• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Perpetual motion machine examination rules, please.

I sent them and e-mail and asked a simple question.
If a gravity powered PMM is allowable, why not just offer a prize for such ?
If someone even builds an electrical over unity device, it would be known.
 
A thread lurches ponderously off the slab: "It's alive... it's ALIIVE!"

If a gravity powered PMM is allowable, why not just offer a prize for such ?
Click to expand...
There is one, it's called the MDC.

I know everyone always says to post to an existing thread, but sometimes a new thread is warrented.
 
The million dollar chance is going away in a few years but I believe there is still time to win the million dollars for a perpetual motion machine.

Even if the MDC is going away, I think a special prize for a perpetual machine is a waste of effort. Up to now, there isn't the slightest hint that a perpetual motion machine is feasible and if somebody did succeed in building one the amount of publicity and rewards for the accomplishment would probably completely eclipse the benefits of any prize. Furthermore a prize is not necessary to get people to try to build one like the x-prize was for getting a privately funded successful space launch. It seems that even without prizes and without the slightest encouragement from anybody in the scientific/engineering communities people are going to keep trying to build perpetual motion machines.

I suppose that there are a few perpetual motion machine scammers out there and it might be nice to wave the million dollar challenge in their face, but those scammers existed before the MDC and they will exist after it.

So why does somebody want a perpetual motion machine prize?
 
Last edited:
Why bother to win the MDC with a PMM if you can solve the world's power problem?
Billions are spend producing energy, imagine how much you can gain by making it free?
 
davefoc said:
The million dollar chance is going away in a few years but I believe there is still time to win the million dollars for a perpetual motion machine.

Even if the MDC is going away, I think a special prize for a perpetual machine is a waste of effort. So why does somebody want a perpetual motion machine prize?
Click to expand...


Hi All,
Do agree with you that a prize would be a waste of effort. The prize really has nothing to do with it. Over unity is engineering if it can be accomplished.
There are 2 interesting aspects to it. One is that Johann Bessler wrote a book or books describing his claim. His wheels were publicly demonstrated.
So in one sense, what I am attempting would be to show that someone already accomplished converting gravity into mechanical energy.
The second is, Scientists have been doing experiments to try to attain super conductive behavior which they hope would lead to a scientifically developed device.
Didn't see where the thread was a year old. Sorry about that all.
 
After doing some quick reading on Johann Bessler, no one knows exactly how his machine worked. So, there’s really nothing to test.
 
P-Motion said:
The second is, Scientists have been doing experiments to try to attain super conductive behavior which they hope would lead to a scientifically developed device.
Click to expand...

Scientists have been using superconductivity for decades. Superconductors exist in virtually every hospital, in the West at least. What exactly do you mean by a "scientifically developed device"?
 
P-Motion said:
So in one sense, what I am attempting would be to show that someone already accomplished converting gravity into mechanical energy.
Click to expand...



Can I just point out that water-power mills have been converting gravity into mechanical energy for centuries?




Or was that not what you had in mind?
 
Broes said:
Why bother to win the MDC with a PMM if you can solve the world's power problem?
Billions are spend producing energy, imagine how much you can gain by making it free?
Click to expand...

I used to make this argument also.

I think, it is not completely valid though. It is conceivable that a perpetual motion could be built in which the excess energy generated was so small that the use of it as a source of energy was impractical.

[muse mode]
It's interesting to me that there are people out there who take seriously the possibility of perpetual motion machines. For as long as I can remember, a perpetual motion machine has seemed an obvious impossibility to me. How is it that people can have such different views of the world?

There is one tantalizing clue that perpetual motion machines are not impossible. Where did the energy to produce the world that we know come from? So if energy was created from nothing at some point in time then couldn't it be created again? Another idea might be that the energy of the universe has always existed and therefore it was never created, so more can't ever be created. But postulating that the energy has always been there doesn't seem to be any more of a satisfying answer than "god did it", which doesn't answer anything either.

It is interesting that vast amounts of research and theorizing have been devoted to questions like that and it doesn't seem like we are any closer to answering them today than when some long ago ancestor of man first looked up into the sky and wondered about it.

[\muse mode]
 
I think, it is not completely valid though. It is conceivable that a perpetual motion could be built in which the excess energy generated was so small that the use of it as a source of energy was impractical.
Click to expand...

Then it is just a matter of scaling. Make 10 devices instead of 1 or make the device itself bigger. If there IS a way to get free energy and we can tap into it, it's only a matter of perfecting it.
 
P-Motion said:
...
So in one sense, what I am attempting would be to show that someone already accomplished converting gravity into mechanical energy.
...
Click to expand...
I believe gravity can be used for mechanical energy, but not perpetually so. Are you arguing otherwise?

Do you have a working PM machine?

Are you making a claim for the Million Dollar Challenge?
 
Broes said:
Then it is just a matter of scaling. Make 10 devices instead of 1 or make the device itself bigger. If there IS a way to get free energy and we can tap into it, it's only a matter of perfecting it.
Click to expand...

