Overunity.com Archives

Hi Everybody,

I am writing from Osl? and was in the middle of a long posting but the net was cut out for some reason so I'll try to summarize quickly.

These couple of days I met with Finsrud and saw his device working for hours. I also met with two professors of Physics from Oslo University who have observed the device several years ago. Finsrud is a truly amazing guy, a real genius. I have tell you, however, that now I understand better why this experiment has not realized its full scientific potential. I also heard some remarks from the two professors which, although expected, are very aggravating.

I'll continue this in another posting to avoid being cut out again ...

The first Physics professor, whom I met personally, said that although he saw the device working, there must be some "trick", even though he could not specify it. When I asked him if it were proven with certainty that this device is truly running for hours without any "tricks" would he then accept it. He said no, even then he would not accept it.

The retired professor of Physics was more open-minded and while he also referred to some unspecified "trick" he said that he will accept it if it is shown that this is a genuine effect. He, like the first professor, also referred to the fact that Finsrud is a former magician which he thought might be providing grounds for supposing that he is applying some "trick".

I'll stop here to prevent being cut off ...

I hope that I'll meet in person with the retired professor before I leave for the states. Also, I will meet with Finsrud tomorrow and probably on Sunday and will have a better picture about his reservations about considering his device other than a sculpture. So far I have made several hours of video with conversations with Finsrud and several hours of the running device. I'll try to shoot some more video till the end of my stay. Any comments or suggestions are welcome.

I should mention also that Finsrud's device is furthering the SMOT idea and I'm pretty convinced now that others such as Torbay have based their inspiration on it. You may call Finsrud's device a working Torbay motor ... At last we have something genuine and something that for the first time in modern history demonstrates perpetual motion.

Many thanks for letting us know.
It would be good, if you could post a few of your videos,
when you are back home over here.
Many thanks.

Just had a personal meeting with the retired professor from the Physics department  at Oslo Uniersity who has visited Finsrud some ten years ago and saw the device. As I said before, he is pretty sceptical, although he would accept it as a real phenomenon if it is proved through the application of the standard methods of science. His opinion is that Finsrud has placed a hidden motor with a battery inside the base of the motor and that keeps the ball turning. He does not have a direct proof of that suggestion but he says that it is for Finsrud to prove there is none.

Finsrud, however, is making no scientific claims, always insisting that this is only art and nothing else.

On the other hand, if true, this is a seminal experiment that should not be dependent on the psychology of one person or another. The experiment should be replicated no matter what.

I think there is some urgency to that since this is the only working experiment known to date and it should not vanish when Finsrud is gone. I also felt that Finsrud is afraid of something and that's why he doesn't want to pursue it along a scientific route. Of course, I am not Finsrud and cannot speak for him and his actual feelings and fears. What I'm writing here are only my impressions of what I saw.

I think there are two things to be done. First, a non-destructive way is to be sought (say, portable gamma-ray flaw detector) to observe directly the base and the supporting column holding the track so that any hidden motor be excluded. Second, the whole device has to be replicated and this should be the top priority of anybody interested in this field. I don't see anything more interesting in this field at this moment than Finsrud's device.

I also think the magician Randi should be contacted and asked to uncover the "trick", if any. He is a professional magician and as such should be expected to know how to uncover the tricks of his competitors without asking them to reveal their tricks by taking apart whatever they are showing on the stage. I will contact Randi upon my return to the states and it will be very good if he feels some pressure from other parties too.

Send me you comments, thoughts and ideas as to how this experiment can be proven real to the scientific community.

Quote from: hartiberlin on August 25, 2006, 02:58:08 PM
Many thanks for letting us know.
It would be good, if you could post a few of your videos,
when you are back home over here.
Many thanks.

Omnibus thnaks, and I second Hartibelin's remarks.

Some pics and and a video of the device:
http://www.galleri-finsrud.no/sider/mobile/foto.html

pretty interesting device, 3 pendulums, with attached three magnets, 3 stationary magnets?, and a ball on a circular bi rail track. (all magnets are red?)

there is a spring visible that is large enough to keep such a device running for a very long time.  anniversary clocks and 400 day clocks run for a year and more on a very small wound up spring.  this device is enough similar to a clock that it could be running from stored energy in the big spring for years.  the spring visible in the device is a very strong spring for such a device.  it might continue inside the tube to the base of the device.

Hi Stefan, mikestrecks2006, dingbat,

I'm still in Norway and therefore cannot do anything with the videos. When I get back to New York I'll see what I can do to post them so that you can see in more detail the working of the device.

dingbat, the spring you're referring to cannot explain the effect. Will say a little more on that below. First, I want to tell all that Finsrud showed me his workshop (although he asked me not to video there). He began pulling preliminary experiment after preliminary experiment. These he has carried out in the course of many years (about 30 some years) all with the goal to study where Nature would take a given mass. He was able to show me remnants of at least ten experiments. Eventually he brought 12 ring magnets into the secure room where the main device is. He then distributed them randomly on the floor (by casting 12 coins -- minding the heads or tails) and then suspended another ring magnet from the seiling to act as a pendulum. With this experiment he wanted to demonstrate how he began constructing the device. At the beginning the mentioned pendulum was swaying as an ordinary one, following the expected path. As time went on, however, the pendulum started randomly to change its trajectory at times spinning almost in a circle even. The magnetic fields of the floor magnets were kicking in.

Then, he said, he made two more of these stations and connected the three pendulums observing further strange behavior -- when one pendulum stops another would restart it and so on. This phenomenon, he thinks, is at the basis of the principle of his device.

In my opinion, however, the main effect is due to the clever way of retracting the horse-shoe magnets right at the time when the steel ball approaches the "sticky point". This is achieved by a very careful timing and adjustment of the three pendulums responsible for the retraction of the magnets. One can easily see also three wires protruding between the tracks which are being pushed by the ball during its motion. These activities ensure asymmetrically stronger pull towards the magnet than the pull after the ball passes the magnet by.

I'll continue in another posting ... 

Continue ...

In addition there are three smaller magnets, positioned above the track slightly after each horse-shoe magnet. The role of these smaller magnets (very well tuned) is to somewhat slow down the run of the steel ball so that there wouldn't be too much acceleration. This is like adding more friction, which may be done through roughening the track, but doing it with a magnet is pretty clever. The physical properties of the track would change in time while the magnetic "friction" will always stay the same.

As I said, it is these factors that are the main players in the working of the device. The rest seems redundant. Finsrud, however, insists that the randomly imbedded magnets in the base of the device as well as the magnets at the bottom of the fourth pendulum, the pendulum that is within the central supporting column and is not visible, play a crucial role in the working of the device. That is why he went out of his way to demonstrate the experiment with the twelve ring magnets.

I asked him if he would allow a fiber optic camera to be inserted into the central cylinder so that it can be shown that there is no hidden motor there. Unfortunately, the top of the tube containing the fourth pendulum is sealed and there is no direct access to the internal void. That's why I mentioned above non-destructive methods with gamma-rays ...

The spring that dingbat is referring to is not wound and is only to suspend the top part of the device. There are many more springs as well as flexible metal plates acting as springs which Finsrud has used for suspension purposes. Also, the spring dingbat refers to does not go along the central core -- it is only what one can see in the picture. Same applies to the numerous other springs which are used only for suspension and flexibility and cannot be considered as storing the energy necessary to drive the device. Therefore, these springs are of no concern.

The main concern is to prove that there is nothing hidden in the base of the device which secretly would be the driving mechanism.

Continue ...

Finsrud insists that due to the proper suspensions the motion of the steel ball is causing various favorable vibrations which cause the device in want of a stop never to find that stop. The importance of these additional vibrations caused by the ball, however, isn't clear to me and at this moment I think that it is only a redundancy. This is only a hunch, however, and until I carry out my own replication I wouldn't know.

Finsrud insisted that due to the mentioned vibrations the track in front of the ball is always lower which is what really makes the ball move. However, you will see in the video which I took that this lowering of the track is almost indiscernable and the shift of the track caused by the ball is less that 1mm. This depression of the track is expected anyway from the mass of the ball which is almost 1kg. As I said before, the propelling of the ball seems to be caused by something else which is what is clever about Finsrud's device and is being copied by others such as Torbay -- the disbalance of the attraction when ball approaches the horse-shoe magnet versus the attraction when the ball passes the horse-shoe magnet. This disbalance is ensured by the clever way of retracting the magnets due to the very motion of the ball. The additional smaller magnets also have their role, as I explained earlier.

Of course, all this has to be replicated right away which may not be an easy task in view of the very demanding requirements for tuning up the device. Everything has to be benign, the magnets have to have just the right induction and by no means the goal should be to place monstrous neodymium magnets. The right characteristics and time constants of the pendulums are to be sought so that a perfect timing conditions can be achieved and so on. Otherwise, the actual making of the device doesn't seem to be too complicated but the tweaking would be crucial and requires a lot of patience.

He said that even he had had problems sometimes with starting the device. He said that recently people were coming to see it and he just hadn't been able to start it. He wasn't sure it will work when I arrived there. Luckily, however, he was able to start it at around 12:00 and it was working until the gallery closed at five. When I arrived the next day it was still working and he was able to tell by the pitch of the sound that it was healthy and will continue running. When I arrived the third day he said that it had stopped but when he opened the security door it turned out it is actually running, although it didn't sound to him as healthy as it should. He thought it will soon stop running but in fact it ran the whole time I was there.

Continue ...

I should also mention one important aspect which Finsrud couldn't emphasize more -- the need to construct three rather than two-dimensional models of perpetual motion devices. He showed me various models of well-known non-working devices which he had tried to extend into a third dimension. A peculiar three-dimensional device is also the motor we are discussing here and which is the only working device which he has made (nothing else is needed). Indeed, the activity of the device includes not only running of a ball in the xy-plane but also a motion (of the horse-shoe magnets) along the z-axis. In his opinion the gallery of the non-working devices is full of such devices because they have always been thought of as two-dimensional and not three-dimensional such.

Has anyone heard of the initial construction of the Diesel engine? Finsrud looked in his files to show it to me but couldn't find it. This invention has been a perpetual motion, he says, but certain business interests have suppressed it. Does anyone know more about it?

I was told, that in the footer
are just repelling magnet plates, which
just one plate is fixed to the stand and
the other is fixed to the upper device, so
it is always titling to the side and goes
back and forth titling and never finds
an equilibrium place.... so with the additional
upper devices, the device always moves.

Stefan, as I mentioned Finsrud very much emphasizes on the magnets you talk about, placed inside the base. These he considers the major components and his major achievement and is what he considers the functioning of the device is based on. He even made a special experiment with 12 ring magnets, demonstrating the principle. I have a video of that experiment as well. I?m, however, not so sure about that, that is, I?m not sure that these bottom magnets are at the basis of the machine?s functioning. As a matter of fact, I found out that he wasn?t too happy when I was asking him to explain more about these bottom magnets and how they are positioned. He seems to consider that his secret and wouldn?t divulge too much on that matter. As a matter of fact, it is exactly that part of the construction that gives the sceptics the most room for non-acceptance only because it cannot be seen what?s enclosed there.

As far as tilting goes, you will see from the video I?ll post how slight it is ? less than a millimeter. The lowering of the track indeed seems to appear ahead of the ball but I?m not sure this is the main reason for the motion of the ball. One would expect such depression of the track anyway. We are dealing with a steel ball of almost 1kg weight. It seems more likely to me that the general principles (dangling carrot in front of the donkey; cat chasing its tail) which we discussed at length with regard to Torbay?s and other motors are in fact responsible for the observed perpetuum mobile effect here. Obviously, Finsrud is the pioneer in this and everyone such as Torbay, for instance, are just building on these principles.

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=553061720631716456&hl=en)

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Hi Stefan,

Aside from being occupied with his artwork (for instance, he was just finishing the statue for the Norwegian Oscars) and students, Finsrud is working on at least a couple of other technical projects right now. He showed me the prototype of one of them ? a machine utilizing the energy of the sun. Another one is using the energy of the tidal waves in Oslo fjord. He also showed me prototypes of numerous other projects for perpetuum mobile which have led him to the successful one.

