fake power?
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Joined
·
113 Posts
Yep! 
Magnetic perpetual motion machines have been tried since at least medieval times. The pesky laws of thermodynamics get in the way every time.
The laws of thermodynamics in layman's terms;
1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't get out of the game.
Just joined the board, I'll post an intro tomorrow.
Magnetic perpetual motion machines have been tried since at least medieval times. The pesky laws of thermodynamics get in the way every time.
The laws of thermodynamics in layman's terms;
1. You can't win.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't get out of the game.
Just joined the board, I'll post an intro tomorrow.
There used to be a fellow on that claimed he was using ENTROPY (differences in heat) to create a free energy machine.
There is a website that has offered a goodly reward for anyone that will submit their machine for study and be proven that it works.
Nobody has so far.....
It is like the 100 mpg carb that got out of the factory by mistake and the guy that got it was either killed for it....
Or the oil companies bought it and destroyed it.
Chevron did buy the controlling shares of the GM battery used in the EV1 (or so a report put out).
Hmmm...
There is a website that has offered a goodly reward for anyone that will submit their machine for study and be proven that it works.
Nobody has so far.....
It is like the 100 mpg carb that got out of the factory by mistake and the guy that got it was either killed for it....
Or the oil companies bought it and destroyed it.
Chevron did buy the controlling shares of the GM battery used in the EV1 (or so a report put out).
Hmmm...
Joined
·
728 Posts
Many, many individuals, organizations and communities have tried to support the free energy contributors over the years but in every case there is no substantial proof to back up their claims. I'd fully support it if I thought there was some validity to the case but like so many before me have stated, you'd have to find a way around the laws of thermodynamics to have a free energy machine.
99% of free energy "scientists" are exactly the opposite. Most don't understand the scientific method and as a result, often have very incomplete theories and devices to boot. They try to sell you on the idea but if you were to ask for a very simple measurement such as watts in and watts out, they won't do it for you.
The light bulb test in that video really made me laugh. All it proves is that a flywheel with momentum will continue to display potential energy as it slows down. That's not shocking to anyone. A test that would impress me would be the following:
Attach a watt/hour meter to the input side and a separate one on the output side. Run the device up to full speed. Disconnect the device from the input power source. Record the input power used in watt/hours (MUST HAVE BOTH! Just peak watts or something like that is not the full measurement.) Wait until the device stops completely. Record the output power. If output power exceeded input power, you're on to something.
The test described above matters because it has practical application. We generate and use electricity. Amounts of electricity are rated in watt/hours. Your EV doesn't run on some arbitrary amount of volts and amps, the combination of the two make watts and the amount of time it pulls watts is the watt/hour. It only makes sense to rate a device with that measurement.
The funny thing is that these guys refuse to use that metric. They instead rely on irrelevant metrics such as device speed or difficulty of stopping it or peak voltage. None of that makes a car go. Give me a tangible result and I'll preach to the world that you are a genius, otherwise I'm going to ignore it.
That's my 2 cents.
99% of free energy "scientists" are exactly the opposite. Most don't understand the scientific method and as a result, often have very incomplete theories and devices to boot. They try to sell you on the idea but if you were to ask for a very simple measurement such as watts in and watts out, they won't do it for you.
The light bulb test in that video really made me laugh. All it proves is that a flywheel with momentum will continue to display potential energy as it slows down. That's not shocking to anyone. A test that would impress me would be the following:
Attach a watt/hour meter to the input side and a separate one on the output side. Run the device up to full speed. Disconnect the device from the input power source. Record the input power used in watt/hours (MUST HAVE BOTH! Just peak watts or something like that is not the full measurement.) Wait until the device stops completely. Record the output power. If output power exceeded input power, you're on to something.
The test described above matters because it has practical application. We generate and use electricity. Amounts of electricity are rated in watt/hours. Your EV doesn't run on some arbitrary amount of volts and amps, the combination of the two make watts and the amount of time it pulls watts is the watt/hour. It only makes sense to rate a device with that measurement.
The funny thing is that these guys refuse to use that metric. They instead rely on irrelevant metrics such as device speed or difficulty of stopping it or peak voltage. None of that makes a car go. Give me a tangible result and I'll preach to the world that you are a genius, otherwise I'm going to ignore it.
That's my 2 cents.
Joined
·
5,007 Posts
This looks like a scam to me, I have seen many examples of "magnet motors", but as others have said, none of them stand up to scrutiny, or as I call it, the laws of physics. Anyone heard of the grey motor? its the same idea, a perpetial motor machine that isn't. Although he called it "over-unity".
GM did sell their controlling share (60% ownership I think) of the ovonics NiMh battery patent to texaco though, who in turn sued toyota for trying to use their own improved (reliable) version in their own cars (thus killing the rav4-EV), thats when the "hybrid synergy drive" marketing campain began. Toyota was not legally allowed to use battery packs large enough to deploy an effective electric car, so we got the prius instead.
But this did give the motivation for others to focus on lithium batteries (many different versions by now) instead of heavier nickel or even lead based, so in the long run, I think cheveron/texaco did more harn than good to themselves.
GM did sell their controlling share (60% ownership I think) of the ovonics NiMh battery patent to texaco though, who in turn sued toyota for trying to use their own improved (reliable) version in their own cars (thus killing the rav4-EV), thats when the "hybrid synergy drive" marketing campain began. Toyota was not legally allowed to use battery packs large enough to deploy an effective electric car, so we got the prius instead
.But this did give the motivation for others to focus on lithium batteries (many different versions by now) instead of heavier nickel or even lead based, so in the long run, I think cheveron/texaco did more harn than good to themselves.
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
