Discussion:
Perpetual Motion Failure!
(too old to reply)
CoreyWhite
2007-01-03 03:43:27 UTC
Permalink
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.

But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.

The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.

So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)

I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.

Thanks!!!
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-03 03:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Give up - you're making a complete arse of yourself. There is no such
thing as a perpetual motion machine.
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Autymn D. C.
2007-01-04 15:47:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
Post by CoreyWhite
But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Give up - you're making a complete arse of yourself. There is no such
thing as a perpetual motion machine.
Wrong, everything is in perpetual motion, and everything is a makine.
The_Man
2007-01-04 16:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Autymn D. C.
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
Post by CoreyWhite
But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Give up - you're making a complete arse of yourself. There is no such
thing as a perpetual motion machine.
Wrong, everything is in perpetual motion, and everything is a makine.
Just becuase your asshole is in perpetual motion, doesn't mean that
EVERYTHING is.

If you don't know what a "makine" (machine?) is, go stick your hand (an
yo' mama) into a machine (or play with your Barbies in that frilly
dress you've had your eyes on for so long).
Autymn D. C.
2007-01-04 16:17:01 UTC
Permalink
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-04 16:56:02 UTC
Permalink
It's makine. Learn H?llenic or die. Every body is a makine, so your
nonpoint is not takene.
Are you a polymoron?
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-04 17:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Autymn D. C.
Wrong, everything is in perpetual motion, and everything is a makine.
Are you born this stupid, or did you just work really hard at it? I get
the feeling it comes quite naturally to you though?
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Ross Herbert
2007-01-03 04:38:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.

Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.

With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/

Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
Paul E. Schoen
2007-01-03 05:23:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
How much for one that is just 4% more efficient? Now that would be
priceless!

The OP seems to think the lower the motor voltage, the more efficient it
is. If it has power output, there will also be current, and unless
superconductive, there will always be resistive losses.

Most PM "proofs" involved faulty interpretation of meter readings or
external power sources (heat, light, wind) that were not accounted for.

Paul
Eeyore
2007-01-03 07:07:36 UTC
Permalink
The OP seems to think the lower the motor voltage, the more efficient it is.
LMAO !

He's obviously never heard of I2R losses.

Graham
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 01:13:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul E. Schoen
How much for one that is just 4% more efficient? Now that would be
priceless!
Paul
The problem is that if it was 4.00001 percent more efficient, it would
self destruct.

That is the fundamental flaw in perpetual motion devices.
They rapidly self destruct.

http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
psidre felix
2007-01-03 06:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?


Very high efficiency generator.
Ross Herbert
2007-01-03 08:48:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
Without seeing the actual setup I doubt the claims made in this video.
For a start he is putting raw 100Hz 1/2 wave pulses from the bridge
rectifier straight through the DC ammeter and measuring the same 100
Hz rectified voltage across the motor. The ammeter can't be reading
the true RMS value of the input current and the DC voltmeter can't be
reading the true RMS value of the input voltage. On the output side I
also doubt the readings shown on the meters are factual due to the
fluctuating nature of the lamp brightness. The AC voltmeter pointer is
right down near the lower end of the scale and actually fluctuates
over several minor divisions making it impossible to read the actual
voltage. Methinks there is something very fishy here....
Ancient_Hacker
2007-01-03 13:07:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
Methinks there is something very fishy here....
Many fishy things here:

* As you noted, the input isnt really DC, it's full-wave rectified AC,
which is going to fool the DC meters somewhat.

* And it's plain wrong for full-wave rectified AC to measure power as
the product of the "DC" meter readings. It's wrong even if they used
AC meters. They're so far off, they're not even wrong.

* same thing on the AC side-- cheap "AC" meters actually measure the
average AC voltage, then they paint on a scale thats 66% higher to
convert sort-of from average to RMS, but of course that's only correct
for perfectly clean sine waves.

* And it's wet-your-pants funny that they're using cheap, probably 5%
accuracy at very best analog meters. My local Harbor-Freight store has
a sale on 1% digital multimeters for $2.99 each. Funny how for an
experiment that will get them a Nobel prize plus several billion
dollars in patent royalyies per month, they did not go out and buy
better quality meters.

** you'll alaways notice in these kinds of "demos", they NEVER take the
output and feed it back to the input. There sould be PLENTY, like 3x
times more output power than is ever needed for the input, but they
NEVER feed back the output and unplug the incoming power cord. That
would reveal that there really isnt 3x more output than input in a real
hurry.

