Science Forums: Possible perpetual motion idea for electrical energy - Science Forums

Jump to content

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net!

Welcome to ScienceForums.Net! We welcome science discussion at all levels — from beginners to researchers, covering topics from biology to computer science, and much more. Registration is fast and free, and allows you to post on the forums, so register now and join the discussions!
  
After you've registered, come in and introduce yourself, or visit the forum index. If you need any help  registering, posting, or if you just have some questions about our site, please feel free to contact us at staff at scienceforums dot net.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Create a ScienceForums.Net Blog!
Guest Message © 2012 DevFuse
  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Possible perpetual motion idea for electrical energy Rate Topic: **--- 2 Votes

#1 16 May 2010 - 07:13 PM Altair66 


Lepton
Now im sure some of you have seen these magnetic electrical generators claiming to produce electrical energy non stop, and i know that these machines generally do not exist PERPETUALLY... Here is my question

If I were to test magnetism in a vacuum on the earth, would the magnetic properties be affected?

ive looked online and cant seem to find any practical data or an experiment which has been produced
0

#2 16 May 2010 - 10:11 PM User is online  swansont 


Icon
Shaken, not Stirred
It would be affected by whatever change in magnetic permeability exists between air and vacuum. Which is not much.
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum

Stop failing the Turing test!

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

To release the hounds, click the [+] sign ->
0

#3 17 May 2010 - 12:02 AM Altair66 


Lepton
thanks alot im going to be testing out my expirement next week, to see if i can produce a generator architecture that will be able to run itself and produce energy
0

#4 17 May 2010 - 10:18 AM User is online  swansont 


Icon
Shaken, not Stirred
I predict that the answer will be "no," even without the benefit of inspecting the device in question.
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum

Stop failing the Turing test!

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

To release the hounds, click the [+] sign ->
0

#5 17 May 2010 - 12:48 PM Mr Skeptic 


Icon
iDon't-Believe-You
The Second Law of Thermodynamics says it won't work. I've always found it to be the case, however, that other laws of physics also say such things won't work.
Our voting system is broken! It nearly guarantees that we will have only two political parties that have any chance of winning, and that they will be very similar.
0

#6 18 May 2010 - 03:29 AM User is online  ydoaPs 


just lost the game
How do you plan on overcoming I2R losses and friction?
"Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have. It is the very last inch of us. But within that inch we are free."-Valerie(V for Vendetta)

‎"Scientism" is the pejorative those who believe in magic give to Empiricism so they can pretend making stuff up is on equal footing with Science.

Don't forget to follow me on facebook.
If you like my post, please show me by clicking the green plus ------->
0

#7 19 May 2010 - 03:54 AM 1bobwhite 


Quark
Altair66 ,

Try Googling "Methernitha", and see if any of the information interests you.

Although perpetual motion machines are unknown and theoretically impossible, there exists on the earth many possible sources of energy that have not been adequately explored to be developed as power sources. Most of our more easily derived power comes from the sun in different forms other than light. Some of this power may be within our reach of budget and understanding for its development.

One cheating way to get some "perpetual power" is to construct a radio reception circuit that will tune into a local transmitting tower, and when Qd up, this signal is then rectified to DC to give a few watts of power continuously. Construction plans for these have been around for some time.

I've successfully constructed electrostatic motors that would turn about 1500 rpm. My next step is to try to extract naturally occurring static sources and tie them into the motor circuit. The static is there, but so far I haven't succeeded. No, I'm not using the cat, mainly because she won't cooperate anyway.

This post has been edited by 1bobwhite: 19 May 2010 - 03:56 AM
Reason for edit: missed a word

1

#8 26 September 2010 - 08:14 PM Duelix 


Quark
I think you are trying to produce energy from latent things- IE, radio waves, or static electricity.

Light is latent energy, and it is sufficiently concentrated.

There could be some huge source we don't know about, but I doubt it.
0

#9 19 May 2011 - 02:34 PM Brainteaserfan 


Atom

View PostDuelix, on 26 September 2010 - 08:14 PM, said:

I think you are trying to produce energy from latent things- IE, radio waves, or static electricity.

Light is latent energy, and it is sufficiently concentrated.

There could be some huge source we don't know about, but I doubt it.


Any light that we use here on earth is less that hits the earth to help things grow or whatever else. I've always thought that it would be nice to harness the power of waves. There is a lot of power there. Something like a funnel floating like a floating dock, halfway submerged though, with a fan/screw, in the skinny part. The big part would have to be able to adjust it's size so that if there were big waves, the funnel would be smaller so that less of the wave was harnessed and vice versa. Also, that would need to be placed where the bottom of the body of water was rising so that the waves would all be moving in one direction.
0

#10 19 May 2011 - 03:15 PM Leader Bee 


Baryon
Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?
0

#11 19 May 2011 - 04:47 PM TonyMcC 


Quark

View PostLeader Bee, on 19 May 2011 - 03:15 PM, said:

Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?

I'm sure there are not. There are always "losses" that have to be provided for that eventually stop the motion. In the stirling engine, for example, you will have friction and also heat given off.

0

#12 1 June 2011 - 03:39 AM triskaidekaphile 


Quark
from what i understand, based on the definition of a perpetual motion machine as being ' a machine or device that powers itself and/or can produce extra power' or creates energy, based on this definition, i would say that it's impossible, however, i think you can make something that looks like a perpetual motion machine, maybe you can make something like it using magnets, but i maintain that the energy is coming from somewhere or some source, i daren't say that those magnetic motors don't work, but frauds are common.


0

#13 1 June 2011 - 04:50 AM lemur 


Primate

View PostLeader Bee, on 19 May 2011 - 03:15 PM, said:

Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?

Wouldn't a satellite in orbit be in perpetual motion without friction to remove energy from its motion? Idk if you could say that orbital motion is absolutely 'perpetual' but I think it's the closest empirical example.
0

#14 1 June 2011 - 09:34 AM User is online  swansont 


Icon
Shaken, not Stirred
Satellites have losses and orbits decay.
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum

Stop failing the Turing test!

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea

To release the hounds, click the [+] sign ->
0

#15 1 June 2011 - 09:42 AM Fuzzwood 


Formerly known as Fswd
Carnot cycle, enough said.
0

#16 2 June 2011 - 06:20 PM Dekan 


Atom
Isn't perpetual motion exhibited by the electron in a hydrogen atom.

At the centre of the atom, rests the proton. And around this placid proton, the busy electron orbits eternally.

Does the electron's orbit ever decay? Does its charge ever diminish?

No sir - it is in perpetual motion. And generating an endless supply of electricity to boot.

Who can deny these facts?
Science is an innate attitude of mind. You either have it, or you don't. If you grew up as a kid who liked telescopes, microscopes, and chemistry sets, you have it.
0

#17 2 June 2011 - 10:05 PM A Tripolation 


Atom

View PostDekan, on 2 June 2011 - 06:20 PM, said:

Does the electron's orbit ever decay? Does its charge ever diminish?


Electrons do not orbit in the sense that you are describing.
Why, Mr. Anderson, why? Why? Why do you do it? Why? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you’re fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know?
Is it freedom or truth? Perhaps peace? Could it be for love? Illusions Mr. Anderson, vagaries of perception. Temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose.
0

#18 2 June 2011 - 11:43 PM Brainteaserfan 


Atom

View PostA Tripolation, on 2 June 2011 - 10:05 PM, said:

Electrons do not orbit in the sense that you are describing.


Source?
0

#19 3 June 2011 - 01:19 AM User is online  mississippichem 


Icon
fluorescent protein

View PostBrainteaserfan, on 2 June 2011 - 11:43 PM, said:

Source?


All of quantum mechanics and pretty much every bit of physics since then.
You've come a long way. Remember back when we defined what a velocity meant? Now we are talking about an antisymmetric tensor of second rank in four dimensions.

-Feynman Lectures on Physics II
1

#20 3 June 2011 - 01:29 AM A Tripolation 


Atom

View Postmississippichem, on 3 June 2011 - 01:19 AM, said:

All of quantum mechanics and pretty much every bit of physics since then.


Precisely. It's not a system that resembles planets orbiting a star. That's been outdated for some time.
Why, Mr. Anderson, why? Why? Why do you do it? Why? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you’re fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know?
Is it freedom or truth? Perhaps peace? Could it be for love? Illusions Mr. Anderson, vagaries of perception. Temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users