/sci/ - Science & Math

Power companies will spend billions to get rid of this shit

>>5096677
and that's why we must spread the knowledge. systems like that aren't a new idea, Tesla was probably the first scientist to come up with something like that

any energy taken from the device would rob the wheel of the energy needed to push that bar up. It would get to the bar then stop, and without pushing the bar the wheel wont turn.

But this would be of no help generating electricity even if it did work forever in an isolated system (which I highly doubt).

Anyone know any good techniques to self induce hypnosis? I am talking about a trance where you can program yourself to trigger hallucinations or strange behavior.

Hypnosis? Sorta falls in the same category as tulpa/lucid dreaming I would suppose

It's not "free" energy. The force is being applied by the magnets which will degrade quickly when used this way. It probobly takes more energy to create the magnets than this machine will ever produce.

Now make a magnet powered machine that does this but utilizes the electromagnetism of the Earth or Sun and you'd have energy that'd last you till the human race goes extinct. I say that because if you did this it would eventually destroy the Earths magnetosphere then humanity would go extinct. But that wouldn't happen for generations from now. We're totally safe. <__<

>>5096709
It wouldn't work forever in an isolated system. Magnets aren't forever.

OP's video is nothing more than a neat toy - like any other semi-perpetual motion device.

Could you hook this thing up and generate electricity? Yes, it's possible. It won't be much energy, and the magnets'll die. Easier to mine oil than more magnets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s&t=33m40s

this guy gives a nice little talk about this subject

I wonder what oil companies will do when we run out.

>>5096743
Become power companies and diversify.

Most already do this. It's only a couple like ExxonMobil who stick their heads in the sand and refuse to adapt.

Is this shit reportable?

>>5096740
>Supression of UFO phenomena
Stopped listening there.

I don't see why these so-called "free energy invetors" can't just put their research online.

Let him write a paper conclusively disproving the laws of thermodynamics and collect his nobel prize. Until then, no one of value will care.

I dream of the day when one bold man hacks into all the television sets and computer screens in the world, and delivers the message "My life is forfeit and power companies and jews will kill me in a matter of hours, but here is a blueprint for a free energy motor, everyone, so listen carefully!"

>>5096842
I've seen a ufo before, but I already posted about it here and I'm not gonna get anything from doing it again.

>>5096875
i'm interested

>>5096776

You can report anything. This is science in the sense that it needs to be debunked. The number of replies to this thread saying "the magnets won't last forever" shows an astounding lack of knowledge.

No matter how strong or perfect or ideal a magnet is, it is not a source of energy.

All the early demos were driven by energy from the guy's arm as he moved the magnet back and forth.

The final demo which clearly has frictional losses in the bearings, is not obviously faked. But it is not perpetual motion. A proper scientific test would either show that it slows to a stop, and that the vid was looped or otherwise faked.

>>5096881
all right. here we go again

>think "what are those lights?"
>assume it to be plane since from far away considering it was tiny lights, what else could it be?
>it gets closer and think helicopter considering how low it was
>bout as high as a two story house
>then think, no because it was too silent
>it is soon above my head bout 10 feet ahead of me
>shaped like a frisbee with a hole in the middle
>looked about as thick as a remote control at most
>at this point think rc toy
>one solid object
>with odd lights
>bout as big as a large tire
>hovering bout 4 miles an hour
>how the fuck is it moving like that?
>look for blades of some sort
>none
>yet going in a straight line at a constant altitude
>wtf did I just see?
>looked something like this
>mom saw it too

>>5096894
also it was like 3 in the morning, that's why I couldn't tell what the object looked like till it was fucking close

>>5096882
>magnets don't store energy.

>magnets don;t degrade... what bs is this?

gonna need a source bro

back to reddit please

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7237/full/nature07879.html

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>5096898
>ponies are totally related
wth is wrong with you assholes?

>>5096915
This, Anon, is what you call a troll.
Notice the derisive language and offensive implications. Note also the image attached of one Twilight Sparkle, a figure many find quite angering.
It's no shame that you were drawn to this particular specimen, but let this be a learning experience. We do not feed the trolls.

>>5096898
Except that guy is right. Those things wouldn't work even with eternal magnets.
ITT : People who don't know what a conservative field is.

I wonder if all the people involved in those "perpetual motion" thingy have never taken a physics 101 class or if they are just playing the biggest prank ever.

