Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Free Energy Device (Perpetual Motion)! He did it simply! Arranging magnets like people said couldn'

page: 12
48
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 






it is impossible as magnets are by definition STORED energy and can never be FREE energy. The ignorance is astounding.


I never said free energy,

compare the effective lifespan of a fully charged magnet to a 400km tank of gas and ask your self, if this technique could be invested in by all the multinationals and big wigs of the world, how long would it take to produce a viable cost effective product? Just look at whats been squeezed from the crude internal combustion engine when billions are spent on improving it.

Did you ever think wireless recharging was possible either, what about stem cell science, gene therapy and this list goes on all day.

You see ? this is what happens when research and developement is allowed and not directed and suppressed by our beloved petrochemical overlords.

You are right on one thing though the ignorance here is astounding when the strongest argument is the lifespan of battery the generating of electricity creates too much resistance when even a moron knows it could be scaled up. I dont belive free energy is possible at this moment in time but anything is better than nuclear oil and coal.




posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Zecharia
 


What does any of that have to do with the fact it takes MORE energy to create the magnet than you get out? Why would you want to pay someone for 2kwh of electricity to get 1kwh of use?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
It has everything to do with it. How could you know the energy output from a "theoretical" working scaled up prototype perhaps 10 years down the line ? not to mention the ever improving refining and manufacturing processes that would come from the study and exploration of this new field.

edit on 3-10-2012 by Zecharia because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Zecharia
 



How could you know the energy output from a "theoretical" working scaled up prototype perhaps 10 years down the line?


It is the energy required to manufacture and the force of the magnets that can be calculated with precision, not the system it will be used in.

Magnetic Force

However, we can pretty safely presume that any any traditional arrangement of electronics and/or mechanics will not violate the laws of conservation.

Laws of conservation



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zecharia
It has everything to do with it. How could you know the energy output from a "theoretical" working scaled up prototype perhaps 10 years down the line ? not to mention the ever improving refining and manufacturing processes that would come from the study and exploration of this new field.

edit on 3-10-2012 by Zecharia because: (no reason given)


You can not create a magnet of X energy using less than X energy. The best you can hope for is a 100% efficiency rating. Right now we are far below 100%. Then magnets lose energy over time. So unless it went from production to use the MOMENT it was created you have lost energy. So now we have a near 0% chance with perfect prodcution methods of ever achieving 100% efficiency since it takes time to put the magnet to use once it is created. Then if the device is stopped at ANY time for ANY reason we are also under 100% efficiency.

We are left with any device of this nature, even when done to perfection, taking MORE energy to create than it puts out.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 02:58 AM
link   
I hear what your saying but wouldnt the energy output of the device over its working life quickly surpass the energy required to make it ?

Its like anything else over time it would pay for itself.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zecharia
I hear what your saying but wouldnt the energy output of the device over its working life quickly surpass the energy required to make it ?

Its like anything else over time it would pay for itself.


No, it can NEVER have greater output than input. It will have output = to the input - energy lost due to ineficiency in the transfer. The amount put in will always be less than the amount used to create it, as some will be lost. There is no such thing as 100% efficient energy transfer.
edit on 4-10-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Zecharia
I hear what your saying but wouldnt the energy output of the device over its working life quickly surpass the energy required to make it ?

Its like anything else over time it would pay for itself.


No, it can NEVER have greater output than input. It will have output = to the input - energy lost due to ineficiency in the transfer. The amount put in will always be less than the amount used to create it, as some will be lost. There is no such thing as 100% efficient energy transfer.
edit on 4-10-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)


Unless you were at the forefront of this science with unquestionable credibilty then i have no reason to believe you know this to be true, the simple answer is you dont.

Debunk these then since you seem to be good a quoting the "KNOWN" laws of physics

vid

vid


And yes there are many more videos with convincing designs.

Now i dont claim to be an expert and you can play around with words all you like but they seem to be producing more energy than it takes to run them regardless of the energy required to make the magnets etc.
edit on 4-10-2012 by Zecharia because: Fix links



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Someone on here should make one and have it power an electrical appliance, video it and keep the video running for a few days. I'm all for 'free energy' yet theres an aweful lot of people who try and put it down saying its impossible, nothing is impossible, the mainstream has barely scratched the surface of the universe, people should have an open mind and not automatically spout out 'laws' on which they've been taught in a school or read out of a physics book and automatically shutting down/trying to debunk ideals on what they think they know to be true.
edit on 5-10-2012 by GDR3k because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zecharia
Debunk these then since you seem to be good a quoting the "KNOWN" laws of physics

vid

vid


That is just a youtube video, how about showing us a peer reviewed report from a reputable university - in those videos we do not even know what we are looking at.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Really....... a reputable university ?

I dont have the energy for this anymore lets just crawl back into our holes and rot away. What a magical mystical place we live in.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zecharia
Really....... a reputable university ?

I dont have the energy for this anymore lets just crawl back into our holes and rot away. What a magical mystical place we live in.


