I remember being sucked into that world. I was facinated by the idea of making a motor out of just magnets. They seem practically magical. It wasn't until I was obsessed over a way to generate power with gravity that I learned fully why they types of systems could never work. Things like gravity or the magnetic field from a permanent magnet are constant. That is all. Something that is constant doesn't change. We may not know exactly why magnets attract or how gravity works, but we do know they are constants. An apple falling to the ground or two magnets attracting each other are simply imbalanced systems seeking equalibrium. Electric motors work because of that sought after equilibrium. They only continue to work though, because the electricity put into the system constantly prevents the magnets from attaining equalibrium. I learned, the important part of a generator or motor isn't the forces at play as much as preventing equalibrium from being attained in the system. At first, I was confused about things like Hydroelectric dams. On first glance, they are gravity generators. So, I thought they were an example of how gravity generates power. It doesn't though. Ya, gravity pulls the water down through the generators, but the real power comes from the thing preventing equalibrium, prevents the water from staying at the bottom in the ocean. The sun. It introduces massive amounts of heat into the system, unbalancing it by causing the water to rise as vapor. So, in reality, hydroelectric dams end up being solar power generation. Still, there is something so magical about magnets.
@@andresgalviz315 interesting points, I must question your certainty of finishing your project in 6 months if you have been working on it for 14 years. May I ask how your device works?
The story I was told, is that as microscopes were improved over the years. They became powerful enough to see grains of pollen. What was noticed is that these tiny pollen grains if suspended in water they would perpetually move.. This was shown to Albert Einstein. Einstein said the pollen was being perpetually moved by the movement of the water molecules. From this observation Einstein went on to calculate the size of the water molecule. This is not going to propel your car down the road but is in fact perpetual motion.. Ps don’t shoot the messenger!! Thank you for all the videos ..
A machine that is _not_ a perpetuum mobile, but also doesn't need to be fueled manually, is good enough. Clocks that are wound up exclusively by barometric pressure has existed since the 17th century. And today, the Swiss company Jaeger-Culture manufactures a modern variant of a perpetual clock under the trademark "Atmos". This clock is wound up by changes of temperature and air pressure, which are even in well-climatized rooms rooms sufficient to keep it running.
Bravo! This is the best description of the origin and workings of the thermodynamic laws I ever heard. Should one of these machines have been able to work, why do we not find any of them on the shop shelves for sale? Another very good educational idea.
Per the text book with title "Modern Thermodynamics" published by Wiley & Sons, with Authors Dilip Kondepudi and Ilya Prigogine, on Page 459 read - sharp gradients can violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Real examples have been produced by Floyd Sweet, Howard Johnson, Tom Bearden and many others. But, of course we all know the truth: "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin "The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church "The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin
Thanks for the time spent on this presentation. It is a labour of love. I hope that your batteries stay charged until they short-circuit in about 40 or 60 years. Have a great next year and keep up the good work. We need more people like you.
"Do Perpetual Motion Machines Work?" The short answer is NO - The long answer is that Self-Contained, Closed-Loop Systems cannot be made to run under their own power. A motor cannot run a generator that will in turn run the same motor. A closed system cannot do work and maintain its own operation due to losses in the system. HOWEVER - Can machines be made to produce a large amount of work relative to the energy that YOU input into the system? The answer to this is YES. Provided that the energy you input is used to move a larger amount of energy existing in the environment. No energy is created or destroyed, simply MOVED (and/or concentrated) from one place to another, creating a difference in energy potential that can then be harnessed to do work. So far, the only form of energy that I am aware of that we can move or concentrate in this fashion is HEAT - We have built heat-pumps that can move 10, 20, or even 30 times more heat than we input in the form of electricity. If we can then transfer this heat to a heat-engine and a generator, we could theoretically extract up to 40% of that concentrated heat in the form of electricity.
Any dipole (electric or magnetic) perpetually creates electromagnetic perturbations in the ether. This is real, observable outflow of real energy. That energy had to come from somewhere. It did not come from the creation of the dipole, since the magnitude is much too small. That out flowing energy was previously absorbed from the ether as a property of the dipole. Yes, there is an ether. Michelson and Morley never pointed their interferometer vertically with respect to the surface of the earth. See Robert Distinti for details. Opposites attract. Opposite electric charges and magnetic poles attract. So, a space charge of opposite polarity surrounds any polarity. This unobservable space charge is absorbed and is the source of the observable energy field expressed by the dipole in the form of electromagnetic field surrounding the dipole.
@@marinadizon2720 So the dipole is the framework that allows disturbance in the ether? It's then the field effects of the perturbations (structure) that then gate or give path for energy to flow? I wish there was a comparable iron-filings test for magnets for that of a battery, to see the dipole's inner mechanisms.
The flipside of perpetual motion is COP > 1 machines - or Coeffecient of Power > 1 machines, in which the usable output exceeds the usable input of power. I hope you get into these in some future video as they are all around us, but unintuitive. A turbocharger on a gas (petrol) engine, and even a solar panel, are things that "make usuable power from waste."
Agreed! And they are getting better. There are skyscrapers in NYC thats HVAC UNITS produce ice during summer nights and then the ice is used as a condensing medium for cooling during the day.
Hello Robert, Enjoyed your video - well "video's" since I discovered you last year. Let me make a correction to your content - "Work" creation was discovered in 2008 and first machine built and demonstrated in 2010 - its principal of operation "reduced" the mass "required" to do a specific work - that reduction of mass resulted in a reduction of input cost - thus work available was greater than work provided. By 2019, a total of seven methods were tested to provide excess work, the laws of thermal dynamics had never been presented with a method of "input reduction", and it took several years for those studying it to realize the difference between "Creating energy vs Causing work generation". Eventually you will see it in a university paper - but for now - the limited scope of the conclusions of thermal dynamics results in very limited research on the topic. If you want to know more - just ask. Sincerely Wayne
You could view Mass as a perpetual motion machine. Or the Sun (again mass driven) gives out "free" energy. And at its end of life it recycles by way of a Nova! Even the humble windmill could be viewed as an intermittent perpetual motion machine ....... or a waterwheel! If you look at Geothermal, it too can be classed as "perpetual" It all depends on your definition. Most are not worried about infinitely perpetual, but "can I get something for nothing out of it?" If you are talking in terms of "breaking" physics ...... you are not likely to succeed (no place for the battery) but if you are asking if there are machines that get Something for Nothing then they do exist, in plain sight!
Life consumes energy and degrades over time, requiring more energy to maintain itself. That energy must come from a source, when the source is gone and there are no more sources, life is gone. Always ask where are the batteries. The battery for life on Earth is the Sun.
I just stuck two Stirling engines into a tube furnace, used carbon dioxide as the gas and then run two generators off it. One makes most of the power to run the tube furnace, the other one covers the rest and adds just a little juice extra to run a couple of things
There's no over-unity or broken laws with an air-source heat pump. It simply moves heat energy from a large volume of air into a smaller volume. The huge outside environment is cooled very slightly as heat is extracted, enabling your relatively small house to get a lot warmer.
The US patented( the USPTP Does NOT issue patents to things that do not work) motionless electronic generator by Thomas Bearden is overunity. Once started, it can power itself and put out excess energy. The secret is that the magnetic crystal is replenished by zero point energy. Magnetism is called a force because no one has a working theory, but the fringe refer to it as vibrating crystal that is at the right frequency to to be replentished by the zero point. The only reason it isnt perpetual on earth is magnets rost ( oxidize) in space they should stay magnetised forever
I'd like to discuss a real machine that isn't perpetual motion. It does however harness a flow of naturally occurring energy in the environment that isn't being harnessed anywhere near as much as it should be. Many of your videos are leaning towards it. I've spent 14 years working on this so far. Myself and my team of engineers, how can we get in touch with you?
