You guys are gonna think im either stupid or crazy

[Arsonade]

nice title huh, ok now i know that by saying this I am getting the instant reputation of an idiot, believe me, i know about einstein's theory of relativity and the first 2 laws of thermodynamics, but believe it or not i have made a perpetual motion mechine. at this point, i bet most of you are thinking about closing this message, but i really would like some feedback on your reasoning about my invention, uh...im not so sure i should show the details mostly for patent reasons (any info on pattent details ex:what i can and can't do, would be appreciated), but i can assure you all that it works. my main question to you however is why don't you think it could work, i need to see if i can debate this, i already have debated friction, rate of acceleration (makes sense in the design), einstein's theorys, and even harnessing the energy produced. I'd appreciate any help you can give me but i really would be more likely to reply to an e-mail or an IM, my e-mail is AdamChess4@aol.com and my AIM screen name is AdamChess4.

Adam

P.S. i have a bad fealling that I am posting this in the wrong section, maybe theoretical physics?

 

[Doc Al]

P.S. i have a bad fealling that I am posting this in the wrong section, maybe theoretical physics?

I'm going to move this to Theory Development.

 

[mee]

Does it rely on...

Does it rely on the heat of the sun to work? Will it work if in the vacuum of space at low temperatures? If it only works at Earth temperatures, I think you need to say that it needs something that is not perpetual to work such as fusion from the sun.

 

[Brad_Ad23]

nice title huh, ok now i know that by saying this I am getting the instant reputation of an idiot, believe me, i know about einstein's theory of relativity and the first 2 laws of thermodynamics, but believe it or not i have made a perpetual motion mechine. at this point, i bet most of you are thinking about closing this message, but i really would like some feedback on your reasoning about my invention, uh...im not so sure i should show the details mostly for patent reasons (any info on pattent details ex:what i can and can't do, would be appreciated), but i can assure you all that it works. my main question to you however is why don't you think it could work, i need to see if i can debate this, i already have debated friction, rate of acceleration (makes sense in the design), einstein's theorys, and even harnessing the energy produced. I'd appreciate any help you can give me but i really would be more likely to reply to an e-mail or an IM, my e-mail is AdamChess4@aol.com and my AIM screen name is AdamChess4.

Adam

P.S. i have a bad fealling that I am posting this in the wrong section, maybe theoretical physics?

Oh no! You've proven the laws of physics wrong! Just you! Your little idea is so much better than the millions of ones that have also failed throughout all of recent history. And so rather than go and demonstrate this publically for all to witness and see, you decide to post it here, on the internet.

My opinon,
Stupid and crazy.

 

[ophecleide]

Everything I know (or think I know) about the universe says that what you are saying is not true, so I have an extremely difficult time believing you.

If you were to tell us a little more info about it, I think we'd have a much easier time figuring out why it won't work. For example, does it use electricity? Does it rely on any external forces? There are so many ways you could build something which seams like a perpetual motion machine, it's hard to tell where to start.

 

[Antonio Lao]

For perpetual motion to be possible, all conservation laws of physics must be invalidated. There are many. But for this discussion, I'm just going to mention the three following conservation laws of physics.

1. Energy (time symmetry)
2. linear momentum (translation symmetry)
3. Angular momentum (rotation symmetrry)

For perpetual motion, the conversion of energy or motion must be symmetrical from both directions. It takes energy to produce energy. These energy are in different forms. For example, Chemical to electrical, nuclear to electrical, heat to mechanical, mechanical to electrical. The reverse processes are not all possible.

For perpetual motion, the entropy of the universe must be a constant or, more precisely, zero. The bad news is the entropy is found to be increasing toward the heat death of maximum entropy.

It requires less effort to go downhill than to go uphill linear momentum is not symmetrical up and down.

It requires more effort to rotate against the spin of the earth.

Bottomline is: For perpetual motion to work, there must be no motion to start with. This is more than just a contradiction.

 

[russ_watters]

Most perpetual motion mistakes/hoaxes are input/output issues. Make sure you understand completely what you are inputting and outputting. Take special notice of time, ie, any input for any amount of time has to be added together before subtracting out the output. Make sure you know the difference between power and work. Make sure you take into account consumables. And last (and most important): have you built it? How long has it been running? Is it connected to a power source of any kind for any reason (you may think that's trivial, but it isn't)?

