Does this video show a working self propelled magnetic engine?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by renegadeloser
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

He modifies the device, so that it does the work of raising the bar itself, and still has enough power to spin.

That means he is a lying fraud. Raising the bar requires "work" the system can not provide any work. If it is then he's lying. 2+2 will never equal 7.

hehehe.. the fan in the Free Energy Magnetic Motor video is doing work. it's blowing air across the room.

( don't forget to see my reply to you on page 4)

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


I saw the video, I believe it's a hoax. Why do 3 magnets not make it move at all and a 4th sends it into overdrive? Each magnet would supply the same amount of "energy", thus you should see it moving with probably 1 magnet. The speed it moves at with 4 magnets means 3 is certainly sufficient.

From a logic/mathematic standpoint it has to be a hoax as it would require initial energy to start the spin in his setup. Allow me to explain.

The force the magnet exerts repelling the fan to one side is identical to the force exerted being repelled by the other side. It is pushing the fan to the left and to the right with equal force. This means the fan can never start spinning on its own.
ETA: This is why the bar has to be started at a specific spot and then raised and lowered in the video in the OP. If the magnet is in a fixed location the system stops. The CPU fan has 4 fixed magnets. By necessity the system will not move, and if started manually will stop due to friction. Learn how magnets work, the force repelling one side equals the force repelling the other. Only way to cancel this effect is to move the magnet at set intervals which is not being done on the CPU fan. Obvious hoax.

The only reason you think it works is because you do not understand magnetism.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Don't forget to look at my reply. It's doing work, it just is not work supplied by magnets. It fails multiple logic tests. The only person fooled is one who wishes to be fooled.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by JohnPhoenix

 

I saw the video, I believe it's a hoax. Why do 3 magnets not make it move at all and a 4th sends it into overdrive? Each magnet would supply the same amount of "energy", thus you should see it moving with probably 1 magnet. The speed it moves at with 4 magnets means 3 is certainly sufficient.

From a logic/mathematic standpoint it has to be a hoax as it would require initial energy to start the spin in his setup. Allow me to explain.

The force the magnet exerts repelling the fan to one side is identical to the force exerted being repelled by the other side. It is pushing the fan to the left and to the right with equal force. This means the fan can never start spinning on its own.
ETA: This is why the bar has to be started at a specific spot and then raised and lowered in the video in the OP. If the magnet is in a fixed location the system stops. The CPU fan has 4 fixed magnets. By necessity the system will not move, and if started manually will stop due to friction. Learn how magnets work, the force repelling one side equals the force repelling the other. Only way to cancel this effect is to move the magnet at set intervals which is not being done on the CPU fan. Obvious hoax.

The only reason you think it works is because you do not understand magnetism.

edit on 6-9-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)

I don't believe you are correct. I have tried to make wheels with magnets spin using other magnets placed around it. I could not get much of a turn at all with just a few magnets. I could almost get one revolution with many magnets but them I hit the point where the fields interact with each other and lock up. I didn't have to resources to solve this problem. In that video he has 4 coils he must push equally or the motor wont spin. The poles must align in such a way as to not counteract the motion. One, two or three magnets would cause the fields to overlap and thus stop the spinning. He also said the pusher magnets were much stronger than the tiny magnets of the CPU fan. perhaps there is some resistance but the stronger magnet is strong enough to push through this resistance. That's his explanation anyway in the video and my reasoning from my experiments. In my experiments I were using magnets of the same size and strength.

I actually have an old fan here and an old hard drive. i'll see if I can't get these apart and make one. If it works, I'll post a video.

Btw way here is another of his vids where he lights an LED

My idea is all matter has force inside it circulating around a balanced point. The trick is to be able to make this force extend out enough to interact with the physical componets of the matter. Then work can be done.

This has very little to do with engineering, and more to do with physics.

The magnetics involved, use their non-attracting sides to generate motion. For this to work, the two magnets behind must have less friction, that the ones front. This is achieved by the V-shape of the magnets. But only if the stationary magnet, has it's force in the middle of the V-shape. Wether used both on top and bottom sides, is irrelevant. Because kinetic motion is needed to push the upper and lower magnets out of place, to make the rotion. This is accomplished, with the shape of the rotary on the side. Kiving it potential energy when in the top position, giving it enough potential energy to move the two magnets out of place.

This isn't really an effective machine, as it is in reality just the same system as an electromagnetic motor. Where the kinetic energy is supposed to replace the electromagnetism. The system is not producing enough energy to sustain itself, if it's going to do work ... as you'd have to replace the kinetic parts, with something more efficient, and that in reality being electromagnetism ... you're back where you started.

The only question here, is wether the shape and position of the magnets, will increase the effectiveness of an electrical rotor, or not. And that's an engineering issue.

If you watch the movie Thrive, you will find more information regarding more scientists who have invented and mysteriously died or indicted due to this discover. www.youtube.com...

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


You do understand that your nonsensical reply only shows your extremely limited understanding of electromagnetism right?

He is only exchanging the electricity, to power electro magnets that make the motor work, with permanent magnets. It isn't some hockey, trick, it is simple electromagnetic theory at work.

There is no difference between a magnet and electricity, they are 2 forms f the same natural phenomena.