Same for the Newman motor, the dean drive, etc, etc, ewtc,
etc..............
Ross Herbert
2007-01-04 01:15:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient_Hacker
Post by Ross Herbert
Methinks there is something very fishy here....
* As you noted, the input isnt really DC, it's full-wave rectified AC,
which is going to fool the DC meters somewhat.
* And it's plain wrong for full-wave rectified AC to measure power as
the product of the "DC" meter readings. It's wrong even if they used
AC meters. They're so far off, they're not even wrong.
* same thing on the AC side-- cheap "AC" meters actually measure the
average AC voltage, then they paint on a scale thats 66% higher to
convert sort-of from average to RMS, but of course that's only correct
for perfectly clean sine waves.
* And it's wet-your-pants funny that they're using cheap, probably 5%
accuracy at very best analog meters. My local Harbor-Freight store has
a sale on 1% digital multimeters for $2.99 each. Funny how for an
experiment that will get them a Nobel prize plus several billion
dollars in patent royalyies per month, they did not go out and buy
better quality meters.
** you'll alaways notice in these kinds of "demos", they NEVER take the
output and feed it back to the input. There sould be PLENTY, like 3x
times more output power than is ever needed for the input, but they
NEVER feed back the output and unplug the incoming power cord. That
would reveal that there really isnt 3x more output than input in a real
hurry.
Same for the Newman motor, the dean drive, etc, etc, ewtc,
etc..............
On the Lutec website http://www.lutec.com.au/ there is a link to the
later setup showing the use of digital power meters in place of the
original analog meters in the video. In reading the "how it works"
page it seems that the actual DC input is pulsed on for only 20% of a
revolution. The use of digital power meters (Center 232) is supposed
to provide a counter to the critics who have picked up the obvious
flaws of using analog meters, however these meters actual make the
claims even more fanciful. The specs for the Center 232
http://www.centertek.com/232.htm show that it has a sample rate of
only 2 per second and since the sampling period is not synchronised
with the input pulse, which is on for only 20% of each revolution (ON
period thus dependant on RPM of motor), the chance that a measurement
sample will be taken while the ON pulse is present is very small
indeed, so the readings are flawed in my opinion. Perhaps using a
power meter which samples at least 1000 tmes per second might give
more realistic results.

The LEA also appears to be a rework of the old Adams motor/generator.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
http://jnaudin.free.fr/ (under magnetic motor researches)

A skeptical viewpoint
http://www.phact.org/e/z/adamsmotr.htm
Eeyore
2007-01-04 02:07:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ancient_Hacker
Post by Ross Herbert
Methinks there is something very fishy here....
* As you noted, the input isnt really DC, it's full-wave rectified AC,
which is going to fool the DC meters somewhat.
* And it's plain wrong for full-wave rectified AC to measure power as
the product of the "DC" meter readings. It's wrong even if they used
AC meters. They're so far off, they're not even wrong.
* same thing on the AC side-- cheap "AC" meters actually measure the
average AC voltage, then they paint on a scale thats 66% higher to
convert sort-of from average to RMS, but of course that's only correct
for perfectly clean sine waves.
* And it's wet-your-pants funny that they're using cheap, probably 5%
accuracy at very best analog meters. My local Harbor-Freight store has
a sale on 1% digital multimeters for $2.99 each. Funny how for an
experiment that will get them a Nobel prize plus several billion
dollars in patent royalyies per month, they did not go out and buy
better quality meters.
** you'll alaways notice in these kinds of "demos", they NEVER take the
output and feed it back to the input. There sould be PLENTY, like 3x
times more output power than is ever needed for the input, but they
NEVER feed back the output and unplug the incoming power cord. That
would reveal that there really isnt 3x more output than input in a real
hurry.
Same for the Newman motor, the dean drive, etc, etc, ewtc,
etc..............
Their website is intruiging. I suspect it's some amateurs who simply don't
understand their errors.

http://www.lutec.com.au/

It seems they may have sold the idea to this bunch though

http://www.evergreenltd.com.hk/EEI-Home.htm

They call it an energy amplifier. The k00ks will love it. Do read on.

