejudice the chances of obtaining a granted patent on the invention. Further information is available from: www.ipo.gov.uk.... Dr Brian Wybrow Patent Consultant.”
But, if it provides more output than is required to keep it moving (as he claims), you could create a feedback loop and make it a truly perpetual motion machine.
All he's doing is using the motor to supply that small push to keep it turning. Remove the motor and it won't work.