Let's design a fake Perpetual Motion machine
Bill Beaty
myself reasoning thus: suppose there's a way to power a flywheel by
slowly demagnetizing some permanent magnets. Wipe out the magnets'
stored energy, and inject it as KE into the flywheel. If possible,
this would explain a large number of bizarre PM claims, since every so
often a basement inventor would stumble across the phenomenon. But
as far as I know, nobody has tried to do this intentionally.
OK, what if?
First of all, a pair of repelling magnets placed upon a rotor/stator,
if gradually increasing in magnetization, will experience net
acceleration, and will only stop when the magnets get fully
saturated. During each approach, they decelerate a bit less than they
accelerate during retreat, so the flywheel receives a small kick. But
obviously the magnetization requires an external power supply.
But the other way is interesting: *attracting* magnet-pairs, if slowly
DE-magnetized, will be similarly accelerated. They accelerate while
approaching each other, then decelerate less when retreating, for a
net kick of KE. The net mechanical gain could possibly compensate the
thermal losses of a simple demagnetizer section. I'll assume there's
a few microwatts left over to keep a flywheel slowly turning against
air friction. Very cool if true!!!
It's not hard to demagnetize a small patch on the surface of ceramic
magnet by using a tiny supermagnet. Or, slightly demagnetize an
entire magnet by using a coil to apply a brief pulse. Two
supermagnets, if forced together with alike-poles repelling, will
demagnetize each other. A simple flywheel couldn't do this, since
attracting magnets tend to magnetize each other via "keeper" effect,
which would lead to net braking. The mechanism needs more
complexity. So perhaps combine a flywheel with a pendulum, or a
flywheel with small parts rotating independently. Or perhaps just
place a very tiny supermagnet at the right spot between ceramic
magnets on the rotor & stator? Better yet, let one of the ceramic
magnets spin, that way it will present a random spot of fresh ceramic
for demagnetization.
I think it should be trivial to accomplish this for a few cycles (a
couple seconds acceleration before the effect poops out, like
unwinding a spring.) The real trick would be to juggle things so the
demagnetization is repetitive but very very small, enough where it
could keep a flywheel spinning anomalously for long minutes before the
magnets weakened too much.
If these are feasible, I would suspect that similar fake PM machines
already exist and would have been central to known PM scams. (The
"Searl Device" suspiciously resembles one possible setup, where the
patterns on the large central magnet would be slowly wiped out by the
orbiting ones.) Such an effect could have been repeatedly accidentally
discovered. Imagine owning a spring-powered wheel, but one where the
spring is invisible and takes hours/days to unwind. Pranking
possibilities! Perhaps even risk assassination by oil companies and
the Illuminati! :) In any case, one could go online and start soaking
investors immediately.
amdx
"Bill Beaty" <bi...@eskimo.com> wrote in message
news:13a12f95-f4d4-4b2c...@b36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>I was thinking about all the fringe-science "Magnet Motors" and
>found
> myself reasoning thus: suppose there's a way to power a flywheel
> by
> slowly demagnetizing some permanent magnets. Wipe out the
> magnets'
> stored energy, and inject it as KE into the flywheel. If
> possible,
> this would explain a large number of bizarre PM claims, since
> every so
> often a basement inventor would stumble across the phenomenon.
> But
> as far as I know, nobody has tried to do this intentionally.
I've wanted to build a Dulac pile. They have been used for PM
devices.
http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/emotor/duluc.html
a7yvm1...@netzero.com
property of it.
Of course, limited by its life span.
See: Newton's first.
"Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that
state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. "
Things move forever as long as they're not disturbed.
I guess that means perpetual motion is quite boring.
BarnCat
wrote:
>I was thinking
Too late. The farting assholes in this group beat you to it... except
that their 'motion' is comprised of being perpetually stupid in Usenet.
Damned shame too.
Bill Beaty
> I've wanted to build a Dulac pile. They have been used for PM
> devices.http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/emotor/duluc.html
Those give out nanowatts for centuries, enough for a Franklin Bell.
Perhaps a "Duluc Damp-Pile" would produce the milliwatts needed to
keep an electrostatic motor slowly turning for a few months.
For the metal foil, I notice that Al plus Cu electrochem series gives
2.0V output. But I don't know if the Al oxide layer would be too
much of a problem. If you had a hand-crank embossing roller device,
you could make your own zinc or magnesium foil. Then use silver-leaf
from an art supplier.