Searching for perpetual motion yet we let all our perpetual energy run to the sea in the form or water . We never used too just look at the river derwent in Derbyshire . Why don't we just tap into water !
We need to stop looking at it in as perpetual motion but look it in a way that we can extract more energy then we put in ie using one barrel of oil to extract 50 barrels from the ground. Maybe using a way to extract hydrogen from water which you have done through electrolysis but trying to unlock it through a frequency that might work using ac current. There may be some frequency that just unlocks it at a small amount of current get more energy then what you used, like a pump to pump oil out the ground. Anyway It is food for thought even if it doesn't work but I hope to make a setup one day to be able to experiment it and I hope soon as it has been in my head for many years or you try if you want to go down there?
Robert, I have just found your videos and wow they are fantastic! I wish I had teachers like you in school! How did you learn all this? Is your background physics? What ever you are fascinating to watch.
Perpetual motion is bunk, over-unity is not. Heat pumps do more work on the environment than the user does on the pump. You could spend 100 watts running the pump and do 200 watts of work relocating heat from the cold sink to the hot sink. That's over-unity. The second law is violated every single time an air-conditioner turns on because it does more work than it's supplied with. I'm not talking about making energy either there, I'm talking about doing work on a substance. It has nothing to do with energy creation, I'm talking about the proper physics term "work". The user potentially does 100 Watts of work on the pump and the pump does more work than the user supplied on the environment relocating heat energy against the natural flow of heat. The refrigeration cycle is an over-unity cycle. Now you may say "but the heat already existed at the cold location" and that a moot point because RELOCATING THE HEAT AGAINST THE NATURAL FLOW IS THE LOAD. In this case the load is of higher wattage than the supply, that is over-unity.
The National Ignition Facility can get more energy out than they put in. Perhaps you can also do some Laser-driven Nuclear fusion experiments next year so I can understand what its all about! Hope you had a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you
Great video! I'd have loved a small addendum that could work as a follow up video by itself: how it might be better to focus our efforts not on "machines that doesn't require outside energy", but on "machines that make use of free energy", linking it up with renewables. I'm still hoping for the cheap battery that makes electrical unbeatable (even if its indirect, like with heat storage that doesn't suck like most molten salts projects)
I saw a video snip of a German company using a large, vertical, conveyor bucket machine, in a water tank that has air pumped out the bottom to lift these buckets. They run a large air compressor for this. They claim a 8kW input to get a 52kW output. I'm no scientist but logic tells me it takes the same amount or more of energy to push air into a water column and its great pressure, than the lift factor of the air bubbles. But people keep trying lol
Investigate the effect of buoyancy with decreasing depth. As the bubble rises it expands and the greater volume displaces more water, increasing the upward force. It really worked, but the slavemasters do not want it. Well, maybe now that they are freezing in the dark. Oh, wait, that is just the slaves.
I've seen that and I have had a solution several years. Put an HHO generator at the bottom of the water tank. Electricity creates oxygen and hydrogen, which can be used together or separately to bring up the underwater wheel. Also the deeper the tank and larger the wheel the more efficient it becomes, because the air never loses potential for going up. Also the HHO Gas can be used at the end of the process when it goes to the top of the water. It can be burned for heat and or electricity.
Yes, I remember the one you are thinking of. They had a 10 meter tall tower of water with a conveyor belt of air bells which would get injected with compressed air at the bottom of their range of travel. As the bell of air rose, and the water pressure lessened, the volume of air in the bell would increase, thus increasing the upward force of the bell upon the belt upon which it was attached. The belt contained about twenty such bells. At any given time half were rising, and the other half were going down after having dumped their air, which meant they sank with the weight of steel in water with no air. A belt driven generator was placed at the top of the tower which generated electricity and compressed air to be injected at the bottom. They performed public demonstrations, and offered units for sale. They had large commercial versions, and small home sized versions, each sold via different sales channels. They offered turnkey 100 MW systems composed of dozens of towers.
You should give your scrutiny to William Skinner's 1939 gravity device. It is not a closed loop. It does require a small input to function. As load increases, the influence of gravity also increases. I have had six engineers look at it and they all agreed that they could not understand how it could not work. Skinner spent 30 years developing the device. It is complex and its function is difficult to fully understand, but, it is brilliant and works on a very simple principal. At the end of the day, it is an array of hybrid pendulum flywheels. A gravity turbine, if you will
@@buensomeritano1755 I already suggested to Rob (in the members only video) that perhaps he had missed this device. My comment disappeared for some reason.
@@markflint9089 the only thing I don't like about the milkovich device is that it can only operate at a specific load correctly. Skinner's device is constantly variable. As the load increases, so does the gravitational effect.
The 2nd Law describes a closed system, yet there are none in nature. The error is then extended to electromagnetic machines by insisting they are closed systems as if the electromagnetic phenomenon is somehow different from the rest of every other observable natural phenomenon. Like all man-made engineering, how "open" it is depends on the design and the knowledge of the builder.
Its interesting to read the wikipedia article on "conservative forces". One example being gravity. This basically says if something moves around an arbitrary shape path and returns to its starting point the net work done by the force is zero. Eg If you roll a ball down hill it gains energy, but it takes the same energy to lift it back up to its starting point. The interesting bit is that the shape of the path doesnt matter, if it ever returns to the same position twice then no work is done. This effectively rules out over ballanced wheels as they all return to the same point once per revolution regardless of their design. The force between two magnets is also an example so this rules out so called magnet motors because they also return to the starting position once per revolution. It rules out any rotating perpetual motion machine that uses gravity or magnetisim.
Here's the thing though, we don't need 100% free energy. Here's my idea to debunk.... we've seen these magnetic perpetual rotating wheels using magnets. It works for a while and then eventually slows down. And when you apply a field to do "work" it slows much faster. But we don't need the power to be continually applied like on a generator. We just need a clutch system that puts a pulse in on a timer to keep the generator spinning. It's not free energy but it could be made more efficient where rotating motors don't require a full time draw to spin but just that pulse on a timer that keeps it spinning so you're just reducing the amount of energy required to keep a generator on output. It seems plausible to me but I haven't seen anyone try it. We just need to make things massively more efficient, not free.
The closest we've come to perpetual motion machines are devices that extract energy from one place and move it to another, such as heat pumps. The SEG (Searl Effect Generator) always interested me, as the inventor claimed that the temperature around the device would drop as it drew energy from the surrounding environment. His claims were pretty wild, but it'd be interesting to see it debunked.
But if the energy in is from an atenna or a wimhurstgenerator! Then the first problem is takle on a intellectual function way! /Mikael PS if the search is for a function we need as a windmill working at 0,5-4 m/s! We must look everywere! DS.
Hi Robert! Thank you very much for all your great work! Your videos are both entertaining and full of educational material. I was wondering if you ever looked into pcb stators for gnerators. They seem to be the most effective way of doing a copper winding for generation. Would love to see you opinion on them.
Im dumb, so feel free to criticise lol. With the ball bearing and magnet setup, could the decline be fitted with some type of other magnets and the bearing magnetised, so it generates a current as it passes? Obviously nowhere as simple as that, but is there anything along those lines?