LOL, thats what they whant you to say..
Let their words be like air between your ears.
Enters on the right, half a nanosecond later it
leaves on the left...And please debunkers,
feel free to bang your heads in agony if we
keep posting these vids....




posted on Oct, 8 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Zecharia
 


You want me to debunk a Youtube video that offers zero proof and is evidence of nothing? How about you explain the SCIENCE to me of how you can get a magnet with MORE energy than is used in creating it. Seriously, you understand nothing and Youtube is your science forum. Get a real grasp on science and come back and we can discuss this.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
You have to get past the 'free energy' concept - serious students never make such a claim.

Is a water wheel free energy?
Is a solar panel free energy?

Of course not - one uses kinetic energy, the other uses sunlight. In both cases, the output energy must first be converted.

'Free energy' only has meaning if you look at a subsystem of the larger system. An electric circuit hooked up to a solar panel is getting its energy from a renewable (yet exhaustible!) resource. This is then converted, along with efficiency loss, into a different form of energy.

The 'closed loop' that must be considered is the universe as a whole.

Check out Bob Boyce as an example of someone trying to make headway in this area.
Or here.
Or here.

This 'dark energy' - the same energy that scientists have finally acknowledged we are 99.9996% certain exists...it is all around us. While it is exhaustible, it is on the scale such as trillions and trillions of years.

For anyone looking to make a serious foray...there seem to be a few 'rules' that are helpful to know.

Anyone that gets too vocal, tries to bring a technology to market...or lays things out so easy that a fool could build it - they vanish. Check the mortality rate of these energy folks.

And of course there is the typical slander/discrediting. You'll very frequently find sites and youtube videos that are no longer available.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
It's weird how many people don't realise that magnets store energy; like batteries. And like batteries will always give out less energy than it took to produce them.

This cool desk toy is exactly like one that needs batteries. They will have to be replaced once they run out of energy.

If you saw a perpetual motion machine that needed batteries to work I'm sure you would see that it's not as it claims to be. If you see one that needs magnets, remember, it's exactly the same.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Subterranean13
 


I said that about 100 times in this thread. They don't want it to be true, so they don't care.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Subterranean13
 


yes one magnet maybe, but what if you combined these magnets into a working device. For your statement to be true you would have to know the output of energy from this "theoretical" device over its effective working life.

Compare that [which you cant] with the energy required to produce the magnet and tell me again how you know this. You cant know unless you had a device to compare the energy output over its effective life against the energy used during the manufacturing of the magnets. Deny my ignorance right here im willing to listen to some numbers buddy really.

Lets take wind turbines for example, so much energy and maintenance is required to manufacture and maintain these with a lifespan of about 30 years yet they seem to be effective enough for people to invest in them as they are popping up everywhere yet for some reason ive to believe this field is a dead end oh and nuclear dont even start me on nuclear.... im confused here.... naa im not actually the effort involved in debunking this whole topic alone should raise awareness to the agenda.

I wish people would stop saying free energy because PP's see this as an easy bunk as nothing comes from nothing that we know of. An effective low cost device would be a more accurate description.

Ready for the fames..
edit on 19-10-2012 by Zecharia because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   
There is a bit of rotational inertia used here and might be considered an overunity device.
Not worth much power wise some adventurous mechanic might want to upscale the
contraption. Every movement means falling apart eventually but the idea of setting in
motion that continues is on the right track. There is some sort of big book of free energy devices that has a lot of rotational devices with magnets.
People just like to play with magnets because poppa government and the Illuminati took
away the spark gap coils where the free energy power lies for linear motion.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
I just need to clarify something.

While in some ways a permanent magnet can be seen as a 'magnetism battery', in other ways it cannot. A permanent magnet constantly subjected to a reversal force will eventually lose its magnetism, but a magnet subjected to an aligned force will not. In addition, a permanent magnet will tend to create this aligning force in any ferromagnetic substance that exists in its field.

A battery operates by discharging energetic electrons stored in unstable chemical combinations. Discharge all the available electrons and chemical instability ceases and the battery is discharged. A permanent magnet does not discharge particles; it creates a force field.

As part of my "Off The Grid" segment on the ATS Survival Internet Radio Broadcast (Bushcraft on Fire Radio), I am going to recreate this device. I will weekly be airing a description of my progress and conclusions for anyone who is curious about this device, and curious about the scientific approach to this type of research.

I chose this device because, unlike the vast majority, this video shows the evolution of the concept, tests, and an open, visible operational prototype that clearly shows the operation. It is self-starting and simple, and appears to be scalable.

My initial thought if shown this on paper would be that the transition point would require as much energy to pass as the rest of the revolution would produce. This does not appear to be the case. The proof either way will lie in physical prototyping, not in theory.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MeesterB
like all "perpetual motion" machines, it will stop once you divert any of the energy to do useful work.

Yes this is a very impressive piece of artwork, but nothing more.

Edit: and "scaling up" doesn't make it any more promising, just bigger.
edit on 9/24/2012 by MeesterB because: (no reason given)


Tsk Tsk not so my friend, any fluctuating magnetic field creates electrical potential ie voltage. if one of these was upscaled big time then all would be needed is to create an electrical load upon it lets say to charge a battery and as the load was increased the speed of it would slow to a nice idle and that would be its max potential before it choked. Its not true perpetual motion though because get this. scientists would say that the parts would wear out I kid you not they are that biased.






top topics



 
48
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join