Finsrud's Perpetuum Mobile

[Omnibus]

Please see the following links showing continuous work of Finsrud?s perpetuum mobile:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=553061720631716456&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3078131163857744253&hl=en

The demonstration of this device, the first in modern history on public display, proves that constructing of a functioning perpetuum mobile is possible. The very fact that a perpetuum mobile such as Finsrud?s can be constructed is in direct violation of the Helmholtz? definition of the first law of thermodynamics, stating that such machine cannot be made. This has far-reaching scientific and engineering consequences the foremost of which is the direct demonstration of violation of the principle of conservation of energy.

The importance of violation of the principle of conservation of energy is not only that it will lead one day to cutting our bills or allowing us to drive without paying for gas. This violation is one of those rare sudden shifts in the very basis of our knowledge leading to profound impact on our understanding of how nature works. Its ramifications will lead to deep changes in how our society functions. This unexpected prospect for societal changes induced by seemingly inauspicious change in knowledge is one of the reasons why the resistance of official structures is so strong and why the walls protecting the first law of thermodynamics are so impenetrable despite the evidence. However, now that we have Finsrud?s public demonstration and in view of the new methods of communication it will be more difficult to make it appear that such a device does not exist. This might have happened in the past with other similar devices which has led to establishing the widespread convenient perception that perpetuum mobile is impossible.

The principle of conservation of energy, as any other principle in science, can be overthrown by just one valid experiment at odds with it. Finsrud?s perpetuum mobile (developing the ingenious idea of Greg Watson?s SMOT) is that crucial experiment needed to abolish the principle of conservation of energy.

Finsrud considers his creation a sculpture. However, it obviously has more potential than a mere sculpture and can be considered one of the best examples of the beautiful harmony between art and science.

Among many things, one good aspect of the existence of Finsrud?s device is that it precludes all the attempts to capitalize on such machines. I?ll say a little more on this further.

With the public display of his device Finsrud has given an example of how people who claim successful construction of a perpetuum mobile should behave. Secretive tactics and various games played by the likes of Torbay, Steorn, etc., etc. complicate further the already complicated situation with the acceptance of these devices by the world of science, to the detriment of the real needs of the world.

As is usual in science, in order for a phenomenon to be accepted as legitimate, the author should make full disclosure of the principles it is based upon and should make as much effort as possible to accommodate others to reproduce it successfully.

I understand that some people entertain the idea that such devices can turn into a golden goose for them and they do their best to play the hide and seek game to lure investors and to capitalize on them in any way they can. I am not even speaking about those ready to commit outright fraud. I am talking about individuals having legitimate claims in that area. Their behavior, sadly, will neither produce the golden egg, nor will make them known as the pioneers in this new field. What they will achieve is to only censure themselves and hinder acceptance of the idea of perpetuum mobile by society. I don?t think there are many reasonable people in this world who would believe that the patents that have been issued so far touching on the idea of perpetuum mobile have any merit, save the curious decisions of some parties to not even look at such proposals, probably fearing that some of them might turn out legitimate in the end. The idea has been known for centuries and now we have someone (Finsrud) who has publicly displayed a working perpetuum mobile. This guarantees sure challenging followed by voiding of any patent that has been issued so far (issuing of a patent doesn?t mean it cannot be successfully challenged).

Besides, even if someone manages to maintain a patent on some detail of the functioning of such a device, it is quite unlikely that he or she would be able to license it to a company or have long term success in marketing it. Perpetuum mobile is exactly what business doesn?t like. Business is about hooking up people to products, making these people dependent. Perpetuum mobile is just the opposite ? in the long run it frees the people making them anything but customers.

And this is not because someone evil wants to destroy business. If any destruction of business  should occur it will come about naturally if the truth is admitted in society. For better or worse, business has to be made to abide by the natural laws and not continue to set up all kinds of artificial social circumstances, such as selectively suppressing certain innovations while enhancing others, aimed at creating and cornering customers for its own selfish profit at the expense of the needs of society at large.

Thus, it would be wise if anyone who has successfully constructed a perpetuum mobile to take example from Finsrud, come out and openly present it to the world with all possible detail, forgetting about all those non-disclosure agreements and finagling. Best is to submit texts for publication in journals such as Nature or Physical Review Letters with thorough quantitative description of the devices. Undoubtedly, as a byproduct of such activity people such as magician James Randi may be forced to write in the meantime a check of $1,000,000 when others succeed in replicating the machine. On the other hand, if one is interested in further material benefits, such will inevitably come about by channels other than the secretiveness of a business plan. A certain level of idealism, so much lacking nowadays, would be very appropriate, however. After all, isn?t the very idea of perpetuum mobile the essence of idealistic perception of energy, free from materialistic chains the society has attached to it?

[hartiberlin]

Thanks for the videos.
Looks like the magnets and steel ball is just cooled down,
so only violation of second law.
I think 1st law is always unbreakable.
This seems to be a property  of nature.

BTW, do you know, if both rail-halfs move or just the inner one ?
Have to watch it still with the external video player.
Many thanks for making this available.

[Omnibus]

Stefan, we spoke about this before and, as I remember, we agreed to disagree. Finsrud's device demonstrates violation of the principle of conservation of energy which in thermodynamics is expressed as its first law. Recall the definition of first law: no periodically working machine can be constructed which would produce work without the spending of energy of any kind. Finsrud's machine proves just the opposite and so far it is the only self-sustained machine ever demonstrated publicly in the modern history (which is enough to abolish the first law -- just one machine like Finsrud's is enough for that purpose). The steel ball turns (does work) for hours, days even weeks without the input of energy of any kind, never mind at the expense of cooling down the environment.

The first law can be broken due to appropriate disposition of the parts of the machine in conservative fields. The easiest way to understand this is to analyze the SMOT. Probably you recall the long conversation on that topic I had with someone. Such appropriately constructed machines demonstrate that the nature of energy is more complex than hitherto thought and that energy can be created literally "out of nothing", as it were. Thus for the functioning of such machines it is not necessary to have some initial quantity of something called "energy" stored somewhere. The nature of energy turns out to be such that it can appear due to purely constructive solutions always maintaining non-equilibrium, always tending towards equilibrium and never reaching it. Recall the analogy with the cat chasing its tail and dangling the carrot in front of the donkey.

As far as the track, you can see from both videos that the tracks are immovably attached to each other so both move at the same time.

[hartiberlin]

Hi Omnibus,
many thanks for your videos and observations.

Well we still disagree with the thermodynamic laws,
as this machine could also be explained by the right
turning cycle processes in a 
B ( magnetic flux density) over H ( magnetic field) magnetic diagram
and thus converting environmental heat
directly to mechanical energy via a ferro-magnetic
right turning cycle process and thus violating
the 2nd law of thermodynamic.

I think this is the case for many magnet setups and
special magnet ferromagnetic pulse motors with higher
than 100 % output, e.g. SMOT , LUTEC, STEORN and
some others..

I just think the first law, that states, that energy can not be created,
but only converted,  is a basic principle of nature, otherwise nature
would have already collapsed.

But in the case of the Finsrud device it is very hard to prove,
because the energies are so small, that are at play there
and only a fraction of a degree Celsius would be needed to
cool down to keep the iron ball moving, so this would really be hard
to measure...

Please can you tell us more about the future plans of Finrud,
what he wants to do with his invention ?
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

Omnibus,
what is hard to see is,
how much the whole aluminium rail track is tilting back and forth (up and down)
so the ball can roll on  ?
Is this only 1 degrees or how much about ?

How long does it take Finsrud to start the machine , when he has stopped it ?
How does he exactly start ?
Just give the ball a spin with his hands and
then adjusting the 120 degrees out of phase
mechanical oscillation weights to have the right frequency and phase relationsship to each other ?
What, if these "swinger units" are just a bit
deadjusted, will it then get to a stop ?

Does it have any effect, that these yellow push down spring like metal bar-rods
are shaking and just vibrating and thus giving
multiple pulses to the swinger units ?
Did you talk about these things with Finsrud ?

Many thanks.