Hello all, i'm new to forum and magnet motors. I have built a perendev replica that is an excellent motor break. It has no possibility of working it works better than disc brakes. I am addicted to this obsession. I have seen many computer simulations of running magnet motors but the only one that makes sense to me was the Bowman design. I am attempting a design similar to it currently. I have a laser engraving system that is capable of cutting 1/4" acrylic and it is a real nice tool to have. I would be willing to help others prototype their designs for a nominal fee or for trade on their services. I work with Corel Draw x3 and can import many file types. Contact me directly at laserman (at) bend cable (dot) com no spaces. any link supplied to me i will follow like a blood hound! Thanks to all in advance.
Have a look at the MFT:
http://www.overunity.com/mft
build a motor with lots of power, but doesnt use much,and have it power a 3Kw gen please :) , and ty.,oh and make sure can power the motor, close the loop:).
QuoteHolt <gtnrvs2001@yahoo.com>
I have seen first-hand three magnetic motors running and have written
cost feasibility and reproducibility reports on all three. Two of them
I had in my lab and my staff used the inventors' plans to build several
working replicas. We also went and saw, first-hand, the Perendev
device.
All three designs used "Rare Earth" magnets (Neodymium, or more
correctly stated, Neodymium Iron Boron or NdFeB) and our various
reproductions used NdFeB, SmCo and Ferrite magnets. We did not attempt
to reproduce the Perendev device because of its design proximity to one
of the other two.
The results were always the same: they all run down. Under load, they
run down very quickly. It doesn't take very long for magnets to lose
their magnetism when they are constantly being put in opposition to one
another.
Received this from the Keelynet forum.
This has been my experience also. There is no overunity to be found in permanent magnets.
What most experimenters conveniently forget is the amount of energy it takes to make some material magnetic. They see something working for a short time and think it will go on forever if only properly adjusted.
Once that initial energy is gone the thing stops, yes Omnibus, even a SMOT. It may take a long time if the opposing forces are not too strong and only invoked for short periods, but it will happen.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 26, 2007, 12:37:56 AM
QuoteHolt <gtnrvs2001@yahoo.com>
I have seen first-hand three magnetic motors running and have written
cost feasibility and reproducibility reports on all three. Two of them
I had in my lab and my staff used the inventors' plans to build several
working replicas. We also went and saw, first-hand, the Perendev
device.
All three designs used "Rare Earth" magnets (Neodymium, or more
correctly stated, Neodymium Iron Boron or NdFeB) and our various
reproductions used NdFeB, SmCo and Ferrite magnets. We did not attempt
to reproduce the Perendev device because of its design proximity to one
of the other two.
The results were always the same: they all run down. Under load, they
run down very quickly. It doesn't take very long for magnets to lose
their magnetism when they are constantly being put in opposition to one
another.
Received this from the Keelynet forum.
This has been my experience also. There is no overunity to be found in permanent magnets.
What most experimenters conveniently forget is the amount of energy it takes to make some material magnetic. They see something working for a short time and think it will go on forever if only properly adjusted.
Once that initial energy is gone the thing stops, yes Omnibus, even a SMOT. It may take a long time if the opposing forces are not too strong and only invoked for short periods, but it will happen.
Hans von Lieven
This is incompetent gibberish.
I have never seen a working permanent magnet motor (except for Finsrud's about which I still have certain reservations).
However, show me a self-starting permanent motor making several full turns and don't bother at all about magnets running down. Anyone concerned with the energy necessary to magnetize the magnets or magnets getting demagnetized while the pmm is working doesn't know what he's talking about.
With the MFT you can have more positive torque
than negative torque,
look at this FEMM simulation LUA force graph:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foverunity.com%2Fmft%2FMFTFORCE.JPG&hash=f528bf72c89e59867d2c0bb46fb1fe8341222875)
This makes the magnet motor run.
But you need the special flux gate setup with the iron ring around
the magnets
to allow the flux gate rotor to pass the fluxgate with acceleration.
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 26, 2007, 12:37:56 AM
What most experimenters conveniently forget is the amount of energy it takes to make some material magnetic. They see something working for a short time and think it will go on forever if only properly adjusted.
Once that initial energy is gone the thing stops, yes Omnibus, even a SMOT. It may take a long time if the opposing forces are not too strong and only invoked for short periods, but it will happen.
Hans von Lieven
It takes energy to make a hammer, but the hammer itself do not store that energy to be used later for pushing nails into a piece of wood.
It takes energy to magnetize a (soon to be) magnet, but the magnet itself do not store that energy to be used later in attracting a piece of iron or repelling another magnet.
If we use say, 1KJ to magnetize a NIB, it doesn?t mean that the magnet will be depleted after doing 1 KJ of work attracting 1000 times a mass of 1 N from 1 m of distance. Magnets do not work this way.
Magnets loose their magnetism only if they are exposed to SEVERE adverse fields. Please read carefully and understand the following articles:
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4A.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4A.htm)
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4B.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4B.htm)
and very specially this:
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4C.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4C.htm)
I hope that this help to clarify once and forever some of the misunderstandings about magnetism in general and permanent magnets in particular.
Sincerely yours
Noble Wolf
Hi Stefan,
I agree the computer simulations confirm that permanent magnet motors are viable. The problem is that the simulations are done under idealized conditions. In practice, however, equal symmetric pieces of permanent magnets give rise to quite disparate magnetic fields around each one piece. This throws the experimenter into daunting problems when trying to put in flesh and blood what the simulation has shown and produce a working device.
It's true that it is during these last decades that we are able to confirm theoretically, through computer simulations, that 700 years old ideas are in fact workable. What is needed now, and there are several very promising projects, is to make it so that many independent researchers can reproduce in their labs working perpetuum mobile's. (Of course, no one can tell with certainty that such haven't been demonstrated earlier, even centuries ago, and have been lost for humanity for various reasons.)
