I don't have a physics background but a debunking to this irrational thought process of mine would be much appreciated. I understand perpetual motion/energy is an old, dried, and silly topic, but I can't make sense of this, so thank you in advance for answering (and yes, it's to do with magnets). This hypothesis doesn't rely entirely on perpetual motion, but consists primarily of it. I'm sure there's something basic I don't understand. Hypothesis: There are two mega-magnets with incredible magnetic pull, and an extremely focused, narrow scope (capable of pulling specific objects from within earth's atmosphere from outer space). For the example imagine two identical mega magnets, M1 & M2. M1 is positioned on earth's surface, M2 is orbiting in outer space with just enough fuel to always keep it at an exact parallel with M1, but in outer space. For the example consider both magnets have the pulling power to pull a heavy object of equal distance to one another. There is a giant spaceshuttle made of ferromagnetic material, sufficient enough in quantity to be attracted to either magnet if the other didn't exist (ie: if the shuttle was in the position of M1, but M1 didn't exist, M2 could pull it to itself, and vice versa). Consider a scenario where M1 is built in such a way that it's based deep in the earth, with a giant non-ferromagnetic door that is capable of blocking the magnetic attraction. This door is capable of opening and closing independently of the magnet (using traditional power/electricity), and serves simply to block M1's pull. The same situation exists for M2 somehow (let's say instead of outer space it's based deep within the moon with the same door complex). In order to move the shuttle from the surface of the earth into outer space expending no fuel from the shuttle, would one not just need to close the door on M1's side, eliminating its magnetic influence on the shuttle and allowing M2 to pull? And when it's time to land, to put the door over M2 and allow M1 to pull? Thanks.