Any current generated from the motion of the ball will cause the ball to slow down (or accelerate less) - consider an electric generator / dynamo, which is typically quite tough to turn due to the magnetic forces within it. Overcoming those forces is part of the process of turning kinetic energy into electric energy. That's why those old dynamo lights on bikes made it harder to pedal your bike (Simpsons even made a joke about this way back when). Any electrical energy generated by the motion of the ball will, hence, cause the ball to slow down by at least as much as that same electrical energy could speed the ball back up (assuming an impossible 100% efficiency of both the electric generator and the electric accelerator).
@crudereviews7221 I read 15 words of your reply and had a instant...."f*ckin duhhhh.." moment to myself. 🤦♂️ Tried to solve a puzzle without having all the pieces. This is why we have refresher courses for construction tickets lol Appreciate the reply, sir, and Hope the new year treats you well 🫡
reminds me of the mikhail dmytriev gravity due to deflections gravity wheel, he is using small dc motor to shift weights on a big flighwhee, claiming overunity up to 12x, ill guess someone has to prove his claims, just like the motoflux magnet motor
In a mechanism, magnets behave exactly like SPRINGS. so you can never make a perpetual motion machine from magnets (any more than you can with springs). And with overbalanced wheel systems etc, they can never work because any weights or fluids must always go from the very top to the very bottom, cyclicly, ie the SAME vertical distance travelled and the amount of energy needed to lift a weight X vertical distance is the same as the energy released when falling X distance. Unless there ie an ENERGY SOURCE being harvested none of those machines can ever work.
Hats off to Mr. Carnot who figured this out about 200 years ago. You can look up "Carnot Cycle" for the answer. Stirling engines can approach but not exceed this number.
I've helped build "perpetual motion machines " we managed to get on to last 7 days.. thats using magnetic bearing and put it in a vacuum.. But there will always be a little friction from something
These machines offer glimpses of how to take advantage of a workforce and translate it into a usable workforce temporality but indeed produce an advantage of possible costs for less well-thought-out energy-wasting devices, saving resources, energy, time, thought, and space.
I think a reasonable proposal would be a off balance wheel that’s allowed to gain speed on its gravity assisted down stroke then using mechanical advantage of some sort to help the wheel past its point of lost inertia in as simple and low energy as possible. Finding a way to capture energy from a large moving mass while not having to push more than is absolutely needed to crest the peak and race back to bottom.
In addition I feel like people poo poo the idea of these hyper efficient machines but give it two days and some new discovery will fundamentally change the way we see the world. It’s very arrogant to assume any “laws” are just that. They are only our understanding at this current time, not the ability to do amazing things with what’s all around you. If you could build a machine that uses multiple levels of gravity assistance, one to help the other once it’s reached a critical limit. Would you be willing to wind a big clock spring for 10 mins everyday if it ultimately powered your home?
you have to use 3 different forces, there are some, and most people make them to get into university. there is the magnet, centrifugal, and drag machine, there is the gravity, centrifugal, magnet machine powering a house in Kansas, there is many flux engines. you can exploit gravity, magnets and geometry to make a never ending desk toy. but if you want real power you want centrifugal, magnet shearing, magnetic current and dipolar PVC.
A water wheel in a stream was the closest thing I got to. I had mad joule thief devices but they stop working when voltage drops. Though I had thought about using radiolosis to use nuclear waste decay that breaks down water to make hydrogen to run a engine or a fuel cell using buoyancy to separate hydrogen from oxygen or a nafion filter with a catalyst as a one way hydrogen seperator. With waste water going back to the nuclear waste to be split again but this only last based on the half life of the waste your using to split water based on radioactive decay.
Thank you Mr Murray for your sense of pedagogy, but how can we explain the rotation of satellites around the planets in a regular and perpetual manner? I don't think that the non-existence of friction is the only reason and what is extraordinary is the similarity with the rotation of electrons around the nucleus, the laws of thermodynamics would be more judiciously limited to the world of gravity ? and I think that molecules work only because they weigh nothing.
Роберт поздравляю с наступающим Новым Годом! Желаю вам крепкого Сибирского здоровья и всех Благ! Вечный двигатель, мы его сделаем... Он существует, так же как луна вращается вокруг земли вечно...;))
Not forever. Gravitational forces cause tidal heating. This causes the Earth and Moon to loose energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation. The result is the moon is moving slowly away from the Earth. They also loose energy in the form of Gravitational waves but that is extremely small.
Something running perpetually in a closed system doesn't matter, if nothing going in and nothing is coming out, all thermodynamic equations are in balance. Put a load on it, however, and we expect the motion to go to zero. If it doesn't, that's a violation of the current equations. That said, it's not like we won't discover a new source of energy to rebalance the equation. But most hobbists pursuing "free energy" are not scientists and most scientists dont publicly suggest looking into it.
@@markflint9089, asteroids in space qualify, per Newton's 1st Law of Inertia, and the entropy of the "system" is zero. Gravity affects it, so it isn't a perfectly enclosed system.
If matter is formed and animated by consciousness, which many believe, then perpetual motion is a condition enabled by extending consciousness to allow it. Indeed consciousness itself could be termed perpetual, though it's not a machine and not subject to the constraints of time. This is obviously not a notion permitted by materialists......
These type of machine fall into the same category as USB heater that can heat you whole house in mins and Earth batteries that can run you house! lol (FB ads etc)
@@marktyler3381 No, it's not just you. You are in excellent company. "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin "The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church "The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin
I truly agree that perpetual motion is not possible, but, at least I feel, The ultimate prize is not perpetual motion, but really long lasting motion. Best examples are the Oxford Electric Bell, and Atmos clocks. I think people spend too much time demonizing the pursuit of really long lasting motion by calling it " perpetual motion".
The thing that made it sink in for me is this. Even if someone could make a perpetual motion machine it would be at best a novelty, you would lose it the second you put a load on it and made it do work.
If we were to make a free energy machine it could comply with the laws of science if you could build a machine which without any external energy inputs would produce energy whilst reducing the temperature of the air around it , that would be using the heat in the air to produce either movement, electricity or both.
Harmonics, lasers for example. Light amplification through STIMULATED EMISSION of radiation. Everything has a frequency, the key is to find it and stimulate a harmonic reaction. TH-cam channels. Social harmonics at work....
How about you make an highly efficient machine? Possibly in the 90% range. Not a heater, something that moves. Another challenge is to make a list of all possible "forces" that are practically available to use for a "highly efficient machine", such as Capillary Action, Magnesium, Gravity, etc. Then list various free possible inputs such as wind, sun heat, shade cold, tidal, etc. Also put together some machines that for all intents and purposes could be considered "Perpetual". Hopefully with enough excess energy to harness.
I have always thought Perpetual Motion Machines could not be made but it does not stop me from being interested in whatever someone makes. I would think that some of these attempts can become helpers in prolonging an action beyond not having it in the system. Then it would be of use but perhaps , too little of use or we would see them everywhere. Just not perpetual.
I have a design which i have not seen anyone try yet and its very simple using water to raise a ball using buoyancy and gravity to drop it, if youtube had pics in comments id love to show everyone and see if someone would try it out
I've seen that idea several times before. Search youtube for bouyancy engine. Typically they have a chain of bouys that enter a tank of water at the bottom, rise to the top and fall back down outside the tank. The problem is the energy required to push open the valve that allows the bouts to enter at the bottom is greater than the energy gained rising up.