I feel, however, that he has had it with the project in question. Many people have come throughout the years to study it and nothing suspicious has been found about it. He has a feeling that should do it and that it has been publicized enough. Unfortunately, he doesn?t realize that this most important technical creation of his needs more than a couple of interviews in the Norwegian press, a presentation as a curiosity on Discovery channel and MTV and a note about it in a Utah brochure in order to convince the world that something revolutionary is going on there. I told you already what, for instance, two physics professors at Oslo University think about it. They are convinced he has used a trick to pull our leg, although when asked what that trick might be they couldn?t identify it. They think it?s up to Finsrud to prove he hasn?t used a trick while I think it?s just the opposite. The burden of proof is on them. They are making the statement that there must be a trick, therefore it?s up to them to prove its validity. I will pursue this problem further and will let you know about the development.

Stefan, you say:

?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.?

Are you suggesting that attraction by magnets is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics? What does this right-turning cycle process have to do with the laws of thermodynamics? I don?t get it.

This I also don?t understand:

?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.?

Why would the violation of the first thermodynamic law lead to the collapse of the Universe? There?s nothing that would suggest that.

As far as the tilting goes, it is less than 1mm at the periphery. You can see the tilting in several places of the videos I posted. This was one of the things I specifically paid attention to when taking the video.

?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 ??

I have video of that too and if I find time I may post it as well. First Finsrud cleaned carefully the track with the paper seen on the first of the two videos I posted. What surprised me was that, unlike what I expected, Finsrud didn?t take special measures to synchronize the pendulums. He just slightly pushed the ball with his hands, enough to make it roll on the track and then slightly slapped it a couple of times. It somehow got into synchronism by itself. Mind you, while doing this Finsrud warned me that the machine probably won?t work this time since he felt the sound it was producing didn?t sound healthy to him. Luckily, however, it ran during the whole time I was in the gallery that day ? from around 12 at noon until around 4:30 in the afternoon. Enough to convince me this was not a trivial matter.

?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 ??

First, these vibrations are self-induced. They are due to the rotation of the ball not vice versa. Finsrud thinks that they have a lot to do with the functioning of the machine. Remember, there is a fourth pendulum inside the supporting column with magnets attached to it facing a set of magnets embedded in clay. This fourth pendulum swings slightly as the ball is turning.

Finsrud carried out a special experiment with 12 ring magnets and a pendulum with another ring magnet to show me how he actually started this project. I have this on video too. As a matter of fact, you can hear at the end of the first video I posted the sound of the drill when he was preparing to show me the experiment with the ring magnets. He thinks that?s the gist of the whole story ? everything is set up in such a way, using various springs, as well as that magnetic pendulum phenomenon, to disallow ever reaching equilibrium.

I don?t deny these additions may help but, as I said before, I don?t think that is the essence of the principle driving his machine. The essence I think is based on the SMOT and this is an ingenious rendition of a continuous SMOT.

Quote from: hartiberlin on September 09, 2006, 07:57:15 AM
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.

Just want to throw in an observation about the model prototype I that I built.  (A magnet motor that uses a small amount of power).  I found that there is no detectable temperature change in any part of the device, except where electrical power is being expended.  The magnets appear to maintain the same room temperature that the room is set to, whether the motor is running or at rest.  There does not appear to be any change in temperature (heat or cold) at all. There is no more temperature change than if you caused the magnets to interact manually.

Liberty

Stefan, I don?t know why you?re mentioning STEORN. First, STEORN haven?t demonstrated anything and therefore shouldn?t be considered in the discussions. Nevertheless, I?ll mention that, as far as I understand, theirs is a motor which needs some energy input. If that?s the case then we have something much more interesting ? the motor of Paul Sprain which was discussed here. Unfortunately, due to the need of energy input Sprain?s device is much inferior to Finsrud?s in demonstrating the invalidity of the firstl thermodynamic law. The sceptics love to have input. In Finsrud?s case whereby there is no input energy they cannot say anything ? chess mate. They can only resort to ridiculous suggestions such as fraud which it obviously is not.

Well, magnetic motors can use a magneto-caloric process
and it can be described via the BH diagram with right turning circular
processes like stirling motors can be described in PV diagrams.
So there is an interaction between moving Bloch walls and
magnetic domains inside iron material ( like the steel ball in Finsrud?s device)
and in magnets and the energy needed to do this which will probably in Finsrud?s case come
from the magnets which will cool then down by themself maybe 1/100th degrees
of Celsius and convert this into the attraction energy onto the steel ball
and thus converts heat energy into mechanical motion of the iron steel ball.
Also the steel ball will probably also cool down itsself a bit cause it can be described
as a "positive" hysteresis, but the frictional forces on the rail track will
also heat it again a bit, so it probably compensates again the cooling...
Also if you calculate the heat needed for such a small friction losses to overcome,
it is probably only in the MilliWatts range and to cool down air to extract Milliwatts
of power would only need 1/hundreds of Celsius to do this, so a very small
temperature drop only, which is hardly at all measureable...

I would really love to see the other basic experiment with the 12 ring magnets.
I think this could be well replicated and if you put coils around the ring magnets
and the pendulum comes never to rest you could also extract some free
energy with this via the outpt coils.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2006, 09:35:24 AM

What does this right-turning cycle process have to do with the laws of thermodynamics? I don?t get it.

See it this way:
There is always a magneto-caloric effect happening when a magnet
attracts iron.
The iron magnetic domains are tilted into the direction
of the magnet and the electron spins are tiltled inside the iron
and can only move in one dimension less than before.

This leads to a lower energy state of the spins of the electrons
of the iron ball. This releases heat energy from the iron ball.

Now when the ball has moved on and the iron magnetic domains
and the electron spins again
restructure and shake loose and don?t point into the same direction,
this will need outside heat energy and therefore the ball cools
down and heat will flow from the surrounding environment onto the ball,
as the ball in this moment is colder than the air.

This is the magneto-caloric effect with is also used in
new modern fridges which use very special new
alloy materials which have a very high magneto-caloric effect.

So in my view the Finsrud machine is just a special heat energy machine,
which is just violating the second law, noting more.

Due to the low energy density, ( just to overcome some MilliWatts
frictional losses) you just don?t see the temperature differences.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2006, 09:35:24 AM
I have video of that too and if I find time I may post it as well.

Maybe you can post these videos here as Google
takes so much time to validate the uploaded videos.
I really would like to see, how Finsrud starts the machine
and the other experiment with the 12 ring magnets and
the pendulum magnet.

Does he hold the pendulum magnet in his hand or
does he fix the thread holding it onto some kind of stand or
upper rod ?
Did the pendulum really never come to a stillstand when you watched this
experiment ?
How exactly was this setup ?
I think this could be much more important than hos whole machine
he has...

Quote from: Omnibus on September 08, 2006, 08:35:46 PM
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=553061720631716456&hl=en)

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

Omnibus, thks for posting the links.

Did he ever say what was the longest time the machine ever run continuously, and did it stop by it self or did he stop it?

Also, can you elaborate on the 4th pendulum-magnet arrangement inside the central column?

Here is some info about magnetic cooling:
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040626/fob6.asp

These cycles also happen with a normal magnet
influencing magnetic attraction into an iron ball material.

Stefan, the validity of the explanation you give of the connection between heat and magnetism is not at all evident. You?re talking about some hitherto unknown dependencies whose nature is even more exotic than the violation of the principle of conservation of energy. I?d propose to apply Occam?s razor and try to explain the phenomenon in more acceptable simpler and viable terms.

There is no evidence that a connection between heat and magnetism exists and therefore such connection should not be invoked for explaining any experiment. Otherwise it will be a free for all and anything will go. One can start fantasizing all kind of things presenting them as plausible explanations. This is not the way science works.

Besides, there is no evidence that conventional machines using magnets have their magnets lose their magnetic induction when attracting other parts of the machines (unless extreme heating over the Curie point occurs or magnets undergo mechanical hits or other extraneous demagnetizing effects). 

Stefan, you write:

?Does he hold the pendulum magnet in his hand or
does he fix the thread holding it onto some kind of stand or
upper rod ?
Did the pendulum really never come to a stillstand when you watched this
experiment ?
How exactly was this setup ?
I think this could be much more important than hos whole machine
he has...?

No, he doesn?t hold the magnet in his hands. It is suspended on the ceiling. As I said, at the end of the first movie you can see Finsrud drilling a hole in the ceiling, preparing for the pendulum experiment.

The pendulum eventually comes to rest but it takes much longer time for it to come to rest when there are magnets, although the starting height is the same.

I don?t think the experiment with the pendulums is more important than the machine itself. There?s a lot more needed in studying just the time and trajectory of the swinging magnet than what I saw to draw serious conclusions. The conclusions from the device are straightforward and are shocking (in saying this I?m excluding fraud for which there is no evidence). Finsrud?s machine is the most shocking and conclusive experiment so far in the area of magnetic motors and of perpetuum mobile in general.

@mickestocks2006, the longest time I understand has been weeks. Exactly how many I don?t know. The device stops by itself, due to slight constructive disparities appearing in the course of its work, wear of the tracks etc., and causing it to get out of synch. This in no way, however, proves that it isn?t a perpetuum mobile.

The fourth pendulum is enclosed inside the supporting column and is somewhat thicker than the rest. At its lower end there is a set of magnets attached facing another set of magnets imbedded in clay at the bottom of the device. These bottom magnets also affect slightly the swinging of the main three pendulums. You can see this in the video in these parts where the bottoms of the pendulums are seen. The displacement of the fourth pendulum or ?pendulum? is very slight and depends on the position of the heavy steel ball (~820g) on the track. As I said these subtle additions to the construction (the fourth pendulum and the magnetic effect on the three external pendulums) ma be helpful for the running of the device since they ensure certain instability of the track. However, the main effect is due to the ingenious solution of the ?sticky spot? problem ? much like the SMOT solves it. Whenever the ball approaches the magnets it retracts so that the ball can overcome the ?sticky spot?.  Once the ball has overcome the sticky spot the gravity returns the magnets in their initial position with maximum attraction. Think about it ? how close to the SMOT this is. However, here, in Finsrud?s device, instead of the ball escaping the magnets, the magnets escape the ball. And all that is self-inflicted, much like in Torbay motor.

@Stefan, back to the magnetic-cooling system. The phenomenon you refer to cannot explain away Finsrud?s perpetuum mobile. Aside for the fact that it is not at all evident that this magnetic-cooling effect is present in Finsrud?s steel ball, even if it is present its effect would be the opposite to those necessary to drive the ball. Think about it, the magnetic-cooling effect in the experiments you gave link to is due to imparting work to the system ? you need to bring the material into a magnetic field and then remove it from there. There are many other principles which use work to produce a refrigerator effect. Your fridge doesn?t cool down spontaneously, you have to plug it to the mains.

Thus, even if there were a cooling effect in Finsrud?s device of the type you describe it would consume rather than produce work. As a matter of fact, the common materials (stainless steel and ceramic magnets) are not known to produce any tangible heat effects due to the introduction in and out of the field which sometimes is very rapid and the fields are very high. The article you cite describes special conditions and very special alloys. And, as I said, even if Finsrud had used such alloys, he would not have been able to have the ball turning for hours with no input energy observing at the same time the cooling effect you describe ? the cooling effect requires spending of energy.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2006, 09:18:04 PM
you need to bring the material into a magnetic field and then remove it from there.

Exactly this is happening.
You are bringing the iron ball into the field of the permanent magnet
and then you are removing the permanent magnet again as the ball rolls on.

So there is probably the magneto-caloric effect happening.
Okay, the effect is very small, but it will be enough to convert
environmental heat on a 100 % conversion process into
mechanical energy to overcome the frictional losses
of the ball rolling on the alu rail track.

It is probably only in the range of 1/100th degrees celsius
and the ball having friction on the rail will also heat up on the rail,
so it probably compensates back and forth...

This so is a perpetuum mobile of a second kind,
as it violates the second "law" of thermodynamics,
which is by the way no law, but only an experience
which now has been proven through the Finsrud
device to be no law at all.