Thats pretty much all I can say without more info on what your device does.

Regarding patents. Depending on how you approach the patent, the USPTO won't even review an application for a perpetual motion device unless you submit a functioning model and it successfully runs for a year, completely self-contained.

 

[Arsonade]

i see your points

ok, first for "mee", the cold of a vacuum is not a problem, it would not be in space or use energy from the sun. next, "Brad_ad23" hey man I am not sayin I am any smarter than they are, i think i just had the right inspiration as stupid as it sounds, and as for not displaying this publicly, dude, this is public! i meen not a huge # of people go to this site but as far as i know nobody has to pay to get in, what do you want me to do? make a billboard in front of my house saying "I HAVE A PERPETUAL MOTION MECHINE!" common man. now to ophecleide, this is my serios problem, idont know if i should show people publicly my designs, this sounds a little conceeded, but if i lost my pattent like that id never forgive myself man, i realize that all of these laws of physics prove me wrong, but the only explination i can give is that i think i have found a loophole in those laws. , now to Antonio Lao, well technicly, i am converting electromagnetic energy to mechanical to electric (technicly electromagnetic i know) . "Bottomline is: For perpetual motion to work, there must be no motion to start with. This is more than just a contradiction." technicly, my PMM does start out with no motion. ok and last but not least russ_watters, man i cannot thank you enough for the patent info, I've been looking for that stuff for a while, and thanks for the help rather than criticisim (although technicly i was asking for critisisim in the first place...watever) unfortunatly i have not built it yet, it would require a lot of money and space to produce safely. I am not sure what you meen by "connected to a power source" yes there would be a genorator in the unit to harness the mechanical energy of the axle, like a turbine in a dam. i can keep a genorator on because otherwise, the spining of the mechanisim would cause it to essencially explode, just enough friction of a genorator would contradict this, but essencially, no, the genorator is not necacary. In concluson, i really would want to show this design to you, I know that by sending the design to myself and not opening the letter, it assures that that idea was mine, but I am not sure if it still aplies if i show the design to someone elce, any info on this russ_watters?

Adam

 

[revesz]

tell us you idea, its not going to be stollen from you, its going to be proved wrong.

 

[Brad_Ad23]

tell us you idea, its not going to be stollen from you, its going to be proved wrong.

Exactly.

I've been around PF for awhile, and I've seen the likes of these people with their claims all the time, and they are always of some similar basic nature. Believe me when I say this: If there was a perpetual energy machine possible, it would already be in place.

Alas, it seems Theory Development should be called something else now a days. something like Crank Ideas or something of the like. A theory is much more sophisticated and a much higher title of respect for a group of ideas than are in here.

 

[russ_watters]

I am not sure what you meen by "connected to a power source" yes there would be a genorator in the unit to harness the mechanical energy of the axle, like a turbine in a dam.

There is a guy here who keeps posting perpetual motion machine ideas and they generally have an external power source providing what he calls a "control signal." Needless to say, this "control signal" is where all of the output power comes from.

Since you are worried about showing your idea to us, there isn't any way for us to help you. My recommendation is find someone you trust who knows a lot about science/engineering to look over your idea. You could probably hire a grad student pretty cheap if you're short on cash - and put in writing that he can't take any of your ideas.

 

[WWW]

Law number 1 in a non-entropic system is:

The system (in any level of it) must be opened.

Since you keep the knowledge of it as any closed system, your own idea is under the laws of TD2.

Shortly speaking, a real idea of a non-TD2 system must not be closed to public, because if this is really a non-TD2 system, then it will change all of us in any aspect of what we call existence, including you Arsonade.

So, Arsonade do you afraid to be chaneged, or not?

 

[Antonio Lao]

As I recall, Tesla tried to build a perpetual motion machine. At first, many rich people gave him money as investments but because the machine was never completed, investors started to retract their interests. Tesla died a poor and lonely man.

