Why is this not a perpetual motion machine?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of a proposed perpetual motion machine that utilizes magnets and fluid dynamics. Participants explore the underlying principles of energy consumption and production, as well as the physical limitations that prevent such a machine from functioning as intended.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the setup could work under certain conditions, questioning the impossibility of the design.
  • Others argue that even with perfect efficiency, the system would consume more energy than it produces, thus not qualifying as perpetual motion.
  • One participant speculates that using a specific fluid, such as crude oil, might change the dynamics of the system.
  • Concerns are raised about the behavior of the fluid in relation to the magnet, particularly why it would fall back down if being pulled up.
  • A participant points out that an electromagnet would be necessary to control the fluid's movement, but the energy required would exceed the output from the system.
  • Questions are posed about the equivalence of the fluid's behavior upstream and downstream, considering gravity and friction factors.
  • Another participant notes a general principle regarding magnets and perpetual motion, stating that if a magnet can lift an object, it would not allow it to fall back down.
  • Discussion includes the efficiency limits of machines, with a mention of transformers and energy losses due to resistance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some supporting the possibility of the machine working under specific conditions, while others maintain that it cannot function as a perpetual motion machine due to fundamental physical laws. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions, such as the efficiency of the components and the behavior of fluids in relation to magnetic forces. There are also unresolved questions regarding the specific mechanics of the proposed design.

TheJCBand
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
So a friend of mine posted this picture on my facebook wall. I assume there is some kind of inside joke involved that I'm not on the inside of. Anyways, I can't see any reason why this setup is impossible.
 

Attachments

  • 69106_10150290900110471_763635470_15182567_800262_n.jpg
    69106_10150290900110471_763635470_15182567_800262_n.jpg
    16.7 KB · Views: 830
Engineering news on Phys.org
Even if the magnet were able to make a fluid flow through a pipe like that (which it is not) and that the wheel generator worked at a 100% efficiency the contraption would still consume more electrical energy than it can produce, so yes, it is not perpetual motion.

In fact, you can conclude that even without looking at the drawing or knowing any details on the machine, as all physical realizable motions that involve even the tiniest bit of friction or drag belong to the class of non-perpetual motion.
 
sure it will work..if the fluid is CRUDE OIL,,,plenty of it left in good old mother EARTH...
 
Why would the fluid fall back down if there is a magnet pulling it up?
 
russ_watters said:
Why would the fluid fall back down if there is a magnet pulling it up?

Also if it is powerful enough to pull it up, why would it only pull it up through the pipe in the first place.
 
In order for that concept to work, you would need an electromagnet that could be switched on and off to raise the fluid and then let it fall down again. The power used by the electromagnet would be greater than that you make from the waterwheel.
 
Rust?
 
Something doesn't seem right about the idea that the fluid near the magnet falls, while the fluid up the pipe, which is further, rises.

The upstream and the downstream both seem to be equivalent. They both perceive the same gravity, but the (assumed) rising one is 1. further from the magnet, and 2. suffers friction from the pipe walls.
 
Last edited:
General rule with any magnet-based perpetual motion machine: If the magnet is strong enough to pull something up, it won't let it fall. The magnetic force goes up as a function of distance much faster than gravity does.
 
  • #10
The most efficient machines that have been produced are transformers. They only top about 90%. You still have loss due to resistance in the wire.
 

Similar threads

  • Sticky
Insights Why We Don’t Discuss Perpetual Motion Machines (PMM)
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
16K
High School Generating Energy from Molecular Motion
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Explain to me the flaw in this perpetual motion scheme
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Could New Washing Machine Be Damaged by Delivery Guy?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Undergrad What's the trick to this "perpetual" marble device?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Undergrad Feynman: Reversible machines, no perpetual motion?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Perpetual motion machine - Intuitive meaning
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
Mechanical Advantage on Gym Machines
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Graduate Is a Superfluid Perpetual Motion Machine Theoretically Possible?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Have you encountered Perpetual Motion Disease (PMD)?
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
12K