A perpetual machine model that sets me thinking

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a proposed model for a perpetual motion machine (PMM) involving magnets and a ferromagnetic substance. Participants explore the mechanics of the proposed machine and the feasibility of its operation, while also addressing the broader implications of perpetual motion concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a perpetual machine design where magnets attract a ferromagnetic substance and then repel each other, suggesting a continuous rotation of wheels.
  • Another participant asserts that energy input is necessary to move the wheel, emphasizing that the system cannot operate indefinitely without external energy.
  • A later reply warns against discussing PMMs, referencing forum rules and previous discussions that have concluded such machines cannot work.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the feasibility of the proposed perpetual motion machine. While some find the design intriguing, others firmly state that perpetual motion is impossible, citing the need for energy input and referencing forum guidelines against such discussions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of the discussion, noting that claims of perpetual motion must be reproducible and testable, and that previous threads on similar topics have been closed due to established principles of physics.

cng99
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Now I'm not a PMI (perpetual machine inventor). In fact I'm quite convinced that there is no such thing as that. But a while ago, I saw the schematics of a perpetual machine that is hard to debate.

Well this is how the machine worked. The inventor argued that if you have two magnets as arranged in figure A, with a ferromagnetic substance in between, the magnets will be attracted toward the metal. But as you bring the objects upwards, they'll repel each other as the metal gets thinner and the end is reached.

Now based on this argument, he created an arrangement as shown in B and argues that these wheels would rotate forever, as the magnet's attract at the bottom of the metal piece and repel towards the top.

KdrEX.png


Now this looks very convincing. Can anyone resolve this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And also, do tell me how to rotate an image by 45 degrees in Windows 7 Paint, if you know.
 
E N E R G Y

is always why it won't work. It always is.

Forget the forces that you think you can see operating. To get the wheel from that position to the next, you need to put energy IN. The wheel will reach an angle where the Potential energy is at a minimum and it will stay there (or oscillate about the position, finally coming to a halt).Windows Paint sucks. Get a decent free drawing package like Open Office and that will do all the simple (vector) drawing you need. Much better.
 
cng99 said:
Now I'm not a PMI (perpetual machine inventor). In fact I'm quite convinced that there is no such thing as that. But a while ago, I saw the schematics of a perpetual machine that is hard to debate.

Well this is how the machine worked. The inventor argued that if you have two magnets as arranged in figure A, with a ferromagnetic substance in between, the magnets will be attracted toward the metal. But as you bring the objects upwards, they'll repel each other as the metal gets thinner and the end is reached.

Now based on this argument, he created an arrangement as shown in B and argues that these wheels would rotate forever, as the magnet's attract at the bottom of the metal piece and repel towards the top.

KdrEX.png


Now this looks very convincing. Can anyone resolve this?

We do not waste people's time discussing PMMs here on the PF. That is why it is on the Banned Topics list at the Rules link at the top of the page. Please read some of the old locked PMM threads to find out why they don't/can't work.

PF Rules said:
Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions

Search PF and you will find many threads that have been closed in a number of forums. As for S&D, any claim of this nature would be reproducible and/or testable by the scientific community; hence there is no need for debate.
EDIT by berkeman -- here are some recent locked PMM threads:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=522548
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=520290
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=7735
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=515402
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=403572
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K