(((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb a eskimocom http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Bill Beaty
The net mechanical gain could possibly compensate the thermal losses
of a simple demagnetizer section. I'll assume there's a few
microwatts left over to keep a flywheel slowly turning against air
friction. Very cool if true!!! Aaaaaaaand, if that works, then
perhaps we can build a version resembling a 'parametric
oscillator.' Add a battery! This would resemble a battery-powered
ferrite coil (although a constant-current source would be more
appropriate.) As the whirling supermagnets passed by, the
demagnetization would produce tiny alternating pulses of back-EMF.
Then the battery would re-magnetize the ferrite after a small delay.
That one I'm not so sure about (except as existence-proof from
steorn!) But my earlier one is pretty simple, so probably the only
challenge would be to make it run for hours rather than seconds.
Tim Williams
> For the metal foil, I notice that Al plus Cu electrochem series gives
> 2.0V output. But I don't know if the Al oxide layer would be too
> much of a problem. If you had a hand-crank embossing roller device,
> you could make your own zinc or magnesium foil. Then use silver-leaf
> from an art supplier.
Ah, but that's only if you use Cu(2+) electrolyte, otherwise there's no
copper to reduce and it's an inert electrode.
Aluminum in NaOH makes about 0.8V against hydrogen. If you burn the H2
(maybe with MnO2 as in a dry cell, or with O2 in a fuel cell, making this an
aluminum-air cell) you should get closer to 2V.
Interesting trivia: aluminum is not corroded by copper sulfate. But, add a
grain of NaCl and watch out! Chloride catalyzes the displacement reaction.
Tim
--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
Michael A. Terrell
a7yvm1...@netzero.com wrote:
>
> Perpetual motion is built into the universe, it's a fundamental
> property of it.
> Of course, limited by its life span.
> See: Newton's first.
> "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that
> state of motion unless an external force is applied to it. "
> Things move forever as long as they're not disturbed.
That's why Nymnuts will never leave. He's always 'disturbed'.
--
Lead free solder is Belgium's version of 'Hold my beer and watch this!'
Bill Beaty
] Perpetual motion is built into the universe, it's a fundamental
You're talking about 'perpetual drifting.'
The english word "Perpetual Motion" is actually defined more like
"perpetual work," or "perpetual motion against friction," or
"perpetual acceleration." A solar system or a frictionless flywheel
is *not* an example of a PM device, if we're using the usual meaning
of "PM."
When you build a successful PM machine, everyone knows about it. They
notice the large new crater in your neighborhood where your garage
once stood.
Sam Wormley
The term perpetual motion, taken literally, refers to movement that goes
on forever. However, the term more commonly refers to any device or
system that perpetually (indefinitely) produces more energy than it
consumes, resulting in a net output of energy for indefinite time.
The total momentum-energy of the universe is fixed and constant.
The Great Attractor
wrote:
Yes... fixed at the value of ALL... and NOTHING.
If our "Universe" is a mere "bubble" inside a larger Superverse, then
your claim needs re-evaluation.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Only if shown to be untrue by experiment.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show
Sam Wormley
Maybe not.
Sue...
[...]
Hardly worth the design time. Simply sprinkle some saw dust
and syrup on a real machine 'till it stops working. Then
you will have a fake machine.
Sue...
The Great Attractor
wrote:
In the grand, quantum scheme of things, I guess perhaps not.
Bill Beaty
> Hardly worth the design time.
It's the Randi technique: a good fake can lead many onlookers to think
more critically, and might even cause some of the believers to think
twice.
> Simply sprinkle some saw dust
> and syrup on a real machine 'till it stops working. Then
> you will have a fake machine.
So you didn't like the famous fake PM machines built by David Jones,
"Daedalus," columnist in Nature?
PM Machines as Art
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/art.htm
His were straightforward: battery banks, plus very well hidden
electrical connections. Much cooler would be to intercept ambient RF
from distant AM stations, 60Hz b-fields, or perhaps harness the
thermal IR of warm human passersby. Or build something which turns
for weeks, while slowly destroying a permanent magnet.
((((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( (o) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty Research Engineer
beaty a chem washington edu UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74
billb a eskimo com Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
ph206-762-3818 http://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/
bert
Sam My lastest idea is to marry a wind turbine to large flywheel. Its
machanical energy all the way down TreBert
MooseFET
> On Mar 14, 11:36 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Hardly worth the design time.
>
> It's the Randi technique: a good fake can lead many onlookers to think
> more critically, and might even cause some of the believers to think
> twice.
>
If you split a chunk of wood, you can glue it back together along the
split and the split can be near impossible to detect. The chunk of
wood can be hollowed out so that batteries, electronics and a a coil
can be hidden inside.
Tubing can works as the structure for holding stuff up and as a way
to hide the energy source. It can also work as a way to bring
compressed air to the machine through a hidden pipe.
