Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Science fun for all. Science fairs, homemade experiments, amateur microscopy, comics, puzzles, videos, or anything else you'd like to share.

Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 8th, 2011, 1:55 am 

Hi folks, it's your old neighborhood crackpot Dave here again. (up to no good as always...)

While I grew up, I was absolutely fascinated with Science. Like most science geeks, I went through a spell where I explored the concept of Perpetual Motion Machines. Specifically, the kind that use Gravity and/or Magnetism to create an imbalance that might be exploited to produce power. It didn't take much of an education to realize the task of designing one is impossible. Of course, the main reason they don't work is that it's impossible to insulate a critical part to be immune to Gravity or Magnetism.

At least that's what I thought until I ran across "Diamagnetic Levitation". I'm sure most of you have seen the "Floating Frog" demonstration. For those that haven't, here is a short YouTube video of it:



Basically, some scientists found a sweet spot near the top of a super electromagnet. This area of a few cubic inches has the unique property of forcing the electrons in Matter to feel upwards pressure. Inside this sweet spot, the force of downwards gravity is balanced against an upwards electron pressure and effectively neutralizes gravity within this small zone for many materials.. such as water and fruits and frogs etc. If you want to visit their site to learn more, especially the science behind this, then here is the URL:

http://www.ru.nl/hfml/research/levitation/diamagnetic/

This sparked my old fascination with Perpetual Motion Machines and I decided to try a conceptual design as shown below. On their site, they explain that there is nothing special about their super electro-magnet. It draws a huge amount of power, and the coil inside is more like a staircase. This is to leave room for coolant and prevents meltdown. They play with it in the range of 10-16 Telsa. That's a super powerful magnetic field. But they point out that it can be done using super magnets.

This eliminates the huge constant power levels and heat issues. I found a site where they will build you custom super magnets to your specification. I have a drawer with some I have played with. I was making a slip clutch with them. Two small magnets have a contact force of 22 lbs. A bunch of them can pinch/crush your fingers and if one gets away from you, it's velocity to the others can cause it to shatter, not unlike a grenade. So I would be remiss to not warn you from trying to build this device I'm about to outline. It's ultra dangerous!!! Ok.. that said.. here is the design I came up with:

It begins with a U-shaped glass tube as shown, filled to a point with purified water. Note: the level of water on the left reservoir side is the same as on the right.

Image1.jpg
Stage 1:

Next, I add a sluice connecting the top right tube, for water to run downwards, back to the reservoir. Now all I need to do is raise the water level a bit on the right side, to breach the lip of the sluice. This requires nullification of gravity pressure for a small slice of water in the right side tube. Doing so will raise the water level on that side, say about 1/2 inch or more and drain down the sluice and return to the reservoir. This imbalance of water level pressures between both sides should keep the water flowing for a very long time. The plumbing is now sealed to stop evaporation.

Image2.jpg
Stage 2:

To create this imbalance, I use "Diamagnetic Levitation" on the right side water tube, using a specially designed super magnetic core, like the one that floats the frog, except this one uses a permanent magnet rather than an electro-magnet.

Image3.jpg
Stage 3:

Finally, just for fun, I included a small simple water flow powered turbine generator. I mean, what good is a perpetual motion machine if it can't do any work? (lol)

Image4.jpg
Stage 4:

Some details regarding the magnetically coupled generator: The fins spin the disk, which has alternating small magnets. They couple through the glass wall and are picked up with a coil. Now, if you want free power, go buy a solar cell. Lots cheaper than this gizmo. My rough calculations (pulled from the place I sit) indicate that I can pay back the universe for the power used to charge the super magnet, in about 90 days. If I'm really far off.. then perhaps 90,000 days, or 250 years approx.

Image5.jpg
Generator Detail:

So I ask everyone or anyone.. will this idea work? I can't see any reason why not, other than it's impossible of course.

Oh... for those animal lovers out there... I will mention that the frog used in the video was returned safely to the Bio Labs without croaking.

Have a great day folks,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 9th, 2011, 8:29 pm 

Hi folks (again)..

Just a few facts and observations I've gathered to help me analyze this problem from a logical point of view:

1. The sweet spot (as described) is not actually gravity free.
2. The diamagnetic properties of water (frog) resist the intrusion of magnetic lines of force.
3. The frog is actually floating in what might be described as a magnetic bowl of force.
4. There is little magnetism deeper inside the magnetic tube. The lines of magnetic force are mostly contained within the walls of the tube. The intense manifestation of the magnetic lines of force are mostly at the ends, which spread out in a classical field display. However, with a very wide bore and short tube, it's logical some lines of force will manifest inside the tube as well as the outside. Which raises the question of ratio. How small does the bore hole have to become before the internal lines of force stay contained within the walls of the tube and become negligible within the air core of the tube? Or am I completely wrong in that perception?
5. The Magnetic bowls only appear near both ends of the magnetic tube.
6. Yes, there must be a reverse (sour) magnetic bowl near the bottom where the frog will appear to gain weight as the sum of gravity and the diamagnetic repulsive force. That's why I have the water entering mid section of the tube. The entry hole should have little magnetic issues as it's logical the lines of force will stay within the walls and go around the water inlet hole.

Ok, that's most of the factors I can think of, in solving this problem (at least logically).

So here is the final facet (I think) that makes or breaks the concept:

If I put the frog on a small plastic plunger (gauged) and push him up into the magnetic tube from the bottom, I should see on the weight gauge an increase in the frogs weight as I push him into the bottom (sour) magnetic bowl. Gravity and diamagnetic repulsion should add to reveal an apparent weight increase. As I push the frog past this point.. will it's weight simply taper back down to normal, as it moves up further into the tube? Or will it's weight decrease well below normal first, once slightly above the lower magnetic bowl?

If anyone has any input or criticisms of my assessments thus far, please speak up. This problem is driving me batty. (And I am already batty enough...lol)

Best wishes,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby SciameriKen on September 11th, 2011, 4:42 pm 

To sum up the idea is that the Zero G device pushes water into the Sluice where gravity then pushes it downward back towards the Zero G device and repeats the cycle - is that close?

The one question I have is how does the water get past the zero-G zone to get pushed through the cycle again?
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby CanadysPeak on September 11th, 2011, 4:49 pm 

The trick is that you can't neutralize gravity, you can only cancel the force of gravity with another force in the opposite direction.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 12th, 2011, 7:21 pm 

Thanks for the drop-by feedback guys..

For CanadysPeak:
Exactly why the frog levitates... Thank you.

For SciameriKen:
"The one question I have is how does the water gets past the zero-G zone to get pushed through the cycle again?"

I hope the following helps...

Visualize the U-shaped tube half filled with water. On the right tube insert a Styrofoam plug. This plug is coated (Teflon?) to reduce/kill friction and is just the right size (form-fitting) that water can't go around the plug due to surface tension/viscosity. Now push this plug way down to the water level inside the right side tube while allowing the trapped air bubble created to escape around the plug. We want this Styrofoam plug to be resting on the surface of the water, down in the right side tube. Now pour more water into either side tube, trying to keep the plug low in its tube. Since the plug is free to move up or down without allowing the water to go around it, it becomes a volumetric displacement of the water in that shaft that's much lighter than the equivalent volumetric area of water.

Assume the displacement plug is equal volume to raising the water level by one inch. What you will find is that you can not make the water level equal in height on both sides of the tubes at the same time. The height of the water columns is based on the weight of the water. Equal weight in each column yields equal height. But the plug in the right tube displaces several cubic inches of water as nearly zero weight. Thus, the water volume in each tube will always stay equal, but the height of the water level will always be higher in the tube with the displacement plug.

Now, if you slowly fill the tubes with water such that the additional water height in the tube with the plug can breach the lip of the sluice then the excess water will flow back to the reservoir. This process will continue until the plug is pushed to the top of the right tube and is no longer surrounded (top/bottom) with water. Only then will both tubes will have equal water volumes and column water weights. Then the flow will stop because equilibrium has been achieved.

Finally, imagine the Styrofoam plug is now replaced by an intense non-moving magnetic field. The effect of which creates an upwards repulsive force on an area of water to effectively cancel the water weight but not the water volume. This plug never moves but it's effect on the water is the same as the Styrofoam plug. It should also be noted that the water doesn't have precognition about the forth-coming magnetic field. There is nothing to stop the water from entering the field. In fact it's pushed into the field from the water pressure underneath. Once inside the field, the diamagnetic properties of the water start to kick in but it's now too late, the water is already inside the field and can only exit by following the path of least force, (gravity vs. magnetic) which is upwards in this case. One might call this aspect of the design as the "Devils Trap".

Ok, it's all a bit more complex than I've explained, but that's the general gist of it. In a sense, it's a bit like an electric motor, where the magnetic fields are turned off and on in such a manner as to keep the motor in a state of non-equilibrium. In our case the electromagnetic (diamagnetic) sequence is done on a molecular level and is not instantaneous. There will be a bit of reluctance on the part of the molecules to oppose shifting their polarity. But electro-magnetic reluctance always gives way to the superior force being applied eventually, even if it means a short delay is involved for full alignment of the magnetic poles of the water molecules.

Whew...

I might also mention that I'm completely wasting the (sour) pole at the bottom of the super magnet. If I redesign the tubing into a sort of figure-8, then I can also exploit the bottom magnetic field and add it's pressure effect to the upper half and double the water volume thru-put.

Now.. I'm not an idiot (Ok.. perhaps a bit crazy at times). I know this concept defies the laws of thermal dynamics and other long since proven laws of energy conservation, etc. But I still can't find the flaw in my reasoning. Can anybody help?

Best wishes,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby CanadysPeak on September 12th, 2011, 7:33 pm 

Dave,

One flaw is that you can't practically pick up a volume of water with a magnetic field (Where do you plan on getting 10 T or even 20 T?). Even if you could, it's not free - the magnet would push the earth downward by an equal force, meaning do work.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 12th, 2011, 8:04 pm 

Thanks CanadysPeak,

You are right, I can't pick up water with a magnet. The Diamagnetic property is a repulsive property. Which means I can most definitely "Push" water around with a powerful enough magnet. As for the Telsa rating, the small Super Magnets in my possession are rated at 1.4 Telsa. If I put one near a drop of water, I can see it creates a small dimple in the surface of said water.

To charge the magnet requires about a 40,000 amp/sec pulse. If my generator produces 0.005 amp/secs.. it will take about 8,000,000 seconds to repay the universe. Or about 92 days. I could be off by a factor of 10 on either (or both) sides. If both sides then it sets the payback period out to possibly 9200 days, or about 25 years. Yea, I know.. paybacks a bitch...lol.

Best regards,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Terry on September 13th, 2011, 7:50 am 



Even the diamagnetic property of water is just as strong as pyrolytic graphite, the magnetic repulsive force don't continuously move the water over a distance if everything is left static and no further work is done.



Why can't this work? Imagine multiplying the effect by many capillary tubes.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby CanadysPeak on September 13th, 2011, 8:27 am 

Terry wrote:

Even the diamagnetic property of water is just as strong as pyrolytic graphite, the magnetic repulsive force don't continuously move the water over a distance if everything is left static and no further work is done.



Why can't this work? Imagine multiplying the effect by many capillary tubes.


Indeed! A good experiment for you. Get a capillary tube and set this up. A few minutes of watching should make the answer plain.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 13th, 2011, 6:05 pm 

Thanks CanadysPeak & Terry,

The video of the guy pushing water around with a magnet demonstrates what I said above very well.. thanks Terry!

The second one "Water Engine" is a joke. Anyone who has sucked on a straw knows the fluid stops when you quit sucking and returns to the glass/cup/can. And if you bend the straw, the fluid will only back flow if air can replace it. Obviously it can't forward flow because of insufficient liquid weight/mass on the down slope tube to draw water up the other side tube. There is no real capillary action in this configuration anyway.

If you really wanted a capillary pump.. just place a tall square sponge in a pan of water. Notice how far the water climbs up the sponge.. well above the water surface level of course. Now just stick a spigot into the sponge, as high as possible while still in the upper wet area of the sponge.. turn on the spigot.. and you have a much more believable water engine. (this part is an intended joke...)

Best wishes & thanks,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 13th, 2011, 8:17 pm 

I wanted to add the whole truth about capillary action but my edit window timed out.. so here is a good explanation on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capillary_action

The reason I said there is no capillary action here is the diagram indicates water flow, which sets the scale of the setup as having too large of a tube for any significant capillary action. Now.. if you filled the big tube with sponge.. hummmm.. I wonder... (lol).

Hope this helps Terry..

Best from,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 14th, 2011, 12:10 am 

Well folks, I've just spent the last 4 hours researching magnetic fields and boy.. do I have a headache..lol. Ok, I believe I found the flaw in my design but I'm not going to post the answer just yet. I'll check back to see if a few of you guys (or gals) want to take a shot at it.

Best to ya all,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Terry on September 14th, 2011, 12:55 pm 

I would say the water rise come from the potential energy in creating the condition for capillary action and that a water column that is longer than the rise level is required on the other side to drive the forward flow of water. If not, the capillary action will support the water column and prevent its downward flow on the other side.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 14th, 2011, 2:34 pm 

Hi Terry,
See my comment above for September 12th, 2011, 4:21 pm.
I had tried to make it clear that the device uses the null gravity zone (where the frog floats).
It doesn't use any form of capillary action.

But keep trying...

Best wishes,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 16th, 2011, 11:50 pm 

Hi Folks, Dave here again to finish this up with some additional education and insights.

The reasons my design can't work are 3 fold (at least).

1. You can't build a 10-15 Telsa Permanent magnet.
2. The interior of the cylinder is not free of magnetism.
3. The Devils Trap requires too great of a water velocity.

Explanations:

Item 1:
If, like me, you were taught that you can just add magnets together to increase the total field strength.. well.. this turns out to be somewhat untrue. That surprised me, so I had to try it out. I have a bunch of identical super magnets and a spring type scale shaped like a tube with a gauge on the side and tray below. You have seen something like it at the super market to weigh fruit. I locked a super magnet in a plastic vice, set the metal tray on it and pulled up. It required 7 lbs to break the magnetic grip. Next.. I used two magnets. Breaking force was 10 lbs. Then three magnets. Break force was 12 lbs. Then four magnets. Break force was 11 lbs. Then 5 magnets. Break force was 11.5 lbs. See where this is going?
Magnet 1: 7 lbs
Magnets 2: 10 lbs
Magnets 3: 12 lbs
Magnets 4: 11 lbs
Magnets 5: 11.5 lbs

I noticed many hobbyists building levitation devices had also indicated that there is little to be gained beyond 4 or 5 magnets. I'm sure the Physics guys have a cool word for this effect of diminishing returns on investment. For now, I'll just call it "Saturation". The magnetic field is produced by the material inside the magnet. At some point, the material becomes magnetically saturated and cannot become any greater, no matter how many magnets are added in series.

I also noticed that the comment on the web site (showing the floating frog) which had stated that this "Diamagnetic Levitation" could be done with permanent magnets had been removed. I thought it was for safety reasons. Some idiot (like me) would try to build it. Now I see it's because it can't be done with the best materials we currently have. Additional research indicates the best science has done so far is about 5 Telsa in a permanent magnet. That's only about 3 times higher than my super magnets.

It should also be pointed out that electro-magnets (using an electrical coil) don't suffer from this limitation. They are only limited by how much electrical power you can apply before meltdown occurs.

Item 2:
I was taught that the lines of force flow through and stay inside the metal. The demonstration was a horseshoe magnet and some iron filings. With a keeper bar across the magnetic end, the magnetic field disappeared. It was being conducted in the bar because it had lower "Permeability" than the air. Even without the bar, the magnetic lines of force stayed inside the metal of the horseshoe as was indicated by the absence of magnetism near the rounded end. The teacher said that if you drilled a small hole in the round end of the magnet, that the magnetism would just flow around the hole and display very little magnetic activity. This grade school science class never covered cylinder shaped magnets. Ok, so no wonder I was so screwed up with misinformation.

1. A magnetic field doesn't "Flow" anywhere. It just "IS". No motion involved at all.
2. The keeper bar doesn't give a path of lower resistance to Magnetic flow. It simply distorts the field shape.
3. The inside of a cylinder magnet is loaded with magnetic flux lines. They are not trapped within the metal walls of the tube.

So we can now see why my idea won't work.
1. The field of a permanent magnet can't be made made intense enough to levitate water.
2. Pushing water into the tube from the side doesn't avoid the internal magnetic flux lines.

So whatever repulsive force might be at the top of the magnetic cylinder is balanced against the repulsive magnetic force against the water entering the tube. So it's still a zero sum gain magnetically speaking.

Item 3:
The Devils Trap. This is the idea that something can enter a trap and can't get back out. It's one directional. Or perhaps the force to exit the trap is lesser than the force of entering the trap. Now in this concept I might have a small chance to win. See.. No material can instantly become magnetic. In fact, in most cases the material will resist becoming magnetic briefly. In electrical terms it's called "Reluctance". To reorient the molecules in a material, a forced magnetic polarity change will produce a small electrical charge, which creates an opposing magnetic field to the polarity being forced on it. It will eventually succumb but it takes a few moments.

So imagine the water is approaching and entering into a magnetic field. It can't produce a repulsive field until the dipoles of the water molecules re-align against the externally applied field. By the time they do, it's too late, the water is already inside the field and the repulsion is, in a sense, omni-directional. In the case of the frog, the field would be trying to crush him from all sides. When the frog (water) reaches the end of the cylinder, the lower density field at the top would offer an escape, since the repulsive effect is greater on the magnetically denser side of the frog (water).

This is the only defendable aspect of my design. But.. I have a feeling the water velocity would have to be extremely high.. like super sonic or greater. (And that's not going to happen..lol.)

So.. I gave it my best shot and got quite an education from the experience. And I had to unlearn a number of misconceptions in the process too. So..... now it's onto "Capillary Action" thanks to Terry. I mean.. how does the orange juice (in an orange) get so high up in an orange tree anyway????

Best wishes to all you folks,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Greek_Geek on September 17th, 2011, 1:30 am 

Isn't the fundamental problem with PMM's is that they propose to extract a limitless amount of energy from a system that has a finite amount of energy?

The water engine is clever, but in reality the liquid probably stops after capillary action, it would not drip onto the turbine. Nature is always trying to achieve the lowest state of energy. If water resists gravity due to capillary action, that means that the intermolecular bonding of water to the glass surface (coupled with surface tension) achieves a lower state of energy than gravity alone. That being said, why would the water suddenly succumb to the force of gravity after the siphon? Capillary action is the lowest state of energy for that system, so succumbing to gravity later would actually mean returning to a higher state of energy.

The universe is easier to understand if you think of it in terms of energy, and there is only a finite amount.
Greek_Geek
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 45
Joined: 10 Sep 2011


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Terry on September 17th, 2011, 9:01 am 

Dave_Oblad wrote:how does the orange juice (in an orange) get so high up in an orange tree anyway????


Osmotic pressure from the root, transpiration pull from the leave, capillary action and active transport in the conducting tissues all play a role in bringing water up.
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 19th, 2011, 3:31 am 

Hey Terry, I owe you an apology.

That "Water Engine" I dismissed so quickly actually does work. I know.. I built it over the weekend, with some modifications. You "All" can build it too.. in just a few minutes with some simple materials.

It has three parts: 1_Capillary tube. 2_Siphon. 3_Water wheel.

I tried sponge for the capillary tube.. too slow. I took a square of toilet paper and rolled it, like a lollypop stick, but not so tight of course. I dipped it in some water and was amazed how fast the water climbed. Nearly 5 inches high and 50% saturated in seconds. Full saturation in about 30 seconds. But it's a soggy noodle by now. I needed a stiffener. So I dragged out some Twisty-Ties, commonly used to close the end of a loaf of bread.

I needed a base, so mad an "X" from Twisty-Ties, with a 5th Prong straight up. Then wrapped a square of Toilet Paper around the vertical Tie and bend it sharply at about 2/3 up it's height. This bent down part then becomes the siphon. Put it in a lid of water and the water ran up the paper and down the siphon. Problem was.. I couldn't get it to drip. I could see the water forming a bulge at the bottom of the siphon but no drip, no matter what I tried. I tried many things to get it to drip, all to no avail. Then I touched it with another piece of Toilet Paper to it and instantly.. the water flowed into the dry sheet. That gave me an idea how to fight fire with fire. Draw the water out of the siphon with the same aspect that's keeping it from dripping, good old capillary action again.

This led to building something that looked a bit like a "Stretcher" used by the military to carry wounded off a battle field. It looks like the letter "H", but the horizontal bar of the letter "H" is much nearer one of the ends. This bar becomes the fulcrum of a off balanced teeter-totter. I then wrapped another tissue to connect the longer bars of the stretcher, in a sheet-like fashion. Like the bed part to carry wounded soldiers. Next comes a cradle to support the fulcrum made from two more twistys. Now it looks like a springboard in a circus, with the long end having a TP sheet spread between the two bars. The support for the fulcrum is high enough to keep the teeter-totter above the water. The long end has extra twisty length, bend downwards, to keep the whole teeter-totter well above, and parallel to, the water line, in the down position.

The short end of this Teeter-Totter was bent into a hook shape to support some balancing ballast weight (more twistys). Enough weight to raise the long end high enough to touch the siphon. You can probably see where this is going by now.

When all the pieces are placed into the pan of water, the water runs up the capillary side, then down the siphon capillary side and into the Teeter-Totter sheet. That sheet soaks up some water. This gives it enough water weight, against it's counter balance weight, to drop down to the parallel position with the water level, held about 3/4 an inch above the water line. It sits in this position for about 30 minutes until the water weight has evaporated from the sheet, enough weight is lost to allow it to once again raise to the siphon, re-saturate, and fall again. This cycle repeats for as long as there is water in the tray.

So, the solution to making the "Water Engine" work was to use another force that trumps "Capillary Action".. Which of course is "Evaporation". Instead of having a "Water Wheel", my design uses a Teeter-Totter. But it is basically the same concept. It will run forever, uses "Capillary Action" and stops only when the water source is gone.

So.. thanks Terry for posting that idea, it is basically sound, with a few minor modifications to extract the water from the siphon and convert that extraction to motion.

Best to all..
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Terry on September 19th, 2011, 6:27 am 

Your description is too long for me to imagine the details. Anyway, if evaporation helped to drive the water flow, heat energy had to be supplied from the environment. Isn't it?
Terry
Member
 
Posts: 444
Joined: 01 Sep 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on September 19th, 2011, 6:14 pm 

Ok, perhaps a Diagram might help. (Wished I had taken a picture, but it looked pretty Micky-Moused.)

Note: I didn't say it was a free energy machine, just Perpetual Motion as long as the water is present.

Unique in that it does exploit Capillary Action to elevate water high enough to do some work. It's a bit boring to watch.. not unlike watching paint dry... (literally lol)

It works best with low humidity.. usually associated with colder environments.

Pmachine.jpg
Diagram:


Best wishes,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby CanadysPeak on September 19th, 2011, 7:25 pm 

Dave_Oblad wrote:It should also be pointed out that electro-magnets (using an electrical coil) don't suffer from this limitation. They are only limited by how much electrical power you can apply before meltdown occurs.



The difference between (commonly accepted) theory and reality gets startling up around 2 T. There are some effects that manifest themselves unexpectedly. The first time I saw one get loose, I had no concept of how much energy that was in that field! Be very careful.
CanadysPeak
Resident Expert
 
Posts: 5931
Joined: 31 Dec 2008


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Madmatt2011 on December 8th, 2012, 6:58 pm 

I have a theory on perpetual motion and free energy but don't have the means to try it out, it probably wouldn't work but here it is. If you had water in a container and put a hole in the bottom the water would pour out until the water level was under the hole, so mount the container high then create a sloping pipe with some form of water wheels at intervals down the pipe these wheels through a system of cogs to get maximum efficiency would connect to dynamos these motors would only have to create enough electric to power a pump to pump the water back to the top if the whole thing was sealed no water should be lost, if this was possible it would run forever

Now for the free energy each of the dynamo motors would produce heat as they turned so if mounted in vertical tubes as the heat rises cold air would fill the tube from the bottom, so if all these tubes were connected to a bigger tube at the top it might just give enough air flow to power another dynamo, on small scale the free energy would be minimal but on a large scale could be usable

Just a thought there's probably many reasons why this wouldn't work
Madmatt2011
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 06 Dec 2012


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Aemilius on March 8th, 2013, 10:46 pm 

Interesting thread.... Still discussing it?
User avatar
Aemilius
Banned User
 
Posts: 100
Joined: 08 Mar 2013


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on March 8th, 2013, 11:30 pm 

Hi again,

Per Madmatt2011:

Sorry, no. Too many losses for the dynamo idea to work.

Per Aemilius:

Welcome. Sure.. if you have anything to add or talk about.. please do.

Best wishes,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Aemilius on March 8th, 2013, 11:40 pm 

Hi Dave, nice to meet you....

I think I might have a couple of ideas. Let me read the thread again and collect them.
User avatar
Aemilius
Banned User
 
Posts: 100
Joined: 08 Mar 2013


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on March 9th, 2013, 12:05 am 

Hi Aemilius, good to meet you also.

I hate to Bait and Run, but I am at work and getting ready to call it a week. I'll be back Monday Night or may drop in over the weekend.. pending other restraints on my time.

Catch you later.

Regards,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Aemilius on March 9th, 2013, 12:10 am 

So if I understand the concept rightly.... You're trying to make the water level at one end of a continuous U-shaped tube higher than the other using the same magnetic principle as that used to levitate the frog, but you want to use powerful permanent magnets instead, then run a trough from the higher end to the lower end creating a circulatory system in the process. That's fascinating!

The problem, if I understand correctly, with the current configuration is that the downward force exerted by the lower end of the magnet on the column of water you're seeking to lift cancels out the upward force of the upper end of the same magnet, and the sum of the those two equal and opposite forces being zero means the water in the continuous U-shaped tube remains in stable equilibrium as if the magnet weren't there at all.

Am I close?
User avatar
Aemilius
Banned User
 
Posts: 100
Joined: 08 Mar 2013


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on March 9th, 2013, 5:29 am 

Hi Aemilius,

You nailed it pretty good. The problem was I was taught something by my Science teacher that was incorrect. That being that magnetism is trapped inside the metal and only appears at the ends. So I thought the hole in the center, where water was to enter, had no magnetism to oppose water from entering the upflow tube.

