The energy producer

[yahya515]

If we put a piece of iron and a magnet close to each other , they will attract , but horizontally there will be little resistance to their relative motion , the force will be vertically and no resistance horizontally, doing little horizontal work will change the vertical force from zero to a number, the change in force will result in huge work.

 

I put a piece of iron close to a magnet , they will attract, I move the iron horizontally away from the magnet, the magnetic force will be zero, I move the iron away from the magnet vertically , then I move the iron towards the magnet horizontally, they will attract again , doing such thing over and over will generate huge work from little work! I did not do an experiment for that it is just theoretical.

 

 

[John Cuthber]

If you try doing the experiment you will find that it doesn't work that way.

[yahya515]

If you try doing the experiment you will find that it doesn't work that way.

I did not do a full scientific experiment with scales , but I tried it by hands and it worked. I designed a simple device and I have a patent for it.

[SamBridge]

I did not do a full scientific experiment with scales , but I tried it by hands and it worked. I designed a simple device and I have a patent for it.

What you're describing is moving the force of a magnetic field over a distance, except they way you do it doesn't create electricity. You move the magnets initially, then you stop and let one magnet attract which only produces force acted upon the magnets and the increase in height is merely the result of the energy you already put into raising the first magnet. There's not any real energy gain. Half the "energy production" threads involve stuff like this, but people never seem to realize that moving your hands or taking the time to raise something is putting energy into the system at one's own expense and thus not efficient.

Edited April 20, 2014 by SamBridge

[yahya515]

f the energy you already put into raising the first magnet. There's not any real energy gain.

when I raise the magnet I do little work because the magnetic force is little ,and that due to the magnets are away from each.

[swansont]

I did not do a full scientific experiment with scales , but I tried it by hands and it worked. I designed a simple device and I have a patent for it.

 

Given your latest threads mentioning patents, I have no respect for the Sudanese patent system. Over-unity/perpetual motion device designs can't be patented in the US. You'd have to actually build one and demonstrate it, because they designs never work. Never.

[Fred Champion]

If we put a piece of iron and a magnet close to each other , they will attract , but horizontally there will be little resistance to their relative motion , the force will be vertically and no resistance horizontally, doing little horizontal work will change the vertical force from zero to a number, the change in force will result in huge work.

 

I put a piece of iron close to a magnet , they will attract, I move the iron horizontally away from the magnet, the magnetic force will be zero, I move the iron away from the magnet vertically , then I move the iron towards the magnet horizontally, they will attract again , doing such thing over and over will generate huge work from little work! I did not do an experiment for that it is just theoretical.

 

 

I suggest you investigate whether or not you can get more energy out of a magnet than it took to make the magnet. If you can, you will have solved the perpetual enengy problem.

[timo]

It's remarkable that all perpetual motion devices proposed on SFN in the past ten years base on magnetism. I wonder if that warrants looking into "potential energy of a dipole-dipole system" and possibly writing up a small explanation on it.

[Fred Champion]

Magnetism is not far from magic-tism.

 

The only force we understand really well is the push (attempt at displacement). Explanation of force in a field as displacement attempted by a flow of field particles usually is not received very well. Magic rubber bands are more fun and apparently more believable.

[yahya515]

I think I have been misunderstood while explaining my idea to generate work from nothing , I will try again :

 

I have here four positions , position A , B , C ,and D , in position A the piece of iron is above and the magnet is below, they are close to each other horizontally and vertically , at this position the magnetic force is huge , the co-area between the iron and the magnet is large , we take away the iron , to be in position B by moving it horizontally , without undergoing any resistance because it is a horizontal motion , there is not force horizontally, it is a vertical force between the magnet and the iron, so we move the iron horizontally to be in position B in position B we let go the iron, to be away horizontally by moving it but close vertically , while the co-area between the iron and the magnet decreases a lot there will be a huge decrease in the magnetic force , we will be able to lift it away from the magnet with little force to be in position C , in which it became away both horizontally and vertically , we return it again by moving it to be in postion D away vertically but close horizontally .in position D we let go of the iron to move with huge force to be again in position A , we repeat that to produce energy . I change the magnetic force from very small number to a bigger number , using this trick , and using very little work , the change in magnetic force will produce huge work .

The total number of the input work done is much less than the total number of the output work done , by this process we generate work from nothing .

 

3D picture for the four positions:

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah116/Yahya_Sharif/moooo_zpsqolrlahz.jpg

[Sensei]

without undergoing any resistance because it is a horizontal motion , there is not force horizontally,

 

Your assumptions are wrong.

 

Do you have metal pipe and magnet? Reproduce this experiment:

[swansont]

I think I have been misunderstood while explaining my idea to generate work from nothing , I will try again :

 

 

No misunderstanding is required. You can't generate energy from nothing.

[yahya515]

 

Your assumptions are wrong.

 

Do you have metal pipe and magnet? Reproduce this experiment:

 

I am confused , the copper should not be attracted to a magnet.

Edited March 21, 2015 by yahya515

[John Cuthber]

I am confused , the copper should not be attracted to a magnet.

Thank you for clarifying that you don't understand physics.

 

[yahya515]

I am not using copper, I am using iron with a weak magnet , the force due electricity will not be a big effect in my invention. compared with magnetic force I gain ,is there a horizontal magnetic force?

Edited March 21, 2015 by yahya515

[Sensei]

I am confused , the copper should not be attracted to a magnet.

 

Here is even nicer version

 

It's not just copper, I said metal. And you don't need pipe actually. U shape or L shape metal works as well.

 

I was doing it hundred time with different materials (the most often Aluminium), with different magnets.

 

With stopwatch/digital camera (and compare frames in image editing software) you can measure speed of passing through them.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Sensei

[yahya515]

the magnet in the video is very strong , if you want to use it in my invention , fine, the iron will undergo the resistance I saw in the video , however , the magnetic force will be huge huge using a strong magnet, return to the my invention , I ask, using weak magnet will that give a noticable horizontal resistance ? in comparison with the vertical magnetic force ?

Edited March 21, 2015 by yahya515

[Sensei]

Are you aware that you're turning iron to magnet by placing close it to permanent magnet?

 

Take for example steel knife, magnet and needle.

Touch needle by knife, they don't attract each other.

Attach permanent magnet to one end of knife.

Touch needle again by other end of knife.

Needle will be attracted by knife.

Disconnect magnet from knife end.

Needle will disconnect too.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Sensei

[yahya515]

Are you aware that you're turning iron to magnet by placing close it to permanent magnet?

I can solve that , every invention has its problem which can be solved , I ask again , will there be a noticable horizontal resistance using a weak magnet ?

if there is not a noticable horizontal resistane then my invention works, and I can generate huge work by doing little work , which is in other words generating energy from nothing!!

[Sensei]

Sorry, but I see no invention made by you.

 

How are you going to extract energy?

 

Energy generator needs to:

- increase temperature of body.

This is what burning carbon, burning oil, burning methane, nuclear power plant, power stations are doing.

This body is typically water, which changes to gas state, and moves rotor blades of electric generators.

 

- increase velocity of electrons directly (water dam power station, wind power station).

 

- chemical reaction changing one compound to another compound, which later can be f.e. burned and release energy at will.

f.e. electrolysis of water to Hydrogen and Oxygen, then liquefy, and burn in rocket while launching in a few seconds.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Sensei

[yahya515]

Sorry, but I see no invention made by you.

 

How are you going to extract energy?

 

I have patented a device which will benefit from this produced energy , it is more complicated than this ,I want to check the concept of producing energy first .

Edited March 22, 2015 by yahya515

[pavelcherepan]

Replying to comment by Yahya made in the other thread

 

 

 

I will gain the energy I used as kinetic energy in lifting it up against gravity again by letting it be free in position D " see my picture " , as potential energy, I will have magnetic energy plus potential energy , in position C I loose it as kinetic energy , in position D I gain it as potential energy, so I am not loosing energy.

 

OK, what is the initial position of metal plate? (Before step A). There are two options:

 

a) Lying on the desk by the side of the magnet, then:

 

When you lift it up and perform work against gravity, yes, you convert your work into potential energy of the plate (assuming a very efficient lifting mechanism), but then as you move it sideways to hover over the magnet, you still have to apply force to move it and to counter gravitational pull (and also the attraction by the magnet). This energy loss will not be converted into potential energy as the height doesn't change, and so will be an energy lost.

