2153 Do Perpetual Motion Machines Work

[@Mosfet510]

"The hardest part of building a perpetual machine is...where do you hide the batteries?" That's a good one!

[@salan3]

pmsl

[@timothyjohnson1511]

Per the text book with title "Modern Thermodynamics" published by Wiley & Sons, with Authors Dilip Kondepudi and Ilya Prigogine, on Page 459 read - sharp gradients can violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Real examples have been produced by Floyd Sweet, Howard Johnson, Tom Bearden and many others. But, of course we all know the truth: "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin "The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church "The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin

[@ColinWatters]

Its interesting to read the wikipedia article on "conservative forces". One example being gravity. This basically says if something moves around an arbitrary shape path and returns to its starting point the net work done by the force is zero. Eg If you roll a ball down hill it gains energy, but it takes the same energy to lift it back up to its starting point. The interesting bit is that the shape of the path doesnt matter, if it ever returns to the same position twice then no work is done. This effectively rules out over ballanced wheels as they all return to the same point once per revolution regardless of their design. The force between two magnets is also an example so this rules out so called magnet motors because they also return to the starting position once per revolution. It rules out any rotating perpetual motion machine that uses gravity or magnetisim.

[@mrtelechi]

Fascinating subject, and explained in a way that even I could understand. Thank you.

[@stuartlark6441]

What about a heat pump, I was told that for 1kw of electricity put in you get 3kw of heat out because of the super efficiency of the gas.

[@robinvince616]

There's no over-unity or broken laws with an air-source heat pump. It simply moves heat energy from a large volume of air into a smaller volume. The huge outside environment is cooled very slightly as heat is extracted, enabling your relatively small house to get a lot warmer.

[@scottfitchet9499]

I’ve noticed that the sun isn’t petering out any time soon. 🌞

[@jslevenson101]

These machines offer glimpses of how to take advantage of a workforce and translate it into a usable workforce temporality but indeed produce an advantage of possible costs for less well-thought-out energy-wasting devices, saving resources, energy, time, thought, and space.

[@g-funk484]

I have a design which i have not seen anyone try yet and its very simple using water to raise a ball using buoyancy and gravity to drop it, if youtube had pics in comments id love to show everyone and see if someone would try it out

[@55Ramius]

Link to an image or design drawing ?? Pretty sure it will not work but always interested in seeing the designs.

[@ColinWatters]

I've seen that idea several times before. Search youtube for bouyancy engine. Typically they have a chain of bouys that enter a tank of water at the bottom, rise to the top and fall back down outside the tank. The problem is the energy required to push open the valve that allows the bouts to enter at the bottom is greater than the energy gained rising up.

[@g-funk484]

@@ColinWatters i am aware of that design with the issue being the ball entering the water at the bottom, my idea has a ball fall onto a counter weight to set a flap up and then free fall into water with a ramp under to push it over as it slightly sinks then starts to rebound out of the water it ends up in a clear tube that sticks out of the water that has been filled already with water and has at least 5 small flaps inside that the ball will open as it raises inside the tube, each flap will close automatic as they sink, the flaps stop water spilling out so that way the top of the tube can be open, its like the tooth pic experiment inside a water column, this way you can raise the ball as high as you want, its really hard to explain but its very simple, last when the ball reaches the top of the clear water tube it hits a leaver and there will be a mesh flap that pushes the ball out using that counter weight from the beginning releasing the energy that the ball put into it and then it will start all over again as the ball falls out and resets the counter weight on the way down before it falls again into the water, i have thought about this idea for a very long time and i can not find a reason for it not to work, if i can show you my design im sure you would agree it does not break any physics and each part of my design is very simple and plausible, i am yet to see anyone that has even drawn up this design

[@ColinWatters]

@@g-funk484 I'm afraid I only followed about half of that. I refer you to the wikipedia page on "conservative forces" in short it means if your machine ever returns to the same position twice then gravity will do no work on it. Since bouyancy is also caused by gravity the same will apply.

[@g-funk484]

@@ColinWatters lol yeh its hard to explain my idea and i know what you mean if my idea works i would be the 1st person to have a ball move constantly which i doubt is possible but i really cant see why it wouldn't work, i do not see any part of it having an issue thats what gets me, usually i can always find an issue with my or other peoples designs but this one has stumped me, i will send you a link to where i got the idea partly from so at least understand better

[@tonyguy9762]

Before I watch this, nah. Energy cant be made or destroyed. There is always loss due to entropy.

[@6teeth318-w5k]

Yea.

[@smegheadGOAT]

No even the sun will stop one day

[@jrmarshall-iz8sq]

Spun not span,,, just a laugh.

[@selfcorrected-Bobby]

Maybe a maglev rotor could keep on spinning until the stator and levitating rotor's magnetic fields die out...? no? I wish you could explain why this wouldn't work. The magnetic potential lifespan will maybe be a century? if you hd a HUGE stator magnet, above which floating a rotor magnet of such a shape to rotate in place on top of the base magnet? There would be no friction. It would temporarily be perpetual for maybe lie 10 years? How long would the magnets last. I've really no idea.

[@selfcorrected-Bobby]

could there be some feedback loop to remagnetise say the stator and rotor with some wireless tesla thingy that is powered by the levitating spinning rotor with a layer of circularly arrangd NSNS magnets on its rim? in a vacuum? I guess the magnets would wear out. So as I said it would be temporarily perpetual As you would trap almost in temporal stasis the potential energy of the magnetic domains say of tetrateanite?

[@AtlasReburdened]

Air friction, back emf from eddy currents produced in anything around it, loss of energy through sound production or friction from bearings depending on if it's spin stabilized or bearing stabilized.