Graham
psidre felix
2007-01-03 17:06:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
Without seeing the actual setup I doubt the claims made in this video.
For a start he is putting raw 100Hz 1/2 wave pulses from the bridge
rectifier straight through the DC ammeter and measuring the same 100
Hz rectified voltage across the motor. The ammeter can't be reading
the true RMS value of the input current and the DC voltmeter can't be
reading the true RMS value of the input voltage. On the output side I
also doubt the readings shown on the meters are factual due to the
fluctuating nature of the lamp brightness. The AC voltmeter pointer is
right down near the lower end of the scale and actually fluctuates
over several minor divisions making it impossible to read the actual
voltage. Methinks there is something very fishy here....
yeah, i don't know enough about this stuff to be able to tell a fraud from
a video. kewl beans.
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 01:19:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
Without seeing the actual setup I doubt the claims made in this video.
For a start he is putting raw 100Hz 1/2 wave pulses from the bridge
rectifier straight through the DC ammeter and measuring the same 100
Hz rectified voltage across the motor. The ammeter can't be reading
the true RMS value of the input current and the DC voltmeter can't be
reading the true RMS value of the input voltage. On the output side I
also doubt the readings shown on the meters are factual due to the
fluctuating nature of the lamp brightness. The AC voltmeter pointer is
right down near the lower end of the scale and actually fluctuates
over several minor divisions making it impossible to read the actual
voltage. Methinks there is something very fishy here....
yeah, i don't know enough about this stuff to be able to tell a fraud from
a video. kewl beans.
If it is a video on perpetual motion, it obviously is a fraud.
There is nothing to tell.

End of story.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 01:15:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
Without seeing the actual setup I doubt the claims made in this video.
For a start he is putting raw 100Hz 1/2 wave pulses from the bridge
rectifier straight through the DC ammeter and measuring the same 100
Hz rectified voltage across the motor. The ammeter can't be reading
the true RMS value of the input current and the DC voltmeter can't be
reading the true RMS value of the input voltage. On the output side I
also doubt the readings shown on the meters are factual due to the
fluctuating nature of the lamp brightness. The AC voltmeter pointer is
right down near the lower end of the scale and actually fluctuates
over several minor divisions making it impossible to read the actual
voltage. Methinks there is something very fishy here....
If conventional meters are used at all, they are wrong.
They are ALWAYS wrong.

Even true RMS instruments are wrong if used outside their allowable
crest value range.

See http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse112.pdf and
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse132.pdf
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Ross Herbert
2007-01-03 09:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by psidre felix
Post by Ross Herbert
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Don't feel too bad that you are finding that PM is just not possible
due to the laws of physics. We humans just have to accept that no man
made machine can be 100% efficient, and this fact therefore rules out
the possibility of PM being achieved by man.
Others with more money and qualified people at their disposal have
tried and failed to build PM machines.
With regard to highly efficient motors you might like to read this
CSIRO paper on the design of their wheel motor.
http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/papers/iwscem/
Nearly 98% efficient and the magnet ring they built would be akin to
your multi-pole magnet. BTW, you can buy a fully built wheel complete
with motor for around AU$75K - how is that for the price of as near
perfect a motor you will find?
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
Further, how the Lutec Electricity Amplifier (LEA)supposedly works
http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm
Ross Herbert
2007-01-03 09:31:03 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 01:41:30 -0500, psidre felix <***@gmail.com>
wrote:

SNIP
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
It seems that Lutec is not the only one with this idea

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
Eeyore
2007-01-04 02:08:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
SNIP
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
It seems that Lutec is not the only one with this idea
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
Note their resoanant circuit.

Graham
Eeyore
2007-01-04 02:12:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Herbert
SNIP
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
It seems that Lutec is not the only one with this idea
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
I just read some more there. This bit had me close to tears of laughter.

" Seven people have since built this device in Australia and it seems to work
fine, but no-one can explain the effiency anomoly that occurs after about 15
minutes of running time. In the two that I have personally seen, the eff. rating
jumps from 85% (normal) then after about 15 mins goes to around 120%.

We have set up oscilloscopes, amp meters, volt meters, temp meters and can't
account for the increase.

We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "


When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >

Graham
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-04 02:25:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
"Quick Robin - fetch the Bat-MultiMeter!!"
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Eeyore
2007-01-04 02:56:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
Post by Eeyore
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
"Quick Robin - fetch the Bat-MultiMeter!!"
I can only imagine the guy was thinking magnetometer but must have misheard it.

It certainly gave me a chuckle. Funniest thing I've seen in days in fact.

Graham
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-04 02:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
Post by Eeyore
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
"Quick Robin - fetch the Bat-MultiMeter!!"
I can only imagine the guy was thinking magnetometer but must have misheard it.
It certainly gave me a chuckle. Funniest thing I've seen in days in fact.
Graham
Perhaps we should design a magmamonitor to sell to them.

