Why can't we get free energy from magnet motors, according to scientists?

[Ergo]

Hi

We are told by scientists that not even neo magnets cannot provide free energy in a setup and if we try we will deplete the magnets!
But I would like to read their explantion of why they think it's not possible.
Iv'e googled a lot but can't find any information about this. Do any of you have a link?

[NerzhDishual]

@Ergo

If you google words like magnetism conservative force, you will come across this kind of links:
http://ask.metafilter.com/45235/Is-magnetism-magic-or-what
http://www.ka9q.net/crackpots/index.html

I personnaly do not attach great importance to these sorts of dissertations.

An old Chinese proverb says:
"Man who says it cannot be done should not interrupt man doing it."

You can also consult:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Kedron:Eden_Project:Permanent_Magnet_Energy_Gain
"Kedron, headed by Kenneth C. Kozeka, Ph.D., presents what they believe will be an abundant source of extremely inexpensive, pollution-free mechanical energy, harnessed from strong electromagnetic forces generated by the spin of electrons in powerful permanent magnets such as those made of neodymium."

Best

[steve_whiss]

Hi,

most of these "can't be done" statements close like a steel bear-trap on one principle.

In 1915 - 18 Emmy Noether (a maths genius) proved that any closed system cannot gain energy - all it can do is shuttle it from one form to another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem

Her work concerned electrodynamics (energy systems associated with capacitors and charge) - but the way she wrote her maths meant that it had general applicability. Like when someone who is just so skilled does work - she made it all look so easy and simple .... try doing this from blank paper yourself and is really tough. At this time Einstein was stuck - this freed him up to make progress on "relativity part II" (General Relativity). He said he looked up to her.

Emmy's maths and energy analysis has been boosted from a Principle to a Law (i.e. higher standing then Einstein's work). This is the Law of Conservation of Energy, sometimes just called Conservation of Energy. You will hear of research and science being done to test Relativity - none will test Noether's work. There is simply no need.


Thus, the favourite means to sink without trace any "free energy" idea - is to show that the system being proposed fits / complies to Emmy Noether's work. If it has characteristics meeting the starting assumptions - Game Over - that's it, a conclusion is reached.

And magnets have those characteristics.


This is where the "can't work" people come from - they are true scientists, know and have read Noether and have been down this road - like thousands of times (this stuff is NOT new, this has been raked over regularly around the world for about 200 years - this all stopped when Noether showed WHY it was pointless).

OK, so what is wrong with this picture?

It is unlikely that the maths is wrong. This is very long established and heavily inspected. As the Open Source people say "all bugs are trivial given enough eyes". Guys rated as geniuses have crawled all over Noether (I hope she forgives me for putting it like that... There is no error in the maths

OK, so let's accept the maths. Magnets of themselves cannot add energy because they fit into one of those LCE categories.


But 101 people have found they can get advantage! So what could be going on? Assumptions!

1. about the process - which assumes:

  physics can be modeled by maths, therefore
  physics will (must!) behave like maths

- it is however unlikely that this is so; for maths is abstract cognition and not connected directly to the world, except in the minds of those imagining the work. It must be given context and applicability


2. Noether's work assumes that Creation (whatever that is) is over. What if... this is not so?

since 1998 the Universe has been known to expand in such a way as to show the expansion speeds up - something accelerates expansion (the galaxies retreat from each other like our local Deity has his foot on the gas).

Perhaps - at some level - Creation has not stopped? Could more be arriving all the time - and pushing the rest out?

That would mean that a start assumption "as the system under test sits here - nothing is magically added" - is false. Oops. Noether assumed this (what else was reasonable?).

// it should also point out that the simple existence of the Universe shows a substantial flaw in Conservation of Energy..... LCE would have it that we should not exist, so it cannot be true for all Time

3. physics is different.

The physics of 1915 had empty space (ether ideas had been dropped by then); plus some sort of atom, mass and electrons. That's about it. Oh, photons and fields.

Since then, whole worlds of particles, sub-atomics, smaller and smaller stuff - keeps arriving.

And something odd can be seen - yet is rarely mentioned. There seems (could there be a proof?) that the energy density of the Universe has an inverse relationship to size. What that means - is that the smaller you go, the higher the energy density of - whatever it is that lives at that size (makes sense?)


Oops big-time. When you shrink to foam size (10^-35m) the energy density is ridiculous. If you added up the energy of foam occupied by an atom - it's about 10^20 MORE then the power output of a Supernova. Mad!

That means empty space - the space in which an atom floats (as worked out in the 1960's by Wheeler) - has 10^20 more punch then the 10^41 joules dumped by a Supernova (at this point you should really, really wonder if hi-energy physics is ... completely safe)


Now - this was 100% unknown in Noether's day.

Well, does that matter?

Yes. Very much so. You see, matter is used to build and wall (define) "systems". Noether considered maths for a defined, closed system     one built of logical, ideal walls.

So, what is the aperture size (wall material size) for a material containers? Um, let's be generous. 10^-18m ? This is the gap between atoms etc.


That means - material walls are POROUS to smaller stuff. Well, it's a good job those small guys - can't carry much energy, then ... oops, um foam size is about 10^-35m ??

With all that insane energy? They'd get through easily!

Damn. That would mean a start assumption for Noether's maths - can't be met, in practice.


Well, perhaps DON'T make LCE systems from material. What else? Fields? Let's see - the strongest we have are electrostatic and magnetic. Let's use them!

Um, anyone seen anything odd in the way energy behaves, about - magnets, then?


What am I getting at is-

a) Noether is mathematically right - but the maths may be non-applicable for wholly practical reasons.

b) material walls are useless for LCE systems, like trying to confine ants in a lion cage. They just leak every way. But those who do try - will never find any excess present (... oh, where did it go?) - as any excess just runs away through those leaky walls.

c) magnets can never add energy - tick!

d) but space has BUCKETS of energy with lots of odd stuff happening (we KNOW this, as the Universe expands)

e) any system wanting to bottle up energy translations - might choose to use magnets, as mag fields do not have dimensional limitations i.e. "wall aperture size".


Conclusion: Noether is formally correct - and always will be. Physicists / scientists rely on such work - and sup it up. Magnets can never add energy - but SPACE itself might well.


Make any sense??

Steve

[NerzhDishual]

@steve_whiss

Make any sense?

As far as I can catch it!
I'm not a scientist.

Magnets can never add energy - but SPACE itself might well

.

May I say the following ?
When you shiphon a liquid out of a tank with a hose (a pipe).
The hose itself is not adding energy but the atmospheric pressure is.

Best

[hartiberlin]

@steve_whiss
you are correct,
but magnets can interact with the open space and other materials,
which have a magneticcycleprocess which alters their spin and thus
there are temperature changes involved which can cool down
the other materials or the magnets themself and thus
can convert heat energy back to mechanical energy.

Thus is is a magnetically excited thermodynamical cycle process
which could violate the "2nd law", if the parameters are set right.

Look into magnetic cooling (fridges) and magnetic heat pumps
for references.