We can really easily explain it by violation
of the second "law", no need to violate the first law
of thermodynamics.

But surely it is a great achievement and really very
ground breaking !

2. So how long is the pendulum thread in the 12 magnets experiments ?
about as long  as the room is high ? So he hangs it to the ceiling
and it bounces back and forth over the magnets laying on the floor ?
Did he find a position, where the pendulum magnet never
stopped ? Or did it come to a rest ?
Only much later ?
How long is the time compared to each other ?
Many thanks.

@Stefan, you wrote:

?Exactly this is happening.
You are bringing the iron ball into the field of the permanent magnet
and then you are removing the permanent magnet again as the ball rolls on.?

Not exactly. Think about who is doing what. It?s easier to understand it in terms of a SMOT. The net energy when the steel ball travels along a closed loop is zero ? put the ball at the entrance of the ramp, let it go up the ramp, let it fall off the ramp and then bring it back to the beginning of the ramp. In doing so no net energy has been gained in the magnetic field. Magnetic field is a conservative field. Whatever energy has been gained when the ball was attracted by the magnet (heating in your terms) is lost upon the return of the ball to the initial position (equivalent cooling has taken place).

The excess energy we are so much concerned about is produced in the gravitational field ? magnetic field has lifted the ball spontaneously (in the gravitational field) to a height h and gravitational energy mgh has been imparted to the ball at the expense of no energy spent. This is the excess energy (in simplified terms) which is created out of nothing and which, if the device is properly made, makes it self-sustaining.

@Stefan, pendulum thread is almost as long as the height of the room ? you can get a feeling for the dimensions of the room from the video.

Yes, he does exactly that ? the magnets are on the floor, randomly spread (he tosses change and places magnets where the coins are, heads or tails corresponding to S and N poles) and he swings the pendulum over them.

I don?t think there was a situation whereby the pendulum magnet never stopped swinging. It always comes to a rest but sometimes deflected from the equilibrium at a certain height over the floor.

As far as the time goes, I don?t have quantitative results. Will be good to carry out a thorough study applying some way to measure, say, the exact length of the trajectory of the pendulum over the magnets and compare it with the length of the trajectory of the regular pendulum.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2006, 10:19:32 PM
@Stefan, you wrote:

Ã,“Exactly this is happening.
You are bringing the iron ball into the field of the permanent magnet
and then you are removing the permanent magnet again as the ball rolls on.Ã,”

Not exactly. Think about who is doing what. ItÃ,’s easier to understand it in terms of a SMOT. The net energy when the steel ball travels along a closed loop is zero Ã,â€" put the ball at the entrance of the ramp, let it go up the ramp, let it fall off the ramp and then bring it back to the beginning of the ramp. In doing so no net energy has been gained in the magnetic field. Magnetic field is a conservative field. Whatever energy has been gained when the ball was attracted by the magnet (heating in your terms) is lost upon the return of the ball to the initial position (equivalent cooling has taken place).

The excess energy we are so much concerned about is produced in the gravitational field Ã,â€" magnetic field has lifted the ball spontaneously (in the gravitational field) to a height h and gravitational energy mgh has been imparted to the ball at the expense of no energy spent. This is the excess energy (in simplified terms) which is created out of nothing and which, if the device is properly made, makes it self-sustaining.

Omnibus,
surely gravity also helps in the Finsrud device,
but this might be just a storage field it is using.
( to temporarly store the height difference)

I guess, whatever its main function principle is,
the 1st law is not violated, but just the second "law"
and that heat-conversion is also at play,
also if you can?t see and measure it directly,
as the power is only in the milliWatts range.

But with very exact calorimetrical measurements
this heat conversion will probably also be seen.

Anyway, we should better concentrate to
build simular units or work out a better scaled
up device with more power output.
Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 09, 2006, 10:25:50 PM
@Stefan, pendulum thread is almost as long as the height of the room Ã,â€" you can get a feeling for the dimensions of the room from the video.

Yes, he does exactly that Ã,â€" the magnets are on the floor, randomly spread (he tosses change and places magnets where the coins are, heads or tails corresponding to S and N poles) and he swings the pendulum over them.

I donÃ,’t think there was a situation whereby the pendulum magnet never stopped swinging. It always comes to a rest but sometimes deflected from the equilibrium at a certain height over the floor.

As far as the time goes, I donÃ,’t have quantitative results. Will be good to carry out a thorough study applying some way to measure, say, the exact length of the trajectory of the pendulum over the magnets and compare it with the length of the trajectory of the regular pendulum.

Yes, this would be a good first experiment to see,
if a pendulum of the same weight and
without magnets on the floor will swing a shorter
time period, than the 12 magnets experiments.

As Finsrud said, he got the idea to his device from
this experiment and that due to his "chaos theory"
the pendulum will never come to a still stand, when the optimum
magnets positions on the floor are found, this is probably
the main experiment, which should prove his theory right
or wrong.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan, you know for a long time my contention that we don't even need other devices to prove violation of the first law f thermodynamics -- SMOT is enough for this purpose. As I explained in my previous posting, travel along a closed loop in a magnetic field leads to no net energy. Heating is negated by cooling. Violation of the first law occurs when in the gravitational field part of the closed loop is covered for free, spontaneously helped by the magnetic field. Just this example is quite enough to abolish the first law. No net heating and cooling. Simply producing of energy out of nothing, only due to proper disposition of the parts of the machine in overlapping conservative fields.

I can't agree more, however, that for a wider acceptance, every one of us should hold in his hand self-sustaining devices based on the above principle. It is well known that Greg Watson, the founder of this field has had closed-loop SMOTs and even sold some. He is nowhere to be found, however. A closed-loop SMOT of Greg Watson type is much simpler than Finsrud's device. I think Finsrud has added throughout the years redundancies which make it harder to reproduce. Anyway, replication by independent parties of any of these self-sustaining devices is crucial for wider acceptance of the perpetuum mobile concept.

Hi Omnibus!

This is a great thread!

Thank you very much for the videos, amazing! I appreciate it very much.
I known the finsrud machine for years, and this is my favourite, which really works.

I read this discussion with interest, and have some thougts to say. I very agree with Finsrud and you, in the matter of building 3 dimensional machines rather than 2 dimensional. I also had this thought long before. With 3 dimensions we have more possibilities than with 2 dimensions. Nature works in 3 dimensions.

I don't think that Finsrud's machine violates the conservation of energy law. I think the long mentioned "perpetuum mobile" is possible without this violation.

I have a vision about this machine. It has very interesting properties. It's more an artwork, not just a machine, or an experiment. Best artwork in this category I've ever seen.
The main parts are: 6 magnets, 4 pendulums (with additional magnets), a circular track, and a steel ball. (Do I understand Right?)

In my opinion the machine have to be considered as a complex system. It uses motion to induce motion.
For the energy input, It uses the gravity force, the force of the magnets, and a "push" by a person to start. But once the system is started, it uses motion to induce motion, and uses the induced motion to induce a new one. Uses force to induce another force.

When the ball is moving, it causes the pendulums to keep swinging.
When the pendulums are swinging, they cause the sloping of the circle track and the moving of the magnets, And    these processes cause the ball to keep moving. And here we are...
Also, the cylindrical red (pot?) magnets cause the ball to "lose weight" in the proper positions, and this process help the pendulums to slope the circular track. I guess the lowest position of the track is (always?) before the ball in the direction where the ball is moving. Maybe it's less than 1 degree, but it can be enough.

Many people commited the fault of "making the track to change too much", and it didn't work. And we can see in Finsrud's machine, small differences can achieve great effects, if everything are in the correct relation. For me it looks some kind of balance. Or a kind of "balanced unbalance". When it's in synch, it capable to operate for long periode of time.

I wonder what to do, with the small vibrations... They're very intersting, and artistic. I guess the vibrations are not the main principles of the machine, but in the other hand... There are some truth in them, as Finsrud mentions. When many small vibrations act together in the right way, it can achieve a considerable effect, right? Just think freely, not only about this machine... This vibration thing is pretty strange... And artistic... ;)

Now, back to the conservation of energy for some unusual example...
Take a cup of tea, or a steel cube... :D  And place on the table. What happens? Nothing?
The object stay on the table, and don't move. But... This cup of tea continously receives the force of gravity, and produce a force against the table. However, the table is strong enough to keep the cup in its position, and no motion occur. With more precise words, the cup of tea uses 100% of gravity input and produces 0% useful work. So this "device" has an efficiency of 0%.
Now lets place a steel ball on the table. If the table is perfectly horizontal, the same happens. But maybe the table slopes a bit, and if the ball weight enough, begins to bowl. What happens?
The ball receives 100% of the gravity force, and converts perhaps 1% to movement.

Similar to Finsrud's machine... This is the reason why I think there is no need for the violation of the conservation law. Simply it isn't violated in my viewpoint. Maybe It can be violated somehow, if we think about galaxies and galaxies, but not here and now. (The same thing occurs with magnets, just a bit different.)

If somebody out there will present a machine next week, which is an operational gravity wheel, that device is also only capable to convert few percent of the total gravity force. But can have an important property: to do a few continous useful work. The most efficient device now, the steel ball, which you bring to the top of a skyscraper, and release it. However, this ball fall only once by itself, so can't do continous work, and not too useful.

About friction... I believe the friction is not the reason of the unsuccess. This is bullshit. The real reason is the lack of right (simple, natural) knowledge, the unknowness of the right ways.

The heat or the cool of the steel ball or other parts... I don't think it is important.
I think Finsrud himself never thought about a lot of scientific thing, you're talking about. Of course I can be wrong, but he don't needed to do that.
What I think is, he has his own imaginations and ideas, designed, performed his experiments, have done a lot of hard work with his new artwork, and finally let it move...

Thanks for him very much!

Greetings,

Random thoughts:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=553061720631716456&hl=en
@ 41:10 -> 41.30

When you hear that click.  It is something which flashes, seems like an electrical click. Always when the ball is passing a particular point on the system it clicks. 

Personally, I think the pendulums may just be for show.  It is a 1kg ball on a almost frictionless plane.  if it was pushed to start the sytem, that alone is a large amount of energy injected into the system. 

I will now explain what I think the flashing clicking is -
In my opinion it is an electromagnet.  It attractes the ball just before it passes it and switches off again as soon as the ball has passed, thereby speeding its progress without pulling it back.

Maybe inside the column is a coil of wire, a magnetic field (as found on the pendulums) moving past a wire generates electricity.  this could be collected in a capacitor to power the electromagnet.

Alternatively the sound could be a resetting mechanism or some method used to give the pendulums a "kick" to keep them going...but with the quality of the video, it is hard to discern the sound exactly.

Also I believe without the middle bits, the ball, once given a push to get it up to speed as seen in the videos will continue in its orbit for a very long time without any mechanism due to its weight and smoothness of plane.

Shak

@noodles, you wrote:

?Personally, I think the pendulums may just be for show.  It is a 1kg ball on a almost frictionless plane.  if it was pushed to start the sytem, that alone is a large amount of energy injected into the system.?

The energy from the initial push cannot explain the weeks of work of the device. Take away the magnets and this same energy from the initial push will only be enough for just several turns of the ball.

As far as clicks go, they are more than one ? at least three less loud and the one more clear. Clicks are detrimental to the functioning of the device since they're waste of energy which drives it. Therefore, in the analysis (because they are adverse factor) clicks may work in favor of the device and not against it.

?I will now explain what I think the flashing clicking is -
In my opinion it is an electromagnet.  It attractes the ball just before it passes it and switches off again as soon as the ball has passed, thereby speeding its progress without pulling it back.
Maybe inside the column is a coil of wire, a magnetic field (as found on the pendulums) moving past a wire generates electricity.  this could be collected in a capacitor to power the electromagnet.?

You?re suggesting fraud. There have been groups that have studied such a possibility, using very sensitive instruments capable of detecting very slight electromagnetic phenomena. No such phenomena have been detected. Proposals such as yours to explain away the Finsrud effect have been around at the beginning and all of them have failed to detect any foul play.