If the ratio of energy produced to energy consumed to make your perpetual motion machine is too low then it would not be practical to use the perpetual motion machine as a source of energy. If the device costs a trillion dollars to make and it produces only a watt of power then the gadget might be a perpetual motion machine but it is not a practical device for the production of energy.

A moot point, for sure, since I am close to certain, that perpetual motion machines of any kind are impossible, especially mechanical perpetual motion machines.
 
D,
Not really making a claim for the million dollar challenge. Am quite surprised that something that would be engineered would be included.
I am building a small prototype based on how I think Bessler's wheels worked.
It might be that not having the proper tools to work with and the small scale could pose a problem.
So I'm going slowly about it. I will be using a single arm with 2 weights. This way, if succesful, it will show the principle a wheel would use.
The idea is to have a round weight roll away from the axle when it goes beneath the plane of the axle. This will increase its' force because of leverage.
Then to return the weight to a position where it is balanced with the opposing weight, it will swing from an overhead slide like a pendulum.
This will allow all of its' force to be pushing against the wheel.
And when it is in balance with the opposing weight, they will be @ 6 o'clock and 12 o'clock.
Then momentum can continue rotating the arm another 90 degrees to repeat the cycle.
Myself, I kind of get into history, engineering and a little science as a hobby.

Dumb All Over said:
I believe gravity can be used for mechanical energy, but not perpetually so. Are you arguing otherwise?

Do you have a working PM machine?

Are you making a claim for the Million Dollar Challenge?
Click to expand...
 
P-Motion said:
Then to return the weight to a position where it is balanced with the opposing weight, it will swing from an overhead slide like a pendulum.
Click to expand...

You will be disappointed to find that the energy required to move the weight back is slightly more than the energy gained by having it move out on the way down. Your concept has been tried hundreds, if not thousands of times, with exactly the same results. It just sits there.

Check out http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm

Particularly this page http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/thinking.htm
 
Last edited:
P-Motion said:
D,
Not really making a claim for the million dollar challenge. Am quite surprised that something that would be engineered would be included.
I am building a small prototype based on how I think Bessler's wheels worked.
It might be that not having the proper tools to work with and the small scale could pose a problem.
So I'm going slowly about it. I will be using a single arm with 2 weights. This way, if succesful, it will show the principle a wheel would use.
The idea is to have a round weight roll away from the axle when it goes beneath the plane of the axle. This will increase its' force because of leverage.
Then to return the weight to a position where it is balanced with the opposing weight, it will swing from an overhead slide like a pendulum.
This will allow all of its' force to be pushing against the wheel.
And when it is in balance with the opposing weight, they will be @ 6 o'clock and 12 o'clock.
Then momentum can continue rotating the arm another 90 degrees to repeat the cycle.
Myself, I kind of get into history, engineering and a little science as a hobby.
Click to expand...

Once you have built the device and found out that it doesn't keep going on its own, have a look at Donald Simanek's Museum of Unworkable Devices to find out why it doesn't work.
 
Guys, am asking dsimanek for his opinion on it.
There is nothing close to this design on his pages.
Have also searched a Russian page with over 100 designs as well as everything Bessler drew and Asa from Tennessee.
I think the principle I am attempting to demonstrate has not been made known. And if successful will give credence to Bessler's claims.
I think the difficulty in people understanding such a concept is the weight would have a compound behavior. It would swing like a pendulum while it is a part of a "wheel".
I have asked dsimanek about linking to my web page in case someone with decent equipment to work with would like to try building one. I have told Mr. Simanek that I live in an apartment and am using hand held tools.
 
Last edited:
P-Motion said:
Guys, am asking dsimanek for his opinion on it.
There is nothing close to this design on his pages.
Have also searched a Russian page with over 100 designs as well as everything Bessler drew and Asa from Tennessee.
I think the principle I am attempting to demonstrate has not been made known. And if successful will give credence to Bessler's claims.
I think the difficulty in people understanding such a concept is the weight would have a compound behavior. It would swing like a pendulum while it is a part of a "wheel".
I have asked dsimanek about linking to my web page in case someone with decent equipment to work with would like to try building one. I have told Mr. Simanek that I live in an apartment and am using hand held tools.
Click to expand...

Do you want to submit your concoction - when it's finished - to the JREF Challenge? I assure you it'll qualify if you permit examination to eliminate cheating.

If you don't, you're in the wrong subforum.
 
Last edited:
P-Motion said:
D,
Not really making a claim for the million dollar challenge. Am quite surprised that something that would be engineered would be included.
...
Click to expand...
Suppose I claimed I could engineer a mechanical device that was able to talk to the dead. Would you be surprised if my device was eligible for the Million Dollar Challenge?

P-Motion, you say you are not making a claim for the MDC. OK. Might I suggest that your posts are more appropriate for the Science sub-forum. There you can discuss your theories and get excellent feedback from real professional and amateur scientists. Why don't you post there instead of here? This section is for those making a claim for the MDC.
 
As Dumb All Over says, if you are not making a claim for the Million Dollar Challenge, please discuss this elsewhere. I recommend either the General Skepticism or Science subfora.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom