Perpetual motion

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by beenthere, Dec 12, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Perpetual motion devices

    There are many such being touted on the internet these days. They are no longer a rotating arrangement of parts that can apparently turn forever with no power being applied, but the promise is always the same - the device will have an output greater than the input.

    Because simple rotation is no longer even interesting, the name has changed. These devices are now called "overunity" devices, as they claim to produce significantly more power than it takes to operate them.

    The traditional perpetual motion device only claimed to run forever once set in motion. Overunity devices are odd, in that they must be powered continuously, but are also supposed to produce more output than physics would predict is possible.

    However, no figures ever get published to support such claims. This is really strange, as that would be the first thing to check - if one is using 10 watts of power to run this thing, and can measure 20 watts coming out, pointing this out is as natural as any other statistic. Those input-to-output figures never show up, though.

    The next strangest thing, especially with the generators that claim more power out than in, is that none of these devices can ever be self-powered. With an overunity generator, it may take an external battery to start it up, but there should also be a switch to throw, allowing the output to be fed to the input, and keep it running using only its own power. This particular claim is never made.

    Think about this for a bit - if any device is supposed to be able to produce more power out than it takes to operate it, being able to power itself is simply obvious.

    The fact that this can't be made to happen should be a major clue: These claims are all lies. These devices are all scams. Even the magical water power devices should be able to make enough gas to run themselves. None of them do. They are all scams.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2009
  2. S_lannan

    Active Member

    Jun 20, 2007
    247
    2
    I really hate the over-unity crowd.
     
  3. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    While I agree that the scammers are worthy of contempt, I might ask that commentary in this thread be confined to proofs/disproofs of perpetual motion devices. The intent is to make a checklist that people can consult to see if claims any such appear to have substance.
     
  4. jpanhalt

    AAC Fanatic!

    Jan 18, 2008
    5,692
    901
    You aren't serious?

    I'm confused.

    John
     
  5. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Sorry you're confused. If it helps, they really do not work. That's what we keep trying to convince he people who want us to help build perpetual motion devices.
     
  6. loosewire

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 25, 2008
    1,584
    435
    Question ?-Is it possible to have sperms,spores, to have some genetic motion
    that is untectable in frozen or dormate states. They have found dna amber,
    teeth and mummy flesh.So what I am saying Is It possible to have untectable
    motion that can be over a million years old In the case of amber.They are bringing
    cells back that could be microscopic motion. What would be time limit for
    perpetual for dna. There may be something that has not discovered yet,If they
    can bring It back from dormate what to say It was not moving. A teesy bit.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2009
  7. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Beats me. That might be as profitable as researching perpetual motion.
     
  8. loosewire

    AAC Fanatic!

    Apr 25, 2008
    1,584
    435
    Never said anything about profit.It was a question for you learned guys
    that I respect your opinions from past preformance.
     
  9. jpanhalt

    AAC Fanatic!

    Jan 18, 2008
    5,692
    901
    I was asking just for a reasoned response of why you feel this thread is not a direct contradiction of AAC policy against discussion of perpetual motion as established here:

    No more HHO, overunity, or Meyer

    In light of that contradiction, it remains totally unclear what new territory you expect this sticky thread to explore.

    John
     
  10. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    I keep seeing schemes turn up, real Rube Goldberg devices (except Rube Goldberg's ideas worked).

    I noticed someone wanted to try a over unity device using 13.57 Mhz. I don't remember the exact frequency, but there is a RF channel set aside for industrial process, not communication. Things like plasma ashers and other high tech devices depend on it.

    The nearest thing we have to over unity is nuclear. A nuclear bomb shows the basic flaw in the idea, if you have a easy way to create more energy than you put in then you will have something very analogous to a chain reaction. I guess we ought to be grateful the universe doesn't work that way.

    I just wish we could get the concept across to the wishful thinkers. The scammers already know the truth, and don't care. The numbers of scams (ideas) seems to be growing too.

    BTW, I still think my idea for tapping into the rotational energy of the earth would work. Let's spin this sucker down.
     
  11. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Just a statement that the devices do not work, and perhaps something the posters looking for such can read through in a brief time. There is no new territory - I'm just tired of covering he same ground over and over. It is possible that this is as hopeless as in the past in trying to convince people to give up on trying to make an overunity device.

    What made you think there was anything new being discussed? Haven't you gone over the old stuff? Do you feel as if there is something more to be gone over? I might suggest you read through all the old threads linked in this thread - http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=28067 - and see if there is, indeed, any new ground to cover. It is possible that we have not fully addressed quite every aspect of the various issues. It would be most valuable for you to point any shortcomings out.

    I do not feel as if there is anything left unsaid, but the string of arguments establishing our position agains such things is a bit lengthy. Perhaps people need a shorter and more accessible set of reasons why pursuing the impossible is not likely to be fruitful.
     
  12. jpanhalt

    AAC Fanatic!

    Jan 18, 2008
    5,692
    901
    That sounds more like a certain kind or religious revival meeting than any sort of technical or scientific discussion, and it doesn't address my question about the conflicting messages from you and AAC policies.

    If you are after comedy, just void the rule against discussing over unity. Otherwise, just don't discuss it. I can't see any value in repeatedly professing the failure of over-unity, especially if you do not allow discussion according to the previously cited policy against such.

    John
     
  13. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Part of the problem is that many people come into the topic fresh. We have to deal with them as if none of the topic areas have been gone over in the past. One can hardly be angry with a poster who has not learned everything to be known about electronics. We do go over roughly the same material over and over again. It's simply not reasonable to assume every overunity poster has gone out of his way just to irritate us. They are not all scam artists, although we have certainly had some who posted here.

    I personally do not find the topic humorous. I wonder that you do. What about scams ripping people off seems funny?

    Where is the value in repeatedly saying the same things about electronics? It may be that it is the only way people learn.

    What about my previous post?
    That is not answered as yet. Your input could be most valuable.
     
  14. maxpower097

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2009
    795
    388
    Doesn't this go against some physics law in general?
     
  15. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Oh yeah, but that doesn't mean we don't get a lot of visits from some other forums (overunity.com is one I think).
     
  16. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    There seems to be no question about that. I moved a post from some such source to its own thread - http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=31478

    It may turn out that there are few, if any, people who are taken in by the scams and come to us because they can't get something to work. I loostened things up, as it seemed not in keeping with our educational purpose to refuse to treat with some questions. If it appears that only scammers with pseudo intellectual questions are going to be the ones who post, then it will get abandoned as a worthless effort.

    Sure does!
     
  17. Nanophotonics

    Active Member

    Apr 2, 2009
    365
    3
    Stick to the law of conservation energy and one won't go astray.
     
  18. maxpower097

    Well-Known Member

    Feb 20, 2009
    795
    388
  19. beenthere

    Thread Starter Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    This is turning into a live and learn scenario. I was motivated to actually try to teach someone who was about to be taken in by the scammer how it is impossible to make perpetual motion machines.

    So nobody but scammers show up.....

    Guess it time to close the door again.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.