@@ColinWatters i am aware of that design with the issue being the ball entering the water at the bottom, my idea has a ball fall onto a counter weight to set a flap up and then free fall into water with a ramp under to push it over as it slightly sinks then starts to rebound out of the water it ends up in a clear tube that sticks out of the water that has been filled already with water and has at least 5 small flaps inside that the ball will open as it raises inside the tube, each flap will close automatic as they sink, the flaps stop water spilling out so that way the top of the tube can be open, its like the tooth pic experiment inside a water column, this way you can raise the ball as high as you want, its really hard to explain but its very simple, last when the ball reaches the top of the clear water tube it hits a leaver and there will be a mesh flap that pushes the ball out using that counter weight from the beginning releasing the energy that the ball put into it and then it will start all over again as the ball falls out and resets the counter weight on the way down before it falls again into the water, i have thought about this idea for a very long time and i can not find a reason for it not to work, if i can show you my design im sure you would agree it does not break any physics and each part of my design is very simple and plausible, i am yet to see anyone that has even drawn up this design
@@g-funk484 I'm afraid I only followed about half of that. I refer you to the wikipedia page on "conservative forces" in short it means if your machine ever returns to the same position twice then gravity will do no work on it. Since bouyancy is also caused by gravity the same will apply.
@@ColinWatters lol yeh its hard to explain my idea and i know what you mean if my idea works i would be the 1st person to have a ball move constantly which i doubt is possible but i really cant see why it wouldn't work, i do not see any part of it having an issue thats what gets me, usually i can always find an issue with my or other peoples designs but this one has stumped me, i will send you a link to where i got the idea partly from so at least understand better
of course they do- you are standing on one! this planet has been spinning since you stepped on, and will be spinning when your gone! so yes they exist!
I had an idea of using a magnetic bearing to suspend a flywheel mass in a vacuum. With no contact in the bearings theres no friction, and with no air there's no drag, so in theory if you could spin up the flywheel there'd be no way for it to lose energy. It wouldn't be of any use, as you can extract energy from it but it should in theory spin perpetually.
Really only guessing here but I think it would spin a very long time, just not for years. I think there would be a small amount of drag on the ferris material the magnet is acting on or any stray magnetic fields, however small, otherwise it would not float in the first place.
Hard to eliminate all eddy currents (caused by metal moving in the magnetic field of the bearing). In theory it also radiates gravitational waves but they would be negligible.
Idea for a perpetual machine: what if instead of trying to use magnets for a perpetual machine, you use the 1st law of thermal dynamics now the 1st law of thermal dynamics states that you can Not create or Destroy Energy but you can transfer one state of Energy to another what if you some how transfer Kinetic Energy to static Electric Energy and turn the Electric Energy back into Kinetic Energy and the cycle repeats itself in an Infinite loop. The only trouble is trying to find a solution to do this in a officiant way
I believe the only thing we will likely 'discover' . Anytime soon , would be a higher efficiency device, possibly generator. Being above 99% efficient, but below 100.1%. There could possibly be devices that work with little input, using gravity to help it along, or possibly magnets , I have seen magnet motors nearly make 360°, then stall . Maybe something similar can be used to boost the efficiency? Who knows, thing is, would we believe it if someone did make such a discovery??
I have stopped using the terms scientific law which is a bit confusing and can be miss interpeted. I rather use the term scientific fact which I see as being more explicit and clear.
And even then, tidal forces very gradually convert orbital (kinetic) energy into heat via deformation of both bodies. Literally can't achieve perpetual motion in an ideal vacuum.
@@ecoista1373Electrons don't orbit, that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality. Electrons jump around randomly, but the probability of them appearing in any one spot os not equal - there are complicated shape patterns (called Orbitals) that have higher probabilities of finding the electron in them, but there's no reason beyond probability that an electron cant be found a thousand miles away for a split second before being back in the orbital (this is a form of quantum tunneling).
@@etaaramin9361 "Electrons don't orbit," That wasn't the question, but it does answer a question I've had. Electrons are in perpetual motion, they may not be in an orbit, but they are in constant motion. "that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality." An inanimated 2d model will never be a good model when depicting such motions for the simple reason that descriptions of the model do not describe or explain the motion. A 3d animation is better suited to model such motions and even then, it is not likely to be perfect. Recently, I've been getting on people that complain when their vague and abstract communication is misinterpreted. Those people, despite their complaint, take offense when they are told to be clearer and not leave their communication up to interpretation. If I didn't know better, I would think that those idiots actually believe that people are be able to read their minds. Then again, the programming of kids to think they are entitled to everything for free, may have included the programming that people can read their minds.
![เปิดใจ "อาจารย์เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม" อดีตเคยสุดทุกทาง ถ้าใช้หนี้หมดไปบวชแน่ l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IxeE0xVhy08/mqdefault.jpg)
"The hardest part of building a perpetual machine is...where do you hide the batteries?" That's a good one!
pmsl
I remember being sucked into that world. I was facinated by the idea of making a motor out of just magnets. They seem practically magical.
It wasn't until I was obsessed over a way to generate power with gravity that I learned fully why they types of systems could never work. Things like gravity or the magnetic field from a permanent magnet are constant. That is all. Something that is constant doesn't change.
We may not know exactly why magnets attract or how gravity works, but we do know they are constants. An apple falling to the ground or two magnets attracting each other are simply imbalanced systems seeking equalibrium. Electric motors work because of that sought after equilibrium. They only continue to work though, because the electricity put into the system constantly prevents the magnets from attaining equalibrium.
I learned, the important part of a generator or motor isn't the forces at play as much as preventing equalibrium from being attained in the system.
At first, I was confused about things like Hydroelectric dams. On first glance, they are gravity generators. So, I thought they were an example of how gravity generates power. It doesn't though. Ya, gravity pulls the water down through the generators, but the real power comes from the thing preventing equalibrium, prevents the water from staying at the bottom in the ocean. The sun. It introduces massive amounts of heat into the system, unbalancing it by causing the water to rise as vapor. So, in reality, hydroelectric dams end up being solar power generation.
Still, there is something so magical about magnets.
Sharp gradients (systems in non-equilibrium) can violate the 2nd Law. Source: Modern Thermodynamics, Prigogine, Wiley & Sons
Your story is a bit like how alchemy became chemistry. Keep up the science!
Well written.
Look up the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic
@@andresgalviz315 interesting points, I must question your certainty of finishing your project in 6 months if you have been working on it for 14 years.
May I ask how your device works?
The story I was told, is that as microscopes were improved over the years. They became powerful enough to see grains of pollen. What was noticed is that these tiny pollen grains if suspended in water they would perpetually move.. This was shown to Albert Einstein. Einstein said the pollen was being perpetually moved by the movement of the water molecules. From this observation Einstein went on to calculate the size of the water molecule. This is not going to propel your car down the road but is in fact perpetual motion.. Ps don’t shoot the messenger!! Thank you for all the videos ..
See graphene energy harvesting
Look up the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic
@@markflint9089 pendulum hammer thing? I remeber it on keelynet
A machine that is _not_ a perpetuum mobile, but also doesn't need to be fueled manually, is good enough. Clocks that are wound up exclusively by barometric pressure has existed since the 17th century. And today, the Swiss company Jaeger-Culture manufactures a modern variant of a perpetual clock under the trademark "Atmos". This clock is wound up by changes of temperature and air pressure, which are even in well-climatized rooms rooms sufficient to keep it running.
I made a perpetual motion machine, a gravity wheel. It worked ... for about 20 seconds. Lesson learnt.
