VIDEO: Evolution of Perpetual Motion, WORKING Free Energy Generator [?]

QuantumLogic said:
Well, one source of input energy that could be used is RF. When you have an antenna on a tower for a transceiver, you have to be VERY careful disconnecting the antenna from the radio. There is an enormous charge residing in the antenna/cable assembly- enough that it can kill you. I've actually been curious to see exactly how much amperage and voltage can be measured, but considering the risk, I have not tried it yet. Even if it didn't kill me, RF burns hurt :curse:

Good point. I remember reading that Leedskalnin of Coral Castle fame had his Castle by high voltage lines and that he may have been tapping into their immense energy to move rocks etc.
 
Voltage without current does not have power. A significant charge can build up on objects isolated from ground over time (like your radio antenna), but if you tap into it you find the voltage drops because the ability to conduct current from the air is low. I imagine a greater surface area and volume, such as a large mesh ball on a tower would work better. Furthermore, a long vertical conductive structure will short circuit the charge in the atmosphere that exists along it's length. So you would want the tower to be insulated all the way up to just below the "collector".

One interesting way to expand the collector volume and surface area would be to reuse some of the energy in a circuit that would emit plasma (not necessarily visible) around the collector, making the surrounding air itself more conductive (or perhaps making a burst of plasma regularly to collect the energy in the nearby atmosphere, although this could cause radio problems). I suspect a lot of "sparky" energy gathering devices were based on this idea.
 
Divide By Zero said:
QuantumLogic said:
Well, one source of input energy that could be used is RF. When you have an antenna on a tower for a transceiver, you have to be VERY careful disconnecting the antenna from the radio. There is an enormous charge residing in the antenna/cable assembly- enough that it can kill you. I've actually been curious to see exactly how much amperage and voltage can be measured, but considering the risk, I have not tried it yet. Even if it didn't kill me, RF burns hurt :curse:

Good point. I remember reading that Leedskalnin of Coral Castle fame had his Castle by high voltage lines and that he may have been tapping into their immense energy to move rocks etc.

monotonic said:
Voltage without current does not have power. A significant charge can build up on objects isolated from ground over time (like your radio antenna), but if you tap into it you find the voltage drops because the ability to conduct current from the air is low. I imagine a greater surface area and volume, such as a large mesh ball on a tower would work better. Furthermore, a long vertical conductive structure will short circuit the charge in the atmosphere that exists along it's length. So you would want the tower to be insulated all the way up to just below the "collector".

One interesting way to expand the collector volume and surface area would be to reuse some of the energy in a circuit that would emit plasma (not necessarily visible) around the collector, making the surrounding air itself more conductive (or perhaps making a burst of plasma regularly to collect the energy in the nearby atmosphere, although this could cause radio problems). I suspect a lot of "sparky" energy gathering devices were based on this idea.

trendsetter37 said:
Charging batteries through wifi emanations

_http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/180936-researchers-develop-wifi-for-power-that-works-up-to-15-feet-away

For the record I would never dream of using wifi like that for health reasons BUT it should get your imaginative juices flowing. Wifi is not the only frequencies out there by a long shot but the question is how to couple with and or tap what is already out there.

Along the lines of all of these, my thinking has been this: What if you could shield your house from EMF in such a way that the EMF was converted into current and fed into your house power? I would think that's possible, although you'd have to ask someone else how much power you might get from it. If you were living in a high-EMF area maybe you could get quite a bit, plus having shielding might be important to your survival. In that case, though, moving would usually be ideal, I'd say.
 
There is not enough RF energy in the air to power even small devices. You can think about it this way. Radio waves from the open air are never powerful enough to generate observable heat in anything, except perhaps very close to the transmitter. Heat is directly related to power. If there was enough RF energy in the air to do much significant, we would have problems with certain shapes of objects bursting into flames or generating sparks depending on how they were placed. A very chaotic and dangerous way to live. One exception to this of course is lightning bolts, but these are not radio waves as we typically think of them.

To gather a useful amount of energy from the air, it would probably be more useful to make a large array of collectors, prepared for lightning and electrical storms. If all the collectors were generating their own plasma, over a wide enough area, perhaps a lightning bolt would take advantage of this and spread out among all the collectors rather than hitting just one and being wasted. Perhaps the collective effect could actually prevent a lightning bolt from occurring because it would drain the charge preemptively.
 
monotonic said:
There is not enough RF energy in the air to power even small devices. You can think about it this way. Radio waves from the open air are never powerful enough to generate observable heat in anything, except perhaps very close to the transmitter.
Yep, in fact the received power decreases with the cube (3rd power) of the distance between transmitter and receiver (a few other factors come into play, but that cube is the biggest "spoiler").
A practical example of RF power transfer are the "wireless chargers" or "charging mats" now commonplace. But the transmitting and receiving coils are relatively large, spaced a few millimeters apart, so the situation is more akin to a transformer than eg a Wi-Fi setup.
.A
 
Try reading Tesla's manuscripts "The man who invented the 21st century". A sad story of greed and lost of a great mind. The section on Tesla's electric car is very intriguing. He used a series of vacuum tubes in this special box that he could remove from the car's boot that was connected to a large areal on the back. A very long time since I read it.
Now as to the talk of magnets depleting or becoming demagnetized...... I have never seen a "used-up" magnet. Some of Pierre's work in book 3 comes to mind with spiralling current flows.
Wouldn't it be classed as "doing work" if the magnets in this configuration are over coming gravity and friction from the bearings?? To generate power [conventionally] you have to run a magnetic field at 90* to a copper wire/windings. This produces it's own field, making more friction/drag which takes from the original force of the spinning magnets. Unless....this is not the only way to generate. Hmmmmm
 
It's an interesting little machine. It seems plausible that it will stop once the magnets are demagnetized; and the total rotational work could be equal to the work spent to magnetize the magnets. But the machine demonstrates that one can get stable rotation from static magnets only. Now, the next step would be to find magnets that don't decay. What about earth's magnetic field?
 
The mystery of magnets "storing" power is the myth. They put out a magnetic field. It's like a spring that can be stretched or compressed, that does the work. In terms of magnets, like in this invention, the movement of the magnet is akin to stretching and letting go of a spring.

That is how magnets do work in a motor, as electromagnets, using electricity at 50Hz for example, the magnet is flipping poles 120 times a second. That timing is what turns the motor X rpm speed, and the energy used by the magnets is directly related to how much force the motor is pushing out at that speed (syncronous speed).

The wheel turns on and on because it's almost a net zero. It doesn't matter whether he spun it without the magnets or not, it will most likely spin the same time. That's the problem I have with these devices.... the creators are not testing them properly but giving us a "cool looking" demonstration.
 
Divide By Zero said:
The wheel turns on and on because it's almost a net zero. It doesn't matter whether he spun it without the magnets or not, it will most likely spin the same time.

If you pay attention at 2:50, the device actually accelerates of it's own accord. If it was simply running on "net zero", it would start with the initial velocity and then slowly decrease in speed.

Magnetics fields don't behave just like springs. There is hysteresis, remnance, eddy currents and many different aspects of magnetic behavior.
 
Divide By Zero said:
The mystery of magnets "storing" power is the myth. They put out a magnetic field. It's like a spring that can be stretched or compressed, that does the work. In terms of magnets, like in this invention, the movement of the magnet is akin to stretching and letting go of a spring.
The idea that magnets contain some "power source" powering their effect doesn't seem supported, and I would say is a myth, but a piece of ferromagnetic material might have a particular structure that the magnetic moments like to take within its crystalline structure, and magnetizing it might force those moments to take a higher energy orientation (one with local magnetic "conflicts", but kept stable by other forces). So work has been performed to force magnetic moments into a higher energy state, storing energy. If the structure was aggravated in a way that allowed the magnetic moments to overcome these forces and "snap" into a more preferred position, such energy could be released. Is this what you were referring to here?:

Divide By Zero said:
Magnets can store some energy, but like a capacitor, it is very small compared to the battery or other chemical source.'
A battery with a loop of wire (coil) can make a very strong magnet for some time until it is depleted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferromagnetism#Magnetized_materials said:
Magnetized materials

Thus, a piece of iron in its lowest energy state ("unmagnetized") generally has little or no net magnetic field. However, if it is placed in a strong enough external magnetic field, the domain walls will move, reorienting the domains so more of the dipoles are aligned with the external field. The domains will remain aligned when the external field is removed, creating a magnetic field of their own extending into the space around the material, thus creating a "permanent" magnet. The domains do not go back to their original minimum energy configuration when the field is removed because the domain walls tend to become 'pinned' or 'snagged' on defects in the crystal lattice, preserving their parallel orientation. This is shown by the Barkhausen effect: as the magnetizing field is changed, the magnetization changes in thousands of tiny discontinuous jumps as the domain walls suddenly "snap" past defects.

The Wikipedia quote in my other post claims, "If all the dipoles in a piece of ferromagnetic material are aligned parallel, it creates a large magnetic field extending into the space around it. This contains a lot of magnetostatic energy." Is the energy the article is calling "a lot" the same as the the energy you are referring to as "very small compared to the battery or other chemical source"? It certainly wouldn't surprise me if the amount of energy is too small to be very concerned with for powering things, yet I find it curious that this isn't more well known, if it is true.
 
HowToBe said:
The idea that magnets contain some "power source" powering their effect doesn't seem supported, and I would say is a myth, but a piece of ferromagnetic material might have a particular structure that the magnetic moments like to take within its crystalline structure, and magnetizing it might force those moments to take a higher energy orientation (one with local magnetic "conflicts", but kept stable by other forces). So work has been performed to force magnetic moments into a higher energy state, storing energy. If the structure was aggravated in a way that allowed the magnetic moments to overcome these forces and "snap" into a more preferred position, such energy could be released. Is this what you were referring to here?:

Divide By Zero said:
Magnets can store some energy, but like a capacitor, it is very small compared to the battery or other chemical source.'
A battery with a loop of wire (coil) can make a very strong magnet for some time until it is depleted.

It takes X energy to create a magnetic field. The magnetic field doesn't do any work, that's why it is called static. It's like a string holding up a weight, or a spring stretched or compressed. It's potential energy. What does the work in motors/etc is the changing magnetic field, which is a constant shifting of the magnetic flux back and forth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferromagnetism#Magnetized_materials said:
Magnetized materials

Thus, a piece of iron in its lowest energy state ("unmagnetized") generally has little or no net magnetic field. However, if it is placed in a strong enough external magnetic field, the domain walls will move, reorienting the domains so more of the dipoles are aligned with the external field. The domains will remain aligned when the external field is removed, creating a magnetic field of their own extending into the space around the material, thus creating a "permanent" magnet. The domains do not go back to their original minimum energy configuration when the field is removed because the domain walls tend to become 'pinned' or 'snagged' on defects in the crystal lattice, preserving their parallel orientation. This is shown by the Barkhausen effect: as the magnetizing field is changed, the magnetization changes in thousands of tiny discontinuous jumps as the domain walls suddenly "snap" past defects.

The Wikipedia quote in my other post claims, "If all the dipoles in a piece of ferromagnetic material are aligned parallel, it creates a large magnetic field extending into the space around it. This contains a lot of magnetostatic energy." Is the energy the article is calling "a lot" the same as the the energy you are referring to as "very small compared to the battery or other chemical source"? It certainly wouldn't surprise me if the amount of energy is too small to be very concerned with for powering things, yet I find it curious that this isn't more well known, if it is true.

Yep, static is the key word. You can find very powerful magnets, but those themselves are not doing any work. A magnetic field is like gravity or electric(static charges), a potential. You feel the force magnets push or pull, but as soon as they repel or come together, that potential energy is used up. To get that back, it takes energy to bring them together or separate them. No free lunch as the C's say.


The real mystery which I am not too keen on (as there is not much real info) revolve around the stories I hear of Tesla and him "harnessing power". From what I understood, he was using a tower to transmit power from a generating source and receiving it at a long distance wirelessly. The harnessing power from other sources is still mired in mythology (or so I feel- because what electromagnetic force is he tapping into besides his transmitter?)
The reason why Tesla didn't get acceptance is if generated power is transmitted in the air, what prevents anyone from tapping into it? It's like broadcasting a pay TV station over antenna without being able to stop non subscribers from seeing the station.

I can't use the "PTB destroyed everything" as my logic to say that he did tap into something. An analogy would be those pro-ET abductees that were told that the earth PTB are hiding UFO's because they don't want humanity helped. Well the same argument can go both ways, and there are no actual testable facts!
 
Divide By Zero said:
The flashlight is interesting, but this technology has been out for a long time. Peltier plates work in both ways, they can take electricity and create a cold side and hot side. They can also use a temperature differential to create electricity.

However, a LED bulb takes very little power, like that "perpetual" machine spinning and doing almost no work (besides miniscule friction).

Sometimes these things look amazing, but the science behind them are not revolutionary.

Now if the machine or flashlight could power a car or heat up a home, then I would be wondering how it worked and where it was getting its energy from!

I have a fan placed on my wood burning stove (pics below) that I think works the same way (temperature differential creating an electrical current?). It actually worked very well and it didn't take much heat before the fan started to spin. It's made by a Canadian company called "Ecofan".

Unfortunately, it no longer works because I placed the back of it too close to the chimney flue and it melted the wiring and probably overheated the small electric motor. :(
 

Attachments

  • photo 2.JPG
    photo 2.JPG
    87.3 KB · Views: 42
  • photo 1.JPG
    photo 1.JPG
    88.6 KB · Views: 41
That's a neat device. It appears to draw heat through a Peltier chip with a heatsink in order to power the motor. The motor should probably have had more air flow around it by design, and be on the other side of the Peltier chip. That is assuming overheating was actually the problem in the first place. It would be interesting to test it and find out exactly what went wrong, maybe even fix it.
 
monotonic said:
That's a neat device. It appears to draw heat through a Peltier chip with a heatsink in order to power the motor. The motor should probably have had more air flow around it by design, and be on the other side of the Peltier chip. That is assuming overheating was actually the problem in the first place. It would be interesting to test it and find out exactly what went wrong, maybe even fix it.

Yes, I thought it was a neat device also. What actually happened is that the motor seems to have seized. I can hardly turn the fan on it's shaft because its so stiff, and so I'm only assuming that it overheated.

I was thinking of taking it apart to see what the problem is, but I might just see if I can return and exchange it for a new one first. If it happens again, then I'll probably look into it.
 
There is probably nothing wrong with the electrical parts. The plastic back could have warped, skewing the rear bearing and causing it to seize. Or the bearings simply need oiled due to heat rapidly degrading the previous oil. With some motors you can realign the bearings by tapping the spindle sideways with a hammer or tapping the side of the motor housing. Drop it on the floor? Depending on the voltage output of the Peltier plate, you may be able to use another hobby motor.
 
Back
Top Bottom