>>5096936
If not for there people, we wouldn't have such neat toys like this one, would we?

>>5096936
I don't think it matters whether they've taken physics or not. They're in denial, and nothing will ever convince them that it's simply impossible to create energy.

>>5096875
>>5096842
Anyone who's ever failed to identify a flying object has seen a UFO.

neat
might make a mini one as a desk toy
it will never generate usable power

Even if it was working, it would be suppressed just like all the other cool shit that either has no profit in it or threatens big corporations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlE_Tgt8LiA

>>5096981
>cold fusion
>suppressed knowledge
0/10

>>5096960

Unless you have invented the perfect bearing it will not work.

Does nobody on /sci/ understand that magnets do not produce energy and that a perpetual motion device is impossible?

>>5097015
Maybe a few, but overall /sci/ sucks major ball.
It follows the rule of 4chan that every board knows fuck all about its topic.

eremitagian asunto palaa

>>5097036
except /b/, those guys are experts

It might be perpetual in a vacuume, but as soon as you hook it up to a generator, the friction eventually slows it down

>>5097043

vacuum does not make bearings frictionless.

and even with perfect bearings, you still have to start it with some energy, and the system will never have more energy than that.

a spinning ball in outer space is not a perpetual motion machine in any useful sense. as soon as you extract ANY energy from it it will slow down some.

the only energy you can extract from any perpetual motion machine is exactly what you put in to begin with.

The one concept I saw on /sci/ that intrigued me when it comes to perpetual motion would be using boyancy.

magnets get weaker when they're made to do work, but I don't see how buoyancy would be effected.
IF htere was some way to make a loop of floation devices, such that one device's buoyancy would pull in another one at the bottom of the bool of water. The only problem seems to be a technical one in designing an entrance to the bottom of the pool of water that would be suitable. The theoretical limit of using magnets to do work magnets does not seem to be present in buoyancy.

OK assholes, listen up:

The simple fact is that perpetual motion doesn't work, and cannot work, ever, because energy is conserved. It's embedded at the very bottom of all modern science, and nothing at all has shown evidence this basis is incorrect. If you have found any evidence whatsoever of the non-conservation of energy, come claim your Nobel prize, because all scientists everywhere would be interested as fuck in your actual evidence.

Also, though it is possible for certain magnets to have net energy stored in their magnetization that can be harvested while depleting the magnetization, that almost certainly isn't what's keeping all the stuff in the OP's video from working as advertised.

>>5097312

permanent magnets do not "do work" and do not get weaker unless heated too much or demagnetized by external opposing field.

>>5097322
Also, this applies even more strongly to over-unity devices, that are supposed to produce energy out of nothing.

>>5097312
It won't work any way you design your thing. It has nothing to do with magnets getting weaker, like retards think, it has to do with the fact that you are dealing with conservative fields.

A constant magnetic field is conservative, and a buoyancy field is conservative too. It cannot change the total energy of a system in the field, whatever shape your system is.

I actually got something like that in oral exams for engineering school entrance:
"Here is a schematic for a perpetual motion buoyancy machine, show it doesn't work."
It was actually quite subtle, the energy loss came from a second order term that we easily forget.
It's pretty much the same for all those perpetual motion machines, the trick is to put all the energy loss in something that seems meaningless (like pulling the metal bar away from the whell in OP's video), so viewers will think it can work if they don't perform the long and hard calculations.

Normally this contradicts the dogma. The thing seems to overcome the friction produced by the lifting mechanism. How can you find out whether the sequence in the movie is not a loop?

>>5097312
>IF htere was some way to make a loop of floation devices, such that one device's buoyancy would pull in another one at the bottom of the bool of water. The only problem seems to be a technical one in designing an entrance to the bottom of the pool of water that would be suitable.

No, it's not a technical problem. Pushing one device under water will ALWAYS require more force than could possibly be supplied by buoyancy of any number of other devices. Quantify the pressures and you'll see. Think about water columns.

>>5097336
By noting that they haven't become rich and famous. They're all either scams with a hidden energy source or otherwise not as "perpetual" as they look.

>>5097322
>>5097323
>>5097327
>>5097333
Well fuck it's like the smart people finally woke up.