Bravo! This is the best description of the origin and workings of the thermodynamic laws I ever heard. Should one of these machines have been able to work, why do we not find any of them on the shop shelves for sale? Another very good educational idea.
Per the text book with title "Modern Thermodynamics" published by Wiley & Sons, with Authors Dilip Kondepudi and Ilya Prigogine, on Page 459 read - sharp gradients can violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Real examples have been produced by Floyd Sweet, Howard Johnson, Tom Bearden and many others.
But, of course we all know the truth:
"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin
"The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church
"The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin
As homer Simpson put it, "Lisa, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
Thanks for the time spent on this presentation. It is a labour of love. I hope that your batteries stay charged until they short-circuit in about 40 or 60 years. Have a great next year and keep up the good work. We need more people like you.
Happy New year Robert, thank you for all the videos you share with us throughout the years
"Do Perpetual Motion Machines Work?" The short answer is NO - The long answer is that Self-Contained, Closed-Loop Systems cannot be made to run under their own power. A motor cannot run a generator that will in turn run the same motor. A closed system cannot do work and maintain its own operation due to losses in the system.
HOWEVER - Can machines be made to produce a large amount of work relative to the energy that YOU input into the system? The answer to this is YES. Provided that the energy you input is used to move a larger amount of energy existing in the environment. No energy is created or destroyed, simply MOVED (and/or concentrated) from one place to another, creating a difference in energy potential that can then be harnessed to do work.
So far, the only form of energy that I am aware of that we can move or concentrate in this fashion is HEAT - We have built heat-pumps that can move 10, 20, or even 30 times more heat than we input in the form of electricity. If we can then transfer this heat to a heat-engine and a generator, we could theoretically extract up to 40% of that concentrated heat in the form of electricity.
A magnet is a solid-state perpetual machine? The Bloch wall receives a centripetal force allowing for a magnet's centrifugal force?
Any dipole (electric or magnetic) perpetually creates electromagnetic perturbations in the ether. This is real, observable outflow of real energy. That energy had to come from somewhere. It did not come from the creation of the dipole, since the magnitude is much too small. That out flowing energy was previously absorbed from the ether as a property of the dipole. Yes, there is an ether. Michelson and Morley never pointed their interferometer vertically with respect to the surface of the earth. See Robert Distinti for details. Opposites attract. Opposite electric charges and magnetic poles attract. So, a space charge of opposite polarity surrounds any polarity. This unobservable space charge is absorbed and is the source of the observable energy field expressed by the dipole in the form of electromagnetic field surrounding the dipole.
@@marinadizon2720 So the dipole is the framework that allows disturbance in the ether? It's then the field effects of the perturbations (structure) that then gate or give path for energy to flow? I wish there was a comparable iron-filings test for magnets for that of a battery, to see the dipole's inner mechanisms.
The hardest part about making a perpetual motion machine… is coming to the realization that you were born on one. 😢
I don’t need a perpetual motion machine. Just one that lasts 50 years.
Exactly! The term "perpetual motion" is just a red herring.
The earth is a perpetual motion machine if you think about it
No, it isn't. You obviously don't have any understanding of magnetohydrodynamics.
No, it's movements degenerate over time, just very slowly.
Tax payers are a perpetual motion machine. They even self replicate themselves. 😂
The flipside of perpetual motion is COP > 1 machines - or Coeffecient of Power > 1 machines, in which the usable output exceeds the usable input of power. I hope you get into these in some future video as they are all around us, but unintuitive. A turbocharger on a gas (petrol) engine, and even a solar panel, are things that "make usuable power from waste."
Agreed! And they are getting better. There are skyscrapers in NYC thats HVAC UNITS produce ice during summer nights and then the ice is used as a condensing medium for cooling during the day.
Hello Robert, Enjoyed your video - well "video's" since I discovered you last year. Let me make a correction to your content - "Work" creation was discovered in 2008 and first machine built and demonstrated in 2010 - its principal of operation "reduced" the mass "required" to do a specific work - that reduction of mass resulted in a reduction of input cost - thus work available was greater than work provided.
By 2019, a total of seven methods were tested to provide excess work, the laws of thermal dynamics had never been presented with a method of "input reduction", and it took several years for those studying it to realize the difference between "Creating energy vs Causing work generation".
Eventually you will see it in a university paper - but for now - the limited scope of the conclusions of thermal dynamics results in very limited research on the topic.
If you want to know more - just ask.
Sincerely
Wayne
You could view Mass as a perpetual motion machine.
Or the Sun (again mass driven) gives out "free" energy. And at its end of life it recycles by way of a Nova!
Even the humble windmill could be viewed as an intermittent perpetual motion machine ....... or a waterwheel!
If you look at Geothermal, it too can be classed as "perpetual"
It all depends on your definition. Most are not worried about infinitely perpetual, but "can I get something for nothing out of it?"
If you are talking in terms of "breaking" physics ...... you are not likely to succeed (no place for the battery) but if you are asking if there are machines that get Something for Nothing then they do exist, in plain sight!
Life is perpetual motion.
Nope, because life isn't a closed system. Take away the power source of the sun and the radioactive core, and everything dies.
Life consumes energy and degrades over time, requiring more energy to maintain itself. That energy must come from a source, when the source is gone and there are no more sources, life is gone. Always ask where are the batteries. The battery for life on Earth is the Sun.
My life now lies in tatters - my search is futile. Many thanks for the work you do - Have a good new year
I just stuck two Stirling engines into a tube furnace, used carbon dioxide as the gas and then run two generators off it. One makes most of the power to run the tube furnace, the other one covers the rest and adds just a little juice extra to run a couple of things
What about a heat pump, I was told that for 1kw of electricity put in you get 3kw of heat out because of the super efficiency of the gas.
There's no over-unity or broken laws with an air-source heat pump. It simply moves heat energy from a large volume of air into a smaller volume. The huge outside environment is cooled very slightly as heat is extracted, enabling your relatively small house to get a lot warmer.
The US patented( the USPTP Does NOT issue patents to things that do not work) motionless electronic generator by Thomas Bearden is overunity. Once started, it can power itself and put out excess energy. The secret is that the magnetic crystal is replenished by zero point energy. Magnetism is called a force because no one has a working theory, but the fringe refer to it as vibrating crystal that is at the right frequency to to be replentished by the zero point. The only reason it isnt perpetual on earth is magnets rost ( oxidize) in space they should stay magnetised forever
Not a chance in hell
Wind and sun and sea and rain = free energy
But I know what you mean...
Hey Robert, Im liking your content, do you have much knowledge on the Searl Generator ?
I'd like to discuss a real machine that isn't perpetual motion. It does however harness a flow of naturally occurring energy in the environment that isn't being harnessed anywhere near as much as it should be. Many of your videos are leaning towards it. I've spent 14 years working on this so far. Myself and my team of engineers, how can we get in touch with you?
Fascinating subject, and explained in a way that even I could understand. Thank you.
Searching for perpetual motion yet we let all our perpetual energy run to the sea in the form or water . We never used too just look at the river derwent in Derbyshire . Why don't we just tap into water !
We need to stop looking at it in as perpetual motion but look it in a way that we can extract more energy then we put in ie using one barrel of oil to extract 50 barrels from the ground. Maybe using a way to extract hydrogen from water which you have done through electrolysis but trying to unlock it through a frequency that might work using ac current. There may be some frequency that just unlocks it at a small amount of current get more energy then what you used, like a pump to pump oil out the ground. Anyway It is food for thought even if it doesn't work but I hope to make a setup one day to be able to experiment it and I hope soon as it has been in my head for many years or you try if you want to go down there?
