[Yahya A.Sharif (OP)]

Some special system can break the law of conservation of energy.
This magnetic system generates free energy :

In the picture in 1 there is a vertical force between the magnet and the piece of iron.

In 2 I use very small force to move the piece of iron Horizontally. There is not a resistance force, the force between the neodymium magnet and the piece of iron is vertical.


In 3 I also use small force to take away the piece of iron from the neodymium magnet because the area between the the piece of iron and the neodymium magnet is small so the vertical force is small.

In 4 I move the piece iron again horizontally. The force is small because it is horizontal.

In 5 the The neodymium magnet will attract the piece of iron. The area  in 5 is big.  So the force is big.

In 2,3,4 I use small force to move the piece of iron but in 5 I get very big force by the neodymium magnet. Because the area in 5 is big.

I start again from position 1, I use small force to move the piece of iron horizontally as in position 2 and get bigger force in position 5
I repeat this to exert a small force to get a bigger force. The vertical distance I lift the the piece of iron is the same as the horizontal distance I move the piece of iron away from the neodymium magnet.If the distances are equal and I exert force less than I get then I exert work less than I get this result in free energy by the system.

[Yahya A.Sharif (OP)]

The horizontal  force is remarkably tiny if you push a piece of iron on a surface with small friction and put the neodymium magnet below. I tried it by putting tiny balls on glass. The piece of iron is on the balls to get small friction. I could push the piece of iron with small fractions of 1 N.

The vertical force in case of small area is also obviously  smaller than the force in case of a bigger area. You can easily pull the piece of iron and the neodymium magnet apart when they are at edges.

The neodymium magnet is a very strong type of magnet which makes it practical for the system.

[Origin]

Some special system can break the law of conservation of energy.

They really can't.

This magnetic system generates free energy

It really doesn't.

[paul cotter]

Confusion about force and energy is rampant among "free energy" enthusiasts. A force never produces energy on it's own: to produce energy a force needs to move along a path and the work required to move the force is always equal to or greater than the net system production. Neither magnets nor gravity can ever produce free energy.

[Kartazion]

Neither magnets nor gravity can ever produce free energy.

Yes it's sure. The free energy is related to the thermodynamic system.

But the accumulation of energy by gravity is however possible. Further the magnetic energy is there with the electrostatic potential energy which are related by Maxwell's equations.

[1] A gravity battery is a type of energy storage device that stores gravitational energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_battery

I imagine that my answer brings nothing special, but I'm so bored on the scientific forums so I speak for nothing to pass the time on what should be subjects going in the direction of the perfection of the standard model without each time making new discoveries which are not.

[Kryptid]

Let's keep in mind that a pulley system can allow you to lift a weight using less force than trying to lift the weight by itself. However, energy and force aren't the same. A smaller force acting over a longer period of time can expend the same amount of energy as a larger force acting over a shorter period of time. I believe something similar may be happening with your system. Noether's theorem won't allow it to produce net energy.

[Bored chemist]

Some special system can break the law of conservation of energy.

Not really.
I don't see much point to reading further.

[alancalverd]

On the day of a general election, in my undergraduate epoch, a classical physics lecturer stated "As you know, Conservative forces do no work." There was a small riot.

Our correspondent here think he is a closet Tory but is actually Laboring to lift the iron, whereupon the evil capitalist magnate snatches the fruits of his work back again.

[Deecart]

In the picture in 1 there is a vertical force between the magnet and the piece of iron.

I dont see any picture in the .jpg, so i cant understand anything you are talking about.
I am surprised that some other are doing some comment, so they probably see something... or perhaps are used about saying nothing about nothing.

[Bored chemist]

I dont see any picture in the .jpg, so i cant understand anything you are talking about.
I am surprised that some other are doing some comment, so they probably see something... or perhaps are used about saying nothing about nothing.

Of that post, this bit

I dont see any picture in the .jpg

was informative.

[Bored chemist]

This is the first obvious  error.

In 2 I use very small force to move the piece of iron Horizontally. There is not a resistance force,

[Kryptid]

I dont see any picture in the .jpg

Might be an error with your browser. I can see the image just fine.

[Dave Lev]

Confusion about force and energy is rampant among "free energy" enthusiasts. A force never produces energy on it's own: to produce energy a force needs to move along a path and the work required to move the force is always equal to or greater than the net system production. Neither magnets nor gravity can ever produce free energy.

I fully agree that there is no free energy in EM system.
However, Why are you so sure that gravity can't produce free energy?
Don't you agree that Tidal heating  could come free of charge?
As an example
Take a planet with at least two moons at different radius and orbital velocity.
Even if one moon is fully locked with the spin of the planet, the other one will have to contribute some tidal heat energy.
Therefore, under some limitations, it is possible to extract free energy from gravity.

[Kartazion]

it is possible to extract free energy from gravity.

No no no. No energy can be extracted from gravity itself.

[Bored chemist]

Don't you agree that Tidal heating  could come free of charge?

That comes at the expense of the motion of the moon and earth.
It will run out.

[Dave Lev]

Don't you agree that Tidal heating  could come free of charge?

That comes at the expense of the motion of the moon and earth.
It will run out.

Can we prove it?
Let's use the Earth moon system as an example
1. We all know that the moon contributes tidal heat to earth.
You can claim that due to this tidal heat energy, the moon is drifting outwards.
Now can we set the calculation to prove that all the tidal energy had been transformed to the drifting motion of the moon?
2. Let's assume that the moon is fully locked withthe earth and it can't contribute any tidal energy.
Do you think that under this understanding the moon would keep its orbital radius "forever"? 

[Dave Lev]

Noether's theorem won't allow it to produce net energy.

Noether's theorem is 100% correct when it comes to force or energy that isn't free.
For example, EM energy can't be free of charge.
We must invest heat or work to get that energy
However, gravity is for free. It is there due to mass.
Therefore, as there is no loos of mass due to the impact of gravity motion (tidal heat), that tidal energy should be considered as free energy (with or without the drifting motion of the moon).
Please also don't forget that when the moon is drifting outwards, it decreases its velocity and its kinetic energy, but in the same token it increases its potential energy.
So we might claim that there is no difference in the total energy.

[Halc]

Hi Dave,

Still in the habit of making up nonsense facts and not actually looking at the numbers I see.

Can we prove it?

Noether's theorem proves it. If you don't consider that a proof, then no, I apparently cannot prove it to you.

1. We all know that the moon contributes tidal heat to earth.

It does not. The energy comes from the spin of Earth. The moon has long since become tide locked and has no more energy itself to contribute. The cumulative drain of energy into the tides has slowed Earth's spin to 24 hours from under 10 hours long ago.

You can claim that due to this tidal heat energy, the moon is drifting outwards.

Heat isn't what pushes the moon outward. Any energy expended putting the moon into a higher energy orbit (about 3% of the spin energy) does not manifest as heat. Only the remaining 97% does.

Now can we set the calculation to prove that all the tidal energy had been transformed to the drifting motion of the moon?

The mathematics says this isn't so. Only 3% currently goes there. So says the arithmetic if you compare the orbital energy added to the moon to the spin energy subtracted from Earth each century.

Let's assume that the moon is fully locked with the earth and it can't contribute any tidal energy.

That would be the Earth locked with the moon. The moon is already locked with Earth.

Do you think that under this understanding the moon would keep its orbital radius "forever"?

Energy still radiates away. Earth would still spin (every ~1400 hours), so that energy would still bleed away via tides. That energy loss to the locked system would draw the moon in closer and actually speed up the Earth's spin, which seems counter intuitive, but the total energy is still going down at the rate of heat loss from the continued tides.

Even in the absence of tides, energy is radiated away by other means, and the orbit will eventually decay just like two neutron stars spiraling into each other, but slower.

For example, EM energy can't
However, gravity is for free.

One last time: Gravity isn't energy. It has different units.
How much gravity energy does a million kg have? There's no answer to that because gravity doesn't have energy. Gravity is just the means by which objects interact and exchange other forms of energy, which in this case is the kinetic energy of Earth's spin.

Please also don't forget that when the moon is drifting outwards, it decrease its velocity and its kinetic energy, but it increase its potential energy.

Not in equal amounts.

So we might claim that there is no difference in the total energy.

The claim would be wrong, but that apparently doesn't stop you from claiming it.

[Bored chemist]

However, gravity is for free. It is there due to mass.
Therefore, as there is no loos of mass due to the impact of gravity motion (tidal heat), that tidal energy should be considered as free energy

Nonsense.
If you tie a rope to a rock, then push the rock off a cliff then you can use the rope to turn the shaft of a generator and get electricity.
But you can only do it once.
After that  you have to  lift the rock back up and that takes exactly the same energy as you could get from it falling.
There's nothing  magical about gravity.
Noether's theorem doesn't distinguish it.
And that's because reality doesn't distinguish it.
Potential energy is potential energy.

You need to go away again and try learning some science.

[Dave Lev]

.

The energy comes from the spin of Earth. The moon has long since become tide locked and has no more energy itself to contribute. The cumulative drain of energy into the tides has slowed Earth's spin to 24 hours from under 10 hours long ago.

Thanks
So it is all about earth spin.
Hence, when the earth spin would decrease and be fully locked with the orbital motion of the moon, the earth tidal heat would be zero,.
That is fully clear for earth system with one moon
However, if there was one more moon, then by definition the Earth spin can't be locked with two moons as they orbit at different velocities.
Hence, one of them must contribute tidal heat to earth.
 

Gravity isn't energy. It has different units.
How much gravity energy does a million kg have? There's no answer to that because gravity doesn't have energy. Gravity is just the means by which objects interact and exchange other forms of energy, which in this case is the kinetic energy of Earth's spin.

Yes, I fully agree that gravity isn't energy, it is a force,
However, force can do work and work means energy.
You just confirmed that the radius is not effected by the tidal heat.
Hence, as the tidal heat does not change the radius or the mass why can't we claim that the tidal heat does not reduce the gravity force?
So, if we get a tidal heat without any impact on the gravity force, why can't we consider that tidal heat as a free heat due to gravity force?