Something to think about

[augman7518 (imported)]

Want totally free energy? The guy I sold my electric car to is an inventor. He has developed several of these motors and is hoping to have one powerful enough to drive the Fiat. You do not have to have batteries, except for lights and such, to run the vehicle because one of these permanent magnet motors will run indefinitely (for free). They produce 5 times more energy than they consume. There have been several major patents on them, one in 1979 and one 1989. The technology has been around since at least during Henry Fords time (he experimented with them, but we didn't have the powerful rare-earth magnets back then to make them viable.). We are getting very close to having these free energy motors powering generators for our homes ($5000 for a 24k watt generator... you'll be totally off the grid) and powering our cars, requiring no fuel and never stopping to be plugged in and recharged. Watch these and as many more as you can stand (over 60 of them total).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt5z8L4L ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efCelx7q ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa8EBXK ... re=related

[Slammr (imported)]

Nice to see that the laws of physics have been rewritten, since that's the only way this would work. I do have a question: if this thing is generating 25 kw, why does he need a battery for lights?

[fhunter]

How interesting... the conservation laws of physics got changed?

Main question is - where the energy comes from? If it can output 24kW/s, it must be taking at least 24kW/s from somethere else - efficiency just can not be 100%, and energy does not come from nothere.

At least according to the physics I learned at school.

[Arab Nights (imported)]

Perhaps the energy of ideas? And the energy it takes for people to send in an investment check.

[Slammr (imported)]

I think A.N. has it right. These devices will work as long as the checks keep coming in. Once they stop so will the devices, with no more FREE energy available to them.

If they actually worked, they would solve the world's energy problems. Our only need for oil would be for lubrication. Why then, do the inventors of them have to advertise on the Internet for funding?

At a college, to which I went once, they had built a pendulum that was supposed to swing continuously using only the rotational motion of the Earth as an energy source. Unfortunately, it didn't work. It would swing for a while, slowing with each swing, until it quit, and it wasn't required to supply energy to any external device.

The law of conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy) in an isolated system remains constant. A consequence of this law is that energy cannot be created or destroyed. The only thing that can happen with energy in an isolated system is that it can change form, that is to say for instance kinetic energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy) can become thermal energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy). Because energy is associated with mass in the Einstein's theory of relativity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity), the conservation of energy also implies the conservation of mass in isolated systems (that is, the mass of a system cannot change, so long as energy is not permitted to enter or leave the system).

Another consequence of this law is that perpetual motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion) machines can only work if they deliver no energy to their surroundings, and also that devices that produce more energy than is put into them without losing mass (and thus eventually disappearing), are impossible.

Again, to repeat: A consequence of this law is that energy cannot be created or destroyed.

For this device to generate 24 kw of power, it would have to be receiving - given internal resistance - more than 24 kw of power from another source.

I will side with the laws of physics rather than with the claims of someone on YouTube that's requesting funding from the public.

[JesusA (imported)]

Despite the laws of physics, there has long been a search for a source for Perpetual M

otion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion)

and power. The Wikipedia article gives examples dating as far back as the 12th century. There have even been some U.S. patents granted for such devices. You can download copies of the patents for them from the Wikipedia site. None of which, of course, are more than flim-flam.

The Wikipedia article on the History of Perpetual Motion Machines ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of ... n_machines) goes on for pages of text on the various kinds of impossible devices.

[erikboy (imported)]

Sceptical as I am, I do not beleive any free energy machine until I understand the source of that free energy.

Still I can propose a theoretically real 'free energy' machine.

You know that there are steam turbines with thermic efficiency slightly over 50%. Siemens is producing one for example.

Then you all know that there are heatpumps. Normally they work so that when you put in for example 1kW of electric energy you will get additional 3.5kW of heat taken from environment by cooling it. That is the source of energy - you take it from surrounding environment with heatpump.

Now you have invested 1kW of electric energy and got in return 1+3.5kW of heat energy. that equal to 4.5kW if you input that energy into steam turbine with efficiency over 50% you will generate approx. 2.25kW of electric energy of witch 1kW is fed to heatpump and you get 1.25kW of surplus electric energy. And that comes from environment cooling. Energy is taken from environment. That is a real energy.

Temperature differences are generating useful energy for us. So we do not need to heat always. We can cool too, to make heat engines to work.

Now there is a major problem. Current heatpumps can operate that efficiently with temperature differences up to 50 degrees C, but steam turbine with that high efficiency need steam with temperature about +530 degrees of celsius.

I do not know at the moment if this is a principal problem on technical.

[FianceeUvBigGuy (imported)]

I guess I'll NOT cut up my Valero (Shamrock), EXXON, Mobil, Shell, etc. cards just yet. Besides, what if I want a snack while driving and I'm out of cash (as IF!)

That said, If they can find a way to provide perpetual power to "personal" massagers I can stop carrying spare batteries when I'm on the road.

Yoli

Ben Franklin! Go fly a kite!

[fhunter]

You know that there are steam turbines with thermic efficiency slightly over 50%. Siemens is producing one for example.

Then you all know that there are heatpumps. Normally they work so that when you put in for example 1kW of electric energy you will get additional 3.5kW of heat taken from environment by cooling it. That is the source of energy - you take it from surrounding environment with heatpump.

May be I'm misunderstanding, but it looks like КПД (efficiency coefficient) of more than 100% - so - impossible.

I'm not saying that getting "free" energy from environment wouldn't work - it just wouldn't work that way.

[Arab Nights (imported)]

I think I stayed up too late or need to get a life or something. But somehow late at night this thread did jog the following thoughts. All kinds of motors are horrible inefficient and waste all kinds of energy as heat, light, etc. instead of doing what we humans want done. In other words, some percentage of contained energy is always given off as "waste" over the electromagnetic spectrum.

Perhaps because of the name, without thinking I assume solar cells only generate energy from visible sunlight. But visible light is only a tiny part of total spectrum. I was wondering if "solar cells" actually work over a larger part of the spectrum than visible light. Or if somebody put their mind to it if they could come up with materials that generates currents from a wide range of the EM spectrum.

Now, if it were possible to generate electricity from a wide range of the spectrum, could you line an engine or computer casing with that material to generate a current from all the wasted energy? In a sense, it would be "free" energy because it is unused at this time.

Sorry about the tortured logic from "free energy," but I am sure there are a few people here who have a good feeling for solar generation, energy spectrums, etc. and can give a sensible answer.