Overunity and Magnet motors why I fear it won't work

[jake]

I don't believe that a PM only motor will ever be built that will produce usable power for a long period of time.  Magnets exhibit a force.  That force is very useful, but I think it can be shown that it is impossible to arrange a bunch of forces is a closed configuration that will be constantly out of balance.  For a PM motor to "run" it must be constantly out of balance, force-wise.  I don't think this arrangement can occur.

It is kind of like the old story about being stuck in outer space outside the capsule and you are moving away.  You are out of rocket fuel and you can't get back.  How do you move?  The only way is to take off your shoe or something and throw it away from you.  This action will cause a reaction that causes you to move.  Now close yourself inside a box.  Throw the shoe.  The shoe will accelerate you to one side of the box, while it moves toward the other side.  When you and the shoe collide with the box walls, the whole box ends up in the same place it was before, because the system is "closed", the same way any PM only motor must be.  Once you "box in" the forces, you are stuck with a system that will eventually (quickly) balance.

I believe that no matter how you initially arrange the forces, they will not remain out of balance to operate the device.

I do think that devices like perendev can appear to work for a seemingly long period of time.  I would explain this as a "winding up" effect.  If you notice, when the perendev design is "closed", a good amount of force is applied to close the clamshell around the rotor.  Compared to the amount of energy that it takes to rotate the rotor, which is on bearings, the energy to close the clamshell is large.  This initial energy makes the perendev design accelerate and spin impressively fast.  I think that the perendev device will be proven to not work when it is actually released for true scrutiny (I predict it will never be released for true independent testing.)

I have stated before that I believe if you actually arrange a PM device in a way that it does rotate, indicating you are getting power from the magnets, the magnets will fail.  The fact of the matter is, if the device spins (past the initial "windup"), the energy is coming from somewhere.  If there is no electrical input, the energy must really be coming from the magnets.  if energy is coming from the magnets, the magnets must be depleted, and will be depleted.

As noted before, there are at least two examples of motors that "worked", that depleted the magnets.  I don't recall any other examples of motors self running.  Thus, the ones that appear to have run depleted the magnets.  None of the others ran (no credible evidence of having run).

Magnets are an unending source of force.  Not an unending source of energy.

I don't discount that there may be a way to arrange magnets and other things to produce OU COP, but I don't believe it will happen with magnets only.  The energy has to come from somewhere, and it isn't going to come from the magnets, unless the magnets deplete in the process.

Just my opinion, of course.

Jake

[Liberty]

Quote from Jake:

"Magnets are an unending source of force.  Not an unending source of energy."

If an electromagnet makes a 'force' (that requires energy input to make the force) the same force as a permanent magnet, then how is force not convertible back into energy?

[acp]

Hi Jake,

I like your logical analysis of the various ideas presented on this site. I'm curious what you have to say about the Finsrud device?

Albert

[jake]

If an electromagnet makes a 'force' (that requires energy input to make the force) the same force as a permanent magnet, then how is force not convertible back into energy?

A spring also "makes", or exhibits a force.  It is easy to see that a spring does not produce energy, yet for many years it can be used to apply a force to an object.  I would compare that to how a magnet acts.  If you take two like poles and push them toward each other, they act the same way as a spring acts.  When you push the spring, it pushes back, exhibiting a constant force at a given compression.  If you stop pushing, the spring extends to its limit, and quits exhibiting a force.  If you push two like poles together, they exhibit a given force against each other.  If you stop pushing, they move apart to the point where they are out of each other's force range.

Somehow, similar to a spring, a magnet gives and takes as objects are pulled and repelled by it.

There are probably theories on how a magnet does this, but I don't know if anyone has completely resolved that.

I would hold that whenever "work" is done by a magnet - i.e. moving something (as opposed to applying a static force), energy is transferred eithier to or away from the magnet.  When the object that has been moved by the magnet is subsequently moved (by some other force) whatever energy was transferred before is restored.

In simple terms, if a magnet picks up some object, energy is transferred to that object.  When that object is pulled away from the magnet, that energy is transferred back to the magnet.  There must be some mechanism wherby magnetic 'energy' is converted to kinetic energy, and kinetic energy to magnetic 'energy'.

Similarly, if gravity pulls an object down, energy is taken from the object, and 'lost' to gravity somehow.  When the object is lifted, energy is taken on by the object.

I don't know if anyone fully understands the mechanism(s) at work, but the effects are well understood and calculable.  Newton was criticized for not explaining the mechanism of how gravity "works", yet he resolved exactly how to calculate the effect of gravity.  He put it in very clear (and never proven wrong) mathematical terms that allow us to calculate everything from a falling apple to the paths of the planets, yet he did not explain how it works.

In the end, it would be nice to know how it works, but arguably as long as we can calculate all the effects, it really doesn't matter how it works.

The same holds true for magnetism.  We understand to a great degree how magnetism, electricity, and force relate (I didn't say we fully or completely understand it.).  We may never know how it works, but if we come to a point where we can fully calculate and predict its effects, it doesn't matter how it works.

I think the "unified theory" is being sought to fully calculate and explain the relationships between the major "forces".

[jake]

Hi Jake,

I like your logical analysis of the various ideas presented on this site. I'm curious what you have to say about the Finsrud device?

Albert

Albert,

Thank you for the kind words.  I try hard to be objective in a subjective world.


My personal reaction to Finsrud is, I don't like devices that are that "mechanical".  It also appears to fall in the category of devices that could only ever hope to keep turning themselves.  There was another thread here somewhere where the usefulness of this type of device was being debated, and I weighed in there.  In general  I find this type of device kind of useless because if it can't hope to produce significant torque beyond what it takes to turn itself, what can you do with it?  Arguably if it would produce 1w of excess energy, it proves a point.  But how big would it have to be to power even a single light bulb?

For the sake of mankind, a heat pump with a 10% higher COP is a more useful device - in my opinion.  Incremental improvements are where the tangible gains are going to be made.

It doesn't seem that the Finsrud device "works" either, so I guess it doesn't matter much.  Something about the glue drying out???  What's that about?

Jake