the-Unexpected-Soul Posted December 18, 2013 #1 Share Posted December 18, 2013 this two seem legit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted December 18, 2013 #2 Share Posted December 18, 2013 1)Video editing. 2)Spring will be sprung. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the-Unexpected-Soul Posted December 18, 2013 Author #3 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Theoretically, the first one should work as long as the gravity on one side beat the friction on the other side, it work on my mind 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rlyeh Posted December 18, 2013 #4 Share Posted December 18, 2013 (edited) The uploader makes imitation perpetual motion machines, that is how they would work if they did work, he was even a member on these forums. "Please, be advised: I'm not a PMM inventor. Models were built to illustrate how these machines were supposed to work in the minds of Inventors." http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=255119 Edited December 18, 2013 by Rlyeh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the-Unexpected-Soul Posted December 18, 2013 Author #5 Share Posted December 18, 2013 so all his videos are fake, but any how he got some good ideas, i'm thinking that if we combine many technics into one machine, it might actually work efficiently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted December 18, 2013 #6 Share Posted December 18, 2013 i'm thinking that if we combine many technics into one machine, it might actually work efficiently No, because my definition perpetual motion machines can't exist. Do some proper research that doesn't involve youtube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted December 18, 2013 #7 Share Posted December 18, 2013 "by", not "my" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted December 19, 2013 #8 Share Posted December 19, 2013 The first one will eventually slow down and stop. It appears to gain energy by the dropping, but every time the sliders slide, and every time the wheels hit the little wall, energy is lost to friction. Eventually it will stop. The second one if anything would run down even quicker. The spring only has so much energy in it. The fellow demonstrating must be moving his hand very slowly back, otherwise the spring tensioned wheel would not turn at all, and thus the larger wheel would not turn at all. He even pulls the spring loaded piece away and resets it to continue the demonstration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted December 19, 2013 #9 Share Posted December 19, 2013 (edited) "by", not "my" By-the-by, my my. "Rock and roll will never die." Sorry, a small (completely arbitrary and slightly loopy) diversion from the topic. The only possible perpetual motion machine is a zero-sum system, and the only zero-sum system that I know of is the universe. Edited December 19, 2013 by Leonardo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafterman Posted December 19, 2013 #10 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickian Posted December 19, 2013 #11 Share Posted December 19, 2013 As long as friction exists, there is no such thing as perpetuation motion. Even in a vacuum, energy will be long along the joints of any object in motion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted December 29, 2013 #12 Share Posted December 29, 2013 Perhaps the Definition of Perpetual Motion could do with a bit of an overhaul to include 100% efficiency (which is theoretically possible)? Just IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted December 30, 2013 #13 Share Posted December 30, 2013 I'd think that perpetual motion would be possible in a gravity free, vacuum environment, with frictionless components and with no net energy input or output. Putting any load on the system, possibly including just observing the system, could potentially cause the system to wind down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penny_075 Posted May 5, 2015 #14 Share Posted May 5, 2015 What's up guys new to the forum. I believe perpetual motion is possible but I don't think its possible under its current definition, it needs to be redefined to include outside power sources like gravity and buoyancy. I think I have figured out how to build a perpetually moving machine you can take a look at the concept here https://youtu.be/hKv22_PRevQ it uses two water surfaces a lower and upper one to overcome or negate the negative properties of gravity and buoyancy. IE putting a buoyant object under water takes work and moving an object up against the force of gravity also takes work these forces. I believe its possible to rule these forces out or negated them by simply submerging a empty cup under water creating a lower and upper surface. The ideal is to drop a buoyant object inside the cup where it can take full advantage of the lower surface if the buoyant object falls from a high enough height inside the submerged cup and its trajectory is changed it should have enough momentum to break the lower water surface and float up to the top of the cup to the outer upper surface giving that object back the potential energy it lost during its decent. This liner motion or rising and falling motion is an example of potential energy being loss through the fall and regained again through its rise in the water. no laws of physics being broken here the buoyant objects seen in the video are not attached physically so they act as renewing fuel sources and since they are not attached to the machine friction is negotiable. Let me know what you guys think. using gravity and buoyancy to do work or to negate their zero net gains = transference of power from both sources with a positive net gain 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted May 5, 2015 #15 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Maybe if you perpetual believers would like to get one going first, and then show it to: 1. A competent scientist 2. A competent illusionist we could save a little time? (But yes, in a theoretical perfect vacuum, an object in motion will indeed perpetually keep moving (until it hits sumpin..). But that isn't really what is being claimed here is it..? I'm afraid that word salads, lack of knowledge of basic physics, and addition of many new (and all equally unsound) ways to somehow defeat some pretty basic laws, is just a waste of time. And I reckon I could offer a pretty sound argument that if you did somehow create energy out of absolutely nothing, then the multiplying effect would then effectively destroy the entire universe. Now come on guys and gals, you don't want that now do you? I for one would not be happy and would be off to see my lawyer.