Quote from: NobleWolf on October 26, 2007, 02:51:46 AM
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 26, 2007, 12:37:56 AM
What most experimenters conveniently forget is the amount of energy it takes to make some material magnetic. They see something working for a short time and think it will go on forever if only properly adjusted.
Once that initial energy is gone the thing stops, yes Omnibus, even a SMOT. It may take a long time if the opposing forces are not too strong and only invoked for short periods, but it will happen.
Hans von Lieven
It takes energy to make a hammer, but the hammer itself do not store that energy to be used later for pushing nails into a piece of wood.
It takes energy to magnetize a (soon to be) magnet, but the magnet itself do not store that energy to be used later in attracting a piece of iron or repelling another magnet.
If we use say, 1KJ to magnetize a NIB, it doesn?t mean that the magnet will be depleted after doing 1 KJ of work attracting 1000 times a mass of 1 N from 1 m of distance. Magnets do not work this way.
Magnets loose their magnetism only if they are exposed to SEVERE adverse fields. Please read carefully and understand the following articles:
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4A.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4A.htm)
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4B.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4B.htm)
and very specially this:
http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4C.htm (http://www.magnetweb.com/Sect4C.htm)
I hope that this help to clarify once and forever some of the misunderstandings about magnetism in general and permanent magnets in particular.
Sincerely yours
Noble Wolf
Thanks for the good explanation and links. There are people here, however, who would never understand this and will keep pouncing their incompetence on the forum as @hansvonlieven continuously does iin his politely arrogant manner. This has to stop and efforts have to be directed towards more productive activities leading to sooner replication of the perpetuum mobiles based on permanent magnets, perpetuum mobiles whose viability has already been confirmed beyond doubt.
I don`t think that there is incompetent people in this forum. Remember that none of us, absolutely NOBODY, is an expert or "professional" in the field of OU/FE/PM, else we would have many working devices to enjoy. No way, no working/usable device to power our home/car/appliances/etc. yet.
In my opinion, all opinions are valid. Take what you think is good or useful for you and discard what is not. We are all here to learn, to share, to exchange ideas (good and bad ones).
I`ve seen many threads in this forum with almost 100 pages and countless messages of people insulting and discrediting each other ideas/thinkings, discussing if OU/FE/PM is possible or not, messages completely off topic. ?Is this way how we plan to "save the humanity"?. I think NOT.
I personally enjoy when I see here a new idea/plan/link but is very sad (and a waste of time) when I see threads which appears to be written by two ladies who don`t know what an orgasm is.
Sincerely yours
Noble Wolf
Quote from: NobleWolf on October 26, 2007, 01:35:31 PM
I don`t think that there is incompetent people in this forum. Remember that none of us, absolutely NOBODY, is an expert or "professional" in the field of OU/FE/PM, else we would have many working devices to enjoy. No way, no working/usable device to power our home/car/appliances/etc. yet.
In my opinion, all opinions are valid. Take what you think is good or useful for you and discard what is not. We are all here to learn, to share, to exchange ideas (good and bad ones).
I`ve seen many threads in this forum with almost 100 pages and countless messages of people insulting and discrediting each other ideas/thinkings, discussing if OU/FE/PM is possible or not, messages completely off topic. ?Is this way how we plan to "save the humanity"?. I think NOT.
I personally enjoy when I see here a new idea/plan/link but is very sad (and a waste of time) when I see threads which appears to be written by two ladies who don`t know what an orgasm is.
Sincerely yours
Noble Wolf
I disagree. Not all opinions are valid in a scientific discussion. Opinions expressing invalid notions (e.g. the ones you already correctly objected to) aren't valid scientifically, neither are they useful. If we don't resort to playing with words we should reject the opinions that clutter the thread and contribute nothing to the fruitful discussion.
Quote from: NobleWolf on October 26, 2007, 01:35:31 PM
I don`t think that there is incompetent people in this forum. Remember that none of us, absolutely NOBODY, is an expert or "professional" in the field of OU/FE/PM, else we would have many working devices to enjoy. No way, no working/usable device to power our home/car/appliances/etc. yet.
In my opinion, all opinions are valid. Take what you think is good or useful for you and discard what is not. We are all here to learn, to share, to exchange ideas (good and bad ones).
I`ve seen many threads in this forum with almost 100 pages and countless messages of people insulting and discrediting each other ideas/thinkings, discussing if OU/FE/PM is possible or not, messages completely off topic. ?Is this way how we plan to "save the humanity"?. I think NOT.
I personally enjoy when I see here a new idea/plan/link but is very sad (and a waste of time) when I see threads which appears to be written by two ladies who don`t know what an orgasm is.
Sincerely yours
Noble Wolf
Intentionally or unintentionally, you have hit upon a major problem with alternative forums such as this. The problem is that free energy is not possible under current scientific theory. And, mind you, mainstream science is not something to discard lightly. Many very smart and very highly-educated people have spent their lives observing how things work. These people know more than we do, and they do not bother to read this board.
What I am trying to get it is that in order to propose that free energy is possible, you boldly have to set aside Conservation of Energy and the other laws that apply. And when you are brave enough to do that, you are basically saying that anything is possible - the laws of physics as we know them are flawed! We have to create new laws!
This is all very cavalier and noble, but the problem that you quickly run into is that even when discussing competing theories with proponents of free energy, you have great difficulties in discarding dead ends. Because we are in this community that thinks anything is possible, how can anything be seen as worthless? Applying the laws of physics only gets you so far, because you simply have to discard them at some point if you want to hold out hope for free energy. So there you have your problem, and there is no good answer, but my feeling is that Omnibus is right and you really have to prune the bad theories and get them out of the way quickly, or alot of people will waste alot of time. The key is how to figure out what is a bad theory. No current theory leads to an overunity device, so which theory is best? Maybe the one that is least underunity?
I hope I have made myself understood, because my head is starting to hurt from thinking about this.
@shruggedatlas,
I have to remind you once more that I have shown conclusively that CoE can be violated which opens the road for working perpetuum mobile's. I haven't seen any so far (with the exception of Finsrud's) but this I relate only to the engineering difficulties such devices pose to their constructors. I'm seeing some promising proposals, though. I will also pursue further, when I'm back, the patent problem we discussed in another thread (right now I'm in London on my way to NYC). Of course, my analysis isn't based on 'anything goes' mentality, often demonstrating elementary incompetence, which isn't uncommon in forums such as this, but is based on sound and rigorous scientific arguments.
Anyway, it's very easy to build a permanent magnet motor sir. The first thing you need is the idea that effort is strongly related to results. The second thing you need is the awareness that the closer you get to results the more people will try to derail your project. So, you must take those debunker posts like compliments. They do have to have 100% negative previous postings or they do not count as real debunkers. :D
QuoteI have shown conclusively that CoE can be violated
OH, I thought we still didn't get any proof with the CoE hypothesis? Asking around the Internet in various physics groups I have to conclude there is not one person alive today who can make sense of Noetherens graduation paper. I also rather painfully discovered that those people referred to as knowledgeable scientists are mostly imbeciles who cant be bothered to have a conversation using acceptable human gramar and specially common decency.
Well? How does this CoE thing work? Can anyone here please explain the exact way this hypothesis became a theory. I need to see the proof of this before I can accept any of it. If one cant rationalise a wild guess like CoE then what makes them think they can try pass it off as the truth? After such gross lie I really do not need to look at any math to establish an actuate picture of the persons reasoning abilities? do I?
"You just have to accept it as facts"Will make me laugh in your face..... telling me what I
"have to do" now? wow!! How funny!
"you have to respect scientists"Accomplishes exactly the opposite for me. How dare people tell me what to respect! What gross fraudulent behaviour do we have here? Respect is EARNED, you don't get it by telling people to respect you. ROFL!! That's called a lie and liars don't
earn any respect.
99% of the current professors are equal to sponges. They had to sponge up so much information it's awfully obvious they didn't think about any of it. With very few exceptions it's questionable if they even have thinking abilities after showing such incredible blind absorption skills. It's a job reserved for human sponges we all know how incredibly hard it is. You tend to get distracted by your own thoughts. So that leads me to believe those who can accomplish such enormous work don't have much original thoughts (if any). They are so proud of all the discoveries they claim make up physics. But those discoveries where never made by human sponges. The discoveries where all made by thinking, resourceful, adventurous people. All we have to do is compare Tesla's patents to those of Einstein and we all know enough.
I'm using the word hypothesis to describe CoE but that really doesn't do any justice to the topic.
The scientific method requires that one can test a hypothesis, CoE is not even worthy of the hypothesis label !
I conclude,
I'm researching perpetual motion.
You'd better respect that. Perpetual motion devices always work,
you have to take it on faith! You must! ROFL!!!
The comedy value is tremendous...... to bad it means the end of the world.......
Gaby, my compliments to you. One of your better posts.
Hi guys,
@NobleWolf: thanks for the links.
Just my 2 cents.
"Official" Science says that Magnetism (as Gravity) is a conservative force.
So, you can get nothing from these 'forces' (Bessler or Perendev (for example)).
This is impossible. Period. Move on .Nothing to see.
Others scientists(?) say: OK, you sometimes can get something with magnets but they will soon get depleted and all what you could obtain is the energy that was used to build these very magnets.
I'm not a scientist. I was taught that science was logical. To me, these 2 propositions are not compatible.
Is it really impossible or just irrelevant/useless?
Best
Imho the above propositions are compatible, as follows:
First: true magnetic motors DO NOT WORK. I invite all ?open-minded? members to prove me wrong. (Attack my person as much as you may want but remember to post the slightest proof at the end. I base my statement on science AND on history, not just on my personal experience).
Second: if magnets weaken in time, then their field is NO LONGER CONSERVATIVE. (Imagine it like a spiral). Hence, in such cases certain motors may exhibit rotation for a short period of time, until magnets are depleted. (Actually until magnets do not significantly weaken anymore; they may be far from depleted). I am still anxious to see a working magnetic motor falling into this category; they may theoretically exist and although of no practical significance whatsoever, their engineering would be a challenge in itself. And an open gate to LEGEND and FRAUD?
Third: if not first and second above, something else is involved, including (but not necessarily) a FAKE. Often, thermal and other effects are not considered.
So, my reply: impossible or just irrelevant/useless, what?s the difference?!
Quote from: NerzhDishual on October 27, 2007, 04:36:51 PM
Move on .Nothing to see.
Yup, that would be the healthiest choice. ;)
Actually, experimenting is fun. Keep experiments going on but have the above in mind once in a while (like at every 100 spent bucks or 100 millions lost neurons, whichever happens first or hurts more. ;D)
Now hit me hard, my friends.
Tinu
Just a little reminder to Gaby
QuoteThey are so proud of all the discoveries they claim make up physics. But those discoveries where never made by human sponges. The discoveries where all made by thinking, resourceful, adventurous people. All we have to do is compare Tesla's patents to those of Einstein and we all know enough.
Tesla WAS an academic, just like Einstein.
QuoteTesla completed his elementary education in Croatia. He continued his schooling in the Polytechnic School in Graz and finished at University of Prague. He worked as an electrical engineer in Germany, Hungary and France before emigrating to the United States in 1884.
He could also build things whereas Einstein couldn't. Before you bag all engineers and scientists make sure of your facts.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: NerzhDishual on October 27, 2007, 04:36:51 PM
Others scientists(?) say: OK, you sometimes can get something with magnets but they will soon get depleted and all what you could obtain is the energy that was used to build these very magnets.
I have searched all over the web for a scientific statement explaning why the magnets will get depleted in a so called magnet motor but I
haven't found any statements of this matter, so far. Can you please provide a link for me to read of the magnets getting depleted matter?
Until I read a real scientific explanation I continue to believe that the depletion is just another magnet myth created at forums like this.
Quote from: Honk on October 28, 2007, 02:45:50 PM
I have searched all over the web for a scientific statement explaning why the magnets will get depleted in a so called magnet motor but I
haven't found any statements of this matter, so far. Can you please provide a link for me to read of the magnets getting depleted matter?
Until I read a real scientific explanation I continue to believe that the depletion is just another magnet myth created at forums like this.
aaa? hysteresis curve?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis
Check also magnetic domains, Curie temperature and phase transitions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferromagnetism
Combine them?
Yes, I see the point but I'm not satisfied by this reading. Something is still missing.
I miss the scientific pinpoint explanation of why the magnets would get demagnetized. Especially resistent neo magnets.
Let's us see if my FBDISSM will work, like supposedly Sprains EMILIE, then we will know by first hand if the magnets will get demagnetized.
That?s exactly the point: resistant neo magnets will not get demagnetized.
Unless, forcefully opposed to equally strong and resistant neo magnets?
Remember that an ideal magnet should entirely expel magnetic fields (i.e. superconductors). However, this is not the case for real magnets. Any external H will push Br up or down along the hysteresis curve. Normally those variations are small and pretty much reversible as long as external H is successively attractive and repulsive and not too intense. But when H is strong and when is constantly opposing Br, permanent effects are noticed.
I can not confirm the above for neo because neos are imho too valuable to degrade them in such experiments. But I can confirm that ceramic (speaker) magnets get noticeably demagnetized if placed N-N or S-S at close proximity for some time (usually hours).
G'day all,
I have been very quiet until now.
When I earlier pointed out that the amount of energy required to create a magnet was conveniently ignored by most researchers, which seem to see in a permanent magnet a thing that just happens to exist on its own rather than something that had been created with a considerable amount of energy.
The question is where did that energy go?
I was abused for making such a statement. I did not make that statement lightly but as a result of considerable experimentation and contemplation.
It therefore surprises me that no-one to date has actually asked me why I would be making such a statement and what my thoughts on the matter are in detail. Instead I get abuse from those who want us to believe they have a scientific approach to things and accuse me of being unscientific.
If abuse instead of reasoned argument is scientific then I am indeed no scientist.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: tinu on October 28, 2007, 04:25:44 PM
I can not confirm the above for neo because neos are imho too valuable to degrade them in such experiments.
But I can confirm that ceramic (speaker) magnets get noticeably demagnetized if placed N-N or S-S at close proximity for some time (usually hours).
I can update you that I've had N50M neo magnets in totaly close repel mode for 5 month by now and they show no sign of demagnetization at all.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2751.msg47490#msg47490
I have also built a motorized repel unit the see if there is any risk of demagnetization at motion in close repel. See point 2.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3456.msg56445#msg56445
:)
Hong Thanks it is great to see someone doing and not talking all on faith!!!
@honk,
This is a good experiment you have set up there, I am curious as to the results.
Btw, do you know how much energy is required to magnetise a neo magnet? I have no data on that.
Hans von Lieven
No, I dont know the energy need except it's a short pulse of thousands of amps going into a coil forming an electro magnet.
If the coil is super cooled then the energy reqired almost zero, due to the super conducting effect.
I got some new information on how neo magnets are affected by magnetic fields. Please read this link.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2751.msg56551#msg56551
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 28, 2007, 06:36:04 PM
Btw, do you know how much energy is required to magnetise a neo magnet? I have no data on that.
I have no data either. Subject is well worthy of some documentation.
Quote from: Honk on October 28, 2007, 05:28:03 PM
I can update you that I've had N50M neo magnets in totaly close repel mode for 5 month by now and they show no sign of demagnetization at all.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2751.msg47490#msg47490
May I suggest that measuring B in one point or in several points at surface is not necessarily accurate? Actually, you may measure about or very close to .51T for a long time, although the overall flux of the magnet is diminished. This is because the induction at surface is given by the whole volume of the magnet, including the domains from the opposite side as that stressed. What you loose is primarily on the stressed surface. And in order to determine this, an integral of the whole flux would be needed. Of course, integrating is not easy neither convenient. But as alternative, I suggest measuring B at several fixed distances and not at the surface. Higher the distance (up to the available resolution), better the estimate. Agree?
I?d like very much to kindly ask you posting updates on the subject according to the above suggestion, if not too difficult.
Many thanks in advance,
Tinu
It would seem like putting to Magnets in a non metallic tube with one being repused / lifted above the other would take into effect the total field losses. The top magnet could be weighted down also.
Experiment #1 measure drop in repulsed magnets distance over time.
Experiment # 2 mechanical oscillator to raise and lower bottom magnet causing top magnet to raise and lower again measure drop in distance between two magnets of time.
Any loss in lifting power over time would show true loss of both magnets strength.
George King
www.cosmicsalamander.com
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 28, 2007, 05:06:44 PM
G'day all,
I have been very quiet until now.
When I earlier pointed out that the amount of energy required to create a magnet was conveniently ignored by most researchers, which seem to see in a permanent magnet a thing that just happens to exist on its own rather than something that had been created with a considerable amount of energy.
The question is where did that energy go?
I was abused for making such a statement. I did not make that statement lightly but as a result of considerable experimentation and contemplation.
It therefore surprises me that no-one to date has actually asked me why I would be making such a statement and what my thoughts on the matter are in detail. Instead I get abuse from those who want us to believe they have a scientific approach to things and accuse me of being unscientific.
If abuse instead of reasoned argument is scientific then I am indeed no scientist.
Hans von Lieven
Hi Hans,
Surely the position is this. If someone gets a magnet motor working and the amount of energy produced by that device when its coupled up to an generaor / alternator exceeds the amount of energy that it took to energise the magnets, then the system is an OU device. If it stops running before that point then it isn't.
No one knows the answer yet - at least if they do they havn't given a public demo to prove their claims.
klicUK
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 28, 2007, 06:36:04 PM
Btw, do you know how much energy is required to magnetise a neo magnet? I have no data on that.
check this, it may help...
http://www.consult-g2.com/course/chapter5/chapter.html (http://www.consult-g2.com/course/chapter5/chapter.html)
G'day all,
Thanks for the link NobleWolf, this is helpful though not specific enough for what I have in mind. I'll do a bit more ferreting :-)
@klicUK
Exactly my point. There are people here that claim they have conclusively proven OU because of that silly SMOT. No-one has pushed the steel ball into the gate often enough to come anywhere close to the amount of energy it took to magnetise the material. To speak of Overunity being conclusively proven under such circumstances is an emotional wishful thinking type statement, not science.
Hans von Lieven
Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 29, 2007, 04:34:29 AM
G'day all,
Thanks for the link NobleWolf, this is helpful though not specific enough for what I have in mind. I'll do a bit more ferreting :-)
@klicUK
Exactly my point. There are people here that claim they have conclusively proven OU because of that silly SMOT. No-one has pushed the steel ball into the gate often enough to come anywhere close to the amount of energy it took to magnetise the material. To speak of Overunity being conclusively proven under such circumstances is an emotional wishful thinking type statement, not science.
Hans von Lieven
This is, of course, nonsense. That CoE can be violated ha been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. What remains now is to utilize it in a working motor which is only an engineering problem, no matter how daunting. Recently, very promising proposals are emerging and the practical solution, reproducible by independent parties is just around the corner.
Thank you everyone for their insight. What I gather is that it hasn't been done yet...so all that means is... I am not a complete failure... i just haven't figured it out yet. When one says that it cant be done i read into that statement..."jumbo jets will never fly" or "there is no such thing as alien spacecraft" or as far as that goes..."there is no God". When I said magnet motor, I was probably really meaning a perpetual momentum toy that will sit on my desk and spin or twirl for my own amusement. Over unity as i understand is more out than put in...I dont care about the billions of dollars spent on resources or in machinery to make a ND magnet, IMHO if one puts those data points into the equation...one will NEVER achieve over unity. IF you read this response please check it again as i will post my perendev braking system i developed here as soon as i can figure out how to post pics here. I appreciate everone's comments except for maby borg's which was kind of smartass but i may have liked his the most because he is most like me.
Quote from: laserman on October 29, 2007, 04:01:41 PM
Thank you everyone for their insight. What I gather is that it hasn't been done yet...so all that means is... I am not a complete failure... i just haven't figured it out yet. When one says that it cant be done i read into that statement..."jumbo jets will never fly" or "there is no such thing as alien spacecraft" or as far as that goes..."there is no God". When I said magnet motor, I was probably really meaning a perpetual momentum toy that will sit on my desk and spin or twirl for my own amusement. Over unity as i understand is more out than put in...I dont care about the billions of dollars spent on resources or in machinery to make a ND magnet, IMHO if one puts those data points into the equation...one will NEVER achieve over unity. IF you read this response please check it again as i will post my perendev braking system i developed here as soon as i can figure out how to post pics here. I appreciate everone's comments except for maby borg's which was kind of smartass but i may have liked his the most because he is most like me.
Overunity is indeed more out than put in and this has already been achieved beyond a shadow of a doubt. What we're talking about here is obtainment of the 'out' at the expense of nothing 'in'. This is what these 'perpetuum mobile' motors are. Good luck with your project. Wouldn't it be possible to post a video istead of pics?
Quote from: Omnibus on October 29, 2007, 03:30:01 PM
This is, of course, nonsense. That CoE can be violated ha been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. What remains now is to utilize it in a working motor which is only an engineering problem, no matter how daunting. Recently, very promising proposals are emerging and the practical solution, reproducible by independent parties is just around the corner.
Just curious, but how has CoE being violated been "proven beyond a shadow of doubt". I thought that's why Steorn was keeping things so close to their chest until the jury of 22 respectable scientists could publish their results. Now I have a gut feel that you are right, at least CoE may be able to be violated. If there is ever a truly inert magnetic sheild, ie not paramagnetic, then virtually all magnet motors that have ever been thought of could be made to work.
Quote from: klicUK on October 29, 2007, 04:11:41 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on October 29, 2007, 03:30:01 PM
This is, of course, nonsense. That CoE can be violated ha been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. What remains now is to utilize it in a working motor which is only an engineering problem, no matter how daunting. Recently, very promising proposals are emerging and the practical solution, reproducible by independent parties is just around the corner.
Just curious, but how has CoE being violated been "proven beyond a shadow of doubt". I thought that's why Steorn was keeping things so close to their chest until the jury of 22 respectable scientists could publish their results. Now I have a gut feel that you are right, at least CoE may be able to be violated. If there is ever a truly inert magnetic sheild, ie not paramagnetic, then virtually all magnet motors that have ever been thought of could be made to work.
Steorn's is only one of the many promising designs (one of the better ones) that have been proposed for utilizing the violation of CoE. The first ever rigorous scientific analysis for the violation of CoE was carried out in connection with the SMOT. In it it was proven that energy out of nothing can be obtained discontinuously. Continuous production of energy from nothing is done by the permanent magnet motors we're discussing. Unfortunately, so far none has been demonstrated such that independent parties can reproduce it, as science requires. This will soon change, as is becoming more and more obvious.
Quote from: Omnibus on October 29, 2007, 04:17:30 PM
Unfortunately, so far none has been demonstrated such that independent parties can reproduce it, as science requires. This will soon change, as is becoming more and more obvious.
Well I hope your right. I'm still pluggin away, and it's not because I think it can't be done.
Hope you can see these pics!
What do you mean by "perendev braking system"?
P.S. Boy, these are some of the best creations I've seen in this area of research (perpetuum mobile). You may be only a step away from the real thing. Best of luck.
Maby this movie will work. I know i am only showing one stator moving in but it stops faster with two stators. This prototype if for sale if anyone is interested! ;D
omnibus, my joke is that this is a perfect magnetic brake not a magnetic motor, As the perendev motor video shows, when the stators are moved in the motor starts to spin and go really fast...When I move my stators in Hulk Hogan cant spin the armature. I built the perfect brake system!!!
Quote from: laserman on October 29, 2007, 07:27:24 PM
Maby this movie will work. I know i am only showing one stator moving in but it stops faster with two stators. This prototype if for sale if anyone is interested! ;D
I don't get it. What's the point? Why all this effort to build this beautiful device only to show something trivial?
Good on you laserman,
There is nothing trivial about a frictionless efficient braking system, I hope you make millions.
Hans von Lieven
omnibus, i assume you are being sarcastic. I was trying to build a magnet motor using perendev as a design. BUT IT DIDNT WORK!!! At least is shows my ability to design or reverse engineer something and cut it out with a laser...whatever...
Quote from: laserman on October 29, 2007, 09:34:33 PM
omnibus, i assume you are being sarcastic. I was trying to build a magnet motor using perendev as a design. BUT IT DIDNT WORK!!! At least is shows my ability to design or reverse engineer something and cut it out with a laser...whatever...
I think you've done a great job cutting out details with a laser. As far as working as perendev does, I think you need to apply some more effort in tuning it up. All similar devices suffer from this same weaknes--extremely difficult to tune them up. I wonder if you paid attention to what I was saying in connection with Torbay. I think the problem he had in NYC was that his motor was disassembled at the border (an usual procedure nowadays when an unusual device enters the US) and he couldn't put it back together again in a working condition. Even the constructor of the device wasn't able to do it, can you imagine. There's more than meets the eye with these pmm's. On the face of it they look symmetric and perfectly manufactured. The fields that act, though, the fields our eyes can't see, are usually not in such a great shape. If you measure the magnetic field around each one of your ostensibly equal in shape magnets you'll notice they aren't at all the same. Adjustment of the magnetic fields is the key issue here and before you're sure you've done everything in this respect (a very difficult task) you shouldn't give up, turning your creation into a trivial, useless brake or what not.
Dear laserman!
Now I am going to make a Perendev replica, too. In Russia we have Godin-Roschin mashine that use Searl-effect, but have no schemes, how to build it. Can you provide me with the schemes you used creating your replica of Perendev?
Hi vvkarelin,
If you are interested in the Perendev device, you could find here a ((not yet :-\ ?) working) replication:
http://quanthomme.free.fr/qhsuite/dupreprotoperendev.htm (http://quanthomme.free.fr/qhsuite/dupreprotoperendev.htm)
It is in French (but not the pictures and the drawings :))
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreenrg.info%2FImg%2Fperendevdupreprotofini.JPG&hash=57cce47d4ce16c1bcff77b4610d8e408644c2a79)
Best
@NerzhDishual,
This looks more or less like the replication which someone manufactured for Sterling Alen. This isn't what Mike Brady's device is seen to be in the video--the stators in Brady's motor approach the rotor differently. This isn't unimportant. As an example, recall that if you start the ball at point C rather than at point A in this experiment: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 the ball will not compete the loop.
QuoteThis isn't what Mike Brady's device is seen to be in the video--the stators in Brady's motor approach the rotor differently.
Yes that's right, the replication shown isn't like the perendev pmm, because it doesn't have the big motor powering it like the one in perendev's video has just out of shot.
Quote from: acp on October 30, 2007, 11:10:04 AM
QuoteThis isn't what Mike Brady's device is seen to be in the video--the stators in Brady's motor approach the rotor differently.
Yes that's right, the replication shown isn't like the perendev pmm, because it doesn't have the big motor powering it like the one in perendev's video has just out of shot.
No, that's not the reason why the shown device differs from Mike Brady's. Why it differs I've identified in the previous post.
@Omnibus
Thanks for the link.
Please, note that the guy who has replicated the motor is not saying that it will not work. He (still) believes that the Perendev motor works. He is just searching how ???.
At the end of the web page is his notably, wondering whether there could not be some gaps in the magnets's row. (a non continuous magnets's distribution).
Best
Those who have done scientific research, especially in experimental sciences such a Chemistry and Physics know that reproducing previous results sometimes is one of the most difficult parts of the research. One cannot play with that by imagining that results can be reproduced by just approximating the previous study and not following exactly the methods and procedures of the originator. Again, it's like thinking that you can reproduce the result in http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 by ignoring what is done there and imagining that the same result will be obtained by starting the loop at point C.
Quote from: NerzhDishual on October 30, 2007, 11:21:05 AM
@Omnibus
Thanks for the link.
Please, note that the guy who has replicated the motor is not saying that it will not work. He (still) believes that the Perendev motor works. He is just searching how ???.
At the end of the web page is his notably, wondering whether there could not be some gaps in the magnets's row. (a non continuous magnets's distribution).
Best
Of course, one thing Brady must do if he really cares about Science and acceptance of his device by Science is to very thoroughly describe what is done for his motor to spin without the input of external energy. Many people are just dreamers and naively think that such devices will bring them wealth through playing games of secrecy. The only thing such games will bring these people is obsolescence and ridicule. Not to say that such devices are everything the business hates and will never allow to spread., let alone earn money.
Also, as I said, this French person as well as the likes of Sterling Alen should first try to reproduce the device as presented by its original constructor and then fantasize of other constructions. Simple as that.
There is no evidence that the perendev motor was started by a motor on the unseen side. Or should I say there is no evidence that the motor spun up by itself. There are stops and starts on the video. Brady has for surly read the comments accusing him of using a motor to spin it up. If it starts on its own and i were him, i would take 4 minutes out of my life and make and post a new video of machine that will eliminate these comments. To rebuild mine to recently discovered information, i would have to re make all three rotors providing a 50 percent overlap of magnets. my rotor magnets are equally spaced and do not overlap. I would have to also providing some kind of shielding on the attraction side of rotor mags. I am not trying to change the world, I just want a running pmm on my desk to amuse myself. So i am now looking into the bowman design. I guess i missed the loop on Torbay that omnibus suggested and ill look into that. If some one is willing to take over this perendev pmm i have we can discuss. I will listen and take into consideration to any suggestions that others may have.
Quote from: laserman on October 30, 2007, 01:42:53 PM
There is no evidence that the perendev motor was started by a motor on the unseen side. Or should I say there is no evidence that the motor spun up by itself. There are stops and starts on the video. Brady has for surly read the comments accusing him of using a motor to spin it up. If it starts on its own and i were him, i would take 4 minutes out of my life and make and post a new video of machine that will eliminate these comments. To rebuild mine to recently discovered information, i would have to re make all three rotors providing a 50 percent overlap of magnets. my rotor magnets are equally spaced and do not overlap. I would have to also providing some kind of shielding on the attraction side of rotor mags. I am not trying to change the world, I just want a running pmm on my desk to amuse myself. So i am now looking into the bowman design. I guess i missed the loop on Torbay that omnibus suggested and ill look into that. If some one is willing to take over this perendev pmm i have we can discuss. I will listen and take into consideration to any suggestions that others may have.
See, the thing is, Brady couldn't care less to convince anybody. I experienced the same attitude with Finsrud. As for your effort, I think you're doing a great job but you should somehow change ways and get exactly into Mike Brady's rut (forgive the joke). Please try to study carefully what Brady has done and replicate it as closely as possible. Also, try to speak with him. I've spoken with him on several occasions and I'm finding him to be a very pleasant person. Unfortunately, as it seems, there are others, probably lawyers, who are preventing him from being more open. You may try to talk with him, though, and see what his reaction will be. The input of the original constructor is very important in such cases, needless to say.
Quote from: vvkarelin on October 30, 2007, 09:09:45 AM
Dear laserman!
Now I am going to make a Perendev replica, too. In Russia we have Godin-Roschin mashine that use Searl-effect, but have no schemes, how to build it. Can you provide me with the schemes you used creating your replica of Perendev?
i can send you a corel file or an eps file of design if you would like.
Quote from: Omnibus on October 29, 2007, 09:49:49 PM
There's more than meets the eye with these pmm's. On the face of it they look symmetric and perfectly manufactured. The fields that act, though, the fields our eyes can't see, are usually not in such a great shape. If you measure the magnetic field around each one of your ostensibly equal in shape magnets you'll notice they aren't at all the same. Adjustment of the magnetic fields is the key issue here ...
How can we open our eyes and see what we are working with here?
I agree this is a major problem when working with magnet motors, the complete blindness of it.
Quote from: ken_nyus on October 30, 2007, 06:48:52 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on October 29, 2007, 09:49:49 PM
There's more than meets the eye with these pmm's. On the face of it they look symmetric and perfectly manufactured. The fields that act, though, the fields our eyes can't see, are usually not in such a great shape. If you measure the magnetic field around each one of your ostensibly equal in shape magnets you'll notice they aren't at all the same. Adjustment of the magnetic fields is the key issue here ...
How can we open our eyes and see what we are working with here?
I agree this is a major problem when working with magnet motors, the complete blindness of it.
That's a question I'm asking myself for quite a while (I read somewhere that some birds have the ability to see the magnetic fields, if this is any consolation). The thing to do now is to follow exactly the recipes of someone like @xpenzif or the Lego Perpetuum Mobile constructor, that is, of those who seem to have it working and try to reproduce it exactly as theirs first trying to put our inventiveness aside for a while.
[/quote]
(I read somewhere that some birds have the ability to see the magnetic fields, if this is any consolation).
[/quote]
what a crock o crap with all due respect. How would anyone know if birds had the ability to see magnetic fields? Not saying that they dont, but just asking how you would know ???
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070927-magnetic-birds.html
Even if all magnetic motors come to a stop from demagnetization, it would still prove that magnetism is not a conservative force.
Also, if the device can actually run for a few hours and produce overunity, can't you just remagnetize the magnets with coils as the machine runs?
Quote from: NerzhDishual on October 30, 2007, 10:49:03 AM
Hi vvkarelin,
If you are interested in the Perendev device, you could find here a ((not yet :-\ ?) working) replication:
(http://quanthomme.free.fr/qhsuite/dupreprotoperendev.htm)
Oh! Thank you very much. How to learn, whether this device worked anytime?