>>5097336
It's not a dogma, newtonian mechanics and traditional electromagnetics are pretty much set in stone now. They don't apply everywhere, but they apply to macroscopic low energy devices like that toy.
Let me give an example:
>"Rossi ECAT cold fusion generator cannot work."
This is dogma, since what happens inside his reactor is happening at size and energy scales where we still ignore a lot of thing.
>"The toy in this video is nothing but a toy"
This is not dogma, since all it uses is very well know electrostatics and newtonian mechanics, we can DEMONSTRATE from the way those things work that the spinning toy is bullshit. It's not introducing any new element that could make us doubt our knowledge.

>>5097344
To be fair, I called bullshit on the Rossi scam because of his dodgy as fuck behavior.

>Shitty paper without the proper evidence to support his claim
>Won't disclose how the device works so it can be reproduced
>Doesn't even describe the basic mechanism of the reaction
>Goes straight to the press to push his sensationalist claim
>Immediately starts courting venture capitalist investment
>instead of actually demonstrating that he's got a device that works, he just lets people look at some machines he's made and tells them they're awesome and totally work

>>5097356
>>5097344 here
I'm extremely doubtful too, but I just wanted to point out we can't just disprove his thing like we can for the SMOTs.

Myth Busters made an episode on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnJpMX-GXcg

>>5096897
You again nigger? pics or didn't fucking happen.
>ubuntulogo.jpg

>>5097763
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnJpMX-GXcg
Plz, dont post mythbusters

>>5097914
Any particular reason why we shouldn't?

practical perpetual motion != free energy

As soon as you extract work from the motion, it stops moving perpetually

go to /x/ and I'm sure they will enjoy talking with you about how the man is suppressing free energy technology until your faces all turn blue

46 replies? what the fuck

>>5097932
>thinking science is infallible

>>5097938
>2012
>Conservation, how do it be?

>>5096894
That is an interesting story but you have to understand that nobody will believe you until you present us a proof.

Pretty sure fusion energy can be considered "free" given that it outputs more than inputted.

>>5097938
>automatically assumes it fails just because it is fallible

>>5097973
That's not the definition of free. And every energy source goes by "outputs more than inputted", otherwise, it wouldn't be called an energy source in the first place.

>>5097914
What? Mythbuster is totally /sci/ related. If there is a place to talk about it, it's /sci/

>>5097938
haaaa people are funny when they talk about "science" like it's an organization.

science is a study, a process. physics is a science, it is the study of the physical world.

I think what you meant is ">thinking scientific results are infallible"

no one believes that.
but since energy conservation is a thing that we have observed over and over very carefully and have never seen anything different we may assume that energy is conserved.

"but you don't KNOW"

ok I also don't know that gravity won't throw me into outer space but I'm pretty damn sure because I've been observing it for 22 years and its remained pretty fucking constant.

you dumb, nigger

What is that thing underneath the rotating cylinder that gets hit once per cycle?

>>5098003
I was wondering the same. What was the point of that clicking thing?

>>5097763
Oh god. The comments on this video.

>>5098016
>that clicking thing

Sometimes it is more productive to think about how you would do it if you were tasked to fake such a machine. I would use that clicking thing to send a phasing signal (acoustically or magnetically) to something under the table that produces a magnetic pulse at the right moment.

>>5098072
Very nice. I like the way you think.

watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=287qd4uI7-E&feature=related

When does the first "machine" stop? Is it when the water evaporates so there isn't enough force for it to go all the way to the top again? If so wouldn't that make it a nice thing to put in your living room as decoration?

Out of curiousity, what's the closest thing to a perpetual motion machine that's been made?

>>5098131
a motion machine

>>5098132
oh you

>>5096740
>FREE ENERGY ENGINES ARE REAL
>LOOK AT THEM
>THE INVENTORS JUST GET THREATEN
I wish we had some kind of international network that allows us to distribute data freely

>>5098131
these fuckers

>>5098140
heh

>>5098131

There was supposed to be an actual perpetual motion clock in The Great Library before it burned to the ground.

As to the nay-sayers of the OP, why would this device ever stop besides eventual destruction of its bearings and/or reset device? As others have said, permanent magnets don't degrade until heated and it doesn't appear to spin fast enough to heat up due to air resistance. So, other than "conservation!" what gives?

>>5098208
It isn't about magnets degrading.

>So, other than "conservation!" what gives?
That's the whole point. Conservation of energy. If that doesn't make an impression on you, then it only reflects your poor understanding of the fact that energy conservation is extremely well-established and completely unrefuted by all the evidence we've collected over the past centuries.

>>5098219

My point was shouting "conservation!" doesn't mean shit if an explanation of why the device would fail cannot be found. Because guess what, if that can't be found then conservation was just broken.

>>5098234
>My point was shouting "conservation!" doesn't mean shit if an explanation of why the device would fail cannot be found.
Bullshit. It is a reference to a mountain of evidence that says that the entire class of devices is *impossible*.

>Because guess what, if that can't be found then conservation was just broken.
None of these devices actually work. It's been investigated over and over again.

>>5098250

It looks to be working quite well to me and appears transparent enough to not easily be hiding anything. So, want to take a crack at how it's fake?

>>5098262
>It looks to be working quite well to me and appears transparent enough to not easily be hiding anything.
Go be impressed by a magic act or something.

These devices don't work, and the video is not good evidence that they do (given the long history of these exact devices being debunked, and the fantastic level of evidence that says the entire scheme is completely impossible).

I could play games of guessing how each one of them is deceptive, but it's a waste of my time and yours.

If you think these work, go prove us all wrong, with even just one of them. Become a billionaire, win a Nobel Prize. Go ahead, do it. Meanwhile, I'm done talking with morons for the day.

>>5097015
well, yeah, that's why i said desk toy
it'll probably run non stop for a year if i get some good ball bearings, maybe i'll make it run a simple, small kinetic sculpture.
but other than that it's useless

>>5098295
>for a year
I would find that extremely impressive. Anyway, sure.

>>5098316
it's constant rotation, but not particularly fast and not under much stress. good ball bearings could take that for upwards of a year. might get a little squeaky near the end though

>>5098272
> Become a billionaire, win a Nobel Prize.
Nope. You would eliminate a $700 trillion/year industry and the world will hate you. Any hypothetical "perpetual" motion machine would eliminate energy as a salable commodity. The worldwide economy would shit the bed. Without scarcity, the whole house of cards tumbles down.

When hydroelectric power was proposed, it was initially derided as a perpetual motion scheme, but water keeps evaporating from oceans and raining into reservoirs, perpetually from our puny human viewpoint. I know someone who has a good flow of water through his land, two Pelton wheel generators, gets a check for $600 every month from the power company.

>>5096727

This is completely wrong. Magnetic fields are conservative. You don't get any energy from them.

>>5098401
What is the source of power for the field? Why do I get a magnetic field "for free" from a permanent magnet, but I need to input power to make an electromagnet?

>>5098376
>bringing up hydroelectric in a thread about perpetual motion machines
Why are people allowed to be this stupid?

Hydro, solar, and wind are renewable, they are not perpetual. Perpetual motion machine is a very specific and very real term, and when people propose it you laugh at them. A perpetual motion machine is the idea that you can just set up a black box (closed system) with either 100% efficiency or greater than 100% efficiency and then run that indefinitely. It's stupid and wrong.

Hydro is not a closed system; the water comes and goes from an entirely outside source, making it not at all a laughable, derided source of energy. No one initially derided hydroelectric as a perpetual motion machine. The 'hydro' part of hydroelectric is literally older than the electric part; we had machines running off of water before we had electricity as an intermediary. Hydro has never been derided as a laughable crank in any real or meaningful sense.

Comparing hydro to this shit? Stop. Stop it. Right now.

>>5098412
Is the universe a closed or open system? Last time I checked we are sitting on a big spinning permanent magnet racing around a huge energy source.

ShoutStupidAndWinTheArgument.jpg

>>5098408

Even permanent magnets never produce energy. Just like gravity, magnetic fields are conservative.

>>5098408

A magnetic field is not energy. You can store energy in a magnetic field by moving two poles apart just like you can store energy in a gravitational field by walking up a hill. They're conceptually pretty similar. Gravity does not "create" energy and neither does magnetism.

>>5098422
And the core will eventually cool and the sun will eventually burn out. Those are not perpetual motion, the latter is a very big battery and the former is literally nothing at all.

Tapping the latter is called solar energy, it's what people do now, and it is not magic perpetual motion.

Tapping the former is impossible; earth is effectively a static magnetic field. Static magnetic fields cannot produce energy. For an example of a static field, see gravity. Do you think satellites are perpetual motion machines because they're constantly falling to Earth in a circle? Why don't we hook up generators to satellites and beam that energy back down? Do you think that would work?

he pulls a pin, and it starts moving on its own

then it accelerates.

that seems pretty unique among so called perpetual motion machines.

