hijack from Quick question about perpetual motion.

[Dr. Wlazlak]

Hi, This is a very old subject Using the term perpetual motion machine - is somewhat not the right term to use as it is not a real machine at all

What people are after is a limited but long lasting energy source ( Gravity or magnetic ) 

Point 2 is the power output must run the device itself and produce usable output to run other things  ( not perpetual motion )

Most people believe this is impossible But unfortunately for them it is Possible Again ( not Perpetual motion )

But again unfortunately not any want to find out that it is possible - So it remains impossible for lack of interest.  ( Energy Technology )

So the very few that know it is possible with their working devices, maintain that what is possible for the few remain impossible for the many.

This is what Hobbies are for in the line of Retired Engineers 

But there is the wind, and Sun, and Oil, and radiation making machines. So all is good  - People don't need Gravity or Magnetic Power machines.

The main thing is Perpetual motion machines are impossible only because they are owned by the Easter bunny.

And any energy that come from nothing to make more that 100 percent is owned by the tooth fairy.

Only something from something is something - friction 

Tom Wlazlak - EttCM Energy to torque Conversion Motor - systems  This is the Technology of Gravity or Magnetic as told about.

Talking about something that is Not Real, saying it can or can not work because of something Real, is somewhat not very Scientific 

Using the laws of thermodynamics to say perpetual motion can't work it not very clever. one of these things are not real. So ?

Why Talk about Perpetual motion machines at all. They are not a real item they are only Theory that is not real at all.

Use the Right Terms to describe Working Technology, unless otherwise noted on the drawing.

End of Story

 

[exchemist]

2 hours ago, Dr. Wlazlak said:

Hi, This is a very old subject Using the term perpetual motion machine - is somewhat not the right term to use as it is not a real machine at all

What people are after is a limited but long lasting energy source ( Gravity or magnetic ) 

Point 2 is the power output must run the device itself and produce usable output to run other things  ( not perpetual motion )

Most people believe this is impossible But unfortunately for them it is Possible Again ( not Perpetual motion )

But again unfortunately not any want to find out that it is possible - So it remains impossible for lack of interest.  ( Energy Technology )

So the very few that know it is possible with their working devices, maintain that what is possible for the few remain impossible for the many.

This is what Hobbies are for in the line of Retired Engineers 

But there is the wind, and Sun, and Oil, and radiation making machines. So all is good  - People don't need Gravity or Magnetic Power machines.

The main thing is Perpetual motion machines are impossible only because they are owned by the Easter bunny.

And any energy that come from nothing to make more that 100 percent is owned by the tooth fairy.

Only something from something is something - friction 

Tom Wlazlak - EttCM Energy to torque Conversion Motor - systems  This is the Technology of Gravity or Magnetic as told about.

Talking about something that is Not Real, saying it can or can not work because of something Real, is somewhat not very Scientific 

Using the laws of thermodynamics to say perpetual motion can't work it not very clever. one of these things are not real. So ?

Why Talk about Perpetual motion machines at all. They are not a real item they are only Theory that is not real at all.

Use the Right Terms to describe Working Technology, unless otherwise noted on the drawing.

End of Story

 

I'm afraid this is incomprehensible. 

And yes, using the laws of thermodynamics is what we all do in science and they have never failed yet. So if your idea relies on breaking those laws, we can state with confidence it won't work.

But if you are able to explain your design clearly, with diagrams, we may be able to identify where your error lies. 

Edited January 22, 2023 by exchemist

[swansont]

8 hours ago, Dr. Wlazlak said:

Point 2 is the power output must run the device itself and produce usable output to run other things  ( not perpetual motion )

A device that can run itself and produce usable output would run perpetually (from an energy budget perspective).

[Janus]

Whether you consider it It a "Perpetual Motion" device, or an "Over Unity" energy device, matters not. They are both equally impossible.

[Phi for All]

10 hours ago, Dr. Wlazlak said:

But again unfortunately not any want to find out that it is possible - So it remains impossible for lack of interest.  ( Energy Technology )

I'm sorry, but this is a very lazy argument. The market for energy is huge and continually growing. If an investor doesn't invest, it doesn't automatically mean "lack of interest". There are usually many factors involved in choosing new technologies (we knew about electric cars, but they weren't viable until petroleum got to a certain price), but if someone could demonstrate over unity in a testable, reproduceable way, it would be a milestone accomplishment both scientifically and financially. It's crazy to think it hasn't been tried again and again. You shouldn't equate "no successful devices despite centuries of designing them" with "lack of interest". 

[swansont]

2 hours ago, Janus said:

Whether you consider it It a "Perpetual Motion" device, or an "Over Unity" energy device, matters not. They are both equally impossible.

Agree. But why discuss science when you can focus on semantics?

[Dr. Wlazlak]

Hi Again: So what is said is Proof of concept is required

So: Who here can read Engineering Concepts on Energy designs systems of gravity and magnetic propulsion systems motors 

That allows for the recirculation of non-energy drives that produce a reduction of Counter Reaction force to the Action force of power applied.

That is to say, in hydroelectric power the Sun Evaporates water that goes up to a higher level and drops to produce gravity power output

It the magnetic system the iron balls are in the same realm as water being evaporated and lifted to a higher level then gravity is the power

source that recirculates the energy in a balanced Counter Reaction so The Action Energy made by the Gravity is the driving force.

Easy: Right?

If anyone is interested enough Email me.   info deleted    There are drawing I show - you can see for yourself - Easy - Right?

Maybe not so - Because I am showing these drawing to an computer simulation Engineer in Australia That ask a million question on it's works

Again This is not Overunity, or Perpetual motion - I don't use those terms as they not this type of Energy Technology.

I am trying to clear the Air on that subject to many Science Groups.  I say Just stop using the term Perpetual motion it is not a real thing.

This is why I use my own Terms - EttCM  - Energy to torque Conversion Motors - systems - or Magnagravity - non-electric motor systems

Thanks  Tom

 

[Markus Hanke]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Wlazlak said:

Easy: Right?

Lifting anything to a point of higher gravitational potential requires you to put energy into the system in the first place; likewise, producing magnets of substantial strength also requires lots of energy. Whatever motor device you then construct based on these, you will never get out any more energy than you originally put in. You simply can’t cheat nature. So I really don’t get the point of all this? We already have hydropower, and we already have photovoltaic systems - these aren’t new inventions. You really don’t want any more unnecessary mechanical parts such as moving iron balls etc, since these just reduce the overall efficiency of the system.

[Dr. Wlazlak]

All above is true to the limit of what was said

Without seeing the effect of everything else it does not seem to apply

The point being true or false, what can be done by some is not to conform to all 

And again it really does not matter, what is done can not be undone and all Physics apply and the laws of thermodynamics apply in what is done

and what was said above applies and it done not change the facts that if something is real and it does something it does that seems

unreal does not change the facts that it really does the things it does Why comments do undo the do unviewed by the commenter

This is why I invite all to see for themselves if it does or does not do in fact what is does: all comments without viewing and saying down for up is a simple non-true witness to the event as stated.

contact info deleted     if you do not look: Please: Do not look like a fool later.  because this technology is being shown not just here but everywhere and soon worldwide.  It is in the disbelievers best interest ( Just Don't leave a comment )  

This is for the World's use that is all it is for, Nothing more 

Thanks Tom

End of my comments on this topic 1 / 24 / 2023