Possible perpetual motion idea for electrical energy

[Altair66]

Now im sure some of you have seen these magnetic electrical generators claiming to produce electrical energy non stop, and i know that these machines generally do not exist PERPETUALLY... Here is my question

 

If I were to test magnetism in a vacuum on the earth, would the magnetic properties be affected?

 

ive looked online and cant seem to find any practical data or an experiment which has been produced

[swansont]

It would be affected by whatever change in magnetic permeability exists between air and vacuum. Which is not much.

[Altair66]

thanks alot im going to be testing out my expirement next week, to see if i can produce a generator architecture that will be able to run itself and produce energy

[swansont]

I predict that the answer will be "no," even without the benefit of inspecting the device in question.

[Mr Skeptic]

The Second Law of Thermodynamics says it won't work. I've always found it to be the case, however, that other laws of physics also say such things won't work.

[ydoaPs]

How do you plan on overcoming I²R losses and friction?

[1bobwhite]

Altair66 ,

 

Try Googling "Methernitha", and see if any of the information interests you.

 

Although perpetual motion machines are unknown and theoretically impossible, there exists on the earth many possible sources of energy that have not been adequately explored to be developed as power sources. Most of our more easily derived power comes from the sun in different forms other than light. Some of this power may be within our reach of budget and understanding for its development.

 

One cheating way to get some "perpetual power" is to construct a radio reception circuit that will tune into a local transmitting tower, and when Qd up, this signal is then rectified to DC to give a few watts of power continuously. Construction plans for these have been around for some time.

 

I've successfully constructed electrostatic motors that would turn about 1500 rpm. My next step is to try to extract naturally occurring static sources and tie them into the motor circuit. The static is there, but so far I haven't succeeded. No, I'm not using the cat, mainly because she won't cooperate anyway.

Edited May 19, 2010 by 1bobwhite
missed a word

[Duelix]

I think you are trying to produce energy from latent things- IE, radio waves, or static electricity.

 

Light is latent energy, and it is sufficiently concentrated.

 

There could be some huge source we don't know about, but I doubt it.

[Brainteaserfan]

I think you are trying to produce energy from latent things- IE, radio waves, or static electricity.

 

Light is latent energy, and it is sufficiently concentrated.

 

There could be some huge source we don't know about, but I doubt it.

 

Any light that we use here on earth is less that hits the earth to help things grow or whatever else. I've always thought that it would be nice to harness the power of waves. There is a lot of power there. Something like a funnel floating like a floating dock, halfway submerged though, with a fan/screw, in the skinny part. The big part would have to be able to adjust it's size so that if there were big waves, the funnel would be smaller so that less of the wave was harnessed and vice versa. Also, that would need to be placed where the bottom of the body of water was rising so that the waves would all be moving in one direction.

[Leader Bee]

Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?

[TonyMcC]

Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?

I'm sure there are not. There are always "losses" that have to be provided for that eventually stop the motion. In the stirling engine, for example, you will have friction and also heat given off.

[triskaidekaphile]

from what i understand, based on the definition of a perpetual motion machine as being ' a machine or device that powers itself and/or can produce extra power' or creates energy, based on this definition, i would say that it's impossible, however, i think you can make something that looks like a perpetual motion machine, maybe you can make something like it using magnets, but i maintain that the energy is coming from somewhere or some source, i daren't say that those magnetic motors don't work, but frauds are common.

 

 

[lemur]

Are there any instances of a perpetual motion device that does not produce useful energy, simply only enough to keep itself running? A Stirling engine or something?

Wouldn't a satellite in orbit be in perpetual motion without friction to remove energy from its motion? Idk if you could say that orbital motion is absolutely 'perpetual' but I think it's the closest empirical example.

[swansont]

Satellites have losses and orbits decay.

[Fuzzwood]

Carnot cycle, enough said.

[Dekan]

Isn't perpetual motion exhibited by the electron in a hydrogen atom.

 

At the centre of the atom, rests the proton. And around this placid proton, the busy electron orbits eternally.

 

Does the electron's orbit ever decay? Does its charge ever diminish?

 

No sir - it is in perpetual motion. And generating an endless supply of electricity to boot.

 

Who can deny these facts?

[A Tripolation]

Does the electron's orbit ever decay? Does its charge ever diminish?

 

Electrons do not orbit in the sense that you are describing.

[Brainteaserfan]

Electrons do not orbit in the sense that you are describing.

 

Source?

[mississippichem]

Source?

 

All of quantum mechanics and pretty much every bit of physics since then.

[A Tripolation]

All of quantum mechanics and pretty much every bit of physics since then.

 

Precisely. It's not a system that resembles planets orbiting a star. That's been outdated for some time.

[Dekan]

Precisely. It's not a system that resembles planets orbiting a star. That's been outdated for some time.

 

But surely the electron isn't in a fixed position? Relative to the central proton.

 

Sometimes the electron is on one side of the proton. Then it's on the other side. To get to the other side, the electron must move.

 

Whether it moves in a smooth continuous orbit, or abruptly "quantum leaps" around, doesn't really matter. The point is: it moves.

 

And it keeps moving forever. Without using up any of its electrical charge. (Assuming it doesn't get disturbed by outside interference).

 

Isn't that perpetual motion?

[bl4ster]

Change laws of physics and you have perpetum mobile.

Also eletrons move due out affects, its not possible to create something out of nothing

[Fuzzwood]

Go ahead and change them. It's not like they only exist on paper or something.

[bl4ster]

also if we look electrons as perpetum mobile,then our whole universe is perpetum.right?

[swansont]

But surely the electron isn't in a fixed position? Relative to the central proton.

 

Sometimes the electron is on one side of the proton. Then it's on the other side. To get to the other side, the electron must move.

 

Whether it moves in a smooth continuous orbit, or abruptly "quantum leaps" around, doesn't really matter. The point is: it moves.

 

And it keeps moving forever. Without using up any of its electrical charge. (Assuming it doesn't get disturbed by outside interference).

 

Isn't that perpetual motion?

 

The motion of the electron in an atom is not a straightforward extrapolation of macroscopic motion. We don't know the electron is one one side or the other unless we measure its location, which takes energy. Regardless, the entropy of the system does not decrease and no energy is created. It's a quantum system where the energy cannot go anywhere. The impossibility of perpetual motion is a summary that is applied to macroscopic systems and can get misinterpreted because it's not the fundamental principle (much like "nothing can go faster than light" gets misapplied). The fundamental principles are from the laws of thermodynamics: entropy cannot spontaneously decrease — it increases for non-reversible processes — and energy is conserved. Electrons in orbitals of an an atom represents a reversible process. Entropy will remain constant.