Everything that exists to be is due to frequency.
Robert, I have just found your videos and wow they are fantastic! I wish I had teachers like you in school!
How did you learn all this? Is your background physics? What ever you are fascinating to watch.
Perpetual motion is bunk, over-unity is not. Heat pumps do more work on the environment than the user does on the pump. You could spend 100 watts running the pump and do 200 watts of work relocating heat from the cold sink to the hot sink.
That's over-unity. The second law is violated every single time an air-conditioner turns on because it does more work than it's supplied with. I'm not talking about making energy either there, I'm talking about doing work on a substance.
It has nothing to do with energy creation, I'm talking about the proper physics term "work". The user potentially does 100 Watts of work on the pump and the pump does more work than the user supplied on the environment relocating heat energy against the natural flow of heat.
The refrigeration cycle is an over-unity cycle.
Now you may say "but the heat already existed at the cold location" and that a moot point because RELOCATING THE HEAT AGAINST THE NATURAL FLOW IS THE LOAD. In this case the load is of higher wattage than the supply, that is over-unity.
The National Ignition Facility can get more energy out than they put in. Perhaps you can also do some Laser-driven Nuclear fusion experiments next year so I can understand what its all about! Hope you had a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you
Great video!
I'd have loved a small addendum that could work as a follow up video by itself: how it might be better to focus our efforts not on "machines that doesn't require outside energy", but on "machines that make use of free energy", linking it up with renewables.
I'm still hoping for the cheap battery that makes electrical unbeatable (even if its indirect, like with heat storage that doesn't suck like most molten salts projects)
My thought exactly. Machines that make use of free energy.
Look up flow batteries.
I saw a video snip of a German company using a large, vertical, conveyor bucket machine, in a water tank that has air pumped out the bottom to lift these buckets. They run a large air compressor for this. They claim a 8kW input to get a 52kW output. I'm no scientist but logic tells me it takes the same amount or more of energy to push air into a water column and its great pressure, than the lift factor of the air bubbles. But people keep trying lol
Investigate the effect of buoyancy with decreasing depth. As the bubble rises it expands and the greater volume displaces more water, increasing the upward force. It really worked, but the slavemasters do not want it. Well, maybe now that they are freezing in the dark. Oh, wait, that is just the slaves.
I've seen that and I have had a solution several years. Put an HHO generator at the bottom of the water tank. Electricity creates oxygen and hydrogen, which can be used together or separately to bring up the underwater wheel.
Also the deeper the tank and larger the wheel the more efficient it becomes, because the air never loses potential for going up.
Also the HHO Gas can be used at the end of the process when it goes to the top of the water. It can be burned for heat and or electricity.
@@dutch1777real HHO Hahahahahahaha! 🤣🤣😂😂😂🤬
@belalugrisi1614 a simple Air Lift Pump at the bottom of the ocean run off an HHO generator. 🫳🎤
Yes, I remember the one you are thinking of. They had a 10 meter tall tower of water with a conveyor belt of air bells which would get injected with compressed air at the bottom of their range of travel. As the bell of air rose, and the water pressure lessened, the volume of air in the bell would increase, thus increasing the upward force of the bell upon the belt upon which it was attached. The belt contained about twenty such bells. At any given time half were rising, and the other half were going down after having dumped their air, which meant they sank with the weight of steel in water with no air. A belt driven generator was placed at the top of the tower which generated electricity and compressed air to be injected at the bottom. They performed public demonstrations, and offered units for sale. They had large commercial versions, and small home sized versions, each sold via different sales channels. They offered turnkey 100 MW systems composed of dozens of towers.
You should give your scrutiny to William Skinner's 1939 gravity device. It is not a closed loop. It does require a small input to function. As load increases, the influence of gravity also increases. I have had six engineers look at it and they all agreed that they could not understand how it could not work. Skinner spent 30 years developing the device. It is complex and its function is difficult to fully understand, but, it is brilliant and works on a very simple principal. At the end of the day, it is an array of hybrid pendulum flywheels. A gravity turbine, if you will
Take a look at the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic
@@markflint9089 I am very familiar with it. Brilliant. Simple.
@@buensomeritano1755 I already suggested to Rob (in the members only video) that perhaps he had missed this device. My comment disappeared for some reason.
@@markflint9089 the only thing I don't like about the milkovich device is that it can only operate at a specific load correctly. Skinner's device is constantly variable. As the load increases, so does the gravitational effect.
If energy cant be created or destroyed then where is it located?
All the energy in the universe is located in the Dirac Sea. What we call matter is perturbations of the ether.
The 2nd Law describes a closed system, yet there are none in nature. The error is then extended to electromagnetic machines by insisting they are closed systems as if the electromagnetic phenomenon is somehow different from the rest of every other observable natural phenomenon. Like all man-made engineering, how "open" it is depends on the design and the knowledge of the builder.
Great content, love the documentary style
Its interesting to read the wikipedia article on "conservative forces". One example being gravity. This basically says if something moves around an arbitrary shape path and returns to its starting point the net work done by the force is zero. Eg If you roll a ball down hill it gains energy, but it takes the same energy to lift it back up to its starting point. The interesting bit is that the shape of the path doesnt matter, if it ever returns to the same position twice then no work is done.
This effectively rules out over ballanced wheels as they all return to the same point once per revolution regardless of their design. The force between two magnets is also an example so this rules out so called magnet motors because they also return to the starting position once per revolution. It rules out any rotating perpetual motion machine that uses gravity or magnetisim.
Every over balanced wheel design wont work because once it picks up speed all the weights will be pushed out which no one ever mentions
What did you make your grand kids now that you got into 3d drawing and printing or is it on the members channel?
Here's the thing though, we don't need 100% free energy. Here's my idea to debunk.... we've seen these magnetic perpetual rotating wheels using magnets. It works for a while and then eventually slows down. And when you apply a field to do "work" it slows much faster. But we don't need the power to be continually applied like on a generator. We just need a clutch system that puts a pulse in on a timer to keep the generator spinning. It's not free energy but it could be made more efficient where rotating motors don't require a full time draw to spin but just that pulse on a timer that keeps it spinning so you're just reducing the amount of energy required to keep a generator on output. It seems plausible to me but I haven't seen anyone try it. We just need to make things massively more efficient, not free.
isnt it like superconductors break 2nd law of thermodynamics? isnt it a gate for 0 entropy machines? possible no leak storage of energy etc?
I loved the line about the one thing that is perpetual is our search
The closest we've come to perpetual motion machines are devices that extract energy from one place and move it to another, such as heat pumps. The SEG (Searl Effect Generator) always interested me, as the inventor claimed that the temperature around the device would drop as it drew energy from the surrounding environment. His claims were pretty wild, but it'd be interesting to see it debunked.
But if the energy in is from an atenna or a wimhurstgenerator! Then the first problem is takle on a intellectual function way! /Mikael PS if the search is for a function we need as a windmill working at 0,5-4 m/s! We must look everywere! DS.
Hi Robert!
Thank you very much for all your great work! Your videos are both entertaining and full of educational material.
I was wondering if you ever looked into pcb stators for gnerators. They seem to be the most effective way of doing a copper winding for generation. Would love to see you opinion on them.
What about an overbalanced wheel with timed servos?
The self-siphoning bottle wins! 😄
Im dumb, so feel free to criticise lol.
With the ball bearing and magnet setup, could the decline be fitted with some type of other magnets and the bearing magnetised, so it generates a current as it passes? Obviously nowhere as simple as that, but is there anything along those lines?
Any current generated from the motion of the ball will cause the ball to slow down (or accelerate less) - consider an electric generator / dynamo, which is typically quite tough to turn due to the magnetic forces within it. Overcoming those forces is part of the process of turning kinetic energy into electric energy. That's why those old dynamo lights on bikes made it harder to pedal your bike (Simpsons even made a joke about this way back when).
Any electrical energy generated by the motion of the ball will, hence, cause the ball to slow down by at least as much as that same electrical energy could speed the ball back up (assuming an impossible 100% efficiency of both the electric generator and the electric accelerator).
@crudereviews7221 I read 15 words of your reply and had a instant...."f*ckin duhhhh.." moment to myself. 🤦♂️
Tried to solve a puzzle without having all the pieces. This is why we have refresher courses for construction tickets lol
Appreciate the reply, sir, and Hope the new year treats you well 🫡
I would like to see the milcovic pendulum beeing debunked
Yes indeed.
reminds me of the mikhail dmytriev gravity due to deflections gravity wheel, he is using small dc motor to shift weights on a big flighwhee, claiming overunity up to 12x, ill guess someone has to prove his claims, just like the motoflux magnet motor
In a mechanism, magnets behave exactly like SPRINGS. so you can never make a perpetual motion machine from magnets (any more than you can with springs).
And with overbalanced wheel systems etc, they can never work because any weights or fluids must always go from the very top to the very bottom, cyclicly, ie the SAME vertical distance travelled and the amount of energy needed to lift a weight X vertical distance is the same as the energy released when falling X distance.
Unless there ie an ENERGY SOURCE being harvested none of those machines can ever work.
@@andresgalviz315 hahaha for a moment I thought you were serious lol 🤣🤣🤣😎
Gravity can do work, and I can prove it.
Spot on Robert!👍
So where we hide the battery in fusion reactor..... Apparently they broke the first law but then maybe the doing something different idk
love the way you put that at the end uncle rob. the only thing perpetual is our search. quite a poetic old bugger at times arent you mate lol
Whats the maximum efficiency of a Stirling Engine?
Hats off to Mr. Carnot who figured this out about 200 years ago. You can look up "Carnot Cycle" for the answer. Stirling engines can approach but not exceed this number.
The easiest and cheapest way in theory to produce energy is the human body
I've helped build "perpetual motion machines " we managed to get on to last 7 days.. thats using magnetic bearing and put it in a vacuum..
But there will always be a little friction from something
These machines offer glimpses of how to take advantage of a workforce and translate it into a usable workforce temporality but indeed produce an advantage of possible costs for less well-thought-out energy-wasting devices, saving resources, energy, time, thought, and space.
I think a reasonable proposal would be a off balance wheel that’s allowed to gain speed on its gravity assisted down stroke then using mechanical advantage of some sort to help the wheel past its point of lost inertia in as simple and low energy as possible. Finding a way to capture energy from a large moving mass while not having to push more than is absolutely needed to crest the peak and race back to bottom.
In addition I feel like people poo poo the idea of these hyper efficient machines but give it two days and some new discovery will fundamentally change the way we see the world.
It’s very arrogant to assume any “laws” are just that. They are only our understanding at this current time, not the ability to do amazing things with what’s all around you.
If you could build a machine that uses multiple levels of gravity assistance, one to help the other once it’s reached a critical limit. Would you be willing to wind a big clock spring for 10 mins everyday if it ultimately powered your home?
Agreed. There are new materials discovered all the time which may be the key, along with some novel thinking.
you have to use 3 different forces, there are some, and most people make them to get into university. there is the magnet, centrifugal, and drag machine, there is the gravity, centrifugal, magnet machine powering a house in Kansas, there is many flux engines. you can exploit gravity, magnets and geometry to make a never ending desk toy. but if you want real power you want centrifugal, magnet shearing, magnetic current and dipolar PVC.
Any convincing and valuable source (like diy- instructions) that back up what you just wrote?
? sorry you don't have any modern science prophets to prove to you what you can learn if you just read the founders of science.@@karlmccreight8172
A water wheel in a stream was the closest thing I got to. I had mad joule thief devices but they stop working when voltage drops. Though I had thought about using radiolosis to use nuclear waste decay that breaks down water to make hydrogen to run a engine or a fuel cell using buoyancy to separate hydrogen from oxygen or a nafion filter with a catalyst as a one way hydrogen seperator. With waste water going back to the nuclear waste to be split again but this only last based on the half life of the waste your using to split water based on radioactive decay.
This is a fallacy, you are creating a timeline to exclude 400-year machines.
Of course you can have perpetual motion. Everyone needs to get their head out of the box that thinks free energy from nature is taboo.
Thank you Mr Murray for your sense of pedagogy, but how can we explain the rotation of satellites around the planets in a regular and perpetual manner? I don't think that the non-existence of friction is the only reason and what is extraordinary is the similarity with the rotation of electrons around the nucleus, the laws of thermodynamics would be more judiciously limited to the world of gravity ? and I think that molecules work only because they weigh nothing.
I’ve noticed that the sun isn’t petering out any time soon. 🌞
Роберт поздравляю с наступающим Новым Годом! Желаю вам крепкого Сибирского здоровья и всех Благ! Вечный двигатель, мы его сделаем... Он существует, так же как луна вращается вокруг земли вечно...;))
Not forever. Gravitational forces cause tidal heating. This causes the Earth and Moon to loose energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation. The result is the moon is moving slowly away from the Earth. They also loose energy in the form of Gravitational waves but that is extremely small.
Extra energy being the least bit of “ input” 😜
Something running perpetually in a closed system doesn't matter, if nothing going in and nothing is coming out, all thermodynamic equations are in balance.
Put a load on it, however, and we expect the motion to go to zero. If it doesn't, that's a violation of the current equations.
That said, it's not like we won't discover a new source of energy to rebalance the equation. But most hobbists pursuing "free energy" are not scientists and most scientists dont publicly suggest looking into it.
Can you give an example of a "closed system" in the natural world (not man-made)?
@@markflint9089, asteroids in space qualify, per Newton's 1st Law of Inertia, and the entropy of the "system" is zero.
Gravity affects it, so it isn't a perfectly enclosed system.
"We now have the technology to take ET home." -- Ben Rich, CEO Lockheed Skunkworks
Do you think man-made UFO's burn jet fuel ? HA
If matter is formed and animated by consciousness, which many believe, then perpetual motion is a condition enabled by extending consciousness to allow it. Indeed consciousness itself could be termed perpetual, though it's not a machine and not subject to the constraints of time. This is obviously not a notion permitted by materialists......
The truth is that fatal distortions have been introduced into the fundamental definitions.
These type of machine fall into the same category as USB heater that can heat you whole house in mins and Earth batteries that can run you house! lol (FB ads etc)
It's not just me then.
@@marktyler3381 No, it's not just you. You are in excellent company.
"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin
"The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church
"The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin
@@timothyjohnson1511 And a 25 btu candle and a plant pot are not going to save you 1000s of pounds.
When you realize that gravity is not a force, then you need to rethink every resistive force you are trying to over come with machines.
Perpetual motion machines work all the time!
Energy loss is always a fact of existence.
Friction will always frustrate Fiction..
I truly agree that perpetual motion is not possible, but, at least I feel, The ultimate prize is not perpetual motion, but really long lasting motion. Best examples are the Oxford Electric Bell, and Atmos clocks. I think people spend too much time demonizing the pursuit of really long lasting motion by calling it " perpetual motion".
Watch the last five minutes of Jaker's Ladder. You will be convinced.
I would assume these laws are relative to earth right?
The thing that made it sink in for me is this. Even if someone could make a perpetual motion machine it would be at best a novelty, you would lose it the second you put a load on it and made it do work.
If we were to make a free energy machine it could comply with the laws of science if you could build a machine which without any external energy inputs would produce energy whilst reducing the temperature of the air around it , that would be using the heat in the air to produce either movement, electricity or both.
Harmonics, lasers for example. Light amplification through STIMULATED EMISSION of radiation. Everything has a frequency, the key is to find it and stimulate a harmonic reaction. TH-cam channels. Social harmonics at work....
How about you make an highly efficient machine? Possibly in the 90% range. Not a heater, something that moves.
Another challenge is to make a list of all possible "forces" that are practically available to use for a "highly efficient machine", such as Capillary Action, Magnesium, Gravity, etc.
Then list various free possible inputs such as wind, sun heat, shade cold, tidal, etc.
Also put together some machines that for all intents and purposes could be considered "Perpetual". Hopefully with enough excess energy to harness.
I have always thought Perpetual Motion Machines could not be made but it does not stop me from being interested in whatever someone makes. I would think that some of these attempts can become helpers in prolonging an action beyond not having it in the system. Then it would be of use but perhaps , too little of use or we would see them everywhere. Just not perpetual.
Look up METHERNITHA
Haha talking about energy walking through a original power station
You voice seems to be clipping a little
I have a design which i have not seen anyone try yet and its very simple using water to raise a ball using buoyancy and gravity to drop it, if youtube had pics in comments id love to show everyone and see if someone would try it out
Link to an image or design drawing ?? Pretty sure it will not work but always interested in seeing the designs.
I've seen that idea several times before. Search youtube for bouyancy engine. Typically they have a chain of bouys that enter a tank of water at the bottom, rise to the top and fall back down outside the tank. The problem is the energy required to push open the valve that allows the bouts to enter at the bottom is greater than the energy gained rising up.
@@ColinWatters i am aware of that design with the issue being the ball entering the water at the bottom, my idea has a ball fall onto a counter weight to set a flap up and then free fall into water with a ramp under to push it over as it slightly sinks then starts to rebound out of the water it ends up in a clear tube that sticks out of the water that has been filled already with water and has at least 5 small flaps inside that the ball will open as it raises inside the tube, each flap will close automatic as they sink, the flaps stop water spilling out so that way the top of the tube can be open, its like the tooth pic experiment inside a water column, this way you can raise the ball as high as you want, its really hard to explain but its very simple, last when the ball reaches the top of the clear water tube it hits a leaver and there will be a mesh flap that pushes the ball out using that counter weight from the beginning releasing the energy that the ball put into it and then it will start all over again as the ball falls out and resets the counter weight on the way down before it falls again into the water, i have thought about this idea for a very long time and i can not find a reason for it not to work, if i can show you my design im sure you would agree it does not break any physics and each part of my design is very simple and plausible, i am yet to see anyone that has even drawn up this design
@@g-funk484 I'm afraid I only followed about half of that. I refer you to the wikipedia page on "conservative forces" in short it means if your machine ever returns to the same position twice then gravity will do no work on it. Since bouyancy is also caused by gravity the same will apply.
@@ColinWatters lol yeh its hard to explain my idea and i know what you mean if my idea works i would be the 1st person to have a ball move constantly which i doubt is possible but i really cant see why it wouldn't work, i do not see any part of it having an issue thats what gets me, usually i can always find an issue with my or other peoples designs but this one has stumped me, i will send you a link to where i got the idea partly from so at least understand better
of course they do- you are standing on one! this planet has been spinning since you stepped on, and will be spinning when your gone! so yes they exist!
I had an idea of using a magnetic bearing to suspend a flywheel mass in a vacuum. With no contact in the bearings theres no friction, and with no air there's no drag, so in theory if you could spin up the flywheel there'd be no way for it to lose energy. It wouldn't be of any use, as you can extract energy from it but it should in theory spin perpetually.
Really only guessing here but I think it would spin a very long time, just not for years. I think there would be a small amount of drag on the ferris material the magnet is acting on or any stray magnetic fields, however small, otherwise it would not float in the first place.
Hard to eliminate all eddy currents (caused by metal moving in the magnetic field of the bearing). In theory it also radiates gravitational waves but they would be negligible.
Idea for a perpetual machine: what if instead of trying to use magnets for a perpetual machine, you use the 1st law of thermal dynamics now the 1st law of thermal dynamics states that you can Not create or Destroy Energy but you can transfer one state of Energy to another what if you some how transfer Kinetic Energy to static Electric Energy and turn the Electric Energy back into Kinetic Energy and the cycle repeats itself in an Infinite loop. The only trouble is trying to find a solution to do this in a officiant way
I believe the only thing we will likely 'discover' . Anytime soon , would be a higher efficiency device, possibly generator. Being above 99% efficient, but below 100.1%. There could possibly be devices that work with little input, using gravity to help it along, or possibly magnets , I have seen magnet motors nearly make 360°, then stall . Maybe something similar can be used to boost the efficiency? Who knows, thing is, would we believe it if someone did make such a discovery??
I agree. The search is useful if it can result in extremely high efficiency machines that use much less energy than present ones.
I have stopped using the terms scientific law which is a bit confusing and can be miss interpeted. I rather use the term scientific fact which I see as being more explicit and clear.
Steam pressure; ambient temperature
EVERYTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE ...UNTIL SOMEONE BELIEVES IT'S NOT.
Case in point the ignition research facility at Livermore California.
“Moving perpetually happens all the time”
Oh, really?
The entire universe operates on the principle of perpetual motion.
How so? Proof?
@@carpballet A Priori
@@marinadizon2720 Lol times a million
@@carpballet It keeps going.
@@chyfields But we don’t know if it keeps going forever. A perpetual motion machine by definition keeps going forever.
The closest you can get to perpetual motion is planets orbiting.
And even then, tidal forces very gradually convert orbital (kinetic) energy into heat via deformation of both bodies.
Literally can't achieve perpetual motion in an ideal vacuum.
@@crudereviews7221 What about electons
@@ecoista1373Electrons don't orbit, that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality. Electrons jump around randomly, but the probability of them appearing in any one spot os not equal - there are complicated shape patterns (called Orbitals) that have higher probabilities of finding the electron in them, but there's no reason beyond probability that an electron cant be found a thousand miles away for a split second before being back in the orbital (this is a form of quantum tunneling).
@@etaaramin9361
"Electrons don't orbit,"
That wasn't the question, but it does answer a question I've had.
Electrons are in perpetual motion, they may not be in an orbit, but they are in constant motion.
"that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality."
An inanimated 2d model will never be a good model when depicting such motions for the simple reason that descriptions of the model do not describe or explain the motion. A 3d animation is better suited to model such motions and even then, it is not likely to be perfect.
Recently, I've been getting on people that complain when their vague and abstract communication is misinterpreted. Those people, despite their complaint, take offense when they are told to be clearer and not leave their communication up to interpretation. If I didn't know better, I would think that those idiots actually believe that people are be able to read their minds. Then again, the programming of kids to think they are entitled to everything for free, may have included the programming that people can read their minds.
Dunking bird and Atmos clock are two proven "perpetual motion" machines, but both work by harvesting heat energy.