rigorousintuition.ca

Im wondering who wrote those silly laws, about no free lunches, and the impossibility of perpetual motion stuff.

Imagine the resulting force of this on a circular track ;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7CyPtF0ChA

Every action still produces an equal and opposite reaction. The magnet sucked the single ball in hard (not "gently" as the guy says in the video), and this transmitted over to the 4th ball on the other side, which was held further away from the magnet (3 balls between it and the magnet, not zero balls, as on the other side of the magnet => and the force holding it to the magnet diminishes according to the inverse square law), thus it was being held with much less force than the impact of the first ball represented, thus it was propelled away at pace. Imagine if there was only one ball on the other side of the magnet - the force of the impact would barely be enough to release that ball from the pull of the magnet.

To turn it into a perpetual motion machine, you have to pull the single ball away from the magnet in order to do it all over again, and that takes energy - precisely as much energy as was contained in the initial impact! No free lunch!

erosoplier wrote:Every action still produces an equal and opposite reaction. The magnet sucked the single ball in hard (not "gently" as the guy says in the video), and this transmitted over to the 4th ball on the other side, which was held further away from the magnet (3 balls between it and the magnet, not zero balls, as on the other side of the magnet => and the force holding it to the magnet diminishes according to the inverse square law), thus it was being held with much less force than the impact of the first ball represented, thus it was propelled away at pace. Imagine if there was only one ball on the other side of the magnet - the force of the impact would barely be enough to release that ball from the pull of the magnet.

To turn it into a perpetual motion machine, you have to pull the single ball away from the magnet in order to do it all over again, and that takes energy - precisely as much energy as was contained in the initial impact! No free lunch!

Interesting analysis, thanks for that eros. Im not altogether convinced being honest about it, but there ya go.

Im just wondering about your general thoughts on "free" energy from electromagnetism ?

Anyone trying to suggest to me that this is nonsense, might try holding a 100 ton negatively charged peice of Iron, against a 100 ton fridge door charged the same way, and then reverse the polarity of the magnets, and see how much of their personal energy is free is after either operation ?

Try holding a one-hundred ton anything -- period.

Im just wondering about your general thoughts on "free" energy from electromagnetism ?

I guess, the proof is in the pudding. If something is real then the odds are that it will be exposed as being real, no matter how much suppression is going on. If someone has discovered the secret of alchemy and wants recognition, they needn't moan and groan about how the government is suppressing their ideas - all they have to do is produce the gold right in front of a skeptical audience, repeatably.

I haven't explored the area, and I'd appreciate any suggestions as far as specific inventions/ideas are concerned.

Apparantly Hendershot's fuelless generator is a magnet based thing.

Has a turbine driven by magnets on an axle, and the others with the same polarity outside them, so the like poles are facing each other.

Never seen one in action tho.

Im just wondering about your general thoughts on "free" energy from electromagnetism?

well depends what you mean by "free".

If the only costs are setup and minimal maintainance then to me thats free energy.

If you are not being billed per kW....

Rumour has it tesla had a giant capacitor that charged from static energy and delivered the power to a battery/storage system.

Replicating that would involve a minimal cost, if you knew how to build it and it worked.