3 magnets can't power it as it has 4 windings. Just like if open a electric fan and remove 1 of the 4 windings, it will not function. As it will be out of balance.

Perpetual motion can never be proved. It would literally take forever to prove.

From the CPU fan video, he took the basic principle of Maglev and applied it here. He is basically converting magnetic energy into kinetic energy. You cannot create energy [well, you can convert mass into energy based on E=m(c^2)].

The magnets are being slowly de-magnetized in exchange for spinning the fan blade.I am very interested to see how long the CPU fan will run on magnetic power. I may just have to build one and test it. My guess is that it wont run longer than a few days but you never know.

reply to post by joyride0187


It will run until the bearings wear out, which isn't "forever" so it isn't perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is impossible, as the definition of the phrase was written as to make it impossible to accomplish or prove.

No experiment can run"forever" so it could never be proved.

No material can last forever, so it can't be made from one, so it can't be done. As the 2nd law of thermo dynamics is absolute. All things rust/decay, and always seek a more chaotic state from their orderly starting state.

The more acurate term would be, indefinite motion, as this would be more apt to be applied relative to an individuals life span than the nonsensical phrase perpetual motion, as defined by current science.

Im going to try to replicate the CPU fan design over the weekend and test to see if it actually will spin. If it does spin, then I'm going to see how long it will run.


IMHO, transfering magnetic energy into kenetic energy could be REALLY useful. The earth has a huge magnetic field.

Why aren't we using that?

reply to post by joyride0187


For the same reason the definition of perpetual motion is an oxymoron. It is done intentionally to make aanyone attempting it seem like a crackpot, so as to diswade anyone with an interest in not being considered "crazy" by their peers from investigating and trying it.

Perpetual motion was first coined way back in antiquity, and only meant a device that would work in and of itself without outside stimuli for an extended period of time, even DaVinci tried it, and he was one of the smartest people ever to live and considered it only a matter of time before it was made to work.

The definition has since been rewritten, to mean, a device that will start and run "forever" without interference from outside stimuli. Which is of course nonsense, as no material can even stand forevver let alone work forever.

I think I will trust in DaVinci's thought process though, over a liberally educated fool from a modern university, that only parrots what they are told, instead of acting in a detached unconcered manner and only seeks to uncover the truth of the workings of the universe, requardless of outside influence or stimuli.

As DaVinci, obviously knew that no earthly substance would work forever without friction, he was one of if not the smartest people to ever live, he wrote and made most of the theories parroted by modern acedemia, so I would think his looking for perpetual motion, only proves it exists, and is not meant to mean, a device that would or could work "forever" as this is nonsense at its inception.

reply to post by dashen


I can see @ the base of the magnet an area to extract static electricity that can be looped into the design? Nice presentation amazes 1 there is no better clean energy devices available.

A-some tread OP, very interesting and those vids really showed the need to open ones mind about the subject. Going to build one for myself to try out I think...

Apologies if this has already been posted, this is the only truly believable pep motion I have seen


www.youtube.com...

Feel free to embed Im on an FBI monitored IPad

Originally posted by greeny122229
Apologies if this has already been posted, this is the only truly believable pep motion I have seen


www.youtube.com...

Feel free to embed Im on an FBI monitored IPad

Forgot the other obvious one ;D

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by joyride0187

 

No experiment can run"forever" so it could never be proved.

Perpetual motion could easily be proven without running for ever. Output >= input, simple as that. To date, nothing has been demonstrated as even coming close to, let alone over, unity.

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
I think the problem is you guys are having a really hard time understanding the concept. I'm not doing anything here that should violate any laws.

No, you aren't. Which is why you won't generate energy ex nihilo.

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
I think the problem is you guys are having a really hard time understanding the concept. I'm not doing anything here that should violate any laws.

No, you aren't. Which is why you won't generate energy ex nihilo.

I do not, never have proposed to create energy out of nothing. Again, you are not understanding the concept of what I'm talking about.

If you spin the shaft of a motor (an electromagnetic induction device) by hand, you get electricity out of the motor leads. What is your input energy? Your hand turning the shaft. This is not the same as getting electricity out of nothing. This is all I propose to do after the wheel is spinning. Only, I'm not spinning the shaft by hand, I'm using the magnets around the "fan wheel" in conjunction with it's center coils to spin that shaft. They simply replace the hand and the motors energy output at the other end of this shaft is not going to interfere with that motion at all. They are essentially two separate systems only linked by a shaft.

Basically, science really needs to provide the educational principles that will allow everyone to understand that a perpetual motion machine is really a concept, an unobtainable goal that is used as a bell-weather so we can measure just how efficient any closed mechanism or process may be. There should never be any discussion about achieving it, for that automatically becomes pseudo-science. This fact needs to be emphasized ad-nauseum in schools.

Especially today, with the discovery of the Higgs Field, and the boson.... This discovery may in fact allow us to achieve thermodynamic efficiency at unprecedented levels. It could provide a technology were mechanical systems can run for years, rather than seconds, with very little energy consumption and completely eradicate the environmental pollution that is present today because of our machines. And even with such advances, because of entropy itself, we will understand that you can never be perfectly efficient, let alone create a surplus of efficiency.