No problem. You should be aware that the term "perpetual motion" applies to any machine thought to power itself indefinitely or to even produce more power than it consumes. Actual mechanical motion isn't required, at least in the way I know the term.Sorry to offend you before but your statement was retarded...
It's a sad fact of physics that, when you handle energy, the very best you can hope for is mere recovery of what you put in. In real life, it's normal to lose large fractions every time you touch power. The rush towards electric cars, for instance, seems to ignore the fact that you have to make all that electricity somewhere, losing a lot along the way to the pavement underneath you. More coal plants? Nope, too dirty. Nukes? Nope, too dangerous. Homegrown oil? Nope, too messy. I'm befuddled why anyone thinks adding more power conversion steps is an improvement. But I digress.
Here in the world of electricity, we're actually better off and can often achieve >90% conversion efficiencies. That's one reason electricity is considered such a high quality source of energy. You can work on a computer, see the screen and listen to music, all the while warming your room. Compare that to relatively low quality energy like warm air from a solar collector. It can warm the room, but that's about it.
I'm still quite fuzzy on your arrangement, but I don't need to see anything more to know that you cannot power your house without significant power coming from somewhere. Energy is conserved in all cases, and cannot be created out of thin air or made to disappear. We humans can only harness it as it passes from one place to another.