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penny_075 Posted May 5, 2015 #16 Share Posted May 5, 2015 atoms are perpetual in nature that is if unimpeded the electrons will move around an atom forever. I don't think its a mater if perpetual motion is possible. I think the real question is why we are defining it using terms and conditions set by people who believed in leaches as sound medicine. I'm just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted May 5, 2015 #17 Share Posted May 5, 2015 What's up guys new to the forum. I believe perpetual motion is possible but I don't think its possible under its current definition, it needs to be redefined to include outside power sources like gravity and buoyancy. I think I have figured out how to build a perpetually moving machine you can take a look at the concept here https://youtu.be/hKv22_PRevQ it uses two water surfaces a lower and upper one to overcome or negate the negative properties of gravity and buoyancy. IE putting a buoyant object under water takes work and moving an object up against the force of gravity also takes work these forces. I believe its possible to rule these forces out or negated them by simply submerging a empty cup under water creating a lower and upper surface. The ideal is to drop a buoyant object inside the cup where it can take full advantage of the lower surface if the buoyant object falls from a high enough height inside the submerged cup and its trajectory is changed it should have enough momentum to break the lower water surface and float up to the top of the cup to the outer upper surface giving that object back the potential energy it lost during its decent. This liner motion or rising and falling motion is an example of potential energy being loss through the fall and regained again through its rise in the water. no laws of physics being broken here the buoyant objects seen in the video are not attached physically so they act as renewing fuel sources and since they are not attached to the machine friction is negotiable. Let me know what you guys think. using gravity and buoyancy to do work or to negate their zero net gains = transference of power from both sources with a positive net gain From the linked video. Die Checker 1 second agoIt is an interesting idea, but I think you'd have to show that the distance the object falls can generate enough energy to move the secondary ball and doors, and pressurize the secondary tube, and still have enough distance to get up to speed to get around the bend under the water. The longer the tubes, which allow for more speed, the higher the pressure has to be. The higher the pressure, then the longer the ball has to press down on the trapdoor, and the less distance you have to fall. :-) It is an interesting idea, but until a real working model is created it is all just theoretical. There is no hard numbers to show any generation of energy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted May 5, 2015 #18 Share Posted May 5, 2015 Guys, tone it down with the new members, will you? Welcome aboard Penny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted May 6, 2015 #19 Share Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) What??? I thought I was being nice.... Edited May 6, 2015 by DieChecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted May 6, 2015 #20 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Not you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted May 6, 2015 #21 Share Posted May 6, 2015 and water wheel is basically free energy, and it will spin as long as water flows, so as far as practical meaning it is a PMM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted May 6, 2015 #22 Share Posted May 6, 2015 I think the real question is why we are defining it using terms and conditions set by people who believed in leaches as sound medicine. I'm just saying Ahem? Leeches are being used currently, and very effectively... Maggotts, too. If there is some specific thing that you believe is being wrongly put forth, eg the laws of thermodynamics, then I'm happy to listen. It *is* possible to analyse these machines, given enough time and assuming they are not redonculously complex - but surely the first stage is to show one that works, demonstrably and having been properly tested and verified by a credible person or three. Actually the first stage would be to show the design in detail and offer it for analysis, and then test to see if it behaves as per the analysis. As it stands, we have many hundreds of years over which the laws of thermodynamics have been tested to an unbelievable level of precision, so they currently are 'accepted', mainstream, almost proven, even! And it is those pretty-well-proven laws that preclude this. By this, I don't mean perpetual motion as a concept (some things already mentioned can be thought of as having that attribute), but machines that (without cheating) provide it with no input of energy.. There is nothing wrong with pursuing a machine that *does* cheat and uses energy from outside to drive itself beyond forever - be that from the earth's rotation, sunlight, a waterfall.. or perhaps even from quantum fluctuations in a vacuum!!! (now we're talkin' - cool sounding words ..) . But we sorta already know how to do most of that... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emma_Acid Posted May 6, 2015 #23 Share Posted May 6, 2015 and water wheel is basically free energy, and it will spin as long as water flows, so as far as practical meaning it is a PMM. What? A free energy machine is one that doesn't need any input. A water wheel needs the kinetic energy from, er, water, and loses the energy through heat and sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aztek Posted May 6, 2015 #24 Share Posted May 6, 2015 What? A free energy machine is one that doesn't need any input. who cares what your defenition says, if a machine makes me energy and costs me nothing, it is a free energy machine, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acute Posted May 6, 2015 #25 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Perpetual motion can never exist where there is friction and/or air resistance. It is interesting stuff, though, to see how close we can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now