Simplest design - a stick

If the end burns when you poke it into the substance, its magma.
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
t.hoehler
2007-01-12 03:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
Post by Eeyore
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
"Quick Robin - fetch the Bat-MultiMeter!!"
I can only imagine the guy was thinking magnetometer but must have misheard it.
It certainly gave me a chuckle. Funniest thing I've seen in days in fact.
Graham
Magmameter -- first cousin to the smegmameter. Very rare - at least that's
how they hawk them on the 'bay!
Bwahahahahahahahaha! What a bunch of maroons! Wait! Hold the phone!
I've got it! The newest in perpetual motion motor technology!
THE P.T. BARNUM SMEGMAMOTOR! RUNS ON AIR, NEEDS NO CARE! FREE POWER
FOREVER!
Jeeze Louise, I certainly those poor souls get some help . . . .
Tom
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
2007-01-04 02:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
Post by Ross Herbert
SNIP
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
It seems that Lutec is not the only one with this idea
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
I just read some more there. This bit had me close to tears of laughter.
" Seven people have since built this device in Australia and it seems to work
fine, but no-one can explain the effiency anomoly that occurs after about 15
minutes of running time. In the two that I have personally seen, the eff. rating
jumps from 85% (normal) then after about 15 mins goes to around 120%.
We have set up oscilloscopes, amp meters, volt meters, temp meters and can't
account for the increase.
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
Graham
Should be easy enough to "close the loop" and tap off excess energy.
I'll wait until I see that done.
Personally.
I can also guarantee that if someone shows me such a machine I could,
within days, get several $million of backing for them.
--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com
Ross Herbert
2007-01-04 12:22:45 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 02:12:47 +0000, Eeyore
Post by Eeyore
Post by Ross Herbert
SNIP
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
It seems that Lutec is not the only one with this idea
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/adams/adamsall.htm
I just read some more there. This bit had me close to tears of laughter.
" Seven people have since built this device in Australia and it seems to work
fine, but no-one can explain the effiency anomoly that occurs after about 15
minutes of running time. In the two that I have personally seen, the eff. rating
jumps from 85% (normal) then after about 15 mins goes to around 120%.
We have set up oscilloscopes, amp meters, volt meters, temp meters and can't
account for the increase.
We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the
rotor, but we are still stumped. "
When ppl start talking about magma monitors......... < dries eyes >
Graham
The Australian Skeptics awarded Lutec the winner of the Bent Spoon
award for 2001.
http://www.skeptics.com.au/spoon/2001winners.htm
Eeyore
2007-01-04 02:01:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
The give-away is here.....

http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm

The input is pulsed by a rotating switch (commutated) allowing the DC input
current to flow through the motor coils for a percentage of one cycle as
dictated by the actual ON period of the commutator contacts. In most cases this
is around 0.2 of a cycle.

What the crest factor of that ?

Also they claim the output is in watts when it's actually volt-amperes (
apparent power ).

Graham
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 02:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
The give-away is here.....
http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm
The input is pulsed by a rotating switch (commutated) allowing the DC input
current to flow through the motor coils for a percentage of one cycle as
dictated by the actual ON period of the commutator contacts. In most cases this
is around 0.2 of a cycle.
What the crest factor of that ?
Also they claim the output is in watts when it's actually volt-amperes (
apparent power ).
Graham
http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse125.pdf for a crest factor tutorial

a 20 percent duty cycle square wave has a crest factor of 2.5.
This is beyond some older rms instruments, and creates errors in others.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
psidre felix
2007-01-09 00:19:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eeyore
Post by psidre felix
http://youtu.be/uDDWhr84h0Q
Very high efficiency generator.
The give-away is here.....
http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm
The input is pulsed by a rotating switch (commutated) allowing the DC input
current to flow through the motor coils for a percentage of one cycle as
dictated by the actual ON period of the commutator contacts. In most cases this
is around 0.2 of a cycle.
What the crest factor of that ?
Also they claim the output is in watts when it's actually volt-amperes (
apparent power ).
Graham
i appreciate the information, unfortunately most of it is over my head. it
all does make me want to mess around with electro-magnetic experiments very
much though.
Eric Gisse
2007-01-03 04:58:38 UTC
Permalink
CoreyWhite wrote:

[snip latest bout of failure]
But any tips or advice on experimenting would
help while I play around with gears and keep looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Why ask when you aren't going to listen?
Eeyore
2007-01-03 07:05:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
You do realise of course that there's no such thing as a perpetual motion
machine ( without external power *input* ).

I do realise that Americans have some problems understanding such basic concepts
due to their inferior education but I assure you that many have tried and all
have failed.

And no, I'm not just 'lacking optimism'. Honest.