There is a facet that might be worth exploring however. The water is repelled from the magnet because the electrons in the water adopt a field polariety opposing the magnet. But it is not something that happens instantly. It take a moment for the water to become opposed to the magnetic field. So if water was to enter the field fast enough, then the water would not be opposed to entering the field. But once in the field, the electrons do their thing and a repulsion comes into effect. But now it's too late, as the water is already in the field. So I picture a hollow glass tube ring, filled with water (actually I can think of water with disolved material in it that is more reactive that plain water) and a magnetic ring around one portion of the tube, like a bracelet around a wrist (the tube).

Now, if I can get the water to go around the inside of the tube fast enough, then it will not be repelled by the magnet on approach (due to the time delay for the electrons to re-orient and form a repulsive field) until the water was inside the magnetic ring (commited to the devils trap) and the repulsion kicks in against the magnetic field. The magnetically oriented water is pushed away from the magnet and the electrons relax and re-scramble while moving around the ring and the process repeats. But it is continous, because the whole ring is filled with water. This seems like a workable concept.

Basically, the water can not instantly respond to the magnetic field until it's too late. I am taking advantage if this delay to create an imbalence in the magnetic pressure on the water that keeps it moving, once it's at the right speed. I don't see any fault in this concept and it would be true perpetual motion.

Anybody see a problem with the mechanics as explained. If so.. please speak up. And don't just say it defies the laws of thermal-dynamics etc, as I know that already. Explain the mechanics of why it can't work, if you can.

Best wishes as always,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Aemilius on March 9th, 2013, 3:53 pm 

If the water is entering too fast to be affected by the repulsive force on the way in to the magnetic field, wouldn't it also at the same time be exiting to fast to be affected by the repulsive force on the way out of the magnetic field? In other words.... It seems to me that the same increased water flow that will defeat the undesirable resistive downward repulsive effect at the lower end of the magnetic field as the water moves up through the tube will also defeat the desirable additive upward repulsive effect at the upper end of the magnetic field upon exiting.

Actually getting the water to move fast enough could be problematic too. To get the water to move that fast would require a significant increase in water pressure. To develop that kind of water pressure there would have to be a substantial difference between the heights of the two water columns, and I'm pretty sure that's not possible looking at the relatively small effect magnetism has on water.

By the way, I've been tinkering (empirically) on and off over the years with gravity, hydraulics, magnetism and barometric pressure.... Is this thread for considering just this particular idea or others as well?
User avatar
Aemilius
Banned User
 
Posts: 100
Joined: 08 Mar 2013


Re: Perpetual Motion Machines Revisited

Postby Dave_Oblad on March 9th, 2013, 7:28 pm 

Hi Aemilius,

Aemilius wrote:If the water is entering too fast to be affected by the repulsive force on the way in to the magnetic field, wouldn't it also at the same time be exiting to fast to be affected by the repulsive force on the way out of the magnetic field?

Exactly the point of a devils trap. The speed is critical. Too slow and there is balenced loss. Too fast and the desired effect is too minimal. Finding the exact speed is critical. The shape of the machine is like a hulu-hoop lying flat on the ground. The left side has a pump to get the water moving initially and the right side has the magnet. The biggest issue I see is the small amount of push on the water from the magnet may be lost in the friction of the water against the inside of the tube. Also, a possible issue with the polarized water retaining it's polarization long enough to be a problem when it's approaching the magnet again. I don't know how long (persistence) magnetically polarized water will retain its magnetic imprinting.

The first issue is not physics fighting itself.. it's just a system efficiency aspect. The second issue may be canceled by selecting the best size for the hoop.

As far as other subjects, this site is broken into many sub-forums, so decide where your subject matter best fits and go to that forum. You can ask questions and hope an expert may lend a hand or start a debate if you feel a subject hasn't been properly addressed by the experts, etc. You can even post a purely educational piece just to share knowledge. Just play nice. Many cool people hang their respective hats here.

Regards,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Next

Return to Science Fun

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests