The Perendev Magnetic Motor

I've seen this video, but remain unconvinced. The video was shot is such a way that you can't tell if there was another motor behind it that was powering the thing. He said that he would make another video that would show it running on its own. That was several years ago. How long does it take to shoot a video?

I don't think the Perendev magnet motor worked at all. Otherwise, he'd have a working motor on the market by now. No, I don't believe in the government conspiracy in this case.

On the subject of demagnetization. I've read that magnets that are constantly in repulsion with another magnet will lose their magnetism after a time. Personally, I've never tried to verify this so I don't know if it's true. If we assume that the Perendev motor is real, then, yes, it will lose its magnetism after some time since it works in repulsion mode.

OH yes. I built one,and it will work. But the degrading magnets are what literaly brought the Perendev project to a stop. They are now tring to use capasitors to collect the stator charge to powor a electomagnet armature.

Here we go to much plumbing stops up the drain .

Im looking for industry to develope a magnet that is so tightly bonded at a sub molecular level that it resist depolarization.

Are you willing to show a video of your motor? I'd be interested to see for myself.

For your info (and everyone else on CR4), I've read about why magnet motors are not possible but still wonder if there might be a way. If I could afford it, I'll even try experimenting myself.

The way the Perendev works is through repulsion. Whether you use capacitors, shields, or electro-magnets, you'd still have to work with repulsion so (again, assuming it works) your magnets will still degrade. With this in mind, the Perendev is an unworkable magnet motor, 'nuff said.

zegfredgrummin,

I simply don't believe you made one and it worked!

In your first post, you say:

"It's simple, and has a high torque output in all rpm ranges."

What sustained torque at what constant RPM?

A flywheel by itself can have "high torque in all RPM ranges", that means nothing here. These claims tend to talk about torque as if an instantaneous torque measurement equates to some sort of sustained power output; it does not necessarily at all.

I want to hear net HP output over some meaningful time period!

Please provide some tangible evidence if you expect us to take you the least bit seriously.

I wonder if our "good friend" Bob isn't somehow behind this as part of a damage repair scenario.

Regards, Greg

Greg_G writes: "These claims tend to talk about torque as if an instantaneous torque measurement equates to some sort of sustained power output; it does not necessarily at all."

-----

Like spotting a jogger and believing that all that person ever does is run.

Perendev, even if he did build a working motor, doesn't or didn't seem to fathom why his motor works: it takes energy to magnetize a magnet, and the magnetic field that results from that magnetization can be thought of as one form of potential energy. A motor built exclusively of permanent magnets (assuming here that such a device could be built at all) derives its power from something. But what? The magnetization energy of those magnets, perhaps, seeing as it has no other energy source? During operation that motor's magnets will become demagnetized. Of COURSE they will! If Perendev is still scratching his head over this, he must one effing moron indeed.

-e

zeq writes: " Im looking for industry to develope a magnet that is so tightly bonded at a sub molecular level that it resist depolarization."

-----

No need for Industry to make the effort. Magnets are already magnets at atomic/quantum levels.

Insofar as resisting depolarization, a motor constructed of magnets that are completely resistant to depolarization will not work at all. Guaranteed. Why do you think the magnets become depolarized? Because the magnetization energy is expended turning the rotor, perhaps? Depolarization naturally results. It has to. If these magnets did not depolarize, then neither would they be capable of supplying energy to turn the rotor. This energy isn't coming from nowhere. The fact that the magnets are depolarizing proves it.

Magnetism is not Magic. Time to crack those physics texts.

-e

Hi europium, you wrote: "This energy isn't coming from nowhere." ... I agree.

However, if a pure magnet-motor could work and someone could figure out how to quickly and painlessly re-magnetize the magnets, (paying for the energy, of course) then there's no free lunch but perhaps something practical...(?)

Regards, Jorrie

Jorrie writes: "figure out how to quickly and painlessly re-magnetize the magnets, (paying for the energy, of course) then there's no free lunch but perhaps something practical...(?)"

-----

I completely agree: a rechargeable motor would be useful; especially if the recharge time is minimal (and the process is convenient and inexpensive) and that enough energy can be stored in the motor to do useful work over a sustained period of time before the motor must be recharged. A motor whose output could be finely controlled to a reasonable degree would simply be icing on the cake.

One application immediately comes to mind: a motor built into the hub of each wheel on a car. No transmissions or drive shafts to add weight, inefficiency, and mechanical complexity - and centralized emissions (monitoring and) control at your local power plant.

-e

"This energy isn't coming from nowhere." ... I agree. ME TOO.

"if a pure magnet-motor could work "...

Thats what I prefer, no wires, no capacitors, just a magnets and a spinning wheel. So it removes all doubt what is really spinning it.

Well I made a crued one work, I gutted an old hard drive as a spin plate. used a PVC pipe snapped on it and glued a ~18" pressboard wheel to it. On the wheel I have about 60 magnets glued at angles and only (1) one strong magnet as my acting force at the edge of the wheel.
The wheel starts to spin on its own no forcing it into a spin. The wooden wheel I think is like 8 lbs? 1/2" think. The magnets are the common cheap bar mangets at lowes. I used some rubber magnetics to finish my gap around the wheel, but I would say it takes about 1.0 turns per sec. It does slow down when the rubber magnetic pass my acting main magnet. Once I replace the rest and have all ceramic bar magnetics on the wheel I think it will pass 2 turns per sec, and may even speed up to more then 2 turns a sec.
My magnetics are glued to the wheel, not click clatter like in Perendev's.

My crued prototype motor runs on its own, but I am curious about magnet degrade like you mentioned. But the magnetics I used are cheap easy to replace. Once I hook up a solid state board up to turn the spinning magnetic pulses into dc. I might feel upto buying stronger magnets on a later version if I get that far.

I am just glad mine works, although the speed might be slow. That may be because of how heavy the wheel is compaired to the weak magnets. I am not direct connecting a generator mechn'l to it, that is drag regardless what speed or torque you have. I rather use the spinning feilds to pulse coils and ramp it up to dc output. In the pass I have done 33mVac up to 20VDC no load, with an 8ohm load of an led or speaker it drops from 20vdc and holds a 7vdc constant. The output can be changed by how many pulses (oscilations) I decide to couple.

But yes I agree with you a pure magnet motor is the way to go. And that Perendev website selling mood/healing/energy magnet finger rings like my impression was "as seen on tv" kind of stuff can make many people take a step back and think "was that video clip a sales pitch to see the site and buy jewelry?" It would have been better if they seprated stuff to other sites.

Anyhow I hope to barrow a friends camera to take a clip of mine so I can post it to google, return and post a link to it.

Thanks for posting the video!

My request: get a few more stator magnets, in several locations around the wheel.

Lets see that hummer fly!!!

Captbryan, I will take a drive Sunday and see if the next few Lowes over might have more magnets in stock and some extra glue sticks. In part 2 of 3 the table was not very level and the magnet gate magnet was more of a 90' from the board then in part 3 where it was about 70' from crossing the rim plain.

Those rubber magnets where circles and not quite cut halfing the N & S on the same side so that is why so much drag from the fields on the gate.

I shelfed my project about 10 years ago when you have a family you get tied up. But no the kids are older and seeing stuff like Perevden showing off like to good to be true almost fooled me and others. I have been contracted work at N-clr palces and BNL on the RHIC and talked with people about my device it in the past so this is not new to me or the ones I talked about it to. And back then they did not have Google video and blogs to voice your story before it is silenced.

When I at least get this medium size one working and get video with sound and make clips longer then 90secs. And buy/rebuild my electronics half of it to take the magnetic pulses and stage them up to rectified DC output and put a load on it.

Just doing it with flat magnets is almost impossiable. The gate needs to be atleast 4" long but is like 2" and not in a cone shape, but it is not flat which is good for now. Curve magnets would have been better. The first one I did in all rubber magnets and it is hard to bend ceramic.

It is hard if you work at some places where your forced to sign a waiver form any new inventions become part of that company you work for not unless you have a patent. EVEN if you been working on it before ever working for them. That was part of the reason I shelved it. Now I work in a feild that has nothing to do with it. So even if I am asked to have people speak up on my behalf they go back 10 years.

Well one step at a time.

It would be much better as a demo, to avoid pushing it to start it. I noticed that it took under eight seconds for the first rotation, over eight for the second, and was going even slower on the third, but you stopped it half way around. It appears only to be coasting down, rather than accelerating, as it should be, if it were in some way being powered by the magnets.

In your next video, you'll want to be sure that you simply release it, rather than push it. Also, you will want to let it run long enough that we can see than it is speeding up rather than slowing down.

It would be much better as a demo, to avoid pushing it to start it

My thoughts exactly!

Just to comment on what I think I saw:

• The hard drive is being used as a low friction bearing (which was a smart move, I must say). It's not imparting any force to the rotor.
• The motor doesn't start itself which means that there's no force that's pushing it. Without the force, it doesn't look feasible.
• There does, however, seem to be a kick at the point where the magnets change their orientation (which I believe you call a gate). This kick pushes the rotor around with enough force to keep it moving until the next complete cycle. The magnets that are away from the gate don't seem to be contributing any energy to keep the rotor spinning. Unfortunately, the kick is not very strong. The rotor eventually coasted to a stop and the wheel seemed to be searching for a locking point (moving back and forth).

Vulcan, Thank you for your comment.

• "The hard drive is being used as a low friction bearing... not imparting any force to the rotor."

***-True but the board is about 7 lbs. +/- a pound, I will need to cut out a plastic light wieght wheel. but not to light. The wheel is as would be said "energy in motion always in motion" if I need weight later on I can always place it over more wheel cut outs or get the weight when I put the osilator magnetics on the inside wheel for em pluses to get dc output ready.

• The motor doesn't start itself which means that there's no force that's pushing it. Without the force, it doesn't look feasible.

***- true the Board table top was all I had to use at the moment. and with the drag of the rubber magnets I stated I gave it that first kick start as the wheel slowed down all could see the magnetics trying to keep itself going when they hit some slow null spots. But keep in mind the heavy board and from an almost stop spin they did keep trying to keep itself going it spots before hitting the spot from weak magnetics to the stronger ceramic ones.

• "There does, however, seem to be a kick at the point where the magnets change their orientation (which I believe you call a gate). This kick pushes the rotor around with enough force to keep it moving until the next complete cycle. The magnets that are away from the gate don't seem to be contributing any energy to keep the rotor spinning. Unfortunately, the kick is not very strong. The rotor eventually coasted to a stop and the wheel seemed to be searching for a locking point (moving back and forth). "

***- I call the gate the fields on the outside magnet. A flat magnet pole does not do it. a curve cut magnet would be ideal. so the cone head will do for now. As a magnet aproaches the fields at an angle there is some repel action. however as the magnet is passing between the zero point. The magnet is moved from the zero point towards the head. once passed the head it also repels but is not as stong as the the other to points. So the combined forces of the repel of the head + thrust to the head point = a slight greater force then the approch with magnetics angled towards the approch.
*** The rubber magnetics are at the wrong angle and have polarity flaws in them so bad it was hard to cut the N from the S on the same side surface. But I tried to complete the rim in a rush. I will be in the next county over and with see what there lowes has in stock. If I can not complete a full rim I think it would be better then just having less then half ceramic magnetics.

Here's what I saw.

In the video the rotor seemed to spin for the longest time when the camera was zoomed in to where we could not see the entire rotor. There is no reason to zoom to this level unless there is someone pushing the edge of the rotor. When he zoomed out the rotor stopped on its own and by the shadows present you could clearly see there were at least two people present.

With regard to the hard drive, the "spindle" has an electric motor attached to it, that's how it works. Hello? When he flipped the hard drive over it was so quick and the video of such low resolution that it was impossible to see much detail, not that if someone wanted to they couldn't conceal a lithium battery somewhere on the drive to give a little aid to the rotation.

I'm not saying that the guy is being deceptive, just that there were plenty of opportunities to fake what we saw. There's also nothing to say that there wasn't a leaf blower running to push the rotor from six feet away. How about some light mono-filament fishing cord wrapped around the outside of the rotor? You could never see it on the video. Need more ways to fake this? I'll keep thinking.

Again, I'm not saying it's fake, just that video isn't proof.

Also, the push to start and running down are classic features of the cogging phenomenon that plagues all such attempts. There must be a means of field commutation to avoid it or we would make electric motors without field commutation. That is the hardest part of making a motor anyway. And the associated losses are why we have migrated from brushes to electronic commutation.

RCapper, Wow I did not think much on that? I thought if I go with the basics of basic like wood, no grand scale frame that people would think Oh there's a motor chain in the angle iron up to the shaft or something.

But I am glad people still don't trust! I myself rather been proven than be a sucker to freely trust anything for face value.

The hard drive is gutted, the camera I have has no sound.
There is no leaf blower.

"not see the entire rotor. " That why my hands were the shadow, then I thought someone might think the shadow was a cardboard cutout so I moved my fingers. I thought people would want to see the magnetics up close near the gate since the other two clips always show the rim in full view.

I will do another clip maybe one with no sound before I can barrow one. I will put leaves near by but it there was a leaf blower dirt would have been blowing around.

"at least two people present." My two kids less then 8 years old and myself.

"With regard to the hard drive, " I can do another close up of it then snap it on. Believe that drive is bad the sweep arms are snapped out & magnets removed.

"How about some light mono-filament fishing cord wrapped around the outside of the rotor?" That's a good one I thought that about some other peoples stuff and seen the line shine in the light. But no I did not use fishing line or any other tricks.

Anyhow, I picked up some more magnets and glue sticks and hope to complete a bit more of the rim.

Well I appreciate your good nature response. Good luck with your project.

I think that unless you can maintain indefinite rotation that what you will find is that, due to slight elasticities in your system, what you basically have there is an oscillator that you have to "shock" into operation by spinning it but it will eventually run down and stop.

Thank you,

I went to Google and for some reason they are not showing all the clips? only 1 of 3. Well I hope it is just an update and not that I have to put all 3 back up. If not I will just park the clips on one of my sites that is really not related to this stuff.

I will also see if I can gut the spinal from the HD case also, if it won't cause a problem.

I might have time after work to put time into it and cut out a plastic wheel so there is not so much drag on it. I can always add wieght to it later on, But I will come back and repost a clip either way that I do it. till next time.

MJS

I saw only one video -- where you push the wheel, it goes through about 2.5 revolutions, slowing all the while, and then you stop it. I think RCapper saw an additional one.

From the one I saw, it didn't look like the magnets were having any affect on propelling the wheel at all. In fact, if the rotor were to rotate under magnetic force, then it should rotate right at the start of the video, rather than sitting stationary... at least it should according to the hunches on which such motor failures have been constructed in the past. They are expected to operate on the magnetic equivalent of gravity motors, of which there are many that look like they should work, until you look at the actual forces involved: they look (initially) as if you'd just release the shaft and they'd take off.

I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but there have been millions of attempts to make magnet motors and millions to make gravity motors. The magnet motors can get quite large, in hopes that somehow bigness will make them go, evidently. The people who develop these range from serious fraudsters who sell plans for something they know has never worked... to people who simply don't really understand magnetism. Some people like John Searle call themselves "Doctor" or "Professor" but have never been to college and have never taught a college course. Others are honest curious people who are simply unacquainted with the history of failure in these machines.

The rationale given by some for why these motors "should" work would mean that they should work with a very small number of magnets. Good bearings and some inertia "should" carry the rotor past the attraction area of one magnet to the repulsion of the next... and if it "looks" like the repulsion zones are all facing in the same direction and the attraction zones are weaker, then the motor should run in the intended direction. Any of these motors, if they would work, might have to be positioned at a particular starting position, but upon release should accelerate, and continue to accelerate until friction and total net magnetic force balance. In other words they should work like a simple brushed DC motor, of the sort that you can build for a couple dollars. (Bear in mind that when I say "should" do this or that, I mean "should" in the mind of the promoters. I can't see any reason why these things should do anything other than stand still -- as your video demonstrates.)

It is easy to make a very tiny very simple electric motor which will accelerate to 5,000 - 10,000 rpm as a simple demo. But there are no magnet motors that actually start and keep going -- not that any physicist would expect one to. Who knows why people keep trying? -- the people who know magnets say they can't see any reason why these motors should work at all (not just well, but at all). I can't see why they should work either -- they all look like they should just sit there. If they have any potential as a motor they would have to start to turn as soon as they are assembled.

Some have argued that you need to "start" an internal combustion engine, so what's wrong with having to push start a magnet motor. While it is true that an ICE must be started, the reason has no relationship to a magnet or electric motor. The ICE needs to be started for readily observable reasons that are entirely in keeping with ordinary physics. A magnet motor, on the other hand is always "on" -- there is no change in energy state or flow of energy required (in the dreams of magnet motor devotes) so they would have to simply run without being started, just as an electric motor would if you assembled one with the wiring already energized, foolish though that may be.

I've designed a couple working demo motors, of the sort that are useful in a classroom, but I am not a "real" motor designer. But I have a fairly good background in physics, and can see no reason why magnet motors should do anything other than just sit there. The explanations given for their ability to work, despite thousands of demonstrations by their promoters that they do not work, all rely on terminology or "principals" that are outside normal technical language -- so the promoters might just as well be speaking French -- what they say makes no sense at all in terms of ordinary physics. John Searle even invented "The Law of the Squares" to explain how his motor could not only run on permanent magnets alone, but also levitate, fly off into space, and cure illness. The "Law of the Squares" sounds vaguely scientific or mathematical, but his "Law" is actually ramblings about magic squares (where the verticals diagonals and horizontals all add to the same number -- fun but anything but profound). Frankly, he sounds truly demented.

Among the most basic physics is the principal of conservation of energy: science has been unable to demonstrate anything in recorded history in which the energy output is greater than the energy input. The magnet motor folks then say: well, perhaps we are not violating this law, but instead tapping into an unknown energy source. But if it is unknown, then how on earth would you know how to tap into it?? Maybe the best way is to spin around three times and click your heals. Why magnets?? Why not apple motors, or rock motors? I think the answer is because people are mystified by magnets and believe them to have properties they do not possess.

But don't let me deter you from experimenting. It's a bit hard to advise on this, because from a physics perspective such motors are magic... but I'd think you'd be wise to work small, with a small number of magnets, and if you feel a need for precision, then you won't be spending a lot of money. For example I could make a very precise electric motor on my own small lathe for $25 and a lot of time. If I made a large motor, the materials would be far more and I'd have to pay someone to make it on a large lathe: it could easily cost a couple thousand.

From my experience in designing and making demo motors: they can be really crude, really small, really cheap, and full of friction -- and they still work. It seems reasonable to assume that magnet motors should be the same way: if the principal is there, it should be demonstrable for cheap. Some people have lost a lot of money, getting more and more precise with these motors only to find that they don't work. Some have the magnet content of a 50 hp PM motor, and produce 0.00000 hp.

And all along a physicist will say: well of course -- why should they work?

This link may be helpful:

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/cheng2.htm

Blink,

Please feel free to comment. Looking at your site I can assume you have had your far share of trails and errors in your own area of ventures. I have had my fair share of them working at some R&D places.

Yes there has been many people who have tried and failed, and those afraid to lose face made hoax's out of many demos leaving a major distrust of anyone even talking about it. It would be great if that magic bullet could come out and get such high rpms out of magnetics. And by using various shields to obtain a monopole like magnet BUT that is like trying to turn gold from lead.

Yet people forget about is that magnetic breaking happens on many materials. You can make magnets move with spinning aluminium. and shielding materials do negate many fields, but they also attract such materials over a distance. Even an aluminium frame set with many shielding plates, Now high rpm? I think not the drag on the fields would be greater and greater the faster it turned.

To many times people just want to use one force without the other, making an all pulling or all pushing energy. I have done a slow one never really anything fast rpm. but I am willing to try a faster one from what I have learn and what stuff I have on hand.

It all comes down to how strong and shape the magnetics are. Consider the debates on stuff like E=Mc2, it takes more energy to move the mass the faster you want to go. Those high speed rpm demos in my opinion were a farce. as I explained above my reasonable opinion.

Magnetics in general will balance themselves out, weak or strong. but if the neutral area of a gate is use to approach will less opposing force while the poles both achive a similar strength of repel & attraction. The angle of sweep offset the balance to be move pulling or pushing. That offset is not that great but has given enough to push in one direction then the other when the rim lays over the gate magnets outer field paths.

Being that my gate it not the shape I need, and has two N's & two S's about the length angle I am using in the demo. I am still debating on cutting the gate magnet from its base. The base has its own N & S.

The first part is about a 1.5" sweep spanning 2.8 magnetics at most. the other sweep starts where the rod meets the base and is weaker and has 3/4" sweep area. I need to remove the base plate to make better use of the rod & gate magnet.

I have picked up more ceramic magnets and cut out two plastic boards. The second board I will build the magnet millivolt to dc output on later. If I am to cut the magnet I will need the set the rim up to its strength & fields. I may have to stray from the origainal look a bit to make a demo for higher rpms.

Looking at your site I can assume you have had your far share of trails and errors in your own area of ventures.

You're right, although not so much with the current project, which has the huge advantage that I can test it any day on ordinary roads. The last "Ken's weird idea" project is pictured in my avatar, and it was an absolute nightmare to test: winds too high, winds too low, water too low, etc. Add to that the Jekyll and Hyde nature of the boat: struggling along to get on a plane, then jumping ahead so fast that the driver practically gets sucked off the back. I'm hoping that I've had more than my fair share of errors, and at least so far the current project is remarkably easy and straightforward by comparison.

Don't take my post as negative, so much as cautionary: people have spent thousands (in fact I think the original poster for this thread mentions having spent a couple thousand, before abandoning the idea to go on to another "free energy" idea). If you work at a small scale, you can do more for less money -- and small motors are inherently more impressive in terms of speed: it's common to get 25,000 out of little dc motors, but unheard to get that out of 500 hp industrial motors.

Keep us posted as you put up additional videos.

Good luck, Ken

There is a second part of my demo that I want to phase into my demo.

Think of a bucket of water then you siphon water to a lower point. I have built and have an electronic voltage multiplier with all passive components and no power supply.

People use waterfalls to turn generators and I was using window screening as a catch plate. At first the diode banks took 25 to 30 Milli volts to a 20vdc output. LED's could be light from the out put. The freq was not 60Hz but all freq ranges. I took an 8ohm speaker as the load and you could hear phone voices, radio stations and other CB transmission all at once.

This went on for many days round the clock and some CB transmissions did blow a few diodes in the bank but I replaced them. the LEDS would let me know if it failed. I took the solid state device on a field test and found out many places are more negative then positive to ground. Even 20 paces would change charge and the wire clips had to be reverse in order to work at that location.

The weirdest thing found out was in a basement hooking the catch to an old CB house tower. I had a battery operated radio playing next to me in the basement. I hooked the leads up and the radio went dead (no signal) I removed the clips and about 3 secs the radio came back in with signal. I went out of my house and found the radio would be silent next the the exterior of the house (antenna) and about 15' away the portable radio would start to play. But in the long run it depends how strong the signal is where you are at. Out in farm land the background millivolts never really got higher then 12 millivolts to start the trickle effect to ground.

I figured out the when the voltage multiplier would start its oscillations they would strip the charged waves from the air a bit. like how Tesla imaged getting power through the air but with matched towers.

After a few CB liners blew diodes or lighting strikes pops a few I thought it would be better to control the millivolts pulses. Which brings me to use pulses from a magnet to get greater than 12 vdc or higher for AtLeast a 2 amp output or higher. So I thought about mixing two ideas into one.

If you study perendev motor it is a perfect balanced system. It will not work.In oder for a magnetic system to work it has to be in an unbalanced state. There have have been many people who have coped this motor and all they get is a perfect magnetic brake. Perendev was going to show it on the German tv, but he invented an excuse and never showed it because it is a fake. All he is looking for is some suckers to take there money from.

I just happened to see/read your comments on perendev motor...

Well, he's products been on the marker for quite a while here is the url: http://perendev-power.com/index_files/Page880.htm

I also heard once he was talking and said that every months he gets 1800 people that orders these magnetic motors from him...

I notice in the same product list they have "Magnetic Gold Health Rings"...hmmm

Yes, I've also read that he's got people filing charges against him for non-delivery.

I've seen his website. He's given up on his pure magnet motor and gone into electro-magnetic motors.

i can relate to this point of view but, it's the same as the electric cars in '98 when the same car companies that released them, bought them back and destroy them.

the thing is that the interests of the big companies are what are helding back these types pf proyects.

In ordinary permanent magnet motors, in which the magnets are subjected to greater repulsive and attractive forces and temperatures than in a Perendev motor (and therefore should degrade faster) the magnets effectively last forever. I've never seen a Perendev motor work (other than rotating while coasting down). In all the videos I've seen, the motor simply slows down, and is not capable of even sustaining its own momentum, let alone actually powering anything.

How long has yours been working? What caused the magnets to degrade?

There's a link from AmericanAntigravity.com to a beautifully constructed Perednev motor which cannot sustain any speed. Is there something wrong with the way it was constructed?

Ken,

I agree the magnets shouldn't degrade. It's just a bogus excuse for something that claims to do what it can't.

I looked that the "American Antigravity" site, and everything I read was under development, and every video I looked at was a scam. In one an "internal inertial" device with potential for propulsion in space, was shown moving a foot and impacting a wall, when the obvious demonstration would have been to simply show it accelerating along a track over a distance. Another such device was shown moving a boat through the water (feebly) and moving a little suspended trolley along a cable .. both feats legitimately doable as a simple parlor trick by an engineering student: nothing out of line but the claims that this is some sort of breakthrough research. And so on. In the case of the boat for instance, moving an internal weight back and forth against stops, where the shape of the boat is so extremely asymmetrical, bow to stern, will easily move it overall in the streamline bow direction as shown. Yet it is seriously presented as evidence of this revolutionary device's merit. It was hard to stop laughing.

There has been more than enough study of natural processes and development and study of man made ones, at all scales and power levels that if there was some flaw of any practical size in the Law of Conservation of Energy we surely would have seen it by now.

It is inconceivable to me that if there was any merit in ANY of these type of devices, somebody, somewhere wouldn't have developed them long ago for some type of application, military or civilian. Think how many scientists are working just on military related projects in countries all over the world, trying to get a "leg up" on their rivals. How many countries would jump at the chance to free themselves from imported fossil fuels? How many venture capital firms would jump in on a good thing? And on and on...

Anybody who has ever played around with strong permanent magnets has had their imagination tickled about how to somehow make use of their strong attraction and repulsion. The engineers among us, in spirit or in fact have also wondered about the possibility of some kind of "motor" like device to make use of these magnetic forces ... yet nothing has ever been developed in the real world, only purported devices that have "shown promise" and are "under development" in that shadowy "other world", accompanied by pleas for investors or the sale of CDs or the like showing their marvelous potential just enough to tease the technically challenged.

It amazes me that people can watch a magician perform a good trick, and be awed by how he was able to "fool" them, yet all the time realizing it was a trick or illusion. But watching a crude trick, masquerading as a revolutionary breakthrough, performed by someone claiming to be an inventor has some of the very same people walking away believing in what they "saw", in large part because they simply wanted to believe it.

This site, being a lot "slicker" and better done than BeFreeTech, let alone EverWatt is therefore a lot more dangerous to the gullible.

Regards, Greg

Speaking of "gullible," one lady who works in our office is extremely gullible. I took the liberty of telling her that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary.

-e

It amazes me that people can watch a magician perform a good trick, and be awed by how he was able to "fool" them, yet all the time realizing it was a trick or illusion. But watching a crude trick, masquerading as a revolutionary breakthrough, performed by someone claiming to be an inventor has some of the very same people walking away believing in what they "saw", in large part because they simply wanted to believe it.

You are so right. Believing in any of these devices is the equivalent of our kids actually believing us when we tell them that we walked to school and back each day, uphill both ways.

You mean you didn't walk uphill both ways!?!?! I've been Duped!!!!!!

lol

I think the serious issue with this concept is not in it's ability to function. Simple physics states that it will work if arranged properly. The issue is maintaining magnetism. Even if the magnets are going to lose charge, if they last long enough to make the cost of replacing them comparable to or (preferably) cheaper than the cost of traditional fuels, then it is worth the change in technology. Though it would also have to be reasonably convenient to have this maintainence performed as well. Having ones vehicle or generator in the shop for a day each month wuld not be reasonable, but once every three to six months might.

Being that the magnets are rechargable, this cost is mitigated further by the reuse of the changed components.

I suppose it comes down to finding the absolute maximum output to input ratio, then comparing this to current energy trends. If it even matches, it is better; just imagine if it were more effective.

I don't know much about the products on the site, nor do I care to. The technology is possible, we just have to work out the quirks.

Anyway, sorry about rambling. The concept intrigues me.

My friend thinks that if stablized, this technology pair with the Searl effect might creat a revolution in power production. Assuming enough people put work into before the oil companies wiped them out.

Simple physics states that it will work if arranged properly.

Simple physics states just the opposite -- namely that it can not work. Conservation of energy is as basic as physics gets, isn't it? Despite millions of attempts there has never been a device that even hints, let alone strongly suggests, that this basic physics law is incorrect.

If you mean that basic physics says that one magnet will repel or attract another, then yes, that's correct. It would be possible to make a permanent magnet motor, provided you had a device to commutate it -- in other words something to move the the stator magnet or magnets in a cyclical fashion to enable the motor to rotate rather than simply stick in one position. (Bear in mind that if the motor is actually doing something useful, then the force required to mechanically commutate the motor will be large: you've no doubt heard that old equal and opposite force thing) Typically, in the early part of experiments aimed at creating a permanent magnet motor, the energy required for this repositioning is supplied by the hand of the experimenter. (See, for example, Youtube attempts at recreating the Steorn effect, which itself was never demonstrated to work) Later, some go on to use electrics to do the repositioning, and then find that they can't get an amount of energy out of the motor equal to the energy going in. Some of these "magnet motors" are astonishingly inefficient -- 10%, 15%, etc... not remotely close to the 90% efficient motors available off the shelf.

If your friend believes in the Searl effect, then now would be the time for him to invest in it. "Professor" Searl (who in fact has no academic credentials), figures it will take him about $1,000,000 to get a prototype running (despite claiming to have had three such devices supplying power for his house in the sixties, and despite having had several of these fly off into space). By all accounts, he was poor in the 60's, yet he claims to have produced many of these things (if I recall, in one interview, he said he had the three powering his house plus maybe 11 that flew off into space ($14,000,000 worth???). Plausible?

If you believe in the "principal" on which these magnet motors "work", then it is a simple matter to construct one for just a couple dollars: in other words one that will spin for a couple days under its own "power". No one has done that. Perhaps you will be the first, and in so doing will prove that Newton and Einstein were nitwits and that "science" is a worthless pursuit.

Maybe he meant to say "simple minded physics".

This has been a recurring "invention" for years. The issue is solving the commutation problem which, if doable, would be a mechanical method. I have trouble imagining a means of field commutation that wouldn't consume more power than is created. Another problem is that, even if you could make it sustain rotation, there just isn't as much energy to be had from a permanent magnet than people would like to believe. To the guy who says he built one, put a diagram of the method so we can determine it's practicality. Maybe someone will have an idea. But I am skeptical that it runs. Also, without fail, anyone who has something that "works" keeps it secret even though if it really did work then why don't we see a product on the market? It's like we are to believe that all these working devices are kept under wraps because your going to get rich on it but so far no one is getting rich so I guess it must be more valuable to them to own a secret, or maybe it just doesn't work.

I "invented" a magnetic motor myself, 25 years ago. I know how you feel because you are convinced that permanent magnets have an energy that can be converted into mechanical work. In the same time you feel that your concept should work if you'd have the right materials or technology of fabrication. If you have a flexible mind, take my advice: don't waist your time and money on this. Show your concept to some one who really understands magnetics and let him show you why it cannot work.

Coming back to my "invention", I was young and ready to fight anyone contradicting me.

But in an Eureka moment, I discovered where I was wrong in my concept. Eureka moments are not only for discovering new things but also for finding big mistakes. So, I took it as a very good lesson and now I can say I have a sound understanding of magnetics and permanent magnets used in electrical machines. I became an Electrical Engineer.

Always the same old tired worn out claims of "free energy," "zero point," "over unity," or some other highly touted so called "solution" to the world's energy problems. The solution is NEVER made available for thorough and scientific examination. Always claims of suppression by Big Bad Oil, or Utilities or Gov't or one or more of many other excuses.

If you built one, provide the detailed plans. What no plans.

Why did you not provide a URL direct to this Perendev instead to a broad start page with no navigation to the ephemeral character.

If you have something SOLID, put it forth. Othewise go back to the free energy sites and consort with the other cracked pots.

Everyone, well almost everyone here has there feet on the ground and relatively clear heads for thinking straight!

Stan signs: " Why be difficult when with just a little application you can be absolutely impossible!"

-----

Without applying myself this morning I'm completely impossible. Or am I, like you, just galled by this "free energy" crapola? Ugh. I'd shut off the computer, but it's playing Tchiakovsky's The Nutcracker and my little girl is dancing to it. Time to play captive audience...

My first motor of plywood based construcion started to show sign of degrading the very first time I exposed it to a load I was't sure so I removed the load and took tach readings daily for a week. by the forth day a definate loss was detected and a rpm drop 420 rpms over the 4 day run and by the end of the week it had drop to over 1100 rpms I knew then the rummer was true Thats when I started to have knots in my stomach.
As someone stated, Maybe it's time to look at other concepts Know one has answer my question about higher dencity magnets and that is the kiss of death to this Idea. Aparently when magnets interact in this combing manor the electrons in the Neodium born magnet atoms are forced to slowly realine perment or not. It will degrade.
Concept 2 was to have 6 rotors and rings with 36 magnets per rotor and ring with each magnet having 20 lb repulse rating each. Add them up on just the rotors x 20 and you get 4320 ft lbs and you will lose part of that (of course) but not all . Something had to give. But in this case the wrong things.

I had very high hopes for this.

Im abandioning this one and going bach to a earlier concept .

Imagine a a steam turbine powered by a mcrowave boiler 2 hot wired magnatrons at full power approx 800 watts. with a 150 amp alternator suppling the voltage You would recool and recycle the steam to make it a closed system . would he turbine have enough surplus to work and turn the alt.

Your input and ideas are welcome. And for the record I never beleived and still don't expect to strike it rich. MY CONCERN IS GLOBAL WARMING and a way to fix this with a alternative.

There are many, many, many, areas where you could apply yourself by starting with something that we know works, and improving it... rather than starting with something we know does not work and trying to explain why it should. People have been trying to promote fairly sophisticated "free energy" machines since DaVinci's day. No one has succeeded, for reasons that are obvious to physicists and keen observers of nature. But scientists and engineers, working with an increasing body of known principals, have created things that could only be considered magic just a couple centuries ago. But each new successful invention comes about from inch-by-inch, mile-by-mile progress based on known science.

Science and engineering has proven, thousands and thousands of times, that the first and second laws of thermodynamics are correct: they are accurate descriptions of how nature works. Creating a "free energy" or "zero point" machine is no more likely than your stepping outside your door one day and being thrown off into space: suddenly everything is repelled by the earth, rather than attracted to it. Could that possibly happen? Sure, modern physics deals only in probabilities, not certainties. But you should no more expect to be successful in creating a free energy machine than you should expect to fly off into space -- the probabilities are about the same.

There are positively limitless opportunities for improving the things we know work. Devote your time to increasing the efficiency of solar cells from 30% to 60% -- that would be a noble and valuable goal. Devote your time to improving the efficiency of a diesel engine from 35% to 70%. That too, would be a noble goal. Devote your time to finding a cure for cancer. If you don't have a technical background, then devote your time to selling people on the idea of driving small, fuel-efficient cars. These are all things we know we can do -- it simply takes lots of work, lots of serious study, and lots of person-hours.

With so many ways in which we know we can improve the world, (things with a 90% probability of success) why waste time on working on things we know will not work (.00000000000001% probability of success)?

Would the turbine have enough surplus to work and turn the alt? NO.

Zegfredgrummin,

Obviously, your knowledge of physics is ZERO!

You are determined to keep this nonsensical free energy scenario going.

What next?

A hydrogen powered generator that uses some of its output to make its own fuel from water?

A power cell that taps into the "universal energy field"?

A car that recharges itself as it drives?

To my shock and dismay, I tuned in at the end of a show about air powered cars yesterday on the "Discovery" channel (a cable channel devoted to science) and the narrator wrapped it up by showing an air driven compressor that would, if employed, allow the car to recharge its own air tanks ....... resulting in unlimited pollution free driving. This was seriously presented!

These free energy ideas have many legs it seems!

Please invest in a physics book and spare us your crackpot ideas to save the world. There are more than enough of them already.

Greg

I have to admit to conjuring-up a perpetual-motion "machine" when I was a kid. I got this little solar cell for my birthday. You've probably seen 'em: a single silicon cell in a little black plastic enclosure with a bumpy lens on the top (as if the mfr's putting it there made the whole thingie more efficient!).

I connected the solar cell to a grain-of-wheat bulb I stole from one of my big brother's model cars and situated the bulb just above the solar cell so that the light from the bulb would illuminate the cell, causing the bulb to light, illuminating the cell, causing the bulb to light, illuminating... That was the general idea.

I then shined a flashlight on the cell to provide the "initial charge." Nothing happened. Boy was I disappointed.

I'm sure it would have worked. Maybe I didn't look hard enough for venture capital.

-e

Hi zegfredgrummin, this is a 'relatively serious' engineering forum, where one can test the limits of the 'envelope', but not exceed it by much.

From your posts it seems that you will get better response and perhaps valuable input from some of the 'free-energy' forums going on the web. I do not frequent them and hence cannot give you a link, but just Google it a bit...

And good luck with those inventions!

Regards, Jorrie

Zegfredgrummin,

Other than multiplying 6 X 36 X 20 lbs, and coming up with 4320 lbs, how did you then convert that to torque?

As soon as you added a load, the motor rapidly started to slow down, so you removed the load, and the motor slowed down anyway, but at a much slower rate. Again, no different that a flywheel would act.

How did you start the motor?

Why the dribbling out of incomplete details?

Present all you have at once so this doesn't drag out for days, like your test.

Regards, Greg

Yeah let's see some diagrams. If you weren't able to make it work then what's the big secret? Why not let the community take a look at it and if it indeed works at all maybe someone else would have an idea of how to improve it. This is the difference between the scientific community and the quasi-scientific community. One shares their successes and mistakes and the other just hides and obfuscates. I have never seen a plan or a diagram that looked like it would work. If you are so hopeful to benefit mankind then why make yourself seem so selfish by not even sharing info regarding your failures? Is there some lurking fear that you will seem foolish? Maybe you don't even believe in what your doing. I just don't quite grasp the mentality of this cult.

There are no blue print the first one is a reworked copy of the perendev motor And not very pretty to look at. i was in the proscees of buying materials to rebuild it all in alunimium when i noticed the poblem. I've invested $2,000 of my own money in this and now have nothing that I can use.

If you do as i did an reverse engineer form the perendev vidio you will see that the magnets are spaced on each rotor ,1 magnet per each 10 degrees of a circle and the rotors are stagarded in thirds on the rotors where as on the rings they aline. when you close the rings it starts all by itself.

In reguard to statement about free energy WE as a world are only trying to swap one fuel for another and are still adding to the CO2 levels . ONLY if we stop it all will we be able to undo the damage. Also I do indeed wish i did have a good enginnering education Insteed of Edison style trial and error methods.

I am a good craftsman with quite a few achevement.I only came here seaking help Not reticue That doest cut it with me. And i make no apoligies for saying so if tis is all you have to offer Im in the wrong place

Every good scientist subjects his or her work for peer review. Good work rises or sinks on its own merits - at least in an ideal world. Whether you have a "good engineering education" is less relevant than the quality of your work. But obfuscation and delay does nothing but invite skepticism, as you now see. Would you prefer this forum greet your claims with uninformed, empty-headed acceptance, or with professional criticism - either positive or negative, or both? Reprove a fool, and he will hate you for it. Reprove a wise man, and he grows wiser still. Which are you? -e

I think if you have an open mind and listen to what people have to say you will find help though it may not always look like you were expecting it to look. If you don't pay attention, if you contest without offering substance, if you fail to demonstrate even a basic knowledge of what is already known then people will quickly point these things out to you and some who have grown weary of dealing with the denial that is common among the hopefuls of this ilk will be less kind than others. You have only to review the many instances of where people have gone to great lengths to share their knowledge to see that we are not here to deride or ridicule. But there are some expectations, albeit unspoken. First, before you ask, check out Google, Wikipedia and other online sources for the basics. In the area you want to work there is a wealth of information available. Get a physics book and come up to speed on at least the basics of mechanics, thermodynamics and such. If you are apt enough to be a good craftsman with similar application of your talents you can acquire a working knowledge of basic physical laws that we are going to have to abide until someone proves otherwise. Oh and also, it will improve your credibility if you would go to the extra trouble of at least using a spelling checker before you post. The notion that it shouldn't matter doesn't go over well with most people who have made an effort to educate themselves regardless of how righteous the rant of the proponent of "fonic" spelling.

rcapper writes: "But there are some expectations, albeit unspoken. First, before you ask, check out Google, Wikipedia and other online sources for the basics." ***** Oooh. You touched a nerve there, Mr. Capper. I think I'd rather wade through "fonic," self-righteous spellers' posts than deal with those written by individuals who are clearly (and persistently) too lazy even to formulate a Google query. One member of this forum (to remain unnamed) persistently asks questions that a simple Google query will readily answer. Once, as an experiment, I answered this individual's every question regarding a certain type of high-voltage switch based exclusively on the results of a Google search. I further added the constraint that I only answer with results obtained in fifteen seconds or less, with the net result that all of this member's questions got answered to his satisfaction - with him believing I was some sort of expert in this area (which I'm not) - and with me learning a helluva lot about this type of switch. He does this all the time and it burns me up that he's frequently asking others on this forum to, basically, do his work for him. A poor speller I can handle. A lazy-ass time-leach I cannot stand. (Btw, CR4's editor, when running under MacIntosh Safari, does not have a spell-checker, nor italics, bold, nor underline, links, nor anything else. I actually have to >try< to spell korecktly.) -e

Ah, inventors. Very few among them have not struggled.

Have you heard of George Constantinesco? He's what I'd call a "pure" inventor. He gets an idea. Checks if his idea works using math. If it will work according to the math, he makes his designs still using math. Then he builds his inventions exactly, according to design. More often than not, his inventions worked the first time, perfectly and without modification.

With his ability, he never tried to build a magnet motor or other over-unity devices. Could it be because the math didn't support it?

Yet, he did not have an easy life. There were a lot of skeptics and lots more of detractors. Disappointments (not from his inventions) came from all quarters.

You're not a Constantinesco but an Edison, fine. If your Perendev won't work, find something else. Unfortunately, over-unity devices are a real pain to invent. Nobody's ever done it. Should you try? It's your time and your money. Do you have the time and the money?

As someone said, try working on increasing efficiency of existing devices. Just don't try making it more than 100%.

Zeg:

My tendency would be to say that you should really work from blueprints (or the electronic equivalent) but, of course, I have been guilty of building things without anything more than a drawing on a paper napkin.

On the other hand, if you are working on something highly theoretical, then it makes sense to start with a proof of concept prototype of the smallest workable scale, and lowest possible cost. There is no reason that a magnetic motor should not scale up and down perfectly well. So better to work with something with a rotor a few inches across, rather than something with which you are expecting anything remotely close to 4300 lb-ft torque (about the same as twenty car engines together) that you quoted above.

Better to spend $100 rather than $2000. When you have a $100 prototype that appears to run forever under load, than get it patented and seek funding to scale it up.

Ken writes: "Better to spend $100 rather than $2000. When you have a $100 prototype that appears to run forever under load, than get it patented and seek funding to scale it up."

-----

Oh now, c'mon! Give the dude a break! Like, when I tried to build a prototype 330 megawatt power plant for under $100, the dang thing ended up costing more than $450 - and that was before I added the cooling towers and transmission lines. Then came the service roads. Aaargh! Some things just don't scale well!

"I have a problem. A few years ago Perendev (who can be found at American Antigravity .com) for video!, developed a working magnetic motor, But the magnets degrade in a few months rendering the motor useless. I believe in this concept. in its original form."

Sadly you (like so many others, and yes even me) have been duped by the promise of free energy. The device never worked, it is all a scam (this particular device scam has been around for MANY years). I have heard it all before but yours is a particularly sad story (Investing so much money into something that does not and will never work, because of some flashy web graphics and a strong willingness to believe ). You wanted to believe but did not truely understand what you were looking at. You are not a fool but you (like many others) have been fooled.

I like many others have been lured by the false promise of this and other free energy devices, however I had both the practical and engineering background to see thru the lies and hopelessly flawed science and even worse lab results used as proof. Therein lies the problem, I had the real world knowledge and experience to understand what was going on behind the supposed science, and know how to question it and find the actual truth, where many enthusiastic inventors like yourself with little electrical and science knowledge and background cannot (relying on the scams science, marketing and your own strong belief to want it to be true).

It is vital to at least try and understand what is going on in the process and just step back and ask some basic questions such as.....

"This guy can make infinite amounts of energy, why is he not rich, why has the world not changed for the better, why has no one else been able to make the device work from his plans, etc",

"He says the process works but the oil companies/government/aliens are repressing the technology to save billions. Well free energy would actually cost them trillions so surely they would put him out of business very quickly and permanently",

"This device would change the world (free energy, infinite power, etc), and break quite a few physical laws. Why are no media/private companies/governments/oil companies interested?", etc.

"Why are there so many of these free energy devices on the market? Why have their been so many free energy devices since electricity was first invented (and even BEFORE electricity was invented, regarding the free energy water driven motor shaft), if there was something in free energy then surely atleast one of them must work".

I see no easy way to prevent people like you (the eager inventor yearning to make a difference) from falling fowl of all these lies. To take them down would almost make martyrs out of them and their cause. Only knowledge and facts can prevent the tears.

This is the first story I have heard this year regarding a duped inventor and a free energy motor, but not the first or even the 4th free energy motor seller I have heard this year. Upon careful questioning behind the science and lab work of their inventions they were trying to sell, all of the stories behind their inventions turned out to be untrue.

As an example, the last one I talked with had a PhD, professional website and conversed quite well and freely regarding the lab work and science behind his invention. Continued discussion with him revealed the truth however that his invention was all a scam. Upon being unable to convince me with easily provable facts and tests he resorted to telling me a tail about the aliens that visited him and told him to build the device to prevent the world from ending in 50 years.

It just goes to show that just because it looks good on the internet doesn't mean it is actually real or true (video can be modified, credentials and witnesses can be faked, etc).

This is the extent of the help I can offer. The free energy device you are working on will never work because the original never worked. I would be interested to know a rundown on what you spent the $2000 on thou.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack - A real power transmission and distribution engineer.

Even as a newbie, I felt like was surfing youtube when I first found this website...the reason: nasty, arrogant,condesending speach. But I also read very positive/inteligent advice and information!

My questions are: Has anyone tried making an "attracting" mag-motor? It seems to me, that we could harness the same amount of power from the magnets, but with much less loss of gauss, etc.. (magnetic strength-losses from heat would still be a factor)

Also...has anyone built a spiral-shaped, mag-motor, with multiple/overlapping fields?

Thanks,

Bryan

Bryan,

Attracting, repulsing, you name it, it's been done. The fact is that nobody seems to have come out with a real magnetic motor. Videos have been shot but they've been poorly made (bad focus, constructed so it's possible to hide a power source, etc.).

This piston type mag motor looks convincing but if you look at the construction, you'll wonder, why is the motor resting on two high boxes? Because of the spinning blade? Heck you can design the thing so it's above the surface, why design it so that it requires a tall box underneath? Might the box be hiding the real drive motor?

These types of videos are common in mag motors. They look fascinating but try to look at them from a sceptic's point of view.

What will it take to convince you? Me? Mount it on a glass surface where I can see that there are no electrical wires going into the thing; move the cam around in a convincing way so that there's no way that I can say they're hiding something; construct it so that every working part is visible; go to a tv station and show it to the world.

Put your motor in vaccum and its degradation will slow down.

Guest advises: "Put your motor in vaccum and its degradation will slow down."

-----

First let's see a working motor.

Second, let's see a working motor.

Third, ...

...

...then we can worry about performance tuning.

-e

At this point Im ready to burn the darn thing. Im scraping it.

Back in around 1972 I read a article in Popuar Science about a Carter gentleman that converted a vw type 3 wagen into a 2 cylinder 2 cycle steam car he used a propane steam jenny as a boiler the aricle stated the car would run 70 miles a hour all day concistantly and was so smooth you could balance a nickel on the engine case . it was a closed system and the water was recooled and re injected back into the boiler. I do recall they had issues with oil seperation from the water.

I have tried several times to find reprints on the article. I think it was the October issue.

I propose a challange to you to help me suceed I will bulid it at my cost if you will advise me in correct construction .
If use a Tesla disc type turbine with disc diameter 11 .5 inches. and dry type bearings and set it up to use 134-a freion. in a 15 x15 boiler that is microwave heated as I discribed .

What would I need to calulate the energy, to heat, then to horse power. I need a mathmatical equaztion that eather proves it, or proves it impossible . This will be expencive for me . I don't need any more failures

My goal is to at the very least be able to make a 11 k generator . They normally require about 12 Hp to run.

Zeg, just a few questions so that I understand things a bit: why use a "microwave" boiler? I'm assuming your design choices are based, perhaps, on efficiency considerations? Why a Tesla turbine? Are these more efficient than conventional blade-type turbines? What are the drawbacks of each?

And some suggestions: minimize complexity. Worry about the microwave boiler later and as a separate project. Your Tesla turbine won't know the difference. Keep things simple. The more variables you introduce into your project the more difficult - and expensive - everything becomes. Minimize, minimize, minimize.

Take baby steps and thoroughly understand why you are taking each one. Learn as you go. Question everything, especially your own hidden assumptions. Boy is this hard, too, because you first have to discover what they are! Hidden assumptions are killers.

Don't fall in love with your own designs. Be willing to abandon an approach if it clearly won't work. On the other hand, be persistent as hell.

Subject your work to peer review. It ain't easy, and it's sometimes flat-out embarrassing, but you win in the end.

Admit your mistakes. Engineers have a harder time doing this than any other species on Earth, bar none.

Use a spell checker. It won't catch everything, so proof-read your stuff a gozillion times before posting it (even this does not work for me: I often drop words like the, an, a, and other connector-type words. Spell-checkers can't catch this, and they can't catch homonyms - words that are correctly spelled but are the wrong word for the application. Words like pair, pare, and pear). On this forum, your words are YOU. If you're not using Mac Safari, there's a spell-check button right up there at the top of the editor box. That thingie with a green check-mark below 'ABC.' If you are using Mac Safari, tough buns, Ace! For some reason CR4's editor goes a little bonkers.

My two cents' worth.

-e

Zeg:

Did you put the name Tesla in there just to see if we'd all freak out??

Assuming 11k to mean 11kW, then if that generator were 100% efficient, it would require 14.75 hp. Given that the generator will not be 100% efficient, you'd need more than 14.75 hp. 20 would be reasonable.

If you want an 11kW generator, and you want to avoid failure, I'd think that simply buying a nice diesel-powered one would be the way to go.

I think the applicable equation is not, strictly speaking, an equation so much as an inequality:

0 ≠ 1

Nothing is not equal to something. Put another way, there are no free lunches.

I'm afraid I'll have to pass on the challenge. But gosh-golly I sure hope one of the others here will jump in and guide you on your quest for a microwave-heated, freon based turbine engine driven generator. My enthusiasm for the project would have me jumping in all the time with suggested refinements such as super-conducting coils (there may be enough excess current to power the refrig system) and perhaps some type of super collider to get the microwaves set into motion before the generator takes over. I fear that such refinements might cloud the elegance of the basic design. I'd be looking for 400% input/output ratios, while the more conservative types here may only be looking for 300%. Better to start small.

0=1 Binary, hex 00000000 = 1 and 11111111 = 255, ?

If this is a logic test, I'll say: false, false, true. Do I win anything?

Zegfredgrummin,

You've finally won me over with your persistence, and dedication to "sticking it" to the big oil companies. We all know if it wasn't for them and their unholy alliance with the power companies we would have been free from fossil fuels and global warming long ago!

For your motor and generator needs, I suggest you visit EverWatt.com

For special consideration, feel free to mention my name (Greg G, at CR4) to Prof./Dr. Robert Dave Myrland, and tell him the Draco sent you.

Good luck!

Regards, Greg

I can't offer you anything in terms of design. Here's a link to Wiki on the Stanley Steamer. If you google "stanley steamer" you'll find more.

Ken mentioned about a "proof of concept". It's just a prototype built to the bare essentials just to prove that the concept works. It's cheaper and you learn a lot from it.

There are several inventions that seemed to be ahead of their time. One was the steam powered car and the other is the automatic variable transmission or torque converter. Internal combustion engines provided the power and performance that people wanted so these things just didn't catch on. In these days when fuel economy is becoming more important, inventions such as these might see a comeback.

From post 24 you state "Also I do indeed wish i did have a good enginnering education Insteed of Edison style trial and error methods."

And in Additional posts including post 34 you mention microwaves and magnetrons. Words cannot fully describe how incredibly dangerous the associated microwave radiation and high voltages required are. Do NOT attempt this without first getting a better understanding of electrical fundamentals and safety at the very least. As part of my job I work on and design with voltages up to 33kV and currents in the 1000's of amps and I would not tinker with what you are suggesting without proper safety (and microwave detection) equipment. I have (among other things) an electrical engineering degree in power and years of experience in the industry and I would not undertake a project like this without extensive research and planning.

Nothing you have said in your posts leads me to believe you are capable of undertaking a project of this level in a safe manor. Listen to experienced people in the power industry who know! Do not attempt anything further without learning more about the fundamentals and just how monumentally dangerous this is to yourself and others. More engineering education is required.

"I propose a challange to you to help me suceed I will bulid it at my cost if you will advise me in correct construction ." This article was printed back in 1972. If it actually worked as it said we would not still be driving around in petrol-powered cars (have a serious think about that first). Propane, microwaves and high voltage are all very dangerous and no amount of advice here from anyone would be enough given your lack of engineering knowledge and understanding of some of the more basic fundamentals.

"Trial and error" at this level leads to Trial and DEATH.

That is actually very viable and posible solution in my opinion. I am thinking in same direction with Tesla turbine, as of instead of freon, I am more thinking on compressed air solution and circular system.

Sent me few lines so we can colaborate on this.

The guest's advice has a couple of typos. It was supposed to have read:

"Develop your motor in a vacuum, and your degradation will slow down."

Some things are best kept secret: belief in aliens on every corner, belief in "zero point" energy, having voted for any politician, etc. If you don't let people know this kind of stuff, you'll suffer less degradation.

LOL. I tried doing that, and it sucks.

-e

Ken self-deprecates: "I've been working on becoming an idiot savant -- one of those people who can multiply two 10 digit numbers in seconds. I've got the first part pretty well figured out."

-----

I know you better than that, Mr. Ken. But you know, what's really hard for me is that second 10-digit number.

-e

Well I'm making progress. I now know that if I multiply two 10 digit numbers I have to get a 100 digit number. That's common sense. My problem is that I'm never sure which 100 digits to use for the answer.

I'm going to let you slide on your having accused me of self-deprecating. I think that whether or not I do it all over myself is really my business. And frankly, it happens only rarely. But I do have to admit, I kinda like the way it takes me back to my childhood...

"And frankly, it happens only rarely."

-----

Which is good. Last time I tried it I threw my shoulder out of whack.

-e

Did you know that even in Base-2 you still get a 100-digit answer? It's like friggin' magic or something!

Element 63 writes: "It's like friggin' magic or something! " It's not like friggin' magic... it is friggin' magic!

Try this experiment. Write a base 2 number on an overhead transparency. (For full effect, leave off any serifs.) Write the same number on a piece of paper, for reference later in the experiment. Now, hold the transparency in front of yourself, at a comfortable viewing distance. Carefully rotate the transparency , the top going away from you, the bottom moving toward you, until you are looking through the transparency from the OPPOSITE SIDE! (Take a second to reflect on this: you are looking at the number from the back side and it is UPSIDE DOWN!!!) Now... read the number. Compare the number to the one you wrote down earlier. THEY ARE THE SAME! Can you possibly prove to me that this is not magic... or at least a message from aliens??

I think we should patent it immediately before someone steals your idea.

Too late. Last night government goons arrived in black Stealth helicopters and spirited away the plans to Area 51 before The Kabal could follow through with their plans to exploit the scheme to their own sinister ends and blackmail the world into total subservience. Thank goodness the great dane could dial or Elvis would never have come in time to reassure me with The Secret Sign.

-e

Ken reveals a "belief in aliens on every corner..."

-----

You're way ahead of me. I can only admit to a belief in aliens on every other corner.

-e

Could you explain how a vacuum helps prevent magnet degredation? I don't see how.

Jack, my guess (Guest? May I guess?) that running the contraption in a vacuum cuts down on (read "eliminates") air friction, allowing it to gasp a little longer before finally petering out.

Breathtaking.

-e

Sheeeesh, and here I was thinking he meant "you might as well do it inside a big shop vac" ....... 'cause that's where it will end up anyway.

Greg

The last time I heard a gigantic sucking sound was when they signed that NAFTA agreement with Mexico...

-e

-e,

I don't know about the sound from Mexico, but there's a pretty strong sucking sound from the East, and it speaks Chinese.

I guess you've never met my ex- .... oh well, I'll leave that for another time.

Just a general comment on all the helpful, cordial, well meaning replies to the OP here: He is now on his 3rd free energy scheme, having buried the first 2 unceremoniously (the first one deserved at least a moment of silence for the supposed $2000 that degraded even faster than his magnets).

He is now becoming a PPPPPM: (no, I'm not stuttering) PerPetual Poster of PerPetual Motion devices. It is my hope (see post# 47) that Bob will keep him busy for a while, and perhaps perform a Draco mind meld with Dennis Lee.

Sometimes being too nice only encourages more nonsense. I favor putting them out of their misery by dispatching them as quickly as possible, although apparently, the Draco have imbued a favored few with seeming immortality. But then they do say, a mother_ship's love knows no bounds.

Regards, Greg

Greg G wistfully wonders: "I guess you've never met my ex- .... oh well, I'll leave that for another time."

-----

Wonder if she knows my ex. John Gray got it all wrong: Men are from Mars, true, but women are from HELL.

-e

Greg G introduces the difficult-to-pronounce (without indigestion) "PPPPPM" but then explains "(no, I'm not stuttering)"

-----

How 'bout shortening it to just "perp?" or "perper." And maybe call the attempt to foist yet another greater-than-unity machine upon a not-unsuspecting and wary forum "perping?"

-e

-e

I like the sound of perp.

First I thought it wouldn't fit our OP, because he doesn't have his hand out, yet since he keeps introducing things that violate the laws of physics, each time in a serious manner, without regard for their common theme of something for nothing, I think it does fit.

Since algor won an award, I'm expecting a lot more of these kinds of posts. "Hey dudes, I was just chillin' out, reading my new issue of Unscientific American when I cut my lip on a pop-top, then I got this reeaaally coool idea to save the planet ...". Or, "I've invented a new kind of engine that isn't based on the oxidation reactions of old style IC engines that were designed over 100 years ago. My engine can intake conventional IC exhaust, and as it runs in its reverse rotation by using a Tesla reduction reaction cycle it produces gasoline, and only oxygen enriched air is emitted. I was able to run my first prototype a short time, and when I got it up to speed it produced high torque. My plan is to run my engine off the exhaust of a normal old style engine, so I will get twice the power, and an amount of gasoline equal to what the first engine burned. Eventually I will pipe everything together so both engines will be able to run indefinitely, with no polluting emissions at all. This free power will be available to the world to free us from the energy cartel forever. I am presently seeking investors to allow me to get this to market faster."

(Watch me get Emails now from potential investors or people eager to obtain a franchise!)

Regards, Greg

"I favor putting them out of their misery by dispatching them as quickly as possible" perhaps it is my cat-like nature. Taunt the prey, play with it before you kill it. Give 'em a little rope and see how they hang. Got to do something for entertainment and to break the monotony of staring into this box eight to ten hours a day.

Your avatar seems to offer endless possibilites. Yes, I saw the video. I'd prefer to put them out of my misery with this 500 kV arc. Perp enema.

-e

Hi All,

I haven't been here for a while, but visiting, I saw this thread. Not being one to toss out frivolous ideas, I'm just going to suggest something that I was thinking about a while back. Not free energy. Maybe bad idea. Dunno.:

Have the rotor with permanent magnets mounted. Build the "stator" with mechanically variable-angle magnet assemblies in order to attract/ repel the rotor magnets at small angles of incidence using whatever..> pneumatics, hydraulics, inductor, actuators etc. Alot of design-work that's above my head would be involved, and, like I said , maybe bad idea; might not work at all..maybe more energy input than out..maybe not.

Just my .02.

Steve

I think this is an idea that many of us had at one point in our lives, probably as kids or high school students. I have only played with it in my mind and never attempted a model because my sense is that it is a net loss system (when you factor in friction losses). To commute the fields you incur an attractive force equal and opposite to the repulsive force that give energy into the system, no matter how clever you are at doing it. It would be an interesting exercise to develop an accurate mathematical model to analyze this and maybe it would put the argument to rest. However, if you could devise a means of circumventing the "cogging" effect (that didn't consume as much energy as it generated) then it would certainly go. Though I still insist that there simply isn't that much energy to be gotten from permanent magnets but since you could in theory scale it up maybe that wouldn't matter. I wouldn't mind a shed sized building in my back yard but there is also the matter of cost to benefit ratio since more mass is more expensive.

If you draw up a motor with an outer stator, and angle the magnets in it so that they will repel magnets of the rotor, you can come up with something that looks like it should work. In fact you can come up with things that look really convincing. But, inevitably, they never actually work.

I'm thinking of developing a magnetic and gravity motor software simulator. It would faithfully reproduce the actual physics, and would enable an experimenter to try out this stuff without having to build an actual device.

Interesting animation:

http://fdp.nu/AndyMotor/default.asp

If you for a while in time, zero out the permanet magnets magnetism you will be able to make it work.

This is tested out in my lab:

(Some of the info is secret so I will be short)

There are ways to zero out permanet magnets as long the system is activated.

This zero out system draws only 0,1A and when activated the magnet is non magnetic and when swished of the magnet is magnetic once more. It takes only 8 nano sec for the magent to become fully to its self once more.

With a timming controll you can make a timing on when the magnets shall go on and of and in so way also make rotation.

I am curently working on the timming electronics so a working modell is not yet finished, but if working good it may be usefull to many areas.

magnet degredation is bullshit.

You are correct. If you have a method to "zero out the permanent magnets" then you have solved the field commutation issue. Beyond that the timing is trivial. It still does not constitute over unity since the magnets are essentially converting mass to energy, albeit at a very low rate. Can you share your method to "zero out the permanent magnets"?

Re: The Perendev Magnetic Motor

<You are correct. If you have a method to "zero out the permanent magnets" then you have solved the field commutation issue. Beyond that the timing is trivial. It still does not constitute over unity since the magnets are essentially converting mass to energy, albeit at a very low rate. Can you share your method to "zero out the permanent magnets"?>

rcapper,

I made a lot of stuff in my life and I newer failed due to wery mach ground researsh before I even did plan to make any of whatever stuff...

Many years in time with researsh before start make any prototypes may sometimes be the key to get your idea right at end.

U need a working modell of theory before it is fair to even bother with whatever it is.

At least that is how my prosess has been and that is how I gain control to get it right.

My researsh proves that overunity is possible and it also proves that it is possible to gain controll over magnets who indead may be used as repelling its flux/spin-zero particles to the point in time where you need it to make a working force. Sure u need also to deaktivate its spin-zero particles in correct time to make it work and the way to do that are to alter the frequency of the magnet.

I am not allowed at this time to discus this deeper.

However, I gave you some "thinking work" and that is good for you as well as the rest here. I noted that some here acting like they are the guru of the world and realy believes that they know everyting when it is not so.

They can be whatever they like to be, but ""know what to know before it is known""... Yeah, right... You can't taste the food before u eat it...

There are a lot of bullshit out there and many investors have got on it and lose money, professional idiots...

Its to bad that pepole like that is spreading a bad light over real inventors that has real working stuff that has in some times taken many years of development and private investment.

We have passed 2000 and we should be ashamed of us self, we still polute, we still use fossile fuels and it is so stupid, we still fly using wings instead of magnetics, (pimitive things) etc. we do so many things to our planet that is so bad and still pepole talks a lot about global warming. However no one doing a shit about it. No one forces you to use gasoline or diesel remember that and if you realy want to contribute to research I sugest you got out of the school boks and forget about what they told you in school and in the mean while start using electric engines and systems in your cars. And it is possible to order systems like that, and it is out there. I don't drive a car as I find it to be the most stupid thing I se pepole do exsept smoking. I will jump in a car when it is electric and no need for charge anything...

We need new technology and we need it fast...

It's somewhat good that pepole dismiss some of the free energy, as yes some is bullshit, but don't dismiss everything as you can't all the time say someting about everything when the fact lines up to show that you don't have a clue before it is on the market. Don't work agenst real inventors...

Aleksandar Tajsic, Belgrade.

I'm an electronics tech, not a mech eng., so please excuse my lack of expertise in the relm of mechanical engines. My question is this...why does the Perendev motor need to be designed on the principle of repelling! Has anyone designed a mag-motor based on attraction? If so, let me know. :) Bryan

Ok . First Tesla made a very simple turbine it was a rotating disc in a chamber with a u shaped steam path. its a fairly simple thing to build. and reported to be very eficent. so it should be a safe bet , It will have to be back geared also . Im guessing 12/1.

Ok. A microwave boiler would be something like a propane tank converted over.

Im guessing it would need a ceramic powder coating on the inside to dispurse microwaves and some kind of preferated inner cone that would radiate and heat any liquid inside. A pryrex windox is required to aim the magnatron projectors into the chamber, they cant be inside,and the boiler has to be rf sheilded! very well if you use microwaves?

Am I wrong in thinking it is more effecent. than electric heating elements And if not would 2 electric 400 watt elements be enough. to boil and recover quick enough?

Your second part first: A conventional (however form it takes) resistive heating element is 100% efficient at generating heat. Coupling that heat to the water is the trick; most easily solved simply by completely submerging it in said water. High-power microwaves, on the other hand, are generated by a magnetron - something you probably wouldn't want to submerge in water while operating. This means that any heat (not microwaves, but plain 'ol burn-the-fingers kind of heat) the magnetron generates isn't going into heating the water. Plus, magnetrons have other issues - lots of 'em - that a simple resistive heating element doesn't have. Given the choice, you are better off heating the water using plain old-fashioned heating elements, natural gas, or other mature technologies. If you're interested in conserving natural resources, reducing global warming, etc., etc., then your primary target should be efficiency, not novelty.

I'm somewhat familiar with Tesla turbines. But see where you say in your post, "... and reported to be very efficient." Don't take someone else's word for it. Determine the efficiency yourself. Learning how to do this will teach you a whole bunch about what goes into such determinations and what is irrelevant.

I suppose you might want some form of speed reducer between the turbine and generator, but are gears the best choice. You decide, and on the basis of knowing which is best and why.

Conceptually, Tesla turbines are easy to build. But they are precision devices nonetheless and require precision machining. After all, they depend on the source fluid (be it gas or liquid) forming a boundary layer on the turbine disk. A rough disk and you're S.O.L. Especially when it comes to efficiency.

My two pesos' worth.

-e

Speaking of discs for Tesla turbines, you may wish to consider using the disks out of a computer hard drive. Cheap, readily available, and smooth as a baby's bottom.

-e