Graham
John Larkin
2007-01-03 15:40:39 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:05:47 +0000, Eeyore
Post by Eeyore
I do realise that Americans have some problems understanding such basic concepts
due to their inferior education but I assure you that many have tried and all
have failed.
Yeah, all those integrated circuits and biotech stuff and planes that
can actually be manufactured and Mars probes that actually send back
data... must be dumb luck.

John
Michael A. Terrell
2007-01-04 07:24:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Larkin
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:05:47 +0000, Eeyore
Post by Eeyore
I do realise that Americans have some problems understanding such basic concepts
due to their inferior education but I assure you that many have tried and all
have failed.
Yeah, all those integrated circuits and biotech stuff and planes that
can actually be manufactured and Mars probes that actually send back
data... must be dumb luck.
John
You have never heard of the fabulous "British Space Program"? It is
all the missing teeth from poor dental care.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
boson boss
2007-01-03 13:23:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
By logic of math it appears that in our 3D rigid world there is no
geometry that will coin a solution to efficiency ever. Then again it
doesn't seem right. The solutions to various problems in principle and
inventiveness are paths and motions that were not visible previously.
Inventiveness is incomprehensible and unimaginable.

But aside from that there are fundamental laws. There is a feeling that
there is a rule book or mechanism for fundamental forces, conservation
of energy, thermodynamics... How does that machine look like? One
answer is that it looks like actual universe with living beings and all
the rest. When I compare this to the inventiveness I see that it must
be we have supremely little possible imaginative powers over universe.
We don't know universe.

Paths and motions as I said before for the Machine of fundamental laws
are paths of possible information. If I were looking for new types of
devices and so forth I would look for a new way to transmit
information. That is what labs are doing when you think about it only
talk about it differently - they research interactions.

The information universe is problematic. Lets say I ask a question in
parallel to the question above about what kind of machine of
fundamental laws there is. There is a considerable amount of mystery as
to what is information, energy of information, awareness,
interpretation, encoding, quantum world, etc. The simplest information
challenge is one simplest fundamental interaction in the laboratory.
How does the machine consisting of fundamental information transmission
looks like on a whole, large scale? Well, again it is the actual
universe.

Now there are some differences to the first version of "actual
universe". In the second example there is a multitude of 'unnecessary'
information or call it structure - redundant, random, repeated
information, noise, stochastic resonance... Also, we get plenty of
information (well, not quite but...) about everything including quantum
world and cosmology beyond barriers. For example we check that speed of
light is the same everywhere by process of examining supernova stars
and distant universe.

There are two more complex differences to the analysis of universe in
the second informational case. In order to see the information and give
conclusions we spend energy in processing information. And, in case of
most elementary communication, we use rather complex machinery that is
spending some sort of energy to obtain sometimes the smallest signal
for barely any useful information (as in case of particle physics, but
not nearly as much in case of common radio).

In the first case the universe is not processing information but
directly exhibiting the rule book of fundamental laws (realtime
computing without errors?). And, the smallest signal or elements of
"communication" such as fundamental interaction is without any complex
man-made device; actually how big or small is the "device" in nature?
could be any element of mass for gravity, or any electron for charge.

The two distinctions about how to analyze the universe rely on the
common unity of reality - energy. In my opinion the difference is that
the rule book of how and what energy has to be supplied to the
information channel has not been written yet.
boson boss
2007-01-03 19:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by boson boss
By logic of math it appears that in our 3D rigid world there is no
geometry that will coin a solution to efficiency ever. Then again it
doesn't seem right. The solutions to various problems in principle and
inventiveness are paths and motions that were not visible previously.
Inventiveness is incomprehensible and unimaginable.
But aside from that there are fundamental laws. There is a feeling that
there is a rule book or mechanism for fundamental forces, conservation
of energy, thermodynamics... How does that machine look like? One
answer is that it looks like actual universe with living beings and all
the rest. When I compare this to the inventiveness I see that it must
be we have supremely little possible imaginative powers over universe.
We don't know universe.
Paths and motions as I said before for the Machine of fundamental laws
are paths of possible information. If I were looking for new types of
devices and so forth I would look for a new way to transmit
information. That is what labs are doing when you think about it only
talk about it differently - they research interactions.
The information universe is problematic. Lets say I ask a question in
parallel to the question above about what kind of machine of
fundamental laws there is. There is a considerable amount of mystery as
to what is information, energy of information, awareness,
interpretation, encoding, quantum world, etc. The simplest information
challenge is one simplest fundamental interaction in the laboratory.
How does the machine consisting of fundamental information transmission
looks like on a whole, large scale? Well, again it is the actual
universe.
Now there are some differences to the first version of "actual
universe". In the second example there is a multitude of 'unnecessary'
information or call it structure - redundant, random, repeated
information, noise, stochastic resonance... Also, we get plenty of
information (well, not quite but...) about everything including quantum
world and cosmology beyond barriers. For example we check that speed of
light is the same everywhere by process of examining supernova stars
and distant universe.
There are two more complex differences to the analysis of universe in
the second informational case. In order to see the information and give
conclusions we spend energy in processing information. And, in case of
most elementary communication, we use rather complex machinery that is
spending some sort of energy to obtain sometimes the smallest signal
for barely any useful information (as in case of particle physics, but
not nearly as much in case of common radio).
In the first case the universe is not processing information but
directly exhibiting the rule book of fundamental laws (realtime
computing without errors?). And, the smallest signal or elements of
"communication" such as fundamental interaction is without any complex
man-made device; actually how big or small is the "device" in nature?
could be any element of mass for gravity, or any electron for charge.
The two distinctions about how to analyze the universe rely on the
common unity of reality - energy. In my opinion the difference is that
the rule book of how and what energy has to be supplied to the
information channel has not been written yet.
Why does information has to come to us? Examples show this is not the
case at all. If some forces (for example the weak force) were visible
and/or formidable on our scales the universe would not exist with the
complexity and beauty.

