magnetic perpetual motion machine design

[WilbyInebriated]

If I was writing in Norwegian (I am a Norwegian), you would probably not understand me

probably not, unless you were singing "ol' macdonald had a farm" as that along with basic words like 'hallo', 'tusen takk' and 'vaer saa god' is the only norwegian i can recall from what my gammlefar taught me when i was young. he was the son of a norwegian immigrant and i am proud to have norwegian heritage. i still remember how to make blood krub, rommegrot, lutefisk and krumkaker, but that is of little use to help me discuss gravity in your native tongue. by the way, your english is excellent!

Anyways, gravity, as we know it, cannot do work - it is impossible because we use the present (lack of) knowledge to construct machines. I am willing to say that we one day will fully understand gravity, and therefor find ways to harness its potential - but probably on expense for something else. Energy as we know it is all about potential differences. It is reasonable to believe this potential difference also applies to gravity - if gravity is the source of energy. As long gravity and mass doesn't change by itself, no work can be carried out.

Vidar

i would amend 'impossible' to 'not currently possible', other than that i pretty much agree with your statement.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

just my imagination at work, implying that my knowledge of the subject is limited and my motivation to find the perfect series of numbers for how many magnets on each wheel and etc is just as limited

for those of you who know physics, heres something to laugh at

Hi TE12 - I'm not clever enough to get your illustration back up - but I think you've got a the makings of a really interesting design concept.

I wonder if there would be more 'chance' of motion - keeping the three plate division but giving each structure a 'conal' type base on a shared axis.  Then get solid rows of magnets - the outer say North south the next south north and the third north south - again - all on a shared horizontal plane.  Have each circle positioned as close as possible to the next so that they can sense the opposing fields? 

I really need to draw this.  I'll scribble something at the weekend and post it here.  Won't be your own high standard of illustration - but I'm thinking that one circle facing north and the next facing south and so on - may be interesting.

Anyway.  Not well explained.  I'll try and get the time to improve on this.  Nice basic concept you've got here.

Regards,
Rosemary

[Low-Q]

Who or what is determining which direction the wheel are spinning? Is it our imagination, or the physics? Do we cover all possible flaws when we design a magnet motor? There is a lot of issues that we do not think of, or can ever imagine will stop the wheel from spinning - we just build the wheel and stand there as big question marks...wondering why it didn't work. Quite often the explanation is "improper tuning, balance, alignment" etc. I think the explanation is much more simple: Conservative forces cannot do work.

Those who really makes it work, tries to sell it to companies - and a few days later the inventor are busted, put in jail, and spend his time in prison to figure out other ways to make money. This is the never ending story of "successful" magnet motor-, or other perpetual motion machine inventors.

Vidar

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Hi Vidar,

I see so many Youtube videos of magnet motors working - but it always seems to be associated with someone anxiously varying the position of an applied magnet.  It's confusing.  I wonder how difficult it would be to simply get a journalist to film this in action and show NO sleight of hand.  In any event.  I'm very aware of the reluctance of journalists to comment EVER on my own device.  But my own is not that clearly evident.  It requires comparative power analysis and by the time the exercise is explained I see their eyes glazing over.  But I would have thought a moving series of magnets would be unarguable.  In any event.  I'm intrigued enough to try this.  My only other magnet interface is just WAY TOO expensive to manage. And there's a certain unassailable logic in putting those multiple wheels together.  My concern is the 'break' between the magnets.  it gives too much scope to reach that dreaded 'rest' position.  That's it's preferred default and seems to want to get there.

Regards,
Rosemary

[Low-Q]

The classical outcome of a magnet motor is that they are "THIS close!" to make it work. One could more likely had a single bicycle wheel without magnets or other stuff, and spun it up and let it spin - they are also "THIS close!" to spin forever. What magnets do is to make this closed loop not so smooth due to the attractions and repulsions. Sadly these forces adds up to zero - simply because they are the same magnets with the same strength that is closed in a loop... I cannot understand why people cannot see this. I still wonder if it could be possible to make it work anyways... What if we could use only one part of a magnet so we did not have to concern about counter forces. Is this possible for me to achieve? If so, I would be a dead man :-))
I really wonder how Finsruds Perpetual Machine are working. Is it fake, or what are making this heavy steel ball rolling in the circular track between those two bicycle rims? I have an idea, but no answer. I will try to replicate his design one day by using my own understanding on how it works.... one day.