Is there any Physicists that think Free Energy could maybe be possible?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the possibility of free energy, with one participant expressing frustration at physicists who dismiss the concept outright. They claim to have developed a machine using magnetics that could operate independently for several years, despite acknowledging the general consensus that such devices are impossible. The participant has received some validation for their mathematical approach but faced rejection from a professor who refused to engage further. Another contributor sarcastically illustrates the misconception of perpetual motion machines, emphasizing that any perceived over-unity energy output is misleading. The thread concludes with a clear stance that free energy remains a controversial and largely dismissed topic in the scientific community.
Ole SeaBee
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hello Again,

I hope I don't come across as an a@# or worse! I have talked to a couple physicists and when you get to this subject they just shut down. "It is impossible so no more conversation!"

I know it has been tried by much smarter people than me. I might look at things differently though and I believe I have done it. All the math works out and even physical tests of most of the math. There is only 1 thing I am not 100% sure of. I need a magnetic engineer if there is such a thing that can figure the fields for a segmented magnetic disc.

I know some of you will think I am an old fool. My only answer is that I have in the long ago past solved a couple of problems that an engineer said he'd not been able to figure out. Not because of my education, just my problem solving way of doing things.

Thanks,

ed aka Ole SeaBee
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
huntoon,

Thank You. I have viewed that site and many like it before. Was hoping there was something new in the works.

My work does not utilize wind/wave/solar power. I am referring to a machine using magnetics that will run it's self. Parts will wear out and all that so it won't 'Run Forever' but will for several years. No fuel power required otherwise! I know it is supposed to be impossible, I still think I have got it worked out. Again, I have even talked to the professor @ MWSU and he has said my math was correct. When I told him what I was working on he 'Shut Down' saying it's not possible and he had no more time for me in any way.
 
There really isn't much to say here. If you truly are getting more energy out than you are putting into it then what is actually happening is that you are getting energy from somewhere unaccounted for.
-
For instance:
Suppose I take an electric motor and generator and hook the shafts together and then hook the electric output from the generator to the motor through some super-duper high-tech gee-whiz over-unity transformer made from unobtainium. (Yes, I am being sarcastic, such a device is not possible). No matter, in my own crackpot mind I believe it will work. Also hooked between the motor and generator is a fan. My idea is to relax on a sunny day in my back yard with this device sitting next to me to provide a breeze. I set the whole thing down start the device turning manually and it starts and CONTINUES to turn. WOW! I think I am the answer to the worlds energy problems. What has actually happened here is the wind is blowing the blades of the fan and the motor generator pair are nothing but a drain on it. It APPEARS to the less-than-informed that it is a perpetual motion machine. It is NOT! Nor is whatever you have done.
 
Ole SeaBee said:
"It is impossible so no more conversation!"
That pretty much sums it up.

Thread closed.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top