Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Why haven't permanent magnet motors been commercialized?

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Dustin

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 11:24:50 AM9/18/05
to
I've been doing a lot of research on permanent magnet motors (PMM)
lately. I've seen a dozen or so designs which people have claimed to
have working versions of, and even videos demonstrating their
operation. I've also reviewed a number of patents which claim to work,
and I can definitely conceive how a PMM is possible. (But I've also
run across a fair share of articles claiming fraud against those who
claim to have designed a PMM.)

If so many people have built a PMM, then why hasn't this technology
been commercialized and put into production? If the claims are true,
this is a concept that could literally change the world for the better.

And even if someone creates a PMM which uses a small amount of
electricity to get it going or during operation, so what!? I would
rather buy a small battery every six months or so as opposed to the
cost of gasoline - not to mention the environmental benefits. And on
that note, even if the magnets get demagnetized after N months of
operation, again, that seems like an in-expensive cost compared to the
alternatives.

Your thoughts and comments are welcome.
Dustin

Dave

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 11:48:14 AM9/18/05
to
if it really worked all the big environmental organizations would be all
over it as the end of 'big oil' and the cure for pollution.... no, they
don't work.

"Dustin" <dusti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127057090.2...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Dustin

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 12:54:10 PM9/18/05
to
what are your thoughts on Cycclone?
http://cycclone.com/welcome/page1.php

There's a pretty compelling video available on one of the links on the
left-hand side.

Dave

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 1:17:39 PM9/18/05
to

"Dustin" <dusti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127062450....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

watch that video... it shows the 'engine' spinning up with the starter
motor, but then shows it stopping... apparently with no load on it. if it
was indeed free energy he would have to put some kind of real load on it to
remove not only the initial spinup energy but also whatever energy it is
generating. it is an impressive looking and sounding device, but it doesn't
work or there would have been reps from greenpeace and all sorts of other
environmental groups there saying how it was going to put 'big oil' out of
business.


Pi

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 5:53:56 PM9/18/05
to

Haha, all toys use permanent magnet motors. Motors with permanent
magnets. Advantage is that you do not need to magnetize half of the
motor, so you have less losses, lower current consumption. But of
course they are not a free energy source. The only ones more stupid
that the creators of that idea are the followers of that idea.

Pi

Pi

unread,
Sep 18, 2005, 5:59:33 PM9/18/05
to

It is just the motor. You still need electromotors to drive the wheels
of your car.

Pi

Kevin G. Rhoads

unread,
Sep 19, 2005, 8:20:55 AM9/19/05
to
>If so many people have built a PMM, then why hasn't this technology
>been commercialized and put into production?

For the wsame reason the PTO won't patent it, any perpetual motion device REQUIRES a
working model to demonstrate it with the patent application, because the claim is
so beyond the pale that the required proof level is higher.

Investors who are considering investing their money have generally set their bars
even higher than has the PTO. Once someone builds a working perpetual motion machine
that produces free energy, they can get investors. BUT DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH.

Michael Gray

unread,
Sep 19, 2005, 9:33:58 PM9/19/05
to
On 18 Sep 2005 08:24:50 -0700, "Dustin" <dusti...@gmail.com> wrote:

If you can find one that works as claimed, then $1million is yours for
the taking.
Just get them to enter it into JREF's challenge.
But wait for a torrent of "excuses"
Oh, and just check first with:
http://www.skepticreport.com/tools/topjref.htm
and see if they're on the list of top excuses.

operator jay

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 12:27:34 AM9/20/05
to

"Dustin" <dusti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127057090.2...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

PMM can refer to Perpetual Motion Machine, might this be what articles
claiming fraud against PMMs are referring to?

j


Richard Herring

unread,
Sep 20, 2005, 9:32:45 AM9/20/05
to
In message <beMXe.4541$qP3....@news1.mts.net>, operator jay
<no...@none.none> writes
If "permanent-magnet motor" implies a motor which uses only permanent
magnets and no electromagnets, it *is* a perpetual-motion machine.

--
Richard Herring

Autymn D. C.

unread,
Sep 21, 2005, 4:42:08 AM9/21/05
to
Kevin G. Rhoads wrote:
> For the wsame reason the PTO won't patent it, any perpetual motion device REQUIRES a
> working model to demonstrate it with the patent application, because the claim is
> so beyond the pale that the required proof level is higher.
>
> Investors who are considering investing their money have generally set their bars
> even higher than has the PTO. Once someone builds a working perpetual motion machine
> that produces free energy, they can get investors. BUT DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH.

Perpetual motion is so trivial and commonplace. You should use unique,
exact, and thorough terms instead of "produce" or "free" or
"perpetual". Here is my design for a literal perpetual motion machine,
that anyone can make and see for oneself:
http://egroups.com/message/free_energy/16639 (read the long block at
the bottom).

-Aut

0 new messages