Those pesky perpetual motion machines

[mack7963]

So before i explain, let me start out by saying i am not a scientist by any means , I understand the logic of things but not always the mechanics,

I have seen many claims concerning perpetual motion and free energy and have no desire to be pigeon holed as such, so , to be clear this is just an idea i had that seems to make sense logically but the mechanics are unclear.

Based around the principle of the magnet falling down the copper pipe, but using a hollow copper torus for the magnet to fall down should logically generate, as long as its in motion, a repelling magnetic field, if this can be turned into energy, which i believe it can then that energy could be used to power a small motor which could be used to rotate the torus which should generate energy and so on, as far as i understand as long as the magnet is moving over the surface of the copper it will generate a repelling field, now here is what needs to be proven, firstly, can the motion of the copper tube generate enough of a repelling field to repel the magnet away fro the surface, if it cant the idea is dead. Secondly can enough energy be generated to power a small motor if as much friction is removed from the equation, if it can and the first problem is solved then logically you have something that creates its own power. while i realise this is so simple it MUST have been tried i have yet to see anything similar on youtube,  

[Moontanman]

2 minutes ago, mack7963 said:

So before i explain, let me start out by saying i am not a scientist by any means , I understand the logic of things but not always the mechanics,

I have seen many claims concerning perpetual motion and free energy and have no desire to be pigeon holed as such, so , to be clear this is just an idea i had that seems to make sense logically but the mechanics are unclear.

Based around the principle of the magnet falling down the copper pipe, but using a hollow copper torus for the magnet to fall down should logically generate, as long as its in motion, a repelling magnetic field, if this can be turned into energy, which i believe it can then that energy could be used to power a small motor which could be used to rotate the torus which should generate energy and so on, as far as i understand as long as the magnet is moving over the surface of the copper it will generate a repelling field, now here is what needs to be proven, firstly, can the motion of the copper tube generate enough of a repelling field to repel the magnet away fro the surface, if it cant the idea is dead. Secondly can enough energy be generated to power a small motor if as much friction is removed from the equation, if it can and the first problem is solved then logically you have something that creates its own power. while i realise this is so simple it MUST have been tried i have yet to see anything similar on youtube,  

Moving copper and magnets are already used to generate power, see electric motors, the key here is how you move the copper or magnets. I takes an outside power source to do this like a waterfall, or a windmill or a nuclear reactor... Sadly no free lunch here... 

[mack7963]

so moving the copper past the magnet wouldn't repel the magnet upwards?

[John Cuthber]

17 minutes ago, mack7963 said:

 can enough energy be generated to power a small motor

No.

You can't get more  energy out than you put in. The "small" motor " wouldn't produce enough power to drive the torus. 

A big enough motor to do that would need more power than the torus could provide.

 

It's a lost cause.

[mack7963]

i know i know , entropy, thermodynamics etc and you may well be right, but i have to at least see it fail, though correct me if im wrong but if one magnet will induce an electric current as it moves over the copper at its location, wouldn't a secondary magnet induce a separate electrical current at IT'S location there by generating twice as much energy, and if thats true, then 36 magnets would create 36 separate induced electrical currents thus generating 36 times the power of one magnet, i know what your saying and i agree, the nature of the universe is balance, but i don't think this is trying to get out more than you put in.

but like i said i am not a scientist.

[John Cuthber]

36 minutes ago, mack7963 said:

you may well be right,

It has already been proven.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem

37 minutes ago, mack7963 said:

i don't think this is trying to get out more than you put in.

If it is one of "Those pesky perpetual motion machines" then it is.

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, mack7963 said:

i know i know , entropy, thermodynamics etc and you may well be right, but i have to at least see it fail, though correct me if im wrong but if one magnet will induce an electric current as it moves over the copper at its location, wouldn't a secondary magnet induce a separate electrical current at IT'S location there by generating twice as much energy, and if thats true, then 36 magnets would create 36 separate induced electrical currents thus generating 36 times the power of one magnet, i know what your saying and i agree, the nature of the universe is balance, but i don't think this is trying to get out more than you put in.

but like i said i am not a scientist.

...requiring 36 times the input power, plus associated losses etc, to get your 36 times the power...