 

[LURCH]

... I know that by sending the design to myself and not opening the letter, it assures that that idea was mine, but I am not sure if it still aplies if i show the design to someone elce...
Adam

Yes it still applies. When you send the design to yourself, put your own address and the postage stamp on the wrong side of the envelope. The stamp(s) should be across the seal of the flap. This will function like the old-fasshioned "seals" that used to be placed on confidential documents (like "sealed orders"). When the envelope passes through the post office, it will be postmarked, and the postmark will be over the stamp.

Now, because the stamp is placed in such a location that the envelope could not have been opened after the stamp was in place without ripping the stamp, and the postmark is over the stamp, you now have proof that whatever is in the envelope must have been there before the date on the postmark. Anyone trying to patent your same design after that date will be proved as a fraud.

 

[Noah]

As I recall, Tesla tried to build a perpetual motion machine. At first, many rich people gave him money as investments but because the machine was never completed, investors started to retract their interests. Tesla died a poor and lonely man.

Tesla tried to harness the energy of the Earth as an unlimited power source. He understood the laws of thermodynamics. Investors started to retract their interests because of bad media around Tesla. Good inventor, bad business man.

 

[pallidin]

Yes it still applies. When you send the design to yourself, put your own address and the postage stamp on the wrong side of the envelope. The stamp(s) should be across the seal of the flap. This will function like the old-fasshioned "seals" that used to be placed on confidential documents (like "sealed orders"). When the envelope passes through the post office, it will be postmarked, and the postmark will be over the stamp.

Now, because the stamp is placed in such a location that the envelope could not have been opened after the stamp was in place without ripping the stamp, and the postmark is over the stamp, you now have proof that whatever is in the envelope must have been there before the date on the postmark. Anyone trying to patent your same design after that date will be proved as a fraud.

Some added thoughts. The 'sealed envelope" procedure holds very litle weight in a court of law.
Let's say "Bob" has an idea, and makes excellent engineering drawings of the device. Let's further say that "Bob" understands the general idea of a "patent", and goes so far as to even accurately write "claims" of his device that is accompanied with the drawings. Let's go one step further and say that Bob has the documents witnessed and notorized!
Bob, not having the money for a patent, decided to place the documents in an envelope and seal as described.
Let's say that Bob did all of this in June, 2000.
Now, "Jim", across the country and having absolutely no personal or professional relationship with Bob, comes up with the same idea in September, 2001. Jim decides to follow formal procedure, and scraps up the money to submit a patent. In 2003 the patent is granted to Jim.
In 2004, Bob finds out about it and challenges Jim's patent in court.
Who prevails?
Jim does, not Bob.
Why? Because the U.S. Government established the Patent and Trademark Office to be the procedure one MUST follow to be granted idea ownership, and Jim followed that procedure.
There are exceptions.
If both Bob and Jim filed on the same date, and Bob had a notorized document he kept that pre-dated Jim's, then the court will consider it. But, in this case, Bob STILL needed to file a formal patent, not just have notarized documents of ideas collecting in a drawer.
The other exception is if Bob and Jim were professionaly related, and Bob came up with the idea but could not patent it, yet had notorized documents, and Jim secretly stole the idea and patented it. Again, in this case as well, the court will consider it. This aspect is probably closer to what you are wondering about.
In the PF arena, participants could be considered "related" in a court of law, the same as if we were all physically meeting right now at the Holiday Inn, but it's up to the court to determine that.
In ANY case, pre-patent idea exchange with others is risky. The law does provide safegaurds, however.
The MOST IMPORTANT safegaurd is that a non-disclosure/non-use document be written up and signed by all interested parties, dated, witnessed and notorized. Such a document carries CONSIDERABLE legal weight in a court of law; far beyond a personal sealed envelope situation.
This procedure allows for one to get help from others as they develop the idea and still be fully protected. You don't even need a lawyer to do it!

A word of caution: Statements or descriptions of potentially patentable ideas in this or any other public forum is the same as publishing it in a magazine. Under the law, an "idea" that is so published and yet no patent filing occurs with 1 year of publication, the design is remanded to "public domain" and no patent is allowed by anyone.