?Alternatively the sound could be a resetting mechanism or some method used to give the pendulums a "kick" to keep them going...but with the quality of the video, it is hard to discern the sound exactly.?

This is another suggestion for fraud but it is a mere speculation. More is needed to accept your proposal.

?Also I believe without the middle bits, the ball, once given a push to get it up to speed as seen in the videos will continue in its orbit for a very long time without any mechanism due to its weight and smoothness of plane.?

As I said, without the magnets the ball will only make several turns and will stop despite the initial push. If have something else in mind, explain it better.

Quote from: Omnibus on September 10, 2006, 01:41:01 PM

The energy from the initial push cannot explain the weeks of work of the device. Take away the magnets and this same energy from the initial push will only be enough for just several turns of the ball.

As far as clicks go, they are more than one ? at least three less loud and the one more clear. Clicks are detrimental to the functioning of the device since they're waste of energy which drives it. Therefore, in the analysis (because they are adverse factor) clicks may work in favor of the device and not against it.

As I said, without the magnets the ball will only make several turns and will stop despite the initial push. If have something else in mind, explain it better.

This is very right, I agree with Omnibus. Without the magnets, or without the pendulums, the ball will take only several turns, and stop, it's sure. If you don't believe, You can try for yourself.

About fraud suggestion... Finsrud is an artist. In this case he has no interst to do something fraudulant. He didn't advertise his moving sculpture too much, or perhaps didn't at all. Others talked about it much more. He just placed his artwork in his gallery, and that's all. Visitors can see it. There is no evidence for fraud.

I think the clicks are not for a hidden trick. Also the speculated coil, capacitor, and electromagnet can't produce   enough power to do that.

This machine is really a unique one. (Not always needed to look for a hidden trick, or fraud.)
From one more viewpoint it can be considered as a system, which able to continously store some energy received from gravity and the fields of permanent magnets, a kind of storage device. The machine resets itself every turn, and continously store the energy in its own motion. (And use its own motion to resets itself.)
I think at the loud click, the ball give a small push to the pendulums to keep them swinging. The pendulums react each other through various mechanisms, and the kick has been divided.

This machine is quite complex (below the surface), really a great work of art.
Perhaps doesn't run for a century, but prove the possibility.
And everything can be better, and better...

It is said,
that it only stops, if the clay that holds the magnets
in the lower buttom magnet plate dries out too much.

But this could take a few months.

The click sound probably comes from the one small
sawing hole in the track.
You can see it, when the camera zooms across the rail track.
When the ball goes over this small slit then it probably makes this
click sound.
I have to rewatch it to be able to hear it.

Hello,

I never said Fraud.  They were random thoughts about other possibilities.

His reluctance to monetize this discovery is what is causing the doubt.  If it was so good and you wish to help society, release plans, open up the centre so we can all see and allow a replice of the device to be made.  On the other hand, if money is your passion, then take that route, but at least take some route rather than dangling a carrot...

From what I have read, it seems like he has moved on to creating other art and is reluctant to monetize.

I have tried the dangling magnetic pendulum over magnets experiment before, is always seems to find a point of stability and equilibrium.

What is your explanations for the flash at the point in the video in my original post? (clearly visible at 41:12 and 41:17 it is yellow, at bottom of tall spring thing with yellow top)

Hello noodles,

Sorry, if you felt me hostile, I don't want to be. I'm only very excited about this machine. :)
I also think the magnetic pendulum will always stops, and find equilibrium, as you say. Sure. At the best, it can tuned to swing some more time.

About the flash you mentioned... I missedit before, but now I can see, what you say.
At first sight it was very strange. But soon after that I realized what it is. Simple and nothing strange:
You have to keep in mind, that the machine stay behind glass walls from every direction, and above the sculpture there are strong lights to light it properly. And the ball is a clear shining silver ball.
The thing at the bottom of the spring is a normal mother screw made of copper, also clear, used to fix the spring normally.

The flashing is only a normal optical illusion caused by the glass, the lights, and the shining steel parts. Only a reflection. Nothing strange, I think.
If you look more carefully, you can find other similar, but weaker effects on the surface of other parts of the sculpture. For example there is another, smaller and fixed steel ball, with a periodic reflection effect. And possible to find more similar, but weaker ones...

Quote
It is said,
that it only stops, if the clay that holds the magnets
in the lower buttom magnet plate dries out too much.

Good to hear! That can be fixed. Of course, It is obvious that the machine also stops without the pendulums.

I failed to determine what is the big click exactly, but will try once more.
I only had that idea about the ball to react the pendulums. In the other hand the ball always react without my speculation of the big click, because the ball rolls on the swinging track, and interact with the horseshoe magnets, which ones are directly connected to the pendulums.

After the shining steel ball left that spring, the flash appears. And appears periodically. Really only a reflection caused by the ball, the glass, and the lights. What other might be?

That is what I thought was an electrical discharge of some sort... :(

It is a low quality video, so hard to tell for sure, but it seems to me to be more than just a reflection...but without 100% clear video, it is hard to tell.  If the original video poster could make a loss less copy of just those sections, maybe take a screenshot of the high quality version, it would settle the issue fully.

That is what I thought was electric, hence my electromagnet comments earlier.

If I can go of on one of my thoughts again -
The middle gold dome reminds me of a van der graaf generator/something tesla made.
Maybe, pendulums swing, causing something to rub against a material to build static electric charge (EG, cloth on perspex type of thing) then this energy is discharged as the ball hits that point on its run, attracting at just the right moment and switching off just as the ball passes so as not to drag it back.

Maybe...maybe... :)

Also, noise energy costs system energy.  The amount of noise this is making per run is quite a lot, if it was close to 100% efficiency, by reducing this noise, you could have OU quite easily...

But hold on a second, why are we getting so excited about this one?  It stops and there is no big principle here  (unlike for example, SMOT)...

Don't you think, that this static electricity idea is much more complicated than the machine itself?
Not as easy to do as you say, i think. Can you generate enough power with static electricity to affect an almost 1kg steel ball? If you change the charge of the steel ball in such way, does it any considerable effect on the interaction between the magnets and the ball?

However, if this is the case, the sculpture still moves for weeks.  ;)
Yeah, everything stops after a certain time, even the solar system will... Everything change after its certain period of time. In my opinion this is the one real law about the impossibility of perpetual motion, when you think literally.
Of course, this is more philosophical, but true. The only one real perpetual motion is the whole universe itself.

This I posted in the Steorn forum and would like to discuss it here too:

Instead of answering individually, in this post I?d like to summarize what?s available and what is to be done and propose it for a discussion. Something has to be done to move this discussion forward, otherwise it?s useless:

1) I notice that there are no commentaries to my analysis of SMOT after I posted my reply to rufus_firefly on page 8 of this thread (http://www.steorn.net/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=13991&page=8 (http://www.steorn.net/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=13991&page=8)). In that text I clearly explained why SMOT is violating the first thermodynamic law (wich also means that Simanek?s analysis is incorrect). It needs to be established am I right in my analysis or I am not. Establishing this is important also because Finsrud?s device is based on the SMOT concept and if I am right this is a good reason to discuss Finsrud?s device further.

2) I intend to make one experiment myself and another trip to Norway and I would want to propose a simple non-destructive protocol to Finsrud (which I?d like to discuss with everybody here) which will definitively prove the reality of the claim that Finsrud?s device violates the first law. Of course, I?ll post videos of the several things that need to be demonstrated in order to prove unconditionally such violation.

THE PROTOCOL:

This will be done here in the US:
a) A track similar to that of Finsrud?s machine will be made of bicycle or motorcycle spoke wheels (just as in Finsrud) and ~800g ball will be pushed by hand along this track and the time of travel until the final stop will be measured. A video of this experiment will be made and will be posted on the net for discussion. If the time for this motion is an order of magnitude less than 40min it will be an undeniable proof that even if the machine stops after 40min of work it still is a genuine perpetuum mobile (provided that the rest of the protocol confirms lack of hidden energy source.)

This will be done in Norway:
b) I will ask Finsrud to stop the device and leave it on its own until all motion stops. Then a video will be taken, lasting at least 10 min (using a tripod) in which no motion whatsoever of the device should be noticed. The camera lens will be so positioned as the track to be seen horizontal ? no radial movement of the track (the one seen in the current video on the order of less than a mm) should be see during this for at least 10 min of video. No sound should be heard, emitted from the device. If there is no motion during this study and no sound recorded it will be a conclusive proof that there is no hidden energy source whatsoever (mechanical, electrical or whatever else).

c) After the period mentioned in step a of more than 10min I will ask Finsrud to set the pendulums in motion while the ball is removed from the track and let these pendulums come to a rest. If the period of swinging of these pendulums until they so to rest is an order of magnitude lower than this period (for the pendulums to come to rest) while the machine is functioning it will indicate that they are not these alleged Foucault pendulums that can swing for a year without stopping and their swinging (the swinging of the pendulund in Finsrud?s device) due to the initial push cannot explain the functioning of the device.

d) After these tests are done I will ask Finsrud to start the device and will record its work for at least one hour.

A non-interrupted video of steps b), c) and d) will be taken and will be posted on the net for discussion.

This is what I came up with for now and it seems to me that the above protocol will be a definitive proof (if everything goes as expected) that Finsrud?s device is a true perpetuum mobile which is a violation of the first law. I remind you that I conclude definitively that the first law is violated from the functioning of SMOT but it is interesting to observe it in a self-sustaining device as well. Now I?d like to hear what you think of it.

Hey Omnibus,

I thought I had recognized you at the Steorn site.

Anyway appreciate all your posts over there and thanks for taking the time to explain what you believe is going on.

Regards

Eman8 ;)

lock it in a room and guard it...Bessler style.

However, I like your ideas Omnibus.

I'd like to say again that this does indeed stop and theres no big physics law revelation.  so whats the big deal here?
How long would this thing have to go to prove perpetual motion? - Answer: FOREVER, it must not slow or speed up.  the magnets will eventually lose magnetism naturally, so obviously would only be perpetual if some energy was produced out of the system, ie. it sped up.

Perpetual motion seems to be on the fine line between OverUnity and normal energy loss...hence, I think either achieve actual overunity (ie more energy out then in) or you don't have anything to dance about!

Although I do remember reading somewhere that he artificially slows the machine down to prevent this...

I also think he should reduce noise significantly, oil the thing up to reduce friction and remove any artificial dampening and let this thing go on camera.  That and opening it up to prove no dodgy energy source would absolutley destroy and counter arguments I could make.

I like your plan Omnibus!
It proves much more about the machine, and for the machine. It will be very good, when will be done! :)

But, if you want to prove it is a perpetuum mobile, you will clash with invisible walls. And this is not by chance.
It always dependent on the viewpoints of the people, doesn't matter they're educated scientists or not.
The problem is laying deep inside our concepts. Even the most precise physics books aren't enough precise around many points. Even the basic laws and definitions had been written long time ago, aren't precise enough to be considered as the same in different people's mind.

Some random thoughts...

People can't reach the same conceptions about basic things, through their education.
How could they understand what perpetual motion is?

Does anybody know what is perpetual motion, and how it works? Is it exist at all?
What is our conceptions of perpetual motion?

1. When we say, It's a machine which once started, after can run by itself continously and for indefinied time, without any outsider human activity, and do this without any energy spent to it by human, and produce continous work... Yes, in this case Finsrud's machine can be one.

2. But when we say, no energy spent from any source... The answer will change, because gravity and magnetism is a kind of source, Oh yes not for mainstream science, but in reality they are some kind of energy source, Conservative fields as educated people say.

3. Third point... Over 100% efficient.
Is it needed to prove perpetual motion? Perpetual motion means over 100% efficiency, or Coe?
How can you calculate the efficiency for sure of a machine, which runs on conservative fields only?


