Laws of physics broken as a perpetual motion machine was invented
- Thread starter ChocoFace
- Start date
Afraid to say, but out understanding of dynamics is quite complete.
However, we don't completely understand quantum mechanics (we actually know very little) and it may be possible to extract energy from some yet untheorized media. But any kind of basement tinkerer is definitely not tapping into the frontiers of quantum physics with bicycle hubs and magnets or whatever crap people find magical these days.
and this
http://gadgetopia.com/images/perpetual_motion.jpg
it "looks" like it would work because the extended weights exert a greater torque on the hub than the shortened weights...which is true. But there are always MORE weights on the opposite side (it's plain to see; 7 are on the left side, 4 are on the right, plus one in the middle) so the net torque is always zero. It's an overly complicated flywheel.
However, we don't completely understand quantum mechanics (we actually know very little) and it may be possible to extract energy from some yet untheorized media. But any kind of basement tinkerer is definitely not tapping into the frontiers of quantum physics with bicycle hubs and magnets or whatever crap people find magical these days.
and this
http://gadgetopia.com/images/perpetual_motion.jpg
it "looks" like it would work because the extended weights exert a greater torque on the hub than the shortened weights...which is true. But there are always MORE weights on the opposite side (it's plain to see; 7 are on the left side, 4 are on the right, plus one in the middle) so the net torque is always zero. It's an overly complicated flywheel.
This is a complete load. 1st off, perpetual motion is impossible due to thermodynamics. 2nd off, even if this thing really did produce electricity by using gravity, its not "creating" energy, just generating it by means of converting mechanical energy to electrical energy. 3rd off, this video offers no evidence that its doing anything, since for all we know it could be spinning due to a hidden power source or something. And finally, where's their peer-reviewed research paper and test results backing their claim?
Would people stop saying "the laws of thermodynmics"?bz316 said:
Please?
They're the laws of DYNAMICS, the study physical processes. thermodynamics is specifically the study of the relationship between heat and motion.
It just makes you sound silly.
Haha, I always like that one too. they always seem to forget that alternators are already made from permanent magnets.SomethingAmazing said:
It turned out to be a really big inductor, which stores energy in a magnetic field. It resists change by converting the magnetic field into electrical energy.SomethingAmazing said:
It charges up by converting electrical current into a magnetic field. When you cut the power, the current is no longer inducing a magnetic field within the inductor, and the inductor compensates by inducing a current from the magnetic field (but in the opposite direction from the original current.)
It's not magic, just boring.
There's only one machine that I could accept to create energy,and that's the fusion reactor being worked on.Apparently(although I never read it from a source) the energy output is greater than the total energy injected inside via hydrogen isotopes.
But then again,that baby works both on the perceptable and quantum level of physics,so the Laws might not be broken.
If anyone knows about this and has a source,do share.Those attempts a making obscene amounts of energy are much more interesting than the guy who makes a "super-duper free energy machine"tm
But then again,that baby works both on the perceptable and quantum level of physics,so the Laws might not be broken.
If anyone knows about this and has a source,do share.Those attempts a making obscene amounts of energy are much more interesting than the guy who makes a "super-duper free energy machine"tm
Obviously hydroelectric is real and works, but I wasn't talking about hydroelectric.SomethingAmazing said:
I meant when someone claims to have an engine that runs on burning hydrogen from water (or some silly variation on the idea), when really it takes more energy than it produces. Like these idiots:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9iWaCMbw60
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KVM1UAPCzc
Double idiot points for the news stations giving them the time of day.
To use gravity to move something you have to invest energy (moving it 'up') and the energy invested is always more than that which is produced due to energy losses (No such thing as 100% efficiency, always a loss usually shown as heat). If they claim that more energy goes into the battery than used, (Thin air e.g. 2kWh into battery for 1kWh investment), then we enter the realm of peer-reviewed, repeatable proof needed.lacktheknack said:
Expect chaos. Gravity will cease to function, giant wormholes everywhere, paradoxes, complete damage to everything that ever was, ever is and ever will be...Ekonk said:
Nothing big.
OT:
Fake until proven true. That is my current stance.
Perpetual motion isn't free energy, and no energy is "free" it came from somewhere.
At least pretty much everyone here understands that. I'm glad the reasonable people out-number the ignorant in SOME places of the world.
At least pretty much everyone here understands that. I'm glad the reasonable people out-number the ignorant in SOME places of the world.