In short, if you really believe your PMM idea is patentable, follow the above.
In all probability it is not patentable, however, and you likely are misunderstanding certain aspects of physics, and so you should feel free to expound on your idea here.

 

[Antonio Lao]

The "something" that is found in quarks and leptons and also in photons keeping them to live a long, long time is the closest thing to a perpetual motion of "something."

Nature does not want to waste time and energy. It is the smallest things that will be the most stable. Electron and proton are the smallest of their respective group and photon is the smallest among the bosons. These are the ones that are stable and live a long time. The first two forming the atoms of the universe and the third is the best messenger one can find in nature, never tiring shuttling information at the constant speed of 186,000 mi/s.

 

[Arsonade]

Law number 1 in a non-entropic system is:

The system (in any level of it) must be opened.

Since you keep the knowledge of it as any closed system, your own idea is under the laws of TD2.

Shortly speaking, a real idea of a non-TD2 system must not be closed to public, because if this is really a non-TD2 system, then it will change all of us in any aspect of what we call existence, including you Arsonade.

So, Arsonade do you afraid to be chaneged, or not?

man, if i was afraid of being chalenged i would never have started this post

Adam

P.S if anybody is reading these right now, I am still makin relpies so h/o a sec

 

[Arsonade]

Exactly.

I've been around PF for awhile, and I've seen the likes of these people with their claims all the time, and they are always of some similar basic nature. Believe me when I say this: If there was a perpetual energy machine possible, it would already be in place.

Alas, it seems Theory Development should be called something else now a days. something like Crank Ideas or something of the like. A theory is much more sophisticated and a much higher title of respect for a group of ideas than are in here.

i wouldn't doubt it man, but comon, giving up on something because it hasnt been done yet seems...stupid

Adam

 

[Arsonade]

There is a guy here who keeps posting perpetual motion machine ideas and they generally have an external power source providing what he calls a "control signal." Needless to say, this "control signal" is where all of the output power comes from.

Since you are worried about showing your idea to us, there isn't any way for us to help you. My recommendation is find someone you trust who knows a lot about science/engineering to look over your idea. You could probably hire a grad student pretty cheap if you're short on cash - and put in writing that he can't take any of your ideas.

now i understand what you meen and no it definatly has nothing of the sort, i think your idea of double checking my designs seems good, buuut...

Some added thoughts. The 'sealed envelope" procedure holds very litle weight in a court of law.
Let's say "Bob" has an idea, and makes excellent engineering drawings of the device. Let's further say that "Bob" understands the general idea of a "patent", and goes so far as to even accurately write "claims" of his device that is accompanied with the drawings. Let's go one step further and say that Bob has the documents witnessed and notorized!
Bob, not having the money for a patent, decided to place the documents in an envelope and seal as described.
Let's say that Bob did all of this in June, 2000.
Now, "Jim", across the country and having absolutely no personal or professional relationship with Bob, comes up with the same idea in September, 2001. Jim decides to follow formal procedure, and scraps up the money to submit a patent. In 2003 the patent is granted to Jim.
In 2004, Bob finds out about it and challenges Jim's patent in court.
Who prevails?
Jim does, not Bob.
Why? Because the U.S. Government established the Patent and Trademark Office to be the procedure one MUST follow to be granted idea ownership, and Jim followed that procedure.
There are exceptions.
If both Bob and Jim filed on the same date, and Bob had a notorized document he kept that pre-dated Jim's, then the court will consider it. But, in this case, Bob STILL needed to file a formal patent, not just have notarized documents of ideas collecting in a drawer.
The other exception is if Bob and Jim were professionaly related, and Bob came up with the idea but could not patent it, yet had notorized documents, and Jim secretly stole the idea and patented it. Again, in this case as well, the court will consider it. This aspect is probably closer to what you are wondering about.
In the PF arena, participants could be considered "related" in a court of law, the same as if we were all physically meeting right now at the Holiday Inn, but it's up to the court to determine that.
In ANY case, pre-patent idea exchange with others is risky. The law does provide safegaurds, however.
The MOST IMPORTANT safegaurd is that a non-disclosure/non-use document be written up and signed by all interested parties, dated, witnessed and notorized. Such a document carries CONSIDERABLE legal weight in a court of law; far beyond a personal sealed envelope situation.
This procedure allows for one to get help from others as they develop the idea and still be fully protected. You don't even need a lawyer to do it!

A word of caution: Statements or descriptions of potentially patentable ideas in this or any other public forum is the same as publishing it in a magazine. Under the law, an "idea" that is so published and yet no patent filing occurs with 1 year of publication, the design is remanded to "public domain" and no patent is allowed by anyone.

In short, if you really believe your PMM idea is patentable, follow the above.
In all probability it is not patentable, however, and you likely are misunderstanding certain aspects of physics, and so you should feel free to expound on your idea here.

This has given me a lot to think of, i realized that the sealed envolope idea seemed very iffy but i really appreciate the advice on legaly binding this idea, i really do not have any money for a patent so i need something that costs as little as possible. Buuuuuuut...

Yes it still applies. When you send the design to yourself, put your own address and the postage stamp on the wrong side of the envelope. The stamp(s) should be across the seal of the flap. This will function like the old-fasshioned "seals" that used to be placed on confidential documents (like "sealed orders"). When the envelope passes through the post office, it will be postmarked, and the postmark will be over the stamp.

Now, because the stamp is placed in such a location that the envelope could not have been opened after the stamp was in place without ripping the stamp, and the postmark is over the stamp, you now have proof that whatever is in the envelope must have been there before the date on the postmark. Anyone trying to patent your same design after that date will be proved as a fraud.

OK now I am confused lol, no, ill get this legal stuff sorted out soon, need something to do in Spanish class right? lol

 

[ophecleide]

i wouldn't doubt it man, but comon, giving up on something because it hasnt been done yet seems...stupid

Adam

Let's put it this way: The probability of a perpetual motion machine being possible is extremely small because it has not been done yet, so many brilliant people have failed at producing one, and all (or almost all) of our observations about the universe tell us that it is not possible.

I concede that it is possible that for some reason, we have grossly misunderstood all these laws of physics and thermodynamics and the like and there really is a way to produce energy from nothing, but the chances of that being the case are so small, it is not even worth considering. It's like this: There is some miniscule chance that I will be killed by a meteor tomorrow, but it's so small, I won't even consider it as a factor in ANY of my decisions. IMHO, it isn't taking a slim chance, it's being stupid.

 

[ZelmersZoetrop]

Spanish class? It would be interesting if an undergrad or high school student overturned centuries of theory and experiment.

Unless you have found a means of harnessing vacuum flucuations (zero point energy), you do not have a perpetual motion machine. I know you've said you understand the laws of physics, so I won't repeat such laws. But perhaps you could build a small working model of this thing and leave it in your closet for a year or two to see if it still runs. Or expound on your idea here so you won't waste time and energy on a doomed patent application.

 

[Antonio Lao]

I have a friend who works at the patent office (he could be retired by now). And many years ago, he told me that the pile of unapproved applications is higher than Mount Everest.

 

[quddusaliquddus]

Another perpetual motion machine ... wishing you the best of luck

 

[MiGUi]

Hey, perpetual motion don't means that the machine is moving forever.
Thermodynamics says:
- It's not possible to get heat from one system and transform all of this heat into work (1st specie of perpetual motion machine).
- It's not possible that heat can not, spontaneously, go from a cold thermal focus to a hot one (2nd specie of perpetual motion machine).

So, if your machine can get a quantity of heat and transform it, completely, into work, then you are rich.
If your machine can take heat from a cold focus and leave it to a hot focus, without having to work, men... you are rich!

 

[russ_watters]

i wouldn't doubt it man, but comon, giving up on something because it hasnt been done yet seems...stupid

Adam

Its not about giving up at all. In fact you should pursue it until you find...your error.

 

[Arsonade]

and there really is a way to produce energy from nothing.

who said anything about getting energy from nothing , i won't say any more on where it's coming from though, that would give it away.

Adam

P.S. i have a fealing that this reply will discourage even more of you but it still is a perpetual motion mechine, no hoax

 

[Arsonade]

Spanish class? It would be interesting if an undergrad or high school student overturned centuries of theory and experiment.

Unless you have found a means of harnessing vacuum flucuations (zero point energy), you do not have a perpetual motion machine. I know you've said you understand the laws of physics, so I won't repeat such laws. But perhaps you could build a small working model of this thing and leave it in your closet for a year or two to see if it still runs. Or expound on your idea here so you won't waste time and energy on a doomed patent application.

lol i was talking about the pattent information, i was going to look over the patent info in spanish, a class where i really don't pay attenetion, but that's a completely diferent subject. as for building a small working model in my closet, to safely make this think i might need a house, no matter how small, but now that i think about it...yes i could risk it, ok, now all i need is the money lol, thank you summer job lol

Adam

 

[Arsonade]

Another perpetual motion machine ... wishing you the best of luck

lol thanks, i have a fealing ill need it

Adam

 

[Arsonade]

Hey, perpetual motion don't means that the machine is moving forever.
Thermodynamics says:
- It's not possible to get heat from one system and transform all of this heat into work (1st specie of perpetual motion machine).
- It's not possible that heat can not, spontaneously, go from a cold thermal focus to a hot one (2nd specie of perpetual motion machine).

So, if your machine can get a quantity of heat and transform it, completely, into work, then you are rich.
If your machine can take heat from a cold focus and leave it to a hot focus, without having to work, men... you are rich!

OK now youre completely off track, tempeture has almost nothing to do with my PMM, i sopose it could melt if it got hot enough or freze if it got cold enough, but unless i launched it into the sun or douced it in liquid nitrogen, I am not woried bout it.

Adam

 

[Arsonade]

Its not about giving up at all. In fact you should pursue it until you find...your error.

Thats EXACTLY what i meen, the whole reason I am opening this subject to criticizim is so i can make sure i can get as many points of the spectrum as possible, the constructive criticisim is what i need right now, doubts, arguments, logic, i have my own, i want to make sure i have enough of other's

Adam

 

[pallidin]

Arsonade, please allow me to clarify something.

Are you stating that your PMM idea is not 100% perpetual, rather that it could run for such a long time(say 10-100 years) that it could be useful? OK, if so nothing wrong with that. But please clarify that issue.

Secondly, I am sure you are aware that it is well within common engineering science to construct a finely made spring coil, such that after winding, would go "tick, tock" for decades if not much longer without rewinding. Of course, more energy is required to wind it up than in the totality of it's decade long unwinding and the incremental output is excruciatingly low over such a time period.

And a flywheel, specially engineered, has enormous usefulness, but again more energy is required to ramp it up than is extracted.

So, this all leads to my other request for clarification: Is your device such that it needs "charging", electrically or mechanically, and that this "potential" is released over a long period of time? Or do you suggest that no "charging" is needed?

Thank you, and I look forward to your responses.

 

[Relain]

hehe is it better than the carnot engine i have running on my desk? smirks

 

[Arsonade]

Arsonade, please allow me to clarify something.

Are you stating that your PMM idea is not 100% perpetual, rather that it could run for such a long time(say 10-100 years) that it could be useful? OK, if so nothing wrong with that. But please clarify that issue.

Secondly, I am sure you are aware that it is well within common engineering science to construct a finely made spring coil, such that after winding, would go "tick, tock" for decades if not much longer without rewinding. Of course, more energy is required to wind it up than in the totality of it's decade long unwinding and the incremental output is excruciatingly low over such a time period.

And a flywheel, specially engineered, has enormous usefulness, but again more energy is required to ramp it up than is extracted.

So, this all leads to my other request for clarification: Is your device such that it needs "charging", electrically or mechanically, and that this "potential" is released over a long period of time? Or do you suggest that no "charging" is needed?

Thank you, and I look forward to your responses.

100% perpetual, i would say that if it was ever going to begin to malfunction, it would do so in thousonds of years, but that would be human error, ex: a hole drilled in the wrong spot by .000000000000000000000000000000000001 of an inch, one stand being slightly longer than the other, ect. no charging necacary.

 

[Arsonade]

hehe is it better than the carnot engine i have running on my desk? smirks

lol

Adam