So, conceptions plays a lot, and in this case it is very hard to prove anything.
I personally like Finsrud's standpoint, to say: yes it is, and no, it isn't at the same time. I agree with him, and I think this is the closest point to reallity in this conceptional chaos, people have.
You have also known my viewpoint for a time:
I think there is no direct connection between the exact efficiency of a machine, and its ability to can operate by itself or not. Oh yes, it sounds quite strange, and paradox. But, who is the one who knows the truth, and who can say what is true, and what is false? Will we believe him, if one day he knock at the door?

One thing is sure. Every self operational machine can use that energy, what they can take, in a clever and / or efficient way.

Greg, as far as I can see the only direct and concluseve experimental proof for the violation of the first thermodynamic law is the functioning of  SMOT. For one, as far as I can see now, it will not be straightforward to use Finsrud's machine for that purpose. I'm trying to find a definitive non-destructive protocol and it seems there alway will be something that would undermine it as far as Finsrud's machine is concerned. SMOT is another story, it is simple and it is conclusive. I wonder if you?re following the discussion in the Steorn forum regarding Finsrud?s machine.

The SMOT. Basically a very simple device, and the same time the most desputed by people. If my understanding is right, in the case of SMOT, the ball rolls "freely", so it does some work, and the source of the energy for this movement is only magnetism, permanent magnets. The ball runs for "free", by the magnets, without any other energy input from outside, but it only moves to the strongest position of the magnetic field. After that point, the ball can't escapes and stops moving. Or even if you can force it somehow to escape, the ball remains unable to return to the initial position.

So, the ball runs on a period only, and you must take it, and return to the starting position to make it run once more. This is the problem with this simple device, however this is not change, that the ball runs freely on a period. It periodically can produce a few work, but doesn't too useful, because can't repeat it by itself.
On the other hand, I think, it is not the problem of the SMOT, it is a problem of the person, who use it.
I believe the unsuccess is only the lack of talents and knowledge to use the device in the right way, and right construction.

I'm personally not intersted in the simple SMOT too much, but it is a good toy.
In my opinion the SMOT is very similar to the steel ball, which is falling in the gravity field. It has quite similar properties. You can take it to a height and release it, and the ball will fall to the ground where stops. "If the ground isn't present", the ball will continue to fall to the center of the globe, and stops there as the ball of the SMOT stops at the end of the gate. Almost the same.

Quote
For one, as far as I can see now, it will not be straightforward to use Finsrud's machine for that purpose. I'm trying to find a definitive non-destructive protocol and it seems there alway will be something that would undermine it as far as Finsrud's machine is concerned.

I think the SMOT doesn't better for that purpose. Maybe easier and more simple, but doesn't better. I think Finsrud's machine is more promising than a simple SMOT, and more difficult for your purpose, but perhaps can be better. The underminings are typical.

Quote
I wonder if you?re following the discussion in the Steorn forum regarding Finsrud?s machine.

I read that forum, when you posted the link to it. I wasn't too satisfied about it, but I think I'm going to follow it some time. I like to mention again, it is a good plan to do all the experiments, what you wrote, on Finsrud's machine.

Best Regards,

Omnibus, can I ask you to do a little thing for me?

When you speak to, or meet with Finsrud next time?
Can you suggest for him to try to make, or only think about a device, which operates on gravity only? (when the time and the atmosphere is good to suggest this thought)

I have an impression, that he is the right man to think about it. And I believe, after some time he will be able to do it, if he want.

Anyway, Does he want to make other "moving arts" soon?

Thanks,

@Greg,

Finsrud showed me a number of devices which he has made throughout the years, including purely gravity ones. Very interesting. He has been into this for over 30 years. The experience withe these devices has led him to the machine in question. I didn't remain with the impression that he has another working device, though.

@All,

This is the updated version of the protocol:


A simple protocol which will prove conclusively that Reidar Finsrud?s device is a true perpetual motion machine.


Here are the two crucial experiments to be carried out:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1) One of the three small magnets hanging over the track is to be removed and the device with its original steel ball will be set in motion by one of the participants in the test, not by Finsrud. The working device, lacking the mentioned magnets, will be videotaped (recording also the sound in addition) for a period of several hours during which acceleration of the ball should be observed if this is a true perpetuum mobile and not just an efficient re-distributor of the initially imparted energy.

2) At a separate experiment a non-magnetic stainless steel sphere of diameter 2.7?? weighing approx. 820g (as is the diameter and the weight of the original sphere) will be used instead. If this non-magnetic sphere stops its motion shortly after the initial push, this will disprove categorically that there is a switching mechanism which triggers a hidden mechanical or electrical source during the functioning of the machine and will prove that the role of the magnets is not only decorative but they actually drive the device.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


These are redundant experiments that may or may not be performed:

a) In order to insure that there is no hidden energy source of any kind (mechanical, electrical etc.) the machine has to be stopped and have it reach a complete rest. It should stay in this state for not less than, say, a half hour. A digital video-camera fastened on a tripod will videotape it. A redundant tape recorder will also be used to record the sound of the machine at rest. If nothing moves and no sounds from the machine are heard this should serve as a proof that there is no hidden source of energy at least prior to starting the device. Attention should be paid also during the time the device is restarted. All will be videotaped and the video will be a proof that there?s no foul play.

b) To insure the overhead lights are not the external energy source driving the machine they have to be turned off for at least one hour during the functioning of the machine. During that time the videotaping of the machine will be done with the light source of the video camera. Also, a separate digital audio recording will be carried out.

c) As a redundant experiment, a sensitive field-meter, will be used to measure telltale electromagnetic signals from eventual hidden electrical source. Possibly a compass will be placed near the apparatus which will be videotaped. Lack of such telltale signals will be a proof, in addition to the result from the experiment with the non-magnetic ball, that there is no hidden electrical source of energy driving the machine.

Well designed protocol Omnibus, I like it.
Point 2 is very good! :) A must. I wonder what will happen in the case of the non-magnetic ball. I guess the machine will stop.

Well done, waiting for the new results, and videos.
Thanks for your time, work, and persistence to do all these things.

I think the most important thing is to find out exactly how the machine works, and what does it do while it works.

Good luck!

P.S.: I hope Finsrud is going to create some new devices.

Hi Omnibus, are you going to visit Finsrud again
and do these experiments or will he do it alone and
send you the results ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

I intend to go again and do these experiments myself. Of course, I have to have Finsrud's permission which I still haven't discussed with him. Also, I'll invite some outside parties to participate in this. Will keep you posted.

... about the update version of protocol:
1) One of the three small magnets hanging over the track is to be removed and the device with its original steel ball will be set in motion by one of the participants in the test, not by Finsrud. The working device, lacking the mentioned magnets, will be videotaped (recording also the sound in addition) for a period of several hours during which acceleration of the ball should be observed if this is a true perpetuum mobile and not just an efficient re-distributor of the initially imparted energy.

point one is incorrect, sorry:
theese magnets isn't only breaks (I know you were in front of Finsrud's device ... but trust me),
if you see original drawings made by Mr. Finsrud you can find the very function of theese magnets: transmit vibrations from steel ball motion to central pendulum trough the vibrational unit. If you remove one of theese, the central pendulum doesn't "recharge" enough and stop, and the ball will go off syncronism in a pair of turns (because lack of break effect) ... and the test doesn't prove anything

About the other points, everything seems ok!
Very good analysis.

p.s.: thank you for your videos and your efforts ... it was so usefull

Anyway I'm not sure about my interpretation of drawings from Finsrud's website (but drawings are somewhat clear and representative).
What do you think about the complete function of the three cylinder magnets? Do you know how this machine work? I'm so curious ...

hey ... maybe I'm totally wrong! I don't exclude this! but ... there's anybody here?
toc toc?  :D

I know this is an old thread but a very good one. I think the ticking sound heard as the ball moves is simpley due to the 2 rails of the track been different lenghts.A car going round in a tight circle over comes this problem by using the differential gearbox. A steel ball is one fixed item so would ride up a little on the inside track, then fall down and making the click. This is more plausable than some electrostatic discharge. The energy loss by this design flaw is more evidence that the machine could be OU.. Has Omnibus carried out this new tests yet? This is still a wonderful machine!

I think the ball will turn a bit clockwise as the inner track is shorter than the outer. The ball will therefor never say "click" and jump into the track because of a "differential lock". The "click" is by the way too much synchronous to the revolutions of the ball. I believe, as Findsrud said once, that the track is not 100% smooth. Or the "click" comes from one of the three pendulum activators along the track.

Br.

Vidar

I was today at Finsrud's place.
He showed me the machine and started it.
When we went after a few hours, the machine was still running..
More to come soon...inclusive some great video footage.
Regards, Stefan.

it is very strange that the clicking noise happens at only one point on the track when the ball is at a specific position on the track. there is an unseen sync taking place here. very suspicious.

also, it would be possible to make that Aluminum track into a type of air battery. (just a suspicion). the bridge for the battery would be the steel ball contacting the Aluminum oxide layer as a medium dielectric. sort of a hidden battery right in front of your own eye's simply because you wouldn't see it due to a lack of physics know how(simply suspicion on my part).

the whole sync thing has me rather bothered at the click.

did you ask Finsrud what that clicking noise was by chance?

why hasn't anyone tried to replicate it yet or has anyone?

Jerry  8)

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 18, 2011, 02:07:43 PM
I was today at Finsrud's place.
He showed me the machine and started it.
When we went after a few hours, the machine was still running..
More to come soon...inclusive some great video footage.
Regards, Stefan.

Started it? So he stops it once in a while? Did you ask why this machine are stopped all the time?

I was unfortunately not able to meet you there that day. When you called me, I was in the middle of some clearing and disposal of garbage from the house I'm building. Besides, there is about 90km from my place to Drøbak (Frogn) where the gallery are located...

Anyways, I look forward to see some pictures and videos.

Vidar

IMHO, it's just an efficient dynamic sculpture. If it was a perpetual machine, it wouldn't stop. He keeps it in the vault, so why would he ever stop it ? Every time he opens the vault, he is not sure, whether it's still working or not. He alse has never stated that it's perpetual. Anyway, it's really a nice scuplture.

Quote from: Airstriker on July 20, 2011, 04:59:34 AM
IMHO, it's just an efficient dynamic sculpture. If it was a perpetual machine, it wouldn't stop. He keeps it in the vault, so why would he ever stop it ? Every time he opens the vault, he is not sure, whether it's still working or not. He alse has never stated that it's perpetual. Anyway, it's really a nice scuplture.

I have been thinking that the skulpture is slightly affected by the earth rotation. All four pendulums (including the one inside) directions will change for each cycle, and probably be powered by the rotation of the earth. The explanation I've heard is that the track is slightly twisted along with the ball so the ball allways are rolling "downwards". The delay of this twist which allow the slight offset, might be happening due to the earth rotation and its interference with the pendulums.
If this machine was placed in Australia, it would not work - Finsrud have had to design a "mirrored" version of the machine (?).

Well, this is just my guess.

Vidar

Maybe a mini-replica of this sculpture, placed on a turntable, would proove the concept...?

I visited Finsruds gallery today. The Perpetuum Mobile machine was not running when I was there. As he said to me, when this machine had ran for 10 years from 1996 to 2006, he became allmost mad about the machine, because he was more and more obsessed by the machine, allways had to go check if it worked or not. So now he have made a small city with trains, people, cars, sounds, mirrors, real fishes in a small pond :-)
Anyways, if no one yet has been told the REAL reason why there is a click noise coming from this machine, the reason is a notch in the inner bicycle rim he have used as track. Now, Finsrud have placed a model, train railtrack on it. The track is made of brass - a non magnetic conductive material. The replacement to new tracks is done due to severe wear out of the original track.
Attached is a picture of the notch I'm talking about.

Later I will post a detailed picture of the while machine, and explain in detail how it works, and why it works (Told to me by Finsrud himself). I have to arrange all the photos into one big photo first. That wil take some time.

Vidar

Hi All,
I visited with my girlfriend Mr. Finsrud on Monday the 18th of July 2011.

He was very friendly and showed us the perpetual motion machine and also his workshop,
where he tried  many years ago some more gravity wheel designs and also a special
heat to mechanical energy converter sterling machine.

He could not get any other gravity wheel to work, but then he concentrated
on the stopping condition of a magnet pendulum which hangs from the ceiling ( in a 5 Meter height room) and
is deflected from magnets laying on the ground in a chaotic manner.

One pendulum always stopped after a while, but then he used THREE pendulums and coupled them
via springs and then after some tweaking he got a condition, where these 3 pendulums never stop.

Each one of the  pendulums always pulls the other out of the stopping positions.
And this was the secret key to his invention.

In normal physics theory, if you couple 2 pendulums with a spring and let them swing,
each pendulum will transfer its kinetic energy onto the other and then back and force,
so the kinetic energy will be going back and forth from one pendulum to the other
and then back again, until friction will eat up all the motion.

So in coupling 3 pendulums with springs and using the magnetic forces of the chaotic movements
of the magnetic pendulums versus the magnets below the pendulum, he could achive
a constant motion, that never came to a stop.

So he made this into his machine and created from it this perpetual motion machine.

I am just uploading all the videos I took at his place.

As Vidar already wrote, after a few years he got mad about it, checking every day, if it will still work.

Also as the 3 pendulums are just sitting on inverted "V" sharp rail points , these sharp points wear out after some time,
cause the metal there builds crusts and has to be cleaned and also the dust goes onto the
rail and the ball and thus it gets dirty and it will stop after a few days or weeks.

So he normally lets it sit there not working and only will clean and start it , when
some tourist groups will come and want to see it.

Is he working on a bigger machine ?

No, he is mainly an artist and his quest for perpetual motion was done
with this machine.

He said, everybody can build and replicate this machine, if he wants for himself ( but not sell it).

He is currently working on a different art project regarding a model city with special 3D miirror effects
and a very nice model car and train transportation system looking very realistic, but this has nothing to do with
his perpetual motion machine.

He is is also a very talented sculptor and has invented his own sculptor "stone sand" from which he builds
his sculptor figures.

His special material is made out of chromedioxid,silizium and graphite and a binder or something like this
and is very hard.
He said, when in 10.000 years all of our culture will be gone and some archologists will digg up
the grounds at his place, all other things will be vanished, but what they will find are his sculptor figures.
They will last very long time...
;)

So enjoy the videos.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S: Here are the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/user/overunitydotcom?feature=mhee#g/u

I am still uploading them all, so it can still take a few hours until they are all up.
These are all HD1080p movies.

Many thanks to my girlfriend Heidi who filmed also a few movies when I talked with Finsrud.
We had already driven about 6000 Km throughout Scandinavia when we visited Finsrud and
were a little bit exhausted. So excuse my sloppy outfit.


Finsruds own Website is at:
http://www.finsrud.info

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 22, 2011, 04:55:42 PM
P.S: Here are the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/user/overunitydotcom?feature=mhee#g/u

I am still uploading them all, so it can still take a few hours until they are all up.
These are all HD1080p movies.

Many thanks to my girlfriend Heidi who filmed also a few movies when I talked with Finsrud.
We had already driven about 6000 Km throughout Scandinavia when we visited Finsrud and
were a little bit exhausted. So excuse my sloppy outfit.


Finsruds own Website is at:
http://www.finsrud.info

will Finsrud let you add an induction coil or coils so that we can see if we can extract electricity from it. without it stopping.

if it works then Finsrud may be the next Einstein, maybe better than Einstein.

will he comply?

Jerry 8)

Finsrud told me that this machine is so fine tuned so one hair straw will stop it. 'You cannot extract energy from this machine' he told me. However, I know the sound it makes are indeed energy - a point which me and Finsrud disagreed. He explained it away and told me that making sound almost does not require energy... . So from where does this sound energy come from? Anyways, in one article some years ago he said that there is three things we shouldn't dissecere: religion, Jesus, and a perpetuum mobile which works. Interpret this as you like. Without the mystery, this machine has no value.

An explanation of the machine:

A steel ball is rolling on a circular track. The weight of the ball will cause the track to wobble slightly, by being tilted towards the weight of the ball. Initially the ball finds itself in the very "bottom" of the track - at all times the lowest point.

Starting this machine takes some time, and finally the ball has exited the pendulums at the right moments - the perfect sync. Above the track, there is three fixed magnets - 120 degrees apart. These magnets are located a few degrees after the mechanical trigger which makes the pendulums to move, but the flexible arm which the magnets are fixed on to, is a few degrees in front of the pendulum triggers, and close to the big pendulum in the center. When the ball pass by these magnets, the magnets are forced towards the ball for a short moment, a pulse which will reach other mechanical parts of the machine. This force is trigging the center pendulum to offset the wobbeling of the track, so the lowest point is slightly in front of the ball. Together with the moving attractive magnets on each three outer pendulums, will force the ball to move around and around the track until something is worn out enough to mess up the sync.

I could see on one of Stefans last videos, that on of the fixed magnets did not move when the ball passed. Did you ask Finsrud about this, Stefan?

Vidar

Good Morning Stephan,

I have followed Finsrud's machine for years.  Thank you for posting all the videos
from your visit to his Gallery!  What an interesting gentleman!

Respectfully
Ben K4ZEP

I can also confirm that Finsrud is a genuine gentleman. I was litterally pushed and dragged around in his "world", while we were discussing energy, inventions, hobbies etc. I will visit the gallery again later to take more detailed pictures of the machine.
:)

Quote from: Low-Q on July 23, 2011, 08:05:37 AM


I could see on one of Stefans last videos, that on of the fixed magnets did not move when the ball passed. Did you ask Finsrud about this, Stefan?

Vidar

Hi Vidar,
which video did you mean exactly ?

Only in the last 2 videos number 13 and 14,
Finsrud started the device and then it ran contineously.
In the first 12 videos the device was not really in sync,
so only before filming the last 2 movies he started it, by
rubbing the ball with a towel, so all dust came off and
rubbing the railroad track clean out of any dust and
then setting the pendulums into the right syncing motion
with his hands and giving the ball some kicks, so it rolled
in sync with the pendulums.

To the other question, I think if it would be built bigger,
you could surely use some coils around the magnets to
extract some changing magnet fields and have some
electrical output this way. But in this size machine
you will surely drag it down so the ball will come to a stop
probably.
He built and tweaked it for 12 years until he had got it going !


Regards, Stefan.

This is the video (13):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9XmRKR2S-o&feature=player_profilepage

Look at the closest magnet above the track. It clearly bounce when the steel ball pass by, but the one after that doesn't seem to do anything. The third magnet seems to bounce, as I could see the reflections in the steel changed when the ball passed this magnet. But the second magnet, I cannot confirm whether it bounces or not.

Vidar

Hi Vidar,
I don´t know. I did not see it, when I was there.

Maybe just ask Finsrud, when you go back to him.
Maybe he changed something, when he added the modeltrain railroad track onto the
aluminium wheels ?

Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 24, 2011, 09:41:42 PM
Hi Vidar,
I don´t know. I did not see it, when I was there.

Maybe just ask Finsrud, when you go back to him.
Maybe he changed something, when he added the modeltrain railroad track onto the
aluminium wheels ?

Regards, Stefan.

I will visit him some time again. All I know this far, is that the whole mechanism, after the mod. with the rails which increased hight on the track, is adjusted accordingly.

Btw.: To start the machine, did he push, and push the ball untill it got synced with the pendulums? How long took it before the machine ran by itself?

Vidar

The three pendulums in this machine reach its bottom before the steel ball pass it. As the downward force is greatest when the pendulum are at the bottom, it will force the track to wobble in front of the ball.
On the other hand, there is a forth pendulum wich mainly controls the wobbeling. So the track wobbles in sync with the ball, but in addition also wobbles twice as fast as the outer pendulums do two cycles within one cycle of the ball.

If we just could make a replica, but skip the forth pendulum in the middle, and doubble the lengt of the three pendulums so they also are in sync with the cycle of the ball. Maybe it would be possible to increase the kinetic energy in this machine, and finally be able to take energy out of it?

However, the cycle must be fixed in order to keep the important cycle, so if loading the machine, the pendulums must be heavier - a wild guess.

Vidar

Thanks Stefan for the video update of Finsrud's machine. It all looked very real and sincere. Finsrud is a great guy. You stenghtened my belief in him.

Here are my thoughts about the PM matter at hand.

I've been trying to replicate the machine for three years now. Not as an exact copy, but as an example of the principle order of the machine.

There are three main components: !) the central pendulum that moves in chaotic circles in the central column, 2) the three secondary pendulums which operate sequentially pulling each other out of equilibrium and 3) The  ball running on the track making a constant tilt. These components are circuited into a loop by the vibrational feedback unit connecting the movement of the ball back to the central pendulum.

In my replication I try to achieve 1) a simplifciation of this operation in the form of a formula that allows many constructions for the same principle. Think of a conversion formula. 2) optimalization of Finsrud's operators: the ball on the track can be replaced by a flat oscillator spinner always tilted to one side. A ball is not necessary. Good ballbearings though you must have. The chaos array can be replaced by any magnet motor type with a stator (the central pendulum) and a rotor (with Finsrud the static array fixed below the central pendulum). Thirdly the three pendulums in sequential action can be replaced by one pendulum once you depart from a rotating magnet array in the magnetic motor division part.

Finsrud is perfectly right to my opinion speaking of four dimensions for such a machine x- y- and z-axis of the three spacial dimensions and the fourth dimension of time.  If the machine is selfsustaining its autodynamics prove that a conversion process is taking place in the nature of what we see in the cosmic movement of planets: the expansion of the universe is the original drive. It is greater than the contraction which is never successful in coming to a stop because the centre cannot be reached. In fact the machine runs on a conversion of this time energy.

The magnetic rotation is the condensation part where the dark energy of spacial time expansion is converted into circular motion. Thus with gravity as the material response to the expansion of the universe we have these three basic forces in play: magnetism, gravity and the expansion of the centrifugal force of the inertial oscillating part (with Finsrud the ball on the track). The conversion formula should look something like this:
                 

In words: the complementary action of Magnetic force, Gravitational force and Inertial force demonstrates a rectification of time energy provided a looped circuit which keeps the balances of the static forces out of equilibrium.

Think of a rectification circuit turning DC into AC. Now we study with Finsrud a rectification of time energy into kinetic energy. Magnet motors don't work, gravity motors don't work, inertial oscillators like of Milkovitch won't work, but combined, as Finsrud shows, there is an interaction of the forces, a natural coherence, delivering a revolutionary new insight: there is constant creation (read conversion) of energy in the universe from 'dark energy' (or time energy) into kinetic energy.

Observing the universe tells us this kind of logic must be in play. We see macrocosmically basic forces in complement resulting in perpetual motion. This is the concept of life in its physics fundament. There is time, matter and space as the irreducible primal trinity ruling creation as a process and not as a static state, and Finsrud tells us that to respect it in a 4-dimensional way makes it possible to create a model of that universal life principle of space energy rectification. If we understand it right this way we can build a machine which effectively 'eats' space as a substance (say graviton soup or quantum space foam). So space is there possibly as a source of energy and movement trough space can consequently be a result of 'eating space' away at one side of the machine (something which UFO's seem to master).

Indeed no laws of thermodynamics are violated when it works. When it works it is an open rectification unit and then these principles don't apply, they apply only to closed systems.

As an experimental update - we must engage in trials  to test our musings - I can say that i have succeeded in running a 1.6 kg heavy magnetic rotor (my cakra disc , see my IPMMM experiments) with a 1.6 kg heavy pendulum with stator attached which is controlled by an inertial oscillator of 1.6 kg that on its turn is fed by the rotor output. The loop is stable (hard to start up indeed) and can be sustained by hand just moving a magnet, so without further touching the machine (nothing sensational yet apart from a nice reactive cohesion I will not as yet show you). I am at present studying the exact construction of the different lead outs in the circuit to find the proper timing and circuitry of feedback for the chronic imbalance.

For study puposes of supporting theory I have found the pico-graviton theory of Carezani most useful (a contemporary of Einstein supporting our views here, see links below)

My problems are: 1) clumsiness, 2) increasing complication of the design (regularly throwing out too complcated matters), 3) disappointment with failed desing versions, 4) the inability to show anything before I have really achieved a replication of Finsrud by principle (one cannot share uncertainties) 5) the fear that Finsrud sincerely tried but never succeeded and has put a small motor in the column. Just to keep the interest in his gallery going. There is a secondary gain for him.

Thanks Stefan and Omnibus for your materials. Without them I could have never had such a nice hobby - as Finsrud says - of meditating the fundamental life principle of basic forces moved by time. I'll keep you posted when I have new insights. I have tons of movies of failed experiments, but they are only interesting to laugh at when there is success. Don't worry, I keep a lab log of my inspirations and IPMM failures. I still see progress in my work, hence I continue.

Anand Aadhar

My IPMM pages: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4449.new.html#new
My video page at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/anandaadhar
My Finsrud analysis on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9GucVwc36Q&feature=channel_video_title
Carezani's autodynamics site: http://www.autodynamics.org/main/
My own free energy pages on my site (only partly translated, sorry): http://theorderoftime.com/science/free_energy/index.html

Finsrud explained to me that the central pendulum is not moving choatic, but follows a circular path that is trigged by the upper three magnets. He did not mention to me any magnets under that pendulum, but if it is, thes magnets is some how compensating for gravity.

The central pendulum is according to Finsrud, the main reason why the track is bending slightly in advace of the ball so the ball allways rolls downhill. The magnets, levers, and outer pendulums is only help functions to provide that slight offset. - If I understood him correctly. A slight different explanation than my first, but the essence is the same.

Vidar

QuoteIf the machine is selfsustaining its autodynamics prove that a conversion process is taking place in the nature of what we see in the cosmic movement of planets

If the universe stopped to rotate, It would collaps. Rotation is the only movement which balance gravity so matter can still exist.

I think further that Finsruds machine is driven by the same principle. Rotation is preventing it to stop - to put it that way. The rotation of the Earth and the Earth gravity applied to the central pendulum, finally helps the ball to continue. For all I know it could be a heat engine hidden in the concrete which runs the whole thing, but the pendulums helps it to stabilize at a given RPM.

Finsrud say that the machine is art. A machine to wonder about. I wonder if that machine is much "simpler" than we think it is :)

Just thoughts.

Vidar

Congratulations Vidar. What i see You and especially Anand, are on good way to achieve higher degree of selfdevelopement(which even later, when we loose our body, is not for everybody to achieve). In Your place i would have stopped to discuss this openly. It makes no real sence for idiots, as most of "humanity" really is, that should know anything. They never grew up to this knowledge. So it is better to make closed circle of this, really interested in progress. Yours Arius Adolf Nowak

I recently visited Finsrud at his art gallery in Norway, and talked for many hours about his machine. Finsrud told me very clearly in Norwegian (I also happen to speak Norwegian): 

"the machine will not run more than 14 days, and right now without tuning it will not run more than 2 days.  The machine is not made for perpetual motion, but is simple an experiment in Physics."

I am not sure why people are twisting the facts and making this into a perpetual motion, or over-unity machine - when the inventor himself says it is not.  I saw the machine running with my own eyes, and the speed of the ball slows down - just as Mr. Finsrud pointed out, while I was there.

The machine might be an efficient "pendulum clock" of sorts, but it eventually runs out of steam and certainly does not produce excess energy. 

I find Mr. Finsrud to be a down-to-earth and creative personality, with many interests in both art, science and politics.  He has also built a full miniature city with mirrors, cars, trains, people and lights, but it has nothing to do with Physics.

-Nils

Quote from: ElectroGravityPhysics.com on September 05, 2011, 01:33:40 PM
I recently visited Finsrud at his art gallery in Norway, and talked for many hours about his machine. Finsrud told me very clearly in Norwegian (I also happen to speak Norwegian): 

"the machine will not run more than 14 days, and right now without tuning it will not run more than 2 days.  The machine is not made for perpetual motion, but is simple an experiment in Physics."

I am not sure why people are twisting the facts and making this into a perpetual motion, or over-unity machine - when the inventor himself says it is not.  I saw the machine running with my own eyes, and the speed of the ball slows down - just as Mr. Finsrud pointed out, while I was there.

The machine might be an efficient "pendulum clock" of sorts, but it eventually runs out of steam and certainly does not produce excess energy. 

I find Mr. Finsrud to be a down-to-earth and creative personality, with many interests in both art, science and politics.  He has also built a full miniature city with mirrors, cars, trains, people and lights, but it has nothing to do with Physics.

-Nils

Nils,

If it ran for several years, so from where did the machine get the energy from? Even running for two days are more than what we can expect from a mechanical deivice of this relatively small size.

I do not say the machine is a perpetual motion machine, or a machine which creates energy from nothing. I think strongly there is kinetic energy applied to this machine in one way or another. Maybe Finsrud know this, but what is the point in explaining how it actually works, when a mysterious and possible incomplete, but yet reasonable and still interesting explanation will do?

I have to make my own theory of operation - beyond Finsruds own explanations. It can be everything from thermal energy to kinetic energy due to gyroscopic energy applied by the rotating earth. The last option is very very weak energy for this size, but might be sufficient to make a selfrunner when adjusted properly.

When Finsrud applied that extra rail to the bicycle rims, the stiffness and mass changed. The altitude of the track changed. So maybe 12 new years have to be spent to adjust the machine properly again. Who knows.

As yourself, I was invited into Finsrud micro world with cities, hills, walking people, a small fish pond, mirrors and sounds. But I did the whole time had the "Perpetuum mobile" in mind. Whish I could be brave enough to ask Finsrud if I could try to start the machine myself. I'm afraid the answer will be a definite NO ;D

I will visit his gallery again. It is not far away - just 1.5 hours driving.

Vidar

Quote from: Low-Q on September 05, 2011, 03:44:24 PM
If it ran for several years, so from where did the machine get the energy from? Even running for two days are more than what we can expect from a mechanical deivice of this relatively small size.

The Finsrud machine is started - just like any pendulum clock - with the hand and setting the mass in motion. 

Most people do not realize it requires energy to lift an object off the ground, and/or set a heavy metal ball into motion...

-Nils

But those who realize you have to put in some energy, also realize it will stop quite fast and not running for weeks or months. So the first part is easy to understand. The second part is hard to understand. And that is also my point. Given all the moving parts, friction, etc., it is hard to understand the time spand without knowing how it can run for so long time.

Quote from: Low-Q on September 06, 2011, 01:01:55 AM
But those who realize you have to put in some energy, also realize it will stop quite fast and not running for weeks or months. So the first part is easy to understand. The second part is hard to understand. And that is also my point. Given all the moving parts, friction, etc., it is hard to understand the time spand without knowing how it can run for so long time.

Yes, I agree.  Mr. Finsrud has a very low friction device, so it can run for a few days (not months) without stopping.  It is impressive that he can do that.

However, a low friction (knife) bearings with a pendulum can run for a very long time (perhaps days) - just like the one used in the Finsrud machine.

Additionally, it would not surprise me if Finsrud is coupling the force used to push a pendulum around a circle from the rotating Earth into an extra push effect in his machine. 

Here is a science pendulum used to detect the rotation of the Earth.  It is quite amazing to watch, if you have never seen this effect in real life.  When you are standing still on the surface of the Earth, you have no idea your body is actually rotating around a full turn - once per 24 hour.

http://www.3bscientific.com/Oscillations/Foucault-Pendulum-115-V-50-60-Hz-U8403000-115,p_83_110_576_1988.html

-Nils

Quote from: ElectroGravityPhysics.com on September 05, 2011, 01:33:40 PM

I am not sure why people are twisting the facts and making this into a perpetual motion, or over-unity machine - when the inventor himself says it is not.  I saw the machine running with my own eyes, and the speed of the ball slows down - just as Mr. Finsrud pointed out, while I was there.

-Nils

As a matter of fact, Finsrud has attached a plate to the machine saying 'perpetuum mobile' . Even though he calls it also kinetic art, he insists that it keeps running - be it for not more that 14 days - on magnetism and gravity combined with the inertial energy of the ball. It doesn't have to deliver energy, the fact is that is spends energy in an amount we cannot explain from just low friction action and the initial push. He definitely makes a loop that gets very close to a stable run (with autodynamical SE rectifictation or time energy conversion), we under no circumstance have observed before. If not a full perpetuum mobile, it certainly gets very close to it. I think he broke the regular paradigm here and that the common explanations do not apply. We have to take his lead seriously. Successful experiments like this require further theorizing, improving and testing.

The Finsrud machine has a triple pendulum that would
be able to absorb external rocking motion energy from
building motion in any planar direction. Wind or Coriolis
force. Even from traffic or wave energy, if near a sea shore.
The other thing is from a mechanical diagram I saw it has
bunches of long springs in it's base perfect for absorbing
temperature changes. Remember that there are clocks constructed
that derive all their energy from enviromental minute temperature
changes. Note, that these would couple randomly into the machine's
operation and could ultimately cancel existing energy and the
machine would stop due to probabilistic chaotic situations.

So I think the machine gets small amounts of energy from
multiple existing mechanical enviromental sources.

:S:MarkScoffman

Quote from: AnandAadhar on September 06, 2011, 10:54:35 AM
If not a full perpetuum mobile, it certainly gets very close to it. I think he broke the regular paradigm here and that the common explanations do not apply. We have to take his lead seriously. Successful experiments like this require further theorizing, improving and testing.

Being close does not cut it.  It is sort of like getting close to the speed of light, and thinking that it is easy to jump to faster than speed of light travel...

There are lots of experiments "getting close" to perpetual motion.  Just look at a regular spinning magnet close to a super conductor.  It will spin for a very very long time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLwftUd_qbA

-Nils

Quote from: mscoffman on September 06, 2011, 11:40:36 AM
So I think the machine gets small amounts of energy from
multiple existing mechanical enviromental sources.
:S:MarkScoffman

I agree with "MarkScoffman".

I fully support people that are researching alternative energy sources, but this device is not it - although an interesting experiment to learn from.

-Nils

Anyways, no matter how this machine is built, it is one genious piece of art. If it is ran by the weak coriolis energy, so be it. The low friction machine have to be tuned properly to run as long as possible if I understand correctly. Maybe even the pendulums make the machine inefficient when it starts to wear out after the adjustments?

Vidar

Quote from: ElectroGravityPhysics.com on September 05, 2011, 01:33:40 PM

"the machine will not run more than 14 days, and right now without tuning it will not run more than 2 days.  The machine is not made for perpetual motion, but is simple an experiment in Physics."

To me he did not say this, when I was there...

Quote
I am not sure why people are twisting the facts and making this into a perpetual motion, or over-unity machine - when the inventor himself says it is not. 

I think you are twisting the facts here...

Quote
I saw the machine running with my own eyes, and the speed of the ball slows down - just as Mr. Finsrud pointed out, while I was there.

If it runs more than 1 minute it clearly overcomes the friction forces and
generates energy on its own to overcome the friction on the rail.

Also it did not slow down, otherwise after a few  minutes it would have come to a stop.

When we left after at least about an hour or more  it was still running at the same speed.

If it would not run at the same speed it would get out of sync and would slow down
very rapidly.

It probably converts the magnetic energy via a heat cycle process into mechanical energy,
because without the magnets it would not work.

So the macroscopic movements of the magnet atom spins are tapped and converted into real world
mechanical movement of the iron ball.

I just recently read in the NET-Journal an older article, where Albert Hauser interviewed Mr Finsrud.
It is a very open interview, where Finsrud explains how the machine does work, also with a labeled drawing of the mechanics. Also there he indicated that the machine will run for about 14 days, at most 3 weeks.
He also states, why he did this machine, and why he called it "Perpetuum Mobile". He did this, to get some free public media attention for one of his exhibitions. Just to amaze people, e.g. like illusionists do. You also know, that e.g. an illusionist like Copperfield cannot really fly, even if he says so on stage...
The energy for the machines is stored magnetically!
See it like that: In a normal clock you also pull a spring to store energy which then gets released over a longer time to drive the clock. On bigger clocks this lasts for weeks, until you have to again wind up the clock.
Here it's basically the same, just instead of a spring you take a magnet.
See the principle like that: Take one magnet and something magnetic, or two magnets. When they touch each other, the "spring" is unloaded. Now if you take the magnets apart from each other, you store the energy needed for that as potential magnetic energy (just like in a spring it's stored mechanically). The magnets will now attract each other and want to get closer to each other, just like  a loaded spring. So you can take out this energy slowly over days until the magnets again touch each other and the machine stops.


Nothing fancy...

Okay I've got a magnetic rotor running on a composite pendulum setup. Now I have to make the 'vibrational feedback unit' as Finsrud calls it. Would that be a kind of test of Finsrud's principles?


see

http://www.overunity.com/4449/ipmm-man-device-for-the-proof-of-magnetic-overunity/60/#.UKtd5Y6NvIc

Here are some drawings I made. I need more pics to finish/correct.

The last drawing is just because the replica I saw of it was a joke. The angles while not right, yet alone aligned. Was not to scale on any level. It was like watching someone put an engine together wrong and then wonder why is does not work. When then pistons are miss aligned or the timing is off. Please do it right or not at all. Because it is only a hindrance! I'm not trying to sound mean, just making an important point.

Quote from: ace569er on February 20, 2013, 12:44:32 AM
Here are some drawings I made. I need more pics to finish/correct.

The last drawing is just because the replica I saw of it was a joke. The angles while not right, yet alone aligned. Was not to scale on any level. It was like watching someone put an engine together wrong and then wonder why is does not work. When then pistons are miss aligned or the timing is off. Please do it right or not at all. Because it is only a hindrance! I'm not trying to sound mean, just making an important point.

Nice work, very helpful. But where did you see any replica of Finsrud?
Are you referring to any of my descriptions?
I never pretended to replicate anything of Finsrud, nor have I heard of anyone trying to replicate his setup.
I guess you are the first who cincerely tries to offer a proper model here.
So far I just tried to figure out if there is any lawfulness in the principles of operation he seems to base himself upon.
I Couldn't find any confirmation by the way,  of what I thought that would be as yet.

Quote from: ace569er on February 20, 2013, 12:44:32 AM
Here are some drawings I made. I need more pics to finish/correct.
The last drawing is just because the replica I saw of it was a joke. The angles while not right, yet alone aligned. Was not to scale on any level. It was like watching someone put an engine together wrong and then wonder why is does not work. When then pistons are miss aligned or the timing is off. Please do it right or not at all. Because it is only a hindrance! I'm not trying to sound mean, just making an important point.

Ah, wait a minute, now I understand. With 'the last drawing' you refer to my replication of the 'hammer' design. Well, that is not Finsrud but another inventor/artist/impression maker called George Delk. Delk is discussed at http://www.overunity.com/8568/new-magnet-powered-perpetual-motion-machine/nowap/#.USSdD44QPIc (http://www.overunity.com/8568/new-magnet-powered-perpetual-motion-machine/nowap/#.USSdD44QPIc) Nobody ever succeeded in getting any sensible information from Delk about his kinetic artwork. He never said it was a working perpetuum mobile. He proposed his thing with a question mark. He said somewhere that it was running for three years. I tried something and posted it. He responded by saying:

Quote"Very nice job. I especially like the pivoting side magnets. Possibly weight above the pivot point of the pendulum is needed. The design that I am now working on uses very small neodymium magnets and extremely lightweight materials. They do take considerable time to built and adjust."

Nobody could copy his result without cheating, as far as I know, nor did we see his latest 'lightweight neodymium version'.
By the way, see also this failed attempt to replicate Delk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=iduT53y0sxY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=iduT53y0sxY)


Concerning your grumpy remarks about my work here I posted another question at Delk's Youtube page about it. Maybe he will answer this, but I doubt it. Artists as a rule never properly answer questions about their work because they exploit the illusion they create.

He in 2010 wrote:

Quote"Actually, it has been runnning for almost three years now. Thank you for the 4 stars. If your friend can produce these and sell them profitably, more power to him. It does invite interesting conversation. Cheers"

Yes, 'conversation' he says. That is his idea of his effect... That is not very serious if you would be breaking the known laws (or principles) of nature with this thing... So he throws you in doubt. He plays a game so it seems. Or it his psychology of coping with his own genious... and that latter supposition I give little credence.

But, admitted, what I did could be done better, you are right, better magnets, better angles, alignment, proportions, weights  etc., and maybe I will try a better replication even though, as I said in my Youtube movie about it, I cannot see any reason why the damn thing shouldn't stop in the middle... apart from the idea that the magnetic gravitational action of the sliders is overruling the pendulum action and thus breaks away from the laws of thermodynamics and the dead middle.  If Delk would have defended it as perpetual motion, I would have tried better.... but he did not. And without the claim it is still "considerable time to build and adjust" He responded more like an artist interested in likewise renderings of this created illusion. For how can you replicate a PM claim that is not proposed actually?

Thanks for opening this discussion again. You ask me to do it right or not at all, and I will give it a try again maybe..., but do not hesitate to do something yourself right too. Don't point your finger at me. This blog is not just for armchair nerds who themselves try nothing in reality. Passive bystanders have easy commenting, but no right to speak actually. But okay, you are virtually involved and committed now, thanks, and lets be friends on this. Delk's is certainly an easier thing to replicate than Finsrud's.

links and description about Delk and my 'clumsy failing' with it:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Perpetual_Magnetic_Pendulum_by_George_Delk (http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Perpetual_Magnetic_Pendulum_by_George_Delk)
Delk's only presentation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZjNbjhxgt4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZjNbjhxgt4)


Another interesting candidate of an almost Perpetual Motion is this balancing pendulum (see picture) making 40.000 oscillations/day which does seemingly better than Finsrud running for longer than a life time on about two billionths(!) of an amp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZDxzaNsI7Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZDxzaNsI7Q)

I was actually referring to you, yes. Just kind of felt bad saying it, but still felt, it needed to be said. Like I said though, I was referring to the last drawing only. The hammer one. Which still may need a cheater magnet to run.  First an exact replica must be made. Then there is the time to calibrate it, which will be rough. To be able to rule it out.

OK, I like the second replication. It more or less killed my desire to build it...It even appears to move at the same angle of degree. Thanks for the vid. That last one doesn't do much for me. Can't think of a way to draw work from it. Nor do I find it appealing art wise. It's is a very good design though.
   I have been testing the 12 magnet placement(if it is even 12). For the base in Finsrud's Main forth pendulum. I think I might have their placement. Most likely not, but from what I test I think maybe. Sadly I'd have to build it. To rule out, that my powered, simulation of the spring torque, and outer pendulums can run the center one. Then in return themselves. In which I do not see me getting the pieces I'd need to make it any time soon. So if any one wants this Sketchup file, let me know.

Quote from: ace569er on February 21, 2013, 12:58:53 AM
OK, I like the second replication. It more or less killed my desire to build it...It even appears to move at the same angle of degree. Thanks for the vid. That last one doesn't do much for me. Can't think of a way to draw work from it. Nor do I find it appealing art wise. It's is a very good design though.
   I have been testing the 12 magnet placement(if it is even 12). For the base in Finsrud's Main forth pendulum. I think I might have their placement. Most likely not, but from what I test I think maybe. Sadly I'd have to build it. To rule out, that my powered, simulation of the spring torque, and outer pendulums can run the center one. Then in return themselves. In which I do not see me getting the pieces I'd need to make it any time soon. So if any one wants this Sketchup file, let me know.

Share what you have, the more we know the greater the chance of success in this matter.

Here you are. Please fix anything you think is off and send it to me. I'll try to compile the ideas together. Hope enough people, do it. There is a few things I am not happy with, mainly the wire, pendulum tripper. I can't get the angles to match the distance...... So something is wrong. Also I don't see how the base is separated from the, track support, arms and attached the spring. So the track can tilt. Would love feed back from anyone who has seen it in person. The file is a compressed sketch up file, enjoy.

Tho I posted this else where to  answer a question. I paste it here to because I think it appeals;


Though this is just an educated guess....I think the center pendulum is moved by the magnet that tilts the spring as well as the balls weight on the tilted wheel putting pressure on the spring(big one). Also the 3 pendulums are off set to the same side as the very large magnet, on them, is offset on. I think this helps push the center pendulum. If I arrange all repelling magnets in the position shown. Then stop it and just touch it it want to go in that pattern about 2-7 rotations. if you kick it with just one of the three off sets you can keep it going around. I think this is at least somewhat close to what makes the center pendulum move. Sadly everything relys on everything else to run, in my option. so it is hard to test, with a controlled pendulum to push it. yet alone the ball and spring factor. Unless it is completely  built. So I hope this model helps a working replication to be made. Because I want one!!!!!!!!

Quote from: ace569er on February 21, 2013, 05:33:55 PM
Here you are. Please fix anything you think is off and send it to me. I'll try to compile the ideas together. Hope enough people, do it. There is a few things I am not happy with, mainly the wire, pendulum tripper. I can't get the angles to match the distance...... So something is wrong. Also I don't see how the base is separated from the, track support, arms and attached the spring. So the track can tilt. Would love feed back from anyone who has seen it in person. The file is a compressed sketch up file, enjoy.

Thanks, nice work to see it three dimensionally....

I have created a second replication.
The video is at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QsWr5r7PM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QsWr5r7PM)
please your comments..

Quote from: AnandAadhar on March 03, 2013, 08:34:22 AM
I have designed a second replication.
The video is at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QsWr5r7PM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QsWr5r7PM)
please your comments..

-------

B.t.w.see also this earlier failed attempt of someone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxU3MjL35R0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxU3MjL35R0)

Nice I like it it looks good.

Here is my finished, Finsrud's PMD 3-D replication.

Curious if anyone who downloaded it, modified or improved upon it? Please if so upload them, I am, very, interested in seeing them!

Quote from: ace569er on March 25, 2013, 12:54:54 AM
Nice I like it it looks good.

Here is my finished, Finsrud's PMD 3-D replication.

Curious if anyone who downloaded it, modified or improved upon it? Please if so upload them, I am, very, interested in seeing them!

Great job! Is there also an animation or 3d  manipulable file to study your design from all sides?
I'm not sure what that green cogwheel thing at picture six would be in Finsrud's machine...
And what do you think would be the magnetic arrangement inside in the base?

That is something I'm building. I am using several ideas combined to achieve my goal, hopefully. I'm personally very surprised, no one has used magnets in this array. Which gets both the simulated mono pole effect of a V gate.  As well as the counter push and pull,(non-single pole drive) to weaken the gates sticky point(lock). Making the lock no longer ten times, plus, stronger than the gates push, but instead, far, weaker than it.  While keeping the simulated monopole effect that drives(and locks) the movement. While at the same time increasing the drive force.
Making the lock point calibrate-able. Weakening to lock, or if overdone relocating, the lock. So that 11 armatures pushing the 1 can be far stronger than the lock. Instead of just strong enough, to move it. Also to get those degrees, wider then the flux field. It had to be 8 foot around, not good enough. Breath could stop it, unless....You could calibrate the lock, without weakening the drive. Then I figured out how.
Moving it out of the lock range, is useless. Because you must use more energy to move it out of range. Then more to put it back and more keep it there. Which is equal to or more than it would take to just push through the lock. Even though it is 7-15 times stronger then the drive. Depending on the the degree it opens within the length of the gate. After so much, the drive weakens. So Calibrating the lock is the only way to overcome it. Without going very, very large. To make sure there are no two armatures, are in a lock's field at the same time. While keeping the degree separating to achieve The same drive at all 12 points. At all times.
Then Just for fun add a overbalance and use Finsrud's design to till it as it moves, as well as some other use of springs, pendulums, & a few other ideas. Of which I have never seen any of these ideas I have, even partly combined. If even thought of, to hopefully make a beautiful, working, work of art. I'll tell more if anyone can guess what I mean, with my vague riddle like statements.

here's the file. Of Finsrud's art masterpiece.

ace
Nice work.   
Bill