>>5098376

>Nope. You would eliminate a $700 trillion/year industry and the world will hate you. Any hypothetical "perpetual" motion machine would eliminate energy as a salable commodity. The worldwide economy would shit the bed. Without scarcity, the whole house of cards tumbles down.

Sounds like the only people that would hate me are the 1%ers who rely on these things. Also, implying that they wouldn't desperately force governments to introduce artificial scarcity measures like the movie/music industry is doing when the Internet destroyed information scarcity.

>>5098376
You conspiratards are really a piece of work.

If over-unity devices were real and no one believed it but me, I would use them to dominate the solar system.
>hurr durr but da cunspirasy
Shut the fuck up, you moron.

Anyone who knows anything about physics also knows that a perpetual motion device is physically impossible.

>>5098771
isn't the universe a perpetual motion machine?

>>5098815
nope

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe

>>5098771
>Anyone who knows anything about physics also knows that a perpetual motion device is physically impossible.


Anyone who knows anything about physics also knows there's a shitload we still don't know about physics.

>>5098825
I thought that once the universe reaches that point, then it will start collapsing on itself until it gets to a point and then another big bang happens, and it keeps oscillating like that.

>>5098842
nope.

>Ω = the ratio of the actual density of the universe to the critical (minimum) density required for the universe to eventually collapse under its gravity. Ω determines the ultimate fate of the universe. If Ω>1, the universe will experience a Big Crunch. If Ω<1, the universe will expand forever;
>Ω ≈ 0.3:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimensionless_physical_constant#cite_note-Rees.2C_M._2000.2C_p-2

>>5098854
well that sucks. I hope this gets proven wrong in the future or else we'll have to find a way out of this universe (if we even make it that far).

>>5098262
Guuuh "conservation of energy" is not some random shit that we just made up and observed. It is actually demonstrated.
Just open a goddam physics textbooks, and you will find a demonstration of why a magnetic field is a conservative field.

Yeah, sure, you can consider that we are ignorant of some things, and yeah, it is not absolutely impossible to say that maybe some day we discover a new fundamental theory that shows that conservation of energy doesn't apply in some sort of super-special conditions, at very high energy/speed or whatever. Maybe.
But what we can tell for sure, is that it's not going to happen with good ole' macroscopic magnetic fields. All you need to have to demonstrate it's a conservative field is the analytical expression for it.
And this expression can be compared to measurements by anyone, it's not something you can doubt.

>>5098408
force != power != energy

Does conservation of energy apply to dark energy?

>>5098879
It's gonna be a long agony anyway.
The perspective of living as beings of almost pure information at very low temperature in a hibernating state just to save energy -in the case of the expanding universe- is not an enjoyable one.

>>5098890
Personally I subscribe to Kurzweil's view of the Universe "waking up" - essentially that all matter in the universe becomes part of the same intelligence.

At which point we might find that our universe is but the smallest building block of something larger.

>>5096898
enjoy the infantile pony ban

>>5101074
enjoy the spamming ban

>>5101181
Enjoy the ban for false reports

>>5101196
same to you.

>>5101220
>All pony/brony threads, images, and avatars belong on /mlp/.
Nope.

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>5096719
Tulpaforcing

>>5097042
Go there and refresh 10 times. Write down all kinds of threads you have seen in those 10 times (roll threads, requests for porn, ...). Then go there again tomorrow and see how many random threads that are not like the threads you had the previous day. If you found 2 new kinds of threads, it has been a good day.
(I do understand that Random doesn't mean there can't be a long time with always the same thing coming up, but /b/ really isn't that random)

wow, this ban was retarded even by 4chan mod understands.

(USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST)

>>5097948
I remember when it was happening thinking nobody would believe me either. I'm just glad that since no one else can explain it for me that just means I was justified in thinking it was a ufo myself.

>>5101510
Fuck off back to mlp

>>5101510
No it isn't. You broke the rules, hence you were banned. I bet you're underage as well.

>>5096685

> le epic Tesla, he was so fucki great. he created free energy xxxDDD
> lets spred the knowledge xxDD le fuck the capitalism :p
> no, i dont know what is this "ternodynamics" u say lol even though im such a nerd xxDD but no physics, thanks. Tesla was the best xD i want be like tesla, i also dont have children xD

Good bye forever, /sci/
I just can't take this anymore

>>5101677
bye