[@selfcorrected-Bobby]

no but the magnets of the encapsuling stator the field of which is magnetically insular? There would be no bearings as the rotor would be levitating while rotating, it's base would have flat panes to stabilize it and angled serrations similar to the magnetic floor of the stator chamber, to give spine. I've thouht o various designs about how to create spin and letiting a magnetic levitating rotor balance in its spin, i.e. a hemispherical levitating rotor or a bottom slice off a sphere type shape, inside a hollow inside a magnetic stator floor, aoe which it can spin in stable fashion. there would be air friction though, but what if any electricity induced could be split between generating power and also recharging the electromagnetic field?. However the top layer of the rotor has a magtinetic field insulating layer, on top of which is the NSNS circularly arranged magnets, giving frictionless induction to a coil exposed to the inside of such a magnet. How absolute can the vacuum be in there as any particle in the atmosphere will bump against the spinning levitating magnet and will indeed cause sound inside the chamber even if it is levitating and spinning in that chamber without having any components that touch directly, only the fields interact, as the rotor "slips" but remains floating stably on top of a stator magnet beneath it. I don't know, I can't melt tetraneanite or use tinkercad to design plastic molds to make clay molds to pour tetrateanite alloy in to align the domains before it hardens, to test my ideas as I think different designs could be more efficient in creating levitating rotors that stably spin in place much lke a maglev train above its rails... @@AtlasReburdened

[@robinvince616]

A stand-alone device that could spin for ever wouldn't break any laws of physics, but it would only be useful as a novelty or an energy store. With no losses, you could still only extract the same amount of energy that you put into it to get it spinning in the first place.

[@selfcorrected-Bobby]

what if it is spinning because it's a levitating rotating magnet? On top of it is an array of NSNS magnets that cause induction. in a coil, the magnetic rotor is just so there is no bearing and doesn't touch, so there are no cogs or bearings so no friction except whatever atmosphere is or whatever level of vacuum it's in. Someone mentioned to me that when smelting an alloy of tetrateanite that you use an extremely powerful magnet to align it's domains. No doubt this is how tetrateanite was formed in meteors, not for millions of yeras, but millions of years ago as the alloy was still molten and was moving around, being moved around, by the magnetic fields of celestial bodies, which aligned its magnetic domains. In any event, this magnetic field that aligned the tetrateanite alloyw persisted from the time it was molten until it was cooled and set, and so, the magnetic domains of the tetrateanite was set. Now that we have this set, inherent potential force of the magnetic domain in a material, that is a lot of energy that was "put in" however is kept in stasis as it retains its magnetic property as a store of value, much like a battery in fact. Using such a rotor to levitate and spin with an array of NSNS circularly arranged on top of it with a magnetic insulating layer between these two levels of the magnetic levitating spinning rotor, the diameter of the rotor, and the speed of the spin determined by the size and strength of the stator's field relative to the size of the rotor means that it would be lighter work to push this levitating rotor to spin faster, I think the ratio between the weight of the rotor and the speed at which it spins could reduce the magnetic decay of the stator and rotor (it's an idea that unfortunately I can't represent to you with images or videos, but could direct someone to build), then "as much energy as you put in". Well. Sadly i don't agree with this statement even though it's a "law of physics" as you say. But such variable factors as I mentioned now would create ratios with the magnetic durability of the magnetic domains such as the size different between the rotor and stator (the base above which the levitating rotating magnetic disc spins, much like a pizza now with pepperoni NSNS magnets around it's rim,. I think you could get out way more energy that was put in as whatever force, say using a use electromagnet to align the domains of the tetrateanite alloy, would set its strength and it would retain this efficacy much like a battery, and would decay much slower than say a lithium battery would. That's why I previously said elsewhere that magnets that comprise a generator like this could be considered, like a battery, that is, a store of value, as the amount of energy put into that alloy when it was made, i.e. using a massively electromagnet, would in effect trap that field property from the electromagnet into the alloy so as to act as a slowly decaying magnetic store of energy, so in fact the amount of energy you put into it, and the amount you "take out" can't really be compared as it's a material property. Because what you're taking out in fact is not anything of the rotor and stator fields barely affect each other over a long period, while the smaller NSNS magnets arrayed on top of the spinning levitating rotor on the circular edge, would induce AC in the coil. In fact hardly energy would be taken out at all from the stores of value, the magnets would slowly decay, but it would be an induced field in the coil, there are no bearings or cogs, the shape of the disc rotor levitating and stator allow for it to spin stably while levitating. It would retain its magnetic property for a long time I believe, especially if it were in a vacuum chamber with less air resistance, at certain temperatures, this spinning device could be kept near "stasis" even if it spins very fast insomuch as the material properties of the components are kept in stasis through not being allowed to lose magnetism through heat say from friction from any non-vacuum element in the atmosphere that is spins in. I think this is also maybe why the Universe is expanding maybe and not merely drifting away due to a bang inertly, as dark energy at absolute zero forces away celestial bodies like galaxies, while they in turn attract each other.I'm not a practical scientist or a physicist but I've thought about this for so long and am unable to design the magnetic device I'm talking trying to talk about to test it, I mean I can explain it in m head and with some consultation I could have it created, but I am not sure at all even of what I'm saying at this stage without being at liberty to experiment@@robinvince616​

[@valveman12]

People who claim they have made a perpetual motion device, are *_Perpetually Wrong!_*

[@JimEdmiston]

What about nuclear fusion

[@woodworks2123]

Id like to add something theres a difference between perpetual motion machines which by definition are impossible because parts wear and need maintenance. Free energy is a completely different thing and can be different for different people. If you have a diesel generator and you are given somehow the fuel for free which might be collecting used veg oil and converting it to biodiesel. If your given 2nd hand solar panels for free, if you have a river running through your property and have a water wheel or turbine, that energy from any of those devices is free. We can argue about maintenance costs but looking at the average yearly energy bill in the uk is around £1900-£2100 why would you not spend that or a bit more on solar or wind or a combination. This nonsense you keep hearing about 25 year payback period is ludicrous. We spent £5500 on a solar/ battery set up. That alone was around 80% of our yearly needs. In the summer we produce too much . I want to convert the fence to a wind wall fence to fill in the winter shortfall. We're also looking at a ridge turbine for the roof. My payback period for my solar cost is just over 2 years. You can even just get a home battery and charge it during off peak hours when your electricity is cheaper then use that energy when you need it. That could even be done in a flat where you cant put solar or wind up.

[@haddow777]

I remember being sucked into that world. I was facinated by the idea of making a motor out of just magnets. They seem practically magical. It wasn't until I was obsessed over a way to generate power with gravity that I learned fully why they types of systems could never work. Things like gravity or the magnetic field from a permanent magnet are constant. That is all. Something that is constant doesn't change. We may not know exactly why magnets attract or how gravity works, but we do know they are constants. An apple falling to the ground or two magnets attracting each other are simply imbalanced systems seeking equalibrium. Electric motors work because of that sought after equilibrium. They only continue to work though, because the electricity put into the system constantly prevents the magnets from attaining equalibrium. I learned, the important part of a generator or motor isn't the forces at play as much as preventing equalibrium from being attained in the system. At first, I was confused about things like Hydroelectric dams. On first glance, they are gravity generators. So, I thought they were an example of how gravity generates power. It doesn't though. Ya, gravity pulls the water down through the generators, but the real power comes from the thing preventing equalibrium, prevents the water from staying at the bottom in the ocean. The sun. It introduces massive amounts of heat into the system, unbalancing it by causing the water to rise as vapor. So, in reality, hydroelectric dams end up being solar power generation. Still, there is something so magical about magnets.

[@timothyjohnson1511]

Sharp gradients (systems in non-equilibrium) can violate the 2nd Law. Source: Modern Thermodynamics, Prigogine, Wiley & Sons

[@edgarwalk5637]

Your story is a bit like how alchemy became chemistry. Keep up the science!

[@samuelknight5512]

Well written.

[@markflint9089]

Look up the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic

[@samuelknight5512]

@@andresgalviz315 interesting points, I must question your certainty of finishing your project in 6 months if you have been working on it for 14 years. May I ask how your device works?

[@mtttony]

The story I was told, is that as microscopes were improved over the years. They became powerful enough to see grains of pollen. What was noticed is that these tiny pollen grains if suspended in water they would perpetually move.. This was shown to Albert Einstein. Einstein said the pollen was being perpetually moved by the movement of the water molecules. From this observation Einstein went on to calculate the size of the water molecule. This is not going to propel your car down the road but is in fact perpetual motion.. Ps don’t shoot the messenger!! Thank you for all the videos ..

[@peterlang777]

See graphene energy harvesting

[@markflint9089]

Look up the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic

[@peterlang777]

@@markflint9089 pendulum hammer thing? I remeber it on keelynet

[@Stroheim333]

A machine that is _not_ a perpetuum mobile, but also doesn't need to be fueled manually, is good enough. Clocks that are wound up exclusively by barometric pressure has existed since the 17th century. And today, the Swiss company Jaeger-Culture manufactures a modern variant of a perpetual clock under the trademark "Atmos". This clock is wound up by changes of temperature and air pressure, which are even in well-climatized rooms rooms sufficient to keep it running.

[@totherarf]

You could view Mass as a perpetual motion machine. Or the Sun (again mass driven) gives out "free" energy. And at its end of life it recycles by way of a Nova! Even the humble windmill could be viewed as an intermittent perpetual motion machine ....... or a waterwheel! If you look at Geothermal, it too can be classed as "perpetual" It all depends on your definition. Most are not worried about infinitely perpetual, but "can I get something for nothing out of it?" If you are talking in terms of "breaking" physics ...... you are not likely to succeed (no place for the battery) but if you are asking if there are machines that get Something for Nothing then they do exist, in plain sight!

[@judylucas7596]

The earth is a perpetual motion machine if you think about it

[@Cryptic_Triptych]

No, it isn't. You obviously don't have any understanding of magnetohydrodynamics.

[@Jorge-np3tq]

No, it's movements degenerate over time, just very slowly.

[@enterprisencc1701z]

The US patented( the USPTP Does NOT issue patents to things that do not work) motionless electronic generator by Thomas Bearden is overunity. Once started, it can power itself and put out excess energy. The secret is that the magnetic crystal is replenished by zero point energy. Magnetism is called a force because no one has a working theory, but the fringe refer to it as vibrating crystal that is at the right frequency to to be replentished by the zero point. The only reason it isnt perpetual on earth is magnets rost ( oxidize) in space they should stay magnetised forever

[@bélalugrisi]

Not a chance in hell

[@aesopstortoise]

I made a perpetual motion machine, a gravity wheel. It worked ... for about 20 seconds. Lesson learnt.

