1

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 23/09/2024 19:03:11 »

There is nothing to rule out a perpetual motion machine if all losses could be eliminated

Hi Paul, I think you take me far too seriously sometimes (and perhaps not seriously enough at others). I was taking a jibe at physicists in that final sentence and I do know how science is supposed to work.

The other possibility of what we all think of as perpetual motion, or, moreover, overunity, is a system that manages to obtain its energy from a source that we have not yet identified, and that is a possibility that would not offend Mr Noether, is it not?

2

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 23/09/2024 18:48:50 »

The impossibility of perpetual motion WAS demonstrated about a hundred years ago.

Tell that to electrons orbiting a nucleus or an inductor in a superconductor. What does Noether have to say about that? Sure you can't extract energy from such a system and it still be perpetual but it is perpetual until you do. Oh, and I do realise I am talking about a device intended to produce energy, which is not the same thing as the above examples but maybe you should be a little more precise if you're going to make assertions.

3

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 22/09/2024 21:36:42 »

The basic laws such as the conservation laws are very unlikely to be changed as they are the foundation on which this universe stands. 

What happens to the universe if you're wrong?

I did spend quite a time on overunity.com fascinated with the idea of sinking a compressed cylinder of air to be triggered to reinflate at depth so as to take advantage of the work done. In that instance I did fully analyse the system and discovered that the work obtained was the same as was required to recompress the air. I do have a good feel for how Nature balances one kind of force against another. Just I haven't got that feel with regard to magnets yet. I'm sure that if some impossibility of a perpetual motion machine was demonstrated the universe would still stand and physicists would simply, after picking their jaws from the ground, brush off the current dogma, add a few caveats and bolster themselves up with it again.

4

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 22/09/2024 12:55:28 »

There was a forum that went by the name "overunity.com"

Thanks for the measured response, Paul. In case it interests you Stefan, who ran overunity.com, is working with UfoPolitics of overunitymachines.com to resurrect overunity.com, which is currently archived whilst waiting for the huge number of message attachments to be reconnected to the posts to which they relate. I was a member of the overunity.com forum and am now a member of overunitymachines.com. I know that it seems near certain that the conservation laws and Noether's theorem are valid and any kind of free energy is ruled out, however they are generalisations and we don't know for sure that there is no extrahexahedral approach that will allow what in that particular paradigm is impossible. There are still many aspects of physics that are open to deeper exploration and I am sure there are plenty of surprises yet to come.

When I was about 14 or 15 my great uncle showed me a design he had come up with that he suggested might be perpetual. He was unable to build it because that design required some kind of magnetic shielding. After he died I came across mumetal, a magnetic shielding material, but it works by being a very low inductance path, so the field is contained in the mumetal rather than passing through it. But I realised that wouldn't have had the effect Uncle Allan had hoped. However I posted the design to overunity.com and some years later I discovered a video of a German build based on the design that appeared to work. The video may have been a hoax, I've no way to discover whether there was some hidden propulsion system or video editing or some other subterfuge designed to mislead but it appeared convincing and I understood how it was supposed to work. Both that design and my own remix of a similar principle appear - from their geometry and action - to suggest that magnetic attraction and repulsion may be able to be used to run a system without input of any currently known energy except for the intrinsic characteristics of magnets. It may well be that the subject is not worth pursuing but I am not yet convinced because I have not yet found what would prevent this configuration running forever - a 'sticky' point in the cycle, for instance. There will be back-drag on the tab exiting the gap during one part of the cycle and it may be (because Nature likes to keep things symmetrical and in balance) that whatever geometry we can invent the forces will always cancel out. But that is not yet shown, rather, the response from the scientists I have engaged with is to shortcut the investigation by relying on the conservation laws. Perhaps in seeking to understand this device some other discovery may arise, perhaps still not challenging our current understanding of thermodynamics but adding to it. Certainly there is no possibility of that if we are to dismiss anything but what we think we already know.

5

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 21/09/2024 16:43:50 »

I've added the following the the web page about the device:

But will it work?

Well, we don't know yet. I have to finish building it so we can see. I have about one more day of 3D printing parts and still have to find suitable magnets. Also I would rather use 5mm stainless or chrome rods but may have to settle for mild steel rods if I can't find a local source for something better.

Most of the magnetic forces work in the direction we want them to but there is a point, as the metal tab is leaving the magnetic gap, where, in addition to the repulsion vector, which works in our favour, there is a magnetic drag on the tab, trying to drag it back into the gap. At this point the magnets are quite close and it's not easy to work out which force vector will win the tug-o-war but at this same time there are two adjacent pairs of magnets - one pair in attraction and increasing their force and the other pair in repulsion with their force diminishing - that are exerting their force in a helpful direction and they may help to overcome any back-attraction of the closest magnets.

I had rather hoped that someone on one of the science forums I posted to might take a look at the geometry of the device and give some pointers as to how the force vectors will balance but it turns out, in my experience anyway, that the denizens of such fora are a sarcastic, arrogant and unfriendly lot when it comes to examining such a device; probably they feel that since free energy/overunity/perpetual motion is outlawed by thermodynamics it is not worth their time nor worth the risk of tarnishing their professional reputations. So we'll just have to build and test it ourselves.

6

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 12/09/2024 17:10:17 »

Now do as I told you.

Add 'rude' to 'naive'. Also you have reverted to being unhelpful again.

7

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 12/09/2024 16:56:56 »

I would advise you to develop (in the sense of engineering drawing) your cam assembly in two dimensions, when it will become apparent that  even if there were no hysteresis or frictional losses, the system has at least one point of stable equilibrium and therefore will not rotate continuously.

That is a more constructive response, Alan, thank you.

I do have a diagram on my website that shows this, I believe. I can't seem to attach it but you can view it at https://tomboy-pink.co.uk/sfmm/media/principle.png

8

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 12/09/2024 15:10:41 »

Then you are a fool.

What were you doing there?

It. Does. Not. Work.

What's to discuss?

I was a fool despite being a member of mensa (that's what I was doing there).

"It does not work" is an assertion, not an explanation, and I'm sure you guys would never let me get away with naked assertions (or maybe that's what the 'naked' in the forum name is all about.) How about we discuss where I have gone wrong in explaining the force vectors in this device.

9

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 12/09/2024 14:44:45 »

What a load of cobblers

I didn't say that Alan was stupid, Paul, I said he was naive and I stand by it. One thing I noticed at mensa meetings was that very many of these great intellects are naive and I think it is often the case. I was stunningly naive about how the world works, who is in power, what the "great American tradition of philanthropy" is really about, etc until about 20 years ago. Perhaps we would be better off discussing the device rather than the philosophy of science and the altruism of known criminals.

10

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 11/09/2024 09:41:26 »

There's nothing politically inconvenient about perpetual motion or free energy. It would set some Middle Eastern potentates and religious perverts  back into the Dark Ages, but most of the population wouldn't notice the difference and the rest of the world would be a better  place.

Instead of complaining about people like me who offer to help, why not just do it? Naive? Not according to my company balance sheet.

Don't get too wound up about money. In its purest form it is just virtual work - you get it by doing something useful for someone, and it allows you to get others to do stuff  for you. It's the oil  that lubricates collaboration, which in most people's opinion is a Good Thing and the basis of civilisation.

Or are you intending to steal the materials for your prototype?

Alan, just about every word of your response is alien to my way of thinking. I think the "Middle Eastern potentates and religious perverts" run banks and commit genocide; it seems you are determined to drag the conversation into politics and away from the subject of this topic. Your offer to help has amounted to offering to help patent the (already public domain) idea and I am not interested to engage in such a system, as I've already stated; and your additional helpful suggestion is that I work it out for myself - I'm surprised you gave that away for free. Money is a replacement for trust. It probably won't help to point that out since you think it has value rather than that it is an evil introduced to address a failing. All in all your responses demonstrate an inability for the kind of extrahexahedral thinking that allows such ideas as this to arise in consciousness.

Do you think we can get back to, or even make a start on, examining the geometry and magnetic fields in the device?

11

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 10/09/2024 17:52:21 »

Oh dear, things are going south, rapidly.
...

You and I live in different worlds, Paul. In your world people are greedy, selfish and competitive and everything costs money. I, on the other hand, have studied my nature and found that it is not like that at all. Nature never charged me for anything, just some things require a little effort and often a bit of knowledge. The whole construct of money, economics and accounting is just that, a construct, and you may very well say, "Well that is how it is." but it is not universally so and I do things for the love of it and find reward in the doing of it. Patent's just give governments 1st dibs on whatever you invent, so that they can classify stuff as a National Security issue and prevent it being developed. Investment is there to encourage people to support stuff that otherwise they wouldn't bother with or would avoid supporting because it goes against their values. But everybody values money, don't they? Don't they?

I don't believe I mentioned anything that can be classed as a conspiracy theory. The brief synopsis I gave of Bill Gates' altruism is really just scratching the surface of what is publicly known about the evil creature (for anyone who cares to research it.) Anyway, this is all wandering from the topic. I blame Alan for his naivety.

As to whether energy from nothing has ever been demonstrated, well, there are quite a number of people who seem to have done so: Wesley Gary inspired my device; Stanley Meyer might have been on to something but he kinda expired prematurely; Dr. Robert Adams was an interesting guy too; not to mention Ed Leedskalnin and Tesla (seems to be No1 on the physicist's 'din do nuffin' list despite having contributed to an extraordinary number of common devices). There have been a heap of different designs offered by a great number of inventors - oh, oh, another one, Fredrich Luling and his magnetic motor, who even knows about that one? Ok, none of them appear to have changed the paradigm amongst physicists but these inventors don't seem to have the kind of life expectancy required to convince those who choose to believe otherwise. Now that might be a conspiracy theory but I think that term is over and inappropriately used, politically inconvenient theories might be more appropriate.

Sure, you 'scientists' don't want to listen to any such theories because they are obviously impossible and therefore not worth your time but, one day you might overlook something in your haste to concentrate on real science, like pandemics and climate change etc.

Please excuse my cynicism, I must have learned it from somewhere, perhaps I picked it up from what has been thrown at me every time I bring up the subject of free energy.

12

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 07/09/2024 08:08:51 »

Let's cut to the chase.

You can do this yourself by simply looking at your design and calculating the torque at any point in the rotation. Or just build it and see what happens.

If the laws of physics are wrong, you can bring me a working prototype built to your specification. I will help you apply for the necessary patents (in your name as sole inventor) and raise capital to get it into mass production.  Nobody will invest if it isn't (a) demonstrated and (b) patented.   

My fee will be 1% of the factory-gate sale price for every device that incorporates the agreed design - we'll let the lawyers sort out the details. What you do with the rest of the money is entirely up to you - you can mirror the Gates Foundation if you want the world to benefit, or spend it on "slow horses and fast women", as you please.

Well Alan, you say "Simply" calculating the torque but, looking at my design, it seems to me it will involve some FEM analysis and a chunk of integration, neither of which falls within the ambit of my current expertise.

As for investment, patenting etc, if this device is what you guys instantly recognise it to be then who would need to go chasing investment? I am often told there is no such thing as free energy but the fact is that ALL energy is free energy until someone puts a price on it. You're welcome to your lucrative ambitions but that's not where I'm at. Total cost for development so far is negligible, since my time is free, and I neither need or want investment.

And if you think Bill of the notoriously eugenic Gates dynasty is out to benefit anyone but Bill Gates or that killing or paralysing little girls in India and Africa is a boon to mankind then I have a perpetual motion machine to sell you.

13

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 06/09/2024 08:57:48 »

This is a speculative topic, hence it belonging in lighter-side.
It is also a topic that actively denies established science (energy conservation).

The last straw was the invocation of scientific 'dogma', a classic troll resort.

Build a prototype and show us wrong. If you can't do that (and only show a simulation), then science was right all along.

Yes, it is a speculative topic but we are encouraged to phrase topics as questions. A question is an enquiry rather than a speculation. It would have been helpful to let the OP know that a topic has been moved, otherwise it can lead to speculation that the forum does not have the capability to address the subject.

I am in the process of prototyping the device but feel that the point of physics is to examine such questions in the abstract before deciding whether a proposal is worth spending time and resources to develop. I'm frustrated that the general responses I have received have dismissed the idea because it would appear to challenge the consensus rather than by disproving the concept using the specifics of the device.

14

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 04/09/2024 13:46:51 »

...

Thanks for the response Paul. It sums up nicely what is wrong with science: scientists don't question what they think they know. Thanks to "laws" like conservation of energy you shortcut examining anything that looks to challenge those "laws". But that doesn't enlighten anyone as to why - specifically, analytically - this device won't work. It looks logical: the magnets are in attraction where the cam tracks converge and in repulsion where they diverge and in both cases that will impose a vector force on the cam track causing the rotor to rotate. Is there something wrong with that analysis to begin with?

Even as an intellectual exercise it is an interesting problem, n'est'pas? It seems not so when it comes to scientists and physicists in particular. There is a more certain law than thermodynamics and conservation of energy and that is that physicists cannot entertain, even as an intellectual exercise, any challenge to their dogma. But science is the history of challenging dogma, though, as Max Planck said, "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Perhaps this device doesn't contradict the conservation of energy at all, perhaps it is just that the way we define conservation of energy is not specific enough in this case. I seem to recall that it only applies to a closed system. Do we know for sure that magnetism does not cross some boundary? Sub-atomic particles flash in and out of existence, or perhaps in and out of our dimension, are we sure that there is not a similar effect with magnetic fields? But nobody is prepared to even examine such questions because "conservation of energy."

There is another anomaly with physicists: they know for sure that there can be no such thing as a perpetual motion machine and yet they can recognise such a thing (and shut their brain off) instantly.

I'm sorry to rant but I am frustrated that nobody will discuss the geometry of this device and point out - by referring to the device's geometry and magnetic fields - why this machine will not work as I have suggested it will. Being told, "blah, blah, conservation of energy, blah, blah, laws of thermodynamics, blah, blah, ..." feels like being told, "Because I say so!" by a teacher who doesn't know the answer to some question. That is not aimed at you specifically, Paul.

I was told by one physicist that he had never been confronted with such a complex problem in all of his university training. Perhaps that is the real problem: it is not simple to analyse what is happening in this device and therefore far easier to dismiss it by simply stating that if it did work then it would negate conservation of energy and therefore it can't work and therefore it isn't worth thinking about.

Surely somebody has enough familiarity with magnetism to, at least approximately, point out where in the rotation is the "sticky spot" - where the force vectors are wrong or the geometry prevents them acting or some other consideration. But we never get to such a discussion because you guys (and all the other scientists I have found to discuss it with) can shortcut the discussion with variations on "conservation of energy."

15

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 03/09/2024 12:05:20 »

Not as much as the guy who does patent it and thus prevents you (or anyone else) from making one.

Something wrong with the patent system if one can patent prior art.

16

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 03/09/2024 11:06:37 »

If you apply for a patent, the inspector will tell you why it won't work and isn't patentable. If you don't apply for a patent, you are giving away the most significant invention the world has ever seen.

What won't work? The control mechanism? If the device is the most significant invention the world has ever seen then why would I seek profit from it? Surely such a device would profit me as much as anyone and making it freely available opens it to development and improvement by many different minds.

17

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 03/09/2024 10:15:43 »

I've updated the web page for the device detailing the control mechanism that allows the device to be started in forwards or reverse rotation and to be stopped when running. (Just in case anyone is interested.) I'm rather pleased with the way it has turned out and has fitted into the device and I think it is worthy of a patent by itself (if I was into patenting.)

The control system toggles the device off whether it is rotating forwards or backwards, is simple and has few moving parts.

Info at tomboy-pink[ dot ]co[ dot ]uk/sfmm/

18

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 01/09/2024 14:02:32 »

All these schemes for changing/modulating the field of a permanent magnet fail to sum all the input/output energies. For example removing the ferromagnetic material between the two opposing permanent magnets will require energy: in a perfect lossless system this energy will exactly equal any gain resulting from the altered fields and in practice it will exceed any gain.

Certainly there will be force required to pass a ferromagnetic sheet through a magnetic gap. The field induces eddy currents in the sheet and, being an opposite field to that of the inducing magnets, it will create drag. My experiments, though somewhat rough and ready, seem to indicate that moving the ferromagnetic sheet transverse to the field does not seem to cause as much drag as you would expect and I believe the force required to do so is less than the force of the attraction/repulsion forces. I may be wrong in these observations but, as nobody with a good understanding of magnetic fields and forces seems prepared to analyse what is happening with the attraction/repulsion forces and the eddy current drag, I am in the process of building this device in order to empirically test my assumptions. Thanks for the intelligent reply.

19

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 30/08/2024 12:05:03 »

...

Still doesn't address the question. Certainly not with reason. What's so difficult about analysing what forces are operating in this machine and commenting on why it would behave differently than the way I suggest it will. Is there something wrong with how I have described the device or the observations I have made about how and why it should operate? Can anyone address those questions rather than pontificate about perpetual motion machines in general?

20

New Theories / Re: Can one switch magnetic flux with a ferromagnetic material?

« on: 29/08/2024 15:21:05 »

Or you could just buy one.

Your response doesn't answer the question I asked: will the device I described behave in the way I suggested it will?