Quote from: laserman on October 30, 2007, 02:18:35 PM
Quote from: vvkarelin on October 30, 2007, 09:09:45 AM
Dear laserman!
Now I am going to make a Perendev replica, too. In Russia we have Godin-Roschin mashine that use Searl-effect, but have no schemes, how to build it. Can you provide me with the schemes you used creating your replica of Perendev?
i can send you a corel file or an eps file of design if you would like.
Would you be so kind to send it to karelin@newacropol.ru?
What do you think about Searl-effect?
http://www.johnsearlstory.com/ - John Searl's site
Quote from: vvkarelin on October 31, 2007, 09:27:40 AM
What do you think about Searl-effect?
http://www.johnsearlstory.com/ - John Searl's site
To be ignored.
Perendev build more as one motor. This means there is no such thing as the perendev motor. Anyone who can talk about "THE" didn't do his homework. It's also a trademark just in case you are looking to sell engineering work modeled after their patent? lol?
Quote from: Omnibus on October 31, 2007, 09:33:20 AM
Quote from: vvkarelin on October 31, 2007, 09:27:40 AM
What do you think about Searl-effect?
http://www.johnsearlstory.com/ - John Searl's site
To be ignored.
Oh, please elaborate on that one Omnibus. Truth was your only friend right? Well lets have it? He was put in prison because it was illegal to make your own electricity. Just like it's still forbidden to capture the radiant field when you live close to a power cable. There was a big fuzz over energy saving light bulbs as that was also considered theft. He was put in prison because his machines worked.
You are clearly a crackpot Omnibus but that doesn't mean I don't listen to you nor am I interested in talking about this subject.
So, when did Searl stop making sense to you? Or is there something wrong with my question again? There is always some excuse to avoid the question here. What is it this time? I seem never to get a normal reply here so give it your best shot.
Are you still waiting for this ready made perpetual motion device to drop in your lap? Why are you not trying to build something yourself? If I may be so rude to ask.
John Searl recently disclosed a new neodymium alloy. He seems to think corrosion is a relevant factor in his device.
He was using NEO magnets years before the US military officially disclosed having em.
For me his discovery of some Rife frequencies provide the best clue. I'm not even sure if John knows who Royal R Rife was. :)
All John did was report his findings.
He didn't have the vigorous scientific background Rife had so we cant expect John to defend this claim.
For me personal....
I think a virus may have a power source! That would sure explain those matching frequencies with other perpetual devices.
You've regressed back to the
"no no it's not real gospel" eh?
What about your friend the truth?
Quote from: Omnibus on October 30, 2007, 09:35:12 PM
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070927-magnetic-birds.html
the article uses extensive amount of words like "may" "possibly" "could" "should" and never says "positively determined" Just more scientist getting grants for useless studies writing articles to receive more grants to perpetuate same while we all pay $3.00 per gallon of gas today. And they say there is no such thing as perpetual motion...
Searl, Perendev, Fecera, Torbay and the like are only myths, hearsay. No independent party has ever reproduced what they claim and presented it to the world openly as Science requires. Until they make it so that their creations are reproduced independently, they are to be ignored. This is how truth in Science is achieved and, yes, truth is my only friend.
Quote from: laserman on October 31, 2007, 12:22:38 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on October 30, 2007, 09:35:12 PM
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070927-magnetic-birds.html
the article uses extensive amount of words like "may" "possibly" "could" "should" and never says "positively determined" Just more scientist getting grants for useless studies writing articles to receive more grants to perpetuate same while we all pay $3.00 per gallon of gas today. And they say there is no such thing as perpetual motion...
You may be right but to say you're right you need to come up with more evidence, not with just your gut feeling.
Quote from: Omnibus on October 31, 2007, 12:43:13 PM
No independent party has ever reproduced what they claim
Nah, I think you ( the independent party) didn't even view his latest videos? You need to train the way you ignore things I think. You want me to stop talking about the topic for you? What is the logic? lol
Here is the url
http://swallowcommand.com
@gabby,
did you actuallly get a copy of the movie? give us all a critique. if you did. the last time i looked it was still in production, like the new serle generator.
hoping it is true, lol
sam
Quote from: laserman on October 29, 2007, 04:01:41 PM
When I said magnet motor, I was probably really meaning a perpetual momentum toy that will sit on my desk and spin or twirl for my own amusement.
Try this one (if it's not a fake)...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMjSQmz1VHM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMjSQmz1VHM)
It on the surface appears not to be fake. The rubber band is winding and un winding with each revolution. It appears to be perpetual motion as far as i can tell. But I may not know enough to see it i am being fooled again (as with perendev device) HELLS BELLS it is a heck of alot more entertaining that that stupid SMOT video IMHO.
Quote from: laserman on November 12, 2007, 04:34:53 PM
It on the surface appears not to be fake. The rubber band is winding and un winding with each revolution. It appears to be perpetual motion as far as i can tell. But I may not know enough to see it i am being fooled again (as with perendev device) HELLS BELLS it is a heck of alot more entertaining that that stupid SMOT video IMHO.
LOL!
As about the rubber band, it is just unwinding. The band is not very visible, though. You probably assume that the rubber band is between the moving ball and its support but actually it is positioned along the back axle. And the rotation of back axle is strictly anti-clockwise, all the time. Watch it closely.
Tinu
if you believe the big bang.. "nothing exploded and made something" - then you should believe in free energy
I think the big bang is stupid.. ..nothing cant explode..
however I do believe there are things (physics) and aspects to Science we dont understand yet.. so ruling out Magnets as a form of energy is crazy