Also, countable, decipherable information that can be compared with
something, is that the quantum plane?

Signals are traced for patterns formed around structures except for
possibly eddies of matter where its turbulence.
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 01:18:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by boson boss
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
By logic of math it appears that in our 3D rigid world there is no
geometry that will coin a solution to efficiency ever. Then again it
doesn't seem right. The solutions to various problems in principle and
inventiveness are paths and motions that were not visible previously.
Inventiveness is incomprehensible and unimaginable.
But aside from that there are fundamental laws. There is a feeling that
there is a rule book or mechanism for fundamental forces, conservation
of energy, thermodynamics... How does that machine look like? One
answer is that it looks like actual universe with living beings and all
the rest. When I compare this to the inventiveness I see that it must
be we have supremely little possible imaginative powers over universe.
We don't know universe.
Paths and motions as I said before for the Machine of fundamental laws
are paths of possible information. If I were looking for new types of
devices and so forth I would look for a new way to transmit
information. That is what labs are doing when you think about it only
talk about it differently - they research interactions.
The information universe is problematic. Lets say I ask a question in
parallel to the question above about what kind of machine of
fundamental laws there is. There is a considerable amount of mystery as
to what is information, energy of information, awareness,
interpretation, encoding, quantum world, etc. The simplest information
challenge is one simplest fundamental interaction in the laboratory.
How does the machine consisting of fundamental information transmission
looks like on a whole, large scale? Well, again it is the actual
universe.
Now there are some differences to the first version of "actual
universe". In the second example there is a multitude of 'unnecessary'
information or call it structure - redundant, random, repeated
information, noise, stochastic resonance... Also, we get plenty of
information (well, not quite but...) about everything including quantum
world and cosmology beyond barriers. For example we check that speed of
light is the same everywhere by process of examining supernova stars
and distant universe.
There are two more complex differences to the analysis of universe in
the second informational case. In order to see the information and give
conclusions we spend energy in processing information. And, in case of
most elementary communication, we use rather complex machinery that is
spending some sort of energy to obtain sometimes the smallest signal
for barely any useful information (as in case of particle physics, but
not nearly as much in case of common radio).
In the first case the universe is not processing information but
directly exhibiting the rule book of fundamental laws (realtime
computing without errors?). And, the smallest signal or elements of
"communication" such as fundamental interaction is without any complex
man-made device; actually how big or small is the "device" in nature?
could be any element of mass for gravity, or any electron for charge.
The two distinctions about how to analyze the universe rely on the
common unity of reality - energy. In my opinion the difference is that
the rule book of how and what energy has to be supplied to the
information channel has not been written yet.
Finding a source of unlimited free energy would be one of the most
imaginably henious crimes against humanity.

For it would be GUARANTEED to turn the planet into a cinder.

Anyone even pondering the possibility should be staked to an anthill.

Per http://www.tinaja.com/glib/bashpseu.pdf for a tutorial.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Joel Kolstad
2007-01-04 01:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lancaster
Finding a source of unlimited free energy would be one of the most
imaginably henious crimes against humanity.
For it would be GUARANTEED to turn the planet into a cinder.
No more so than the *effectively* unlimited energy obtainable from --
controlled -- nuclear reactions...
Autymn D. C.
2007-01-04 16:09:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lancaster
Finding a source of unlimited free energy would be one of the most
imaginably henious crimes against humanity.
For it would be GUARANTEED to turn the planet into a cinder.
Anyone even pondering the possibility should be staked to an anthill.
Wrong, shithead: http://egroups.com/message/free_energy/6928
a***@netzero.com
2007-01-03 15:10:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
Google for FEerguy9, he can help you.
T Wake
2007-01-03 16:55:02 UTC
Permalink
"CoreyWhite" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
<snip>
Post by CoreyWhite
But any tips or advice
</snip>

Learn physics.
Rene Tschaggelar
2007-01-03 17:01:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
[snip]
Post by CoreyWhite
But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
That is the point of perpetual motion machine.
It usually is just a tiny fraction too small to
generate more than it takes. But the next bigger
try is going to be a success. Thus it keeps their
designers perpetually busy with building ever
better and bigger machines.

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
CoreyWhite
2007-01-03 18:25:58 UTC
Permalink
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-03 18:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
As we all know Lego Technic is the prime source of perpetual motion...
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Robert Latest
2007-01-04 10:46:54 UTC
Permalink
["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.]
Post by Phineas T Puddleduck
As we all know Lego Technic is the prime source of perpetual motion...
Sure is. At least that's what I built my first perpetuum mobile out of.

robert
John Larkin
2007-01-03 18:56:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
I bet you're using nickel plated or galvanized washers. That's your
problem. Nicola Tesla used manganese-plated washers, which is why so
few people have been able to reproduce his work.

John
T Wake
2007-01-03 21:33:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
Are you willing to take bets?
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 01:20:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
2007-01-04 01:32:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lancaster
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
Actually, Lego is a really useful engineering tool.
--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com
Eric Gisse
2007-01-04 01:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lancaster
Post by CoreyWhite
I've ordered some new parts for my experiment. I've ordered a whole
gear, axel, and connector set from lego technic, with an extra gear set
that will fit my order. And I also ordered another generator that
needs less torque to create power. We will try the experiment again
next week and see if I have any more success!
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Who cares what the license agreement says?
Post by Don Lancaster
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 02:06:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eric Gisse
Post by Don Lancaster
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Who cares what the license agreement says?
Post by Don Lancaster
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Your first born daughter might.
Read the fine print.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Eric Gisse
2007-01-04 03:18:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lancaster
Post by Eric Gisse
Post by Don Lancaster
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Who cares what the license agreement says?
Post by Don Lancaster
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Your first born daughter might.
Read the fine print.
...and what makes the fine print enforcable?

Can I send you an email that says "By reading this email, you owe me 1
dollar"?

Will you pay me the dollar?

Can I take you to court if you refuse?
Post by Don Lancaster
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Don Lancaster
2007-01-04 16:30:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Eric Gisse
Post by Don Lancaster
Post by Eric Gisse
Post by Don Lancaster
Check your Lego licensing agreement very closely.
Who cares what the license agreement says?
Post by Don Lancaster
Lego specifically forbids use of their product on a perpetual motion
machine.
--
Many thanks,
Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Your first born daughter might.
Read the fine print.
...and what makes the fine print enforcable?
Bruno.

He is Lego's attitude relateralization facillitator.
--
Many thanks,

Don Lancaster voice phone: (928)428-4073
Synergetics 3860 West First Street Box 809 Thatcher, AZ 85552
rss: http://www.tinaja.com/whtnu.xml email: ***@tinaja.com

Please visit my GURU's LAIR web site at http://www.tinaja.com
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
2007-01-03 19:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine. All the parts I ordered arived on my doorstep, and I
went straight to work. I got one $300 wind generator, that could crank
out a wapping 1.5 volts, (but don't ask me what the wattage on the
thing is). And I got a low voltage 0.3volt motor.
But low and behold I found out my famous quadrupole magnet wasn't
strong enough to spin the generator, even when I used the strongest
magnets in my collection I had to get it spinning. So I got a few
different sized washers from the hardware store, and I build a
quadrupole around the generator, with my real presicion made quadrupole
at the center. And wouldn't you know that the thing spun like crazy?
It worked so much better using the real quadrupole at the center, and I
arranged 6 magnets underneath it, and around the generators axel in
another quadrupole. I doubled up the strength of 2 of them and used
smaller magnets for the four others. They switched polarities half way
around the circumfrence of the generator. And boy did it spin.
The only problem was that my motor didn't have enough torque. And to
compensate for this, I put a long piece of plastic on the end of my
motor, and stuck magnets to the end of the plastic. That way when the
motor spins the magnets turn around a larger circumfrence. This seemed
to work, and when I turned the motor on with a AA Battery, my generator
would complete 3 or 4 rotations before the magnets on the motor would
stop and stick the the magnets on the generator. That sucked, and I
could tell the problem was that the motor was spinning too fast instead
of using all the torque it had.
So I see a few options I can try. I can get a lower voltage generator
that will spin only using my quadrupole magnet. Or I can get a higher
torque motor, that will spin my generator when I am using my fabricated
quadrupole with super strong magnets. But first I am going to try to
get some gears for the equipment I already am experimenting with to
turn all of the super fast speed my motor has into extra torque.
That's what gears are made for! :)
I'm just posting this because I need ideas on how I can get a generator
that needs less torque or get a motor that has more torque, or even
info on using gears. My motor already has the maximum efficiency I
could hope for, operating at 0.3volts, and my generator cranks out a
lot of power as well. Its just that I need to work with lower wattages
overall. And I think the best route I could go from here would be to
buy another generator with good efficiency that could generate a
smaller voltage, and see if I can't find another low voltage motor that
was already geared down for torque. But any tips or advice on
experimenting would help while I play around with gears and keep
looking at my options.
Thanks!!!
For how all this stuff should be done...
http://jnaudin.free.fr/

This is a guy I really admire.
A kind of French Bill Beatty
--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com
Kisai
2007-01-04 03:10:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
Work = Force * Distance

In order for your machine to be perpetual. One of the two conditions
must be satisified:

1) There must be no counteracting forces upon the machine, id est,
friction.

2) You can warp space indefinitely.
m***@cars3.uchicago.edu
2007-01-04 03:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kisai
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
Work = Force * Distance
In order for your machine to be perpetual. One of the two conditions
1) There must be no counteracting forces upon the machine, id est,
friction.
Not good enough. A perpetual motion machine is something that not
just moves perpetually but *does work perpetually*.
Post by Kisai
2) You can warp space indefinitely.
And how will this help.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
***@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
The_Man
2007-01-04 11:41:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kisai
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
Work = Force * Distance
In order for your machine to be perpetual. One of the two conditions
1) There must be no counteracting forces upon the machine, id est,
friction.
2) You can warp space indefinitely.
The failure of perpetual motion machines has nothing to do with
friction. It has to do with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Even if
friction could be eliminated entirely, perpetual motion machines would
not operate, since the integral of dq / T must be less than or equal to
zero. From this it is possible to derive the efficiency of any heat
engine (machine) which is less than zero as a consequence of the
increase of entropy in any spontaneous process.
kell
2007-01-04 03:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
SNIP
I searched his name in google groups, this guy lives at alt.magick
for some semi-interesting reading check out his "extrapolating
polynomials" thread.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.magick/browse_frm/thread/254cedf5cf4dc5a3/05bbf31c0ed2b960?lnk=st&q=author%3ACoreyWhite&rnum=16#05bbf31c0ed2b960
Wasted talent.
Phineas T Puddleduck
2007-01-04 03:16:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by kell
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.magick/browse_frm/thread/254cedf5cf4dc5a3/0
5bbf31c0ed2b960?lnk=st&q=author%3ACoreyWhite&rnum=16#05bbf31c0ed2b960
Yep he also admittedly to trying to use other newsgroups to spam another
alt. group over a stupid argument.
--
This space reserved for Jeff Relf's 5-dimensional metric.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
2007-01-04 11:01:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by kell
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
SNIP
I searched his name in google groups, this guy lives at alt.magick
for some semi-interesting reading check out his "extrapolating
polynomials" thread.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.magick/browse_frm/thread/254cedf5cf4dc5a3/05bbf31c0ed2b960?lnk=st&q=author%3ACoreyWhite&rnum=16#05bbf31c0ed2b960
Wasted talent.
He could go a long way if he started with a good education.
--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com
martin griffith
2007-01-04 14:01:07 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Jan 2007 19:43:27 -0800, in sci.electronics.design "CoreyWhite"
Post by CoreyWhite
So I have been working constantly since 2:00PM EST on my perpetual
motion machine.
"If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is
in disagreement with Maxwell's equations then so much the worse for
Maxwell's equations.

If it is found to be contradicted by observation well, these
experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.

But if your theory is found to be against the second law of
thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to
collapse in deepest humiliation."
(Eddington)


martin
Autymn D. C.
2007-01-04 16:14:43 UTC
Permalink
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
2007-01-05 04:17:44 UTC
Permalink
You've got to drain the entropy condenser periodically or it will back
up and case the machine to seize.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:***@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
All wiyht. Rho sritched mg kegtops awound?
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...