[@waynetravis6951]

Hello Robert, Enjoyed your video - well "video's" since I discovered you last year. Let me make a correction to your content - "Work" creation was discovered in 2008 and first machine built and demonstrated in 2010 - its principal of operation "reduced" the mass "required" to do a specific work - that reduction of mass resulted in a reduction of input cost - thus work available was greater than work provided. By 2019, a total of seven methods were tested to provide excess work, the laws of thermal dynamics had never been presented with a method of "input reduction", and it took several years for those studying it to realize the difference between "Creating energy vs Causing work generation". Eventually you will see it in a university paper - but for now - the limited scope of the conclusions of thermal dynamics results in very limited research on the topic. If you want to know more - just ask. Sincerely Wayne

[@orielzob2821]

We need to stop looking at it in as perpetual motion but look it in a way that we can extract more energy then we put in ie using one barrel of oil to extract 50 barrels from the ground. Maybe using a way to extract hydrogen from water which you have done through electrolysis but trying to unlock it through a frequency that might work using ac current. There may be some frequency that just unlocks it at a small amount of current get more energy then what you used, like a pump to pump oil out the ground. Anyway It is food for thought even if it doesn't work but I hope to make a setup one day to be able to experiment it and I hope soon as it has been in my head for many years or you try if you want to go down there?

[@robertpitt8418]

Everything that exists to be is due to frequency.

[@1800imawake]

Tax payers are a perpetual motion machine. They even self replicate themselves. 😂

[@walterbaltzley4546]

"Do Perpetual Motion Machines Work?" The short answer is NO - The long answer is that Self-Contained, Closed-Loop Systems cannot be made to run under their own power. A motor cannot run a generator that will in turn run the same motor. A closed system cannot do work and maintain its own operation due to losses in the system. HOWEVER - Can machines be made to produce a large amount of work relative to the energy that YOU input into the system? The answer to this is YES. Provided that the energy you input is used to move a larger amount of energy existing in the environment. No energy is created or destroyed, simply MOVED (and/or concentrated) from one place to another, creating a difference in energy potential that can then be harnessed to do work. So far, the only form of energy that I am aware of that we can move or concentrate in this fashion is HEAT - We have built heat-pumps that can move 10, 20, or even 30 times more heat than we input in the form of electricity. If we can then transfer this heat to a heat-engine and a generator, we could theoretically extract up to 40% of that concentrated heat in the form of electricity.

[@thatguychris5654]

I saw a video snip of a German company using a large, vertical, conveyor bucket machine, in a water tank that has air pumped out the bottom to lift these buckets. They run a large air compressor for this. They claim a 8kW input to get a 52kW output. I'm no scientist but logic tells me it takes the same amount or more of energy to push air into a water column and its great pressure, than the lift factor of the air bubbles. But people keep trying lol

[@timothyjohnson1511]

Investigate the effect of buoyancy with decreasing depth. As the bubble rises it expands and the greater volume displaces more water, increasing the upward force. It really worked, but the slavemasters do not want it. Well, maybe now that they are freezing in the dark. Oh, wait, that is just the slaves.

[@MichaelCarouthGutenTag]

I've seen that and I have had a solution several years. Put an HHO generator at the bottom of the water tank. Electricity creates oxygen and hydrogen, which can be used together or separately to bring up the underwater wheel. Also the deeper the tank and larger the wheel the more efficient it becomes, because the air never loses potential for going up. Also the HHO Gas can be used at the end of the process when it goes to the top of the water. It can be burned for heat and or electricity.

[@bélalugrisi]

@@MichaelCarouthGutenTag HHO Hahahahahahaha! 🤣🤣😂😂😂🤬

[@MichaelCarouthGutenTag]

@belalugrisi1614 a simple Air Lift Pump at the bottom of the ocean run off an HHO generator. 🫳🎤

[@marinadizon2720]

Yes, I remember the one you are thinking of. They had a 10 meter tall tower of water with a conveyor belt of air bells which would get injected with compressed air at the bottom of their range of travel. As the bell of air rose, and the water pressure lessened, the volume of air in the bell would increase, thus increasing the upward force of the bell upon the belt upon which it was attached. The belt contained about twenty such bells. At any given time half were rising, and the other half were going down after having dumped their air, which meant they sank with the weight of steel in water with no air. A belt driven generator was placed at the top of the tower which generated electricity and compressed air to be injected at the bottom. They performed public demonstrations, and offered units for sale. They had large commercial versions, and small home sized versions, each sold via different sales channels. They offered turnkey 100 MW systems composed of dozens of towers.

[@aikiemarais6676]

Bravo! This is the best description of the origin and workings of the thermodynamic laws I ever heard. Should one of these machines have been able to work, why do we not find any of them on the shop shelves for sale? Another very good educational idea.

[@hopefullyhigh]

As homer Simpson put it, "Lisa, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"

[@vincentwelch7286]

Life is perpetual motion.

[@AtlasReburdened]

Nope, because life isn't a closed system. Take away the power source of the sun and the radioactive core, and everything dies.

[@Jorge-np3tq]

Life consumes energy and degrades over time, requiring more energy to maintain itself. That energy must come from a source, when the source is gone and there are no more sources, life is gone. Always ask where are the batteries. The battery for life on Earth is the Sun.

[@chaorrottai]

Perpetual motion is bunk, over-unity is not. Heat pumps do more work on the environment than the user does on the pump. You could spend 100 watts running the pump and do 200 watts of work relocating heat from the cold sink to the hot sink. That's over-unity. The second law is violated every single time an air-conditioner turns on because it does more work than it's supplied with. I'm not talking about making energy either there, I'm talking about doing work on a substance. It has nothing to do with energy creation, I'm talking about the proper physics term "work". The user potentially does 100 Watts of work on the pump and the pump does more work than the user supplied on the environment relocating heat energy against the natural flow of heat. The refrigeration cycle is an over-unity cycle. Now you may say "but the heat already existed at the cold location" and that a moot point because RELOCATING THE HEAT AGAINST THE NATURAL FLOW IS THE LOAD. In this case the load is of higher wattage than the supply, that is over-unity.

[@donnydavinci1772]

The flipside of perpetual motion is COP > 1 machines - or Coeffecient of Power > 1 machines, in which the usable output exceeds the usable input of power. I hope you get into these in some future video as they are all around us, but unintuitive. A turbocharger on a gas (petrol) engine, and even a solar panel, are things that "make usuable power from waste."

[@Glowbetraveler]

Agreed! And they are getting better. There are skyscrapers in NYC thats HVAC UNITS produce ice during summer nights and then the ice is used as a condensing medium for cooling during the day.

[@VrilyaSS]

reminds me of the mikhail dmytriev gravity due to deflections gravity wheel, he is using small dc motor to shift weights on a big flighwhee, claiming overunity up to 12x, ill guess someone has to prove his claims, just like the motoflux magnet motor

[@dononebullen]

Searching for perpetual motion yet we let all our perpetual energy run to the sea in the form or water . We never used too just look at the river derwent in Derbyshire . Why don't we just tap into water !

[@4v4t4rmusic]

The hardest part about making a perpetual motion machine… is coming to the realization that you were born on one. 😢

[@marinadizon2720]

"We now have the technology to take ET home." -- Ben Rich, CEO Lockheed Skunkworks Do you think man-made UFO's burn jet fuel ? HA

[@manwithnoname3454]

I just stuck two Stirling engines into a tube furnace, used carbon dioxide as the gas and then run two generators off it. One makes most of the power to run the tube furnace, the other one covers the rest and adds just a little juice extra to run a couple of things

[@mikaelfransson3658]

But if the energy in is from an atenna or a wimhurstgenerator! Then the first problem is takle on a intellectual function way! /Mikael PS if the search is for a function we need as a windmill working at 0,5-4 m/s! We must look everywere! DS.

[@drillerdev4624]

Great video! I'd have loved a small addendum that could work as a follow up video by itself: how it might be better to focus our efforts not on "machines that doesn't require outside energy", but on "machines that make use of free energy", linking it up with renewables. I'm still hoping for the cheap battery that makes electrical unbeatable (even if its indirect, like with heat storage that doesn't suck like most molten salts projects)

[@MichaelCarouthGutenTag]

My thought exactly. Machines that make use of free energy.

[@lordgarion514]

Look up flow batteries.

[@brown55061]

Here's the thing though, we don't need 100% free energy. Here's my idea to debunk.... we've seen these magnetic perpetual rotating wheels using magnets. It works for a while and then eventually slows down. And when you apply a field to do "work" it slows much faster. But we don't need the power to be continually applied like on a generator. We just need a clutch system that puts a pulse in on a timer to keep the generator spinning. It's not free energy but it could be made more efficient where rotating motors don't require a full time draw to spin but just that pulse on a timer that keeps it spinning so you're just reducing the amount of energy required to keep a generator on output. It seems plausible to me but I haven't seen anyone try it. We just need to make things massively more efficient, not free.

[@theoriginalrecycler]

I don’t need a perpetual motion machine. Just one that lasts 50 years.

[@markflint9089]

Exactly! The term "perpetual motion" is just a red herring.

[@markflint9089]

The 2nd Law describes a closed system, yet there are none in nature. The error is then extended to electromagnetic machines by insisting they are closed systems as if the electromagnetic phenomenon is somehow different from the rest of every other observable natural phenomenon. Like all man-made engineering, how "open" it is depends on the design and the knowledge of the builder.

[@SGTMARSHALL1]

Hey Robert, Im liking your content, do you have much knowledge on the Searl Generator ?

[@thequestion7550]

A magnet is a solid-state perpetual machine? The Bloch wall receives a centripetal force allowing for a magnet's centrifugal force?

[@marinadizon2720]

Any dipole (electric or magnetic) perpetually creates electromagnetic perturbations in the ether. This is real, observable outflow of real energy. That energy had to come from somewhere. It did not come from the creation of the dipole, since the magnitude is much too small. That out flowing energy was previously absorbed from the ether as a property of the dipole. Yes, there is an ether. Michelson and Morley never pointed their interferometer vertically with respect to the surface of the earth. See Robert Distinti for details. Opposites attract. Opposite electric charges and magnetic poles attract. So, a space charge of opposite polarity surrounds any polarity. This unobservable space charge is absorbed and is the source of the observable energy field expressed by the dipole in the form of electromagnetic field surrounding the dipole.

[@thequestion7550]

@@marinadizon2720 So the dipole is the framework that allows disturbance in the ether? It's then the field effects of the perturbations (structure) that then gate or give path for energy to flow? I wish there was a comparable iron-filings test for magnets for that of a battery, to see the dipole's inner mechanisms.

[@David_Mash]

Of course you can have perpetual motion. Everyone needs to get their head out of the box that thinks free energy from nature is taboo.

[@noblemagi]

This is a fallacy, you are creating a timeline to exclude 400-year machines.

[@axiomV]

Happy New year Robert, thank you for all the videos you share with us throughout the years

[@buensomeritano1755]

You should give your scrutiny to William Skinner's 1939 gravity device. It is not a closed loop. It does require a small input to function. As load increases, the influence of gravity also increases. I have had six engineers look at it and they all agreed that they could not understand how it could not work. Skinner spent 30 years developing the device. It is complex and its function is difficult to fully understand, but, it is brilliant and works on a very simple principal. At the end of the day, it is an array of hybrid pendulum flywheels. A gravity turbine, if you will

[@markflint9089]

Take a look at the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillato of Veljko Milkovic

[@buensomeritano1755]

@@markflint9089 I am very familiar with it. Brilliant. Simple.

[@markflint9089]

@@buensomeritano1755 I already suggested to Rob (in the members only video) that perhaps he had missed this device. My comment disappeared for some reason.

[@buensomeritano1755]

@@markflint9089 the only thing I don't like about the milkovich device is that it can only operate at a specific load correctly. Skinner's device is constantly variable. As the load increases, so does the gravitational effect.

[@g-funk484]

Every over balanced wheel design wont work because once it picks up speed all the weights will be pushed out which no one ever mentions

[@AverLife]

Wind and sun and sea and rain = free energy But I know what you mean...

[@noblemagi]

you have to use 3 different forces, there are some, and most people make them to get into university. there is the magnet, centrifugal, and drag machine, there is the gravity, centrifugal, magnet machine powering a house in Kansas, there is many flux engines. you can exploit gravity, magnets and geometry to make a never ending desk toy. but if you want real power you want centrifugal, magnet shearing, magnetic current and dipolar PVC.

[@karlmccreight8172]

Any convincing and valuable source (like diy- instructions) that back up what you just wrote?

[@noblemagi]

? sorry you don't have any modern science prophets to prove to you what you can learn if you just read the founders of science.@@karlmccreight8172

[@pauldent3059]

The easiest and cheapest way in theory to produce energy is the human body

[@wizrom3046]

In a mechanism, magnets behave exactly like SPRINGS. so you can never make a perpetual motion machine from magnets (any more than you can with springs). And with overbalanced wheel systems etc, they can never work because any weights or fluids must always go from the very top to the very bottom, cyclicly, ie the SAME vertical distance travelled and the amount of energy needed to lift a weight X vertical distance is the same as the energy released when falling X distance. Unless there ie an ENERGY SOURCE being harvested none of those machines can ever work.

[@wizrom3046]

@@andresgalviz315 hahaha for a moment I thought you were serious lol 🤣🤣🤣😎

[@bertoldriesenteil1430]

Thanks for the time spent on this presentation. It is a labour of love. I hope that your batteries stay charged until they short-circuit in about 40 or 60 years. Have a great next year and keep up the good work. We need more people like you.

[@salan3]

These type of machine fall into the same category as USB heater that can heat you whole house in mins and Earth batteries that can run you house! lol (FB ads etc)

[@marktyler3381]

It's not just me then.

[@timothyjohnson1511]

@@marktyler3381 No, it's not just you. You are in excellent company. "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible" - Lord Kelvin "The Sun and stars revolve around the Earth" - Catholic Church "The Second Law of Thermodynamics cannot be violated" - Lord Kelvin

[@marktyler3381]

@@timothyjohnson1511 And a 25 btu candle and a plant pot are not going to save you 1000s of pounds.

[@nikola.tesla.r.and.d.centre]

I'd like to discuss a real machine that isn't perpetual motion. It does however harness a flow of naturally occurring energy in the environment that isn't being harnessed anywhere near as much as it should be. Many of your videos are leaning towards it. I've spent 14 years working on this so far. Myself and my team of engineers, how can we get in touch with you?

[@Godznrg4u]

Gravity can do work, and I can prove it.

[@ШАРАВЕРТ]

Роберт поздравляю с наступающим Новым Годом! Желаю вам крепкого Сибирского здоровья и всех Благ! Вечный двигатель, мы его сделаем... Он существует, так же как луна вращается вокруг земли вечно...;))

[@ColinWatters]

Not forever. Gravitational forces cause tidal heating. This causes the Earth and Moon to loose energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation. The result is the moon is moving slowly away from the Earth. They also loose energy in the form of Gravitational waves but that is extremely small.

[@justtinkering6713]

The closest you can get to perpetual motion is planets orbiting.

[@crudereviews7221]

And even then, tidal forces very gradually convert orbital (kinetic) energy into heat via deformation of both bodies. Literally can't achieve perpetual motion in an ideal vacuum.

[@ecoista1373]

@@crudereviews7221 What about electons

[@etaaramin9361]

​@@ecoista1373Electrons don't orbit, that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality. Electrons jump around randomly, but the probability of them appearing in any one spot os not equal - there are complicated shape patterns (called Orbitals) that have higher probabilities of finding the electron in them, but there's no reason beyond probability that an electron cant be found a thousand miles away for a split second before being back in the orbital (this is a form of quantum tunneling).

[@scotttovey]

@@etaaramin9361 "Electrons don't orbit," That wasn't the question, but it does answer a question I've had. Electrons are in perpetual motion, they may not be in an orbit, but they are in constant motion. "that ideas a result of people misinterpreting models used for explanation as models representing reality." An inanimated 2d model will never be a good model when depicting such motions for the simple reason that descriptions of the model do not describe or explain the motion. A 3d animation is better suited to model such motions and even then, it is not likely to be perfect. Recently, I've been getting on people that complain when their vague and abstract communication is misinterpreted. Those people, despite their complaint, take offense when they are told to be clearer and not leave their communication up to interpretation. If I didn't know better, I would think that those idiots actually believe that people are be able to read their minds. Then again, the programming of kids to think they are entitled to everything for free, may have included the programming that people can read their minds.

[@wizrom3046]

Dunking bird and Atmos clock are two proven "perpetual motion" machines, but both work by harvesting heat energy.

[@pavanbiliyar]

Something running perpetually in a closed system doesn't matter, if nothing going in and nothing is coming out, all thermodynamic equations are in balance. Put a load on it, however, and we expect the motion to go to zero. If it doesn't, that's a violation of the current equations. That said, it's not like we won't discover a new source of energy to rebalance the equation. But most hobbists pursuing "free energy" are not scientists and most scientists dont publicly suggest looking into it.

