Generator ‘Breaks The Laws Of Physics’ and that's why it can't be patented?

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?

One thing I do understand is that it makes no sense whatsoever to deny the patent but of course we all know why it's being denied. Can't have people producing their own energy. Wouldn't be good for the big boys who want us at their teat for everything we need.

This is the Holy Grail of energy and scientists/Engineers have been trying to create perpetual motion for...well, forever.

The Wells Journal has seen the machine in action, and it does appear to work. The tiny motor should not be powerful enough to keep the machine turning once it is started with a light push – but it does.

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.

www.disinfo.com...

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.

More:

www.thisissomerset.co.uk...

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.

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 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.

Agreed,

But the fact is that it has been done and he is now looking to go bigger.

More money will make it...as always.

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 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?

It's a home made machine and actually works. Needs funding to go to the next step.

The reason it can't be patented is because it breaks the laws of physics...that's the reason he's getting anyway.

Amazing.

This guy is gonna get assassinated.
It will never be allowed into production and circulation.

Everyone, "acquire" this video and spread the knowledge. Firefox has certain uh... Addons that allow you special controls over various web content, if you catch my drift.

reply to post by jude11


I don't know, this looks like some cheap trick imo. I would honestly be very surprised if this machine works like this guy says it does...I've seen way too many of these scams to fall for this. The thing hardly looks like it can break the laws of physics.

But on a serious note, it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't accept patents on perpetual motion machines because they appear to break the first law of thermodynamics. What they they don't realize though, is that zero-point energy generators don't break any law, but they provide "free energy". They simply extract the natural energy that appears within vacuums.

I'm gonna guess if it breaks the laws of physics it doesn't work as claimed. It would take a hell of a lot to convince the patent office that something that breaks the laws of physics actually works. That is why they won't patent it.

How do you know it works as claimed, from a video that explains nothing?

Could it be that the wobble of the machine is integral in it's performance?

Originally posted by choppedbrisket
Could it be that the wobble of the machine is integral in it's performance?

This was my first thought.

The wobbling might be producing more energy that lends to the continued motion...like a counter weight maybe?

reply to post by jude11

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

Ok, I wont completely rule this one out yet. The reason I believe it could be possible, is because I've believed for a very long time it is possible to use the magnetic force provided by natural magnets to create a perpetual motion machine. Coupled with the natural power of gravity there is a chance this guy could be onto something. Maybe it's the dodgy looking machine that no one suspects could be the real thing but is actually the real thing.

I can see why he's not getting a patent on this.

It isn't breaking any laws of physics. I've played around with these types of gravity driven wheels. What happens is they quickly reach an equilibrium point and stop. A small push will start them up and they turn a round or two, then stop again. They won't keep running on their own.

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.

reply to post by jude11


wow, this guy needs funding! first we get the print anything printer..now this. if they let it go mainstream and avaliable to everyone it will be the end of socialism!
if they dont understand this does that mean that the 911 story is invalid? no
its whos telling them, not what their telling them
if big business invented it, it would have been patented

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?

Please show us where exactly the patent office has refused to patent it.

I thought that perpetual motion machines were not allowed to use something like an electric motor...Am I wrong? I am going to look into this to see if I can find out how it is built, and exactly how it operates. I don't know much about issuing patents, but maybe he could just reword some things. OR better yet, get a lawyer and sue. Costly though I am sure, if one could even sue the patent office.

ETA:

The quote below is from the comments section on one of the sites you linked, and I think it explains a lot about the machine's method of operation. The person who posted the comment claims to be a patent consultant as well, and if true then what he is saying is probably correct.

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.”

reply to post by jude11


Your GODDAMN right the most important ATS member

reply to post by N3k9Ni

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.

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.

reply to post by jude11


If he was a real scientist he'd first publish his new hypothesis to the scientific community rewriting the law of energy. Otherwise he's saying I know it can't happen but it happened and I don't know why..

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


That the problem. There's no output from the wheel.

The idea is to have weights that extend on one side and retract on the other. Gravity will pull the extended side down making one side always "heavier". In practice, it doesn't work because between the one side extending and the other retracting, they reach a point where they balance each other. The motor is getting it past that balance point.

reply to post by N3k9Ni


That, in effect does not break the law of energy .. it is simply trying to find a way to create energy from a natural force (gravity, in the case you describe) that does not cost money to create. So the real feat is creating energy for CHEAPER than it cost to create.

Which ..... is what every power plant on the planet is. We just need to find a way to make it cheaper. A weight pulling a rotating wheel by gravity is still energy in motion.