A table can have a powerful electromagnet hidden under it. If most
of the machine is nonmagnetic the magnetic part that is attracted
by the magnet can be some distance above the table.
The entire room can be on a giant turntable. If all the light
sources and the camera etc are all in motion, a stationary weighted
wheel would appear to be rotating.
You can give an object with low friction a spin with your hand and it
will spin for a few minutes. Reverse the direction of the tape and
then dub in your voice and you have a device that speeds up over time.
If really low amounts of power are needed, the natural changes in air
temperature and pressure can be used as a power source.
Sam Wormley
Put one on your boat, Herb!
Bill Beaty
> Put one on your boat, Herb!
Or on a railroad cart.
Hey, David Jones has a PM machine movie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cf7czii7dH0
Greegor
generators (or DC motors used in that role)
wear down their magnets?
Tim Williams
news:0ef57af7-3070-48b1...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com...
> Is there any math on how fast ""permanent magnet""
> generators (or DC motors used in that role)
> wear down their magnets?
By "stressing" a permanent magnet (i.e., applying opposing magnetization),
you drive its B-H curve slightly backwards. If you push it past the
coercive force Hc, you'll demagnetize it. Fortunately, this takes an awful
lot of magnetization (ca. 1MA/m). For normal operating levels, you only
push the magnet a little way back along the B-H curve. Because it's quite
square, the drop in remanence (field strength) is small, and after an
initial burn-in at full load, it will remain quite the same for the rest of
its operating life.
BarnCat
wrote:
>Is there any math on how fast ""permanent magnet""
>generators (or DC motors used in that role)
>wear down their magnets?
Bwuahahahahahahahahaahahahaha!
What part of the word "permanent" do you not understand?
bert
Sam My Boat is so small.(just a barrel) Still wind was first used and
every motor has a fly wheel. Flywheel can store energy. They are
protential energy and go round and round I like that feature TreBert
JosephKK
How odd, i can't think of an electric motor nor a turbine that has a flywheel.
MooseFET
I have seen more than one electric motor with a flywheel.
(1) On a quite seriously fast punch machine for making the E core
shapes
out of sheet metal, the motor had a flywheel and the mechanical bit
went
bang-bang at about a 10Hz rate cutting the metal.
(2) A little toy electric motor had just one coil and contact and
worked a
little like a 2 stroke gas engine.
bert
>
> - Show quoted text -
You should think a lot more. Rotor of electric motor is very heavy and
acts like its flywheel Same is true for the heavy blades of turbines.
Best read up on diesel electric trains. TreBert
k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
MG sets often have flywheels.
JosephKK
>On Mar 17, 2:41 am, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 12:31:50 -0700 (PDT), bert <herbertglazie...@msn.com> wrote:
>> >On Mar 15, 10:09 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On 3/15/10 8:11 AM, bert wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Mar 14, 12:02 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> The total momentum-energy of the universe is fixed and constant.
>>
>> >> > Sam My lastest idea is to marry a wind turbine to large flywheel. Its
>> >> > machanical energy all the way down TreBert
>>
>> >> Put one on your boat, Herb!
>>
>> >Sam My Boat is so small.(just a barrel) Still wind was first used and
>> >every motor has a fly wheel.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > Flywheel can store energy. They are
>> >protential energy and go round and round I like that feature TreBert
>>
>> How odd, i can't think of an electric motor nor a turbine that has a flywheel.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>You should think a lot more. Rotor of electric motor is very heavy and
>acts like its flywheel Same is true for the heavy blades of turbines.
>Best read up on diesel electric trains. TreBert
Just the same you had made a blanket statement that was easy to punch holes in.
On top of that there are electric motors that do not have iron armatures precisely
to reduce the rotating mass. Also the blades of high speed turbines are very
decidedly not heavy, simply because they would come off at the high rotational
rates (in excess of 100,000 rpm). Care to join the us readers?
Archimedes' Lever
wrote:
>On Mar 17, 2:41 am, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
No turbine on diesel electric train. Piston diesel engine, driving
electric generator, driving electric traction motor. The loading is so
heavy that there is no "flywheel effect" of any of these components that
makes any difference. The diesel engine rpm determines the rest based on
the load. All three sponge into each other and rpm reductions play right
down through the chain immediately without any flywheel effect
whatsoever. Magnetic fields push hard... or not.
Perhaps a water turbine cares not about the mass of its blades, but a
jet engine turbine most certainly cannot have high centrifugal forces or
the blades will explode (fly apart). They are deliberately kept as light
as possible. The entire assembly rotates easily, to be sure, but I would
not attribute a lot of "flywheel effect" or gyroscopic inertia to it,
though it will have far more than ANY train component. It spins at 100k
rpm!