[@markflint9089]

Can you give an example of a "closed system" in the natural world (not man-made)?

[@pavanbiliyar]

​@@markflint9089, asteroids in space qualify, per Newton's 1st Law of Inertia, and the entropy of the "system" is zero. Gravity affects it, so it isn't a perfectly enclosed system.

[@ka_okai9]

The 'Law' of thermodynamics describes 'a closed system' . Am baffled to see almost noone pays atention to this. Point out to me at least one, just a single one system that is really a closed system. You wont be able to do it. All systems in nature are interconnected in one way or another. The 'Law' of thermodynamics describes a system that has no base in reality.

[@arcomondoestablishito]

You are correct. Bravo.

[@markflint9089]

I was just going to say the same thing.

[@chyfields]

The entire universe operates on the principle of perpetual motion.

[@carpballet]

How so? Proof?

[@marinadizon2720]

@@carpballet A Priori

[@carpballet]

@@marinadizon2720 Lol times a million

[@chyfields]

@@carpballet It keeps going.

[@carpballet]

@@chyfields But we don’t know if it keeps going forever. A perpetual motion machine by definition keeps going forever.

[@dansmif]

The closest we've come to perpetual motion machines are devices that extract energy from one place and move it to another, such as heat pumps. The SEG (Searl Effect Generator) always interested me, as the inventor claimed that the temperature around the device would drop as it drew energy from the surrounding environment. His claims were pretty wild, but it'd be interesting to see it debunked.

[@arcomondoestablishito]

Watch the last five minutes of Jaker's Ladder. You will be convinced.

[@karlmccreight8172]

I would like to see the milcovic pendulum beeing debunked

[@markflint9089]

Yes indeed.

[@tpuj9410]

EVERYTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE ...UNTIL SOMEONE BELIEVES IT'S NOT. Case in point the ignition research facility at Livermore California.

[@dosomething7930]

If energy cant be created or destroyed then where is it located?

[@julianfelipe4943]

All the energy in the universe is located in the Dirac Sea. What we call matter is perturbations of the ether.

[@colinjones9211]

Harmonics, lasers for example. Light amplification through STIMULATED EMISSION of radiation. Everything has a frequency, the key is to find it and stimulate a harmonic reaction. KZbin channels. Social harmonics at work....

[@stubluesjhb1]

My life now lies in tatters - my search is futile. Many thanks for the work you do - Have a good new year

[@richjohn11]

Robert, I have just found your videos and wow they are fantastic! I wish I had teachers like you in school! How did you learn all this? Is your background physics? What ever you are fascinating to watch.

[@florh]

I can say "NOPE!", but self-sustaining machines work... I have 3 of them in mind already, and I just have to build them. Then I'll have 3 solutions for the energy crisis of which 2 are solutions for global warming, the third one is a closed loop system (most of it).

[@MichaelCarouthGutenTag]

How about you make an highly efficient machine? Possibly in the 90% range. Not a heater, something that moves. Another challenge is to make a list of all possible "forces" that are practically available to use for a "highly efficient machine", such as Capillary Action, Magnesium, Gravity, etc. Then list various free possible inputs such as wind, sun heat, shade cold, tidal, etc. Also put together some machines that for all intents and purposes could be considered "Perpetual". Hopefully with enough excess energy to harness.

[@hooberdoober576]

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says you're wrong. And Mother Nature NEVER gets it wrong.

[@willcool713]

There is the Universe/Multiverse, which seems designed to run for eternity, sort of by definition. If holographic theory is right, you could produce a simulation which could run a universe and create it's entire lifetime. So that would also be a perpetual motion machine, in exactly the same way our universe is perpetual, regardless that it may be seemingly quick to us. They've already demonstrated opening actual wormholes from such simulations with a quantum computer. Why shouldn't it be possible to scavenge energy?

[@thedeadbatterydepot]

Yes, I have Quantum perpetual motion machine. I have solved the riddle, with new science no one has seen before. I can alter atoms, make new elements no one has seen before. My lithium batteries are rated to last 219 years if recharged everyday. 2024 should be my year! Lol, you could look at my device for 100 years and never figure it out, never understand what your looking at. For nearly free too, I can divide by 0, I made the formula.

[@JanektheDragonmaster-ng4dq]

You are wrong. There are plenty machines you just dont know them. Ill mention one the bird. Make it work 20 years and you got your work. Scale it 100k times and your house are running freely. All you need is 1 big bird. Its your alley small generation.

[@401ksolar]

So extrapolating from the "theory of thermodynamics" by erecting windmills all over, will eventually stop the rotation of the earth because we are unable to see the n-particles that bombard the Earth's dynamo core. (Which drives the planet's weather vortices)

[@steve29836]

The National Ignition Facility can get more energy out than they put in. Perhaps you can also do some Laser-driven Nuclear fusion experiments next year so I can understand what its all about! Hope you had a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you

[@AntonioFidanzio]

il moto perpetuo fatto con le ruote non si ottiene maggior potenza di quella inserita L ATTREZZO fatto da me ottengo la rotazione 1 a 1 con maggiore potenza in base alla lunghezza delle leve (6) con qualcosa che non posso dire PARTO con un motore di 1.5kw che fa 1400 giri che li riduco a 40 che sono uguali an uscita dove collego un generatore dopo aver aumentati i giri a 1600 per ottenere 13kw dove collego altrei attrezzi per fare una centrale elettrica a costo zero l attrezzo lo potete vedere su youtube scrivendo moltiplicatore di potenza QUESTO E IL MOTO PERPETUO

[@freethisone]

in the case of a wheel spinning with only the initial input perpetual. lets say 100 years of sinning is enough to call it perpetual.. you think there is no way to do this but you are certainly incorrect. i myself have taken one approach that can theoretically achieve the main goal. Because i do not care about fame or glory i can tell you, then show you.. Dan from green power youtube channel set the stage a long time ago. it is true you have still not up to date with the discovery but others have seen it. I understand its potential. I device the ferrous wheel. you simple take the track roll it up like a spiral, then ad the 2 magnets at the base.. cheers. ps the name of the video is not important. just search his channel and you can ind it.. a track that contained magnets, and steel spacers. and the car is simply 2 round magnets on an axial. cheers..