 

b) Lying on top of magnet:

 

Here you'll need to apply force to counter both gravitational pull and the pull of the magnet. And while lifting against gravity is 'refundable' in the form of increasing of potential energy, the magnetic field rapidly decreases with distance and so most energy used to separate plate from magnet will be lost.

 

This is just the first step and you're already losing energy, hence the efficiency of the system is far below 100% and you can't generate energy from nothing.

Edited March 22, 2015 by pavelcherepan

[yahya515]

 

OK, what is the initial position of metal plate?

there is not an initial position it is a circle , after position D you return again to position A and so on.

Replying to comment by Yahya made in the other thread

 

 

OK, what is the initial position of metal plate? (Before step A). There are two options:

 

a) Lying on the desk by the side of the magnet, then:

 

When you lift it up and perform work against gravity, yes, you convert your work into potential energy of the plate (assuming a very efficient lifting mechanism), but then as you move it sideways to hover over the magnet, you still have to apply force to move it and to counter gravitational pull (and also the attraction by the magnet). This energy loss will not be converted into potential energy as the height doesn't change, and so will be an energy lost.

 

b) Lying on top of magnet:

 

Here you'll need to apply force to counter both gravitational pull and the pull of the magnet. And while lifting against gravity is 'refundable' in the form of increasing of potential energy, the magnetic field rapidly decreases with distance and so most energy used to separate plate from magnet will be lost.

 

This is just the first step and you're already losing energy, hence the efficiency of the system is far below 100% and you can't generate energy from nothing.

I do work twice , first change it from position A to position B , moving it horizontally , without horizontal resistance . also another horizontal motion from position C to D .

second changing it from position B to C , doing little work, because the magnetic force will be less, the critical point is , the magnetic force at position C will be less than it in position D , right? if so then the input work is much less than the output work.

for the output work it will be in changing from position D to A again , so the output work is much more the input work.

I mean I lifted it with small force to counter small magnetic force from stage B to stage C, and it came back with huge magnetic force from stage D to stage A again, the horizontal work can be neglected .

Edited March 22, 2015 by yahya515

[pavelcherepan]

there is not an initial position it is a circle , after position D you return again to position A and so on.

I do work twice , first change it from position A to position B , moving it horizontally , without horizontal resistance . also another horizontal motion from position C to D .

second changing it from position B to C , doing little work, because the magnetic force will be less, the critical point is , the magnetic force at position C will be less than it in position D , right? if so then the input work is much less than the output work.

for the output work it will be in changing from position D to A again , so the output work is much more the input work.

 

1) Does the metal plate spontaneously materialize just above the magnet? Or do you get in there somehow before the initial step A?

2) When moving plate from A to B you still lose energy to gravity. Gravity doesn't go anywhere, it still pulls your plate down, right?

3) Both pictures for C and D are incomprehensible in a sense that it's impossible to figure out how the objects are located in relation to each other

4) Forget about magnetic field, most your energy losses will be due to gravity

[yahya515]

 

1) Does the metal plate spontaneously materialize just above the magnet? Or do you get in there somehow before the initial step A?

2) When moving plate from A to B you still lose energy to gravity. Gravity doesn't go anywhere, it still pulls your plate down, right?

3) Both pictures for C and D are incomprehensible in a sense that it's impossible to figure out how the objects are located in relation to each other

4) Forget about magnetic field, most your energy losses will be due to gravity

1) I first put it there , but that will not be a loss in energy it is just a starter.

2) I suppose that there is a frictionless support for the metal to move above it horizontally,it may not be fully frictionless , but friction will be less than the normal force , which is due to gravity and magnetic force. I can add frictions forces to the input , the output will still be more , however imagining that the support surface is frictionless , gravity will not affect my horizontal push.

3) they are just above each other they have equal surface area , the metal is for example 3 cm above the magnet and away from it horizontally about for example 5 cm in position C , in position D the vertical distance is the same , but horizontal distance from the edges of both the magnet and the iron is zero .

4) there will not be loss due to gravity , only friction force .

look at this picture :

http://i1378.photobucket.com/albums/ah116/Yahya_Sharif/nnmmm_zps5kui200j.png

Edited March 22, 2015 by yahya515