Magnetic, And, Gravity, Motor, Update, And Notes

[guest1289]

  Spring-Powered-Version  Of My  Magnet-Motor-3.5

   In the diagram below of my  Spring-powered-version  of my  Magnet-motor-3.5, it shows the exact spacing between the  Spring-Powered-Components  that would ensure that there is   never   more than  one   Spring-Powered-Component  going  up-hill on  1  down-up  section of the track,  in order to minimize the  up-hill  section as being a sticky-point in the motor,     however,    I'm not sure if that would actually make a difference in terms of the over-all forces occurring in the motor.

    AND ALSO : In the diagram below,  I have connected 2 identical motors with a    connecting-rod,  this further replicates some advantageous forces occurring in my magnet-motor-3.5.
        This connecting-rod  could?  make it possible for one motor to help the other motor get over a  sticky-spot  especially when the first motor has no  spring-powered-component  going  up-hill  on the  relevant  down-up  section of  the  track  ,   this,  and  maybe the  spacing-concept in the previous paragraph,  are very important concepts  translated  from my magnet-motor-3.5  . 
   
   IMPORTANT NOTE :  In a previous post I mentioned that it may be necessary to  add a  2nd-'Identical-Spring'  to each  spring-powered-component   to eliminate the problem of the force from springs decreasing as they expand  :

I then came to a conclusion that the  Spring-powered-version  'may' have even less chance of functioning than I thought,  because the force from a spring decreases as it expands.
        So, my solution would be to add another  'Identical-Spring' to each  spring-powered-moving-component,  However,  the 2nd-'Identical-Spring'  would  pull  down the  spring-powered-moving-component  while  the  1st-spring  in the spring-powered-moving-component is  pushing  the  spring-powered-moving-component down,  this way,  there will be no loss of spring-force as the spring expands.

[guest1289]

    Perpetual-Motion Of Gases Powered Generator

    In gases( and liquids ) the  'atoms / molecules' never stop moving.

    My idea( as far as I know) is that some type of gas would be held( maybe under pressure ) in a container lined with a   'special-material'( something similar to photo-voltaic materials )
     When a gas-atom  collides with the   'special-material' ,  a photon( or part of the electron ) goes into the  'special-material' and causes electrical-current to flow in the 'special-material'.

Note : Obviously the  'special-material'( something similar to photo-voltaic materials ) should not have any protective layer of glass or plastic

    I choose gas rather than liquid since I assume  that gas-atoms collide with things at a much higher velocity than liquid-atoms.
   
    When an  atom-of-gas  bumps into  something,  it is always the electron-shell  of the atom-of-gas  that bumps  into something,  so as far as I know( or guess ) this is  'one'  reason why  electrons are  continuosly  loosing and gaining photons( each time electrons loose or gain photons they go into a higher or lower orbits )

[Zephir]

In my theory the overunity can be generated from thermal fluctuations by lowering their dimensionality at some point. If we put a charged capacitor inside the hot gas, then the molecules of gas will hit the capacitor and they will induce voltage spikes into it. This noise can be measured as a common thermoelectric noise within electronic circuits and it indeed decreases with temperature.

The problem is, this noise cannot be rectified and utilized in any way, once the rectifying diode remains as hot, as the gas, the energy of which we are just trying to utilize. Once we will cool this diode, then yes, the noise of diode will be lower than the thermoelectric noise and we would get some voltage on it. The problem is, such an energy production will be just another form of thermoelectric pile, because the diode will gradually heat itself just with the electric noise, which it rectifies. So we must cool it for to keep the production of energy running and this cooling would also require an energy.

In this respect it's interesting, that the we can drain a quite substantial energy flux by cooling surface with cosmic space. Recently such a surface has been constructed by layering of nanosurfaces and it keeps cool itself between 4 and 5 degrees below the surrounding air temperature - which is already temperature difference worth of utilization with classical thermoelectric Peltier cell.

For example, Ann Makosinski did use power converter integrated circuit, LTC3108 for it. The circuit contained FET's that would oscillate at voltages as low as 20mV. When used with a recommended   transformer, the IC would provide well over 2.5 volts AC. Ann got for 50 mV DC from the Peltiers about 6 mA at 5 Volts AC which was sufficient to light the LED. The result was a bright light at just 5 degree Celcius of Peltier differential.

But such a way of energy generation isn't still free energy in classical sense, overunity the less. We are just draining an energy from accelerated cooling of Earth with cosmic space, i.e. we are still utilizing solar and geothermal energy - just in indirect and diluted way not worth the effort.

In my opinion the situation with utilization of thermoelectric noise will change, if we wouldn't collect voltage fluctuations with 3D resistor, but with some thin narrow 2D plate (graphene layer) or even 1D nanowire (carbon nanotube). The trick here is, once we constrain electrons in their motion in one dimension, then the energy of their vibrations increases in remaining dimensions. The thermoelectric noise at the end of such nanowire will be therefore larger, than at previous 3D case and we can rectify it even with diode at the same temperature. Recently so-called time crystals (a miniature perpetuum mobiles in essence) were observed, which are working on the same principle (constraining motion of charged particles with Penning or magnetic trap).

Because the PN junction of diodes is actually quite narrow, even common LED diode can exhibit a tiny overunity, once it gets polarized in the proper direction. Of course, such an effect is quite weak at the case of single diode - but we can multiply it with usage of graphite nanolayers or nanotubes suspended within charged electret - which is IMO the principle, on which the Steorn Orbo Cube technology was working.

[guest1289]

  Below is a diagram of some designs I made which are intended to cause either gas( or liquid ) or aether,  to propel itself in just one direction,  just through the  perpetual-motion characteristic of  gas( or liquid ) molecules/atoms.

  I have some slight reason to think that the point near the triangles marked  'interaction-point',  is the point of  'maximum-pressure-?' where gas/liquid/aether would tend to be ejected   from the triangles, although of course material would equally be drawn in again after ejection

  I also included a half-dome design 

   I assume aether would have no reason to have the perpetual-motion characteristic of  gas( or liquid ) molecules/atoms,  but I included it in this description anyway.
   ( and I assume there's alternate theories that aether is always darting around all over the place )
    For an  aether-version,  the walls of the containment-shape of the device would either be magnets or electromagnets or electrets

   My/these  designs  also have some sort of similarity with the way the surprising electromagnetic-space-drive tested  by the space-agency functions,  keeping in mind the shape used by the  electromagnetic-space-drive ,  although the similarity becomes ambiguous/confusing

   
   UPDATE : I have now attached another diagram to this post,  in which I have optimized the design

                  Also note,   the gas( or liquid ) or aether is intended to flow inside a closed loop for power generation or for whatever else

[guest1289]

   Is it correct.  that  if you have a   radio-receiver  that has been tuned to be in resonance  with a   specific-radio-transmitter  that the  radio-receiver  will bend the  radio-waves  trajectories  in order to draw them into the  receiver,   

       In other words,  that the  radio-receiver  will behave like a magnet attracting iron-filings that have been thrown in the air

   that would disprove science much more than magnet-motors

   Is it on youtube etc

    If this is correct, and keeping in mind that different components inside devices like computers transmit at different frequencies and I assume at different  'resonances',  then that could shut down individual components of computers and other devices

    And keep in mind that living things also emit radiation,  do they have a resonance

    What about a hot cup of water,  could you theoretically have a  radiation-receiver that would be in resonance with that hot cup of water,  and could it freeze it

    (  could it refreeze the earths north / south pole,  or freeze volcanic lava,  and if a  tornado has resonance could it turn of a tornado or other weather modification etc ,  clouds/thunderclouds,  deep earth electrical currents  etc)

    In tests to determine the resonance of different objects, the object is either sitting  or held by something,  would that not affect it's resonance,  would it be better to magnetically or diamagnetically or electrostatically levitate it instead ,  although even that could affect it's resonance