[@andrewbenson9075]

I truly agree that perpetual motion is not possible, but, at least I feel, The ultimate prize is not perpetual motion, but really long lasting motion. Best examples are the Oxford Electric Bell, and Atmos clocks. I think people spend too much time demonizing the pursuit of really long lasting motion by calling it " perpetual motion".

[@beladn710]

Thank you Mr Murray for your sense of pedagogy, but how can we explain the rotation of satellites around the planets in a regular and perpetual manner? I don't think that the non-existence of friction is the only reason and what is extraordinary is the similarity with the rotation of electrons around the nucleus, the laws of thermodynamics would be more judiciously limited to the world of gravity ? and I think that molecules work only because they weigh nothing.

[@richardoakley8800]

I've helped build "perpetual motion machines " we managed to get on to last 7 days.. thats using magnetic bearing and put it in a vacuum.. But there will always be a little friction from something

[@mfr58]

If matter is formed and animated by consciousness, which many believe, then perpetual motion is a condition enabled by extending consciousness to allow it. Indeed consciousness itself could be termed perpetual, though it's not a machine and not subject to the constraints of time. This is obviously not a notion permitted by materialists......

[@qweqwe5186]

isnt it like superconductors break 2nd law of thermodynamics? isnt it a gate for 0 entropy machines? possible no leak storage of energy etc?

[@dvhx]

I use potential energy to explain why perpetual motion machines cannot work. Apple doesn't fall down from tree because of mysterious gravity, it falls down to lower it's potential energy. Spring under tension springs back to lowers it's potential energy. Two magnets don't repel each other because of the magnetic force, they repel each other to lower their potential energy. Every single natural movement is to lower the potential energy. When you have perpetual motion machine in order to move forever, it has to be circular. After some time, it has to return to it's original position and start over. You can calculate potential energy at any given moment of it's operation, it's just simple calculation of all forces and distances. But when perpetual motion machine returns to it's original position, it will have the original potential energy as it had in the beginning. If you compare two points in time where the potential energy was the same, there will be no movement. Things only move to lower it's potential energy. Things don't move to have the same potential energy as when they started. You may have some initial movement, that's when the machine lowers it's potential energy, but then, in order to return to the beginning and start new cycle, it has to raise the potential energy and things in nature don't want to raise their energy, so the machine will simply not move to the starting point and it will be stuck in some local minimal energy point.

[@RingtailTheRaccoon]

Second post You lose more energy than you gain every time. Anything that looks like perpetual motion is simply stealing energy from somewhere else. There's energy all around you all the time, even Gravity is a form of energy transfer.

[@benjamindemontgomery6317]

Once you work it out. you see why they all fail. Its a bit like what they told Columbus. but in the end Columbus did sail across the sea. don't give up hope 😉

[@ruthjoy7147]

Idea for a perpetual machine: what if instead of trying to use magnets for a perpetual machine, you use the 1st law of thermal dynamics now the 1st law of thermal dynamics states that you can Not create or Destroy Energy but you can transfer one state of Energy to another what if you some how transfer Kinetic Energy to static Electric Energy and turn the Electric Energy back into Kinetic Energy and the cycle repeats itself in an Infinite loop. The only trouble is trying to find a solution to do this in a officiant way

[@robinramkhalawan468]

So where we hide the battery in fusion reactor..... Apparently they broke the first law but then maybe the doing something different idk

[@ameralkahder4537]

Hello sir ... Let me show you my invention, I am that you will find it most interesting. I promise you it will change the way you think.

[@jamest.5001]

I believe the only thing we will likely 'discover' . Anytime soon , would be a higher efficiency device, possibly generator. Being above 99% efficient, but below 100.1%. There could possibly be devices that work with little input, using gravity to help it along, or possibly magnets , I have seen magnet motors nearly make 360°, then stall . Maybe something similar can be used to boost the efficiency? Who knows, thing is, would we believe it if someone did make such a discovery??

[@tedrice1026]

I agree. The search is useful if it can result in extremely high efficiency machines that use much less energy than present ones.

[@warpeople01]

Hey this is a rip-off of physic girl's presentation on perpetual motion and another video on perpetual motion!

[@marlonlacert8133]

Energy loss is always a fact of existence. Friction will always frustrate Fiction..

[@bartronicsecurity]

I have stopped using the terms scientific law which is a bit confusing and can be miss interpeted. I rather use the term scientific fact which I see as being more explicit and clear.

[@Glowbetraveler]

When you realize that gravity is not a force, then you need to rethink every resistive force you are trying to over come with machines.

[@ToddHoldaway]

Haven’t watched yet … why do people argue mechanical advantage 🖖🏻

[@patrickbrogan3323]

of course they do- you are standing on one! this planet has been spinning since you stepped on, and will be spinning when your gone! so yes they exist!

[@paulwright8378]

What did you make your grand kids now that you got into 3d drawing and printing or is it on the members channel?