Here is a simple answer.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pioneer0333

Guest
Why has no one taken hold of using magnitism to produce energy. The design is very simple. Just use "very strong" fixated magnets all with say the north pole side angled to push in the clock wise direction. Next have a center rod also lined with "very strong" magnets. But this rod is free to spin. The magnets on the rod are faced to where it correctly is repelled by the north force that is being displayed by the fixated magnets. This if contained and angled correctly will create an extremely strong perpetual spin of the center rod. After all of this, you will have a perfectly good electric generator. This priciple can apply to a whole host of everyday items too. Like the wheels on a car, the blades of a jet engine, or even the propeller of a boat. This comes with zero emissions, life-time usage and much more. Or am I just talking nonesnse and jibberish.<br /><br /> Someone please respond. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
D

doubletruncation

Guest
I'm having a little bit of difficulty picture exactly what the design is, but it sounds like you're suggesting a perpetual motion machine (which for very well understood phenomena like electricity/magnetism is known to be impossible). If you have a bunch of free magnets you might want to try arranging them as you suggest - I think you'll probably find that they won't do what you're thinking they'll do. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
K

kmarinas86

Guest
<font color="yellow">Why has no one taken hold of using magnitism to produce energy.</font><br /><br />Actually it's been around for a long time. It's called an electric generator.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">The design is very simple. Just use "very strong" fixated magnets all with say the north pole side angled to push in the clock wise direction. Next have a center rod also lined with "very strong" magnets. But this rod is free to spin. The magnets on the rod are faced to where it correctly is repelled by the north force that is being displayed by the fixated magnets. This if contained and angled correctly will create an extremely strong perpetual spin of the center rod.</font><br /><br />Perpetual motion is not the same as perpetual energy. Perpetual energy is equivalent to performing perpetual work, such as an infinite net force over a finite distance, or an finite force over a infinite distance. This has never been observed.<br /><br />On the other hand, a device like yours, it's non-stop action would halt to a grind when an finite amount of energy opposes it. Contrary - A source of infinite energy would be unstoppable and would consume the universe. However, no such energy exists, as any machine can be stopped when a finite and sufficient amount of energy is applied. This means that all machines produce finite work, no matter how much.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">After all of this, you will have a perfectly good electric generator. This priciple can apply to a whole host of everyday items too. Like the wheels on a car, the blades of a jet engine, or even the propeller of a boat. This comes with zero emissions, life-time usage and much more. Or am I just talking nonesnse and jibberish.<br /><br />Someone please respond.</font><br /><br />Do not confuse the invalid concept of perputual energy creation from a finite gadget with that of perputal motion. Perpetual motion needs no energy source, but it requires an absence of fricti
 
A

agnau

Guest
Try this. Aim 25 guns at one guy in the center of a circle. What will that guy do? Assume he is smart and sensible. He will stand still. If he moves toward gunner 1, gunner 1 would shoot. The same is true for gunner #2 - #25. Suppose now the guy turns and each of our gunners is trigger happy. He is dead. <br /><br />The pole is your guy and the arranged outer magnets are the gunner. Your guy needs motivation to move. Unfortunately, you have given him none. Add a propeller and you'd have the classic engery producer of a windmill:)
 
Q

qso1

Guest
If its as simple as your suggesting, why don't you build it? You'd make billions of dollars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
D

doubletruncation

Guest
<font color="yellow">Perpetual motion is not the same as perpetual energy. Perpetual energy is equivalent to performing perpetual work, such as an infinite net force over a finite distance, or an finite force over a infinite distance. This has never been observed.</font><br /><br />good point. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
V

vogon13

Guest
Go to the hardware store and buy some magnets, they be cheap.<br /><br />Build it and get back to us.<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
I made a small model once before, and yes it did work. Also the perpetual spin of the center rod would not by it's self generate the energy. Instead the center rod will be connected to a turbine in an electric genterator. Picture Hoover dam, and how it uses the energy of the flowing water to turn it's turbines and generate electricity. Now imagine that instead using flowing water, you use a magnetic force to spin the turbines.<br /><br /> But in the end, I feel that even a complete magnetic/electric generator would be squashed by the big wigs of the world. Think about it, the entire global economy would be screwed simply because oil and natural gas would not be needed in a big way like it is today. The higher up's would rather exhaust all of the oil deposits and make that money, instead of allowing people to have a source of free energy. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
A

agnau

Guest
I am almost positive that any external friction, providing it does work as claimed (I will leave that dispute until later), will produce enough drag to stop the rod. <br /><br />I am also suprised to hear you say it was perpetual while it seems to me your post indicates that you do not have, or perhaps dismantled, the device.
 
A

alek_a

Guest
<font color="yellow"><i>Just use "very strong" fixated magnets all with say the north pole side angled to push in the clock wise direction. Next have a center rod also lined with "very strong" magnets. But this rod is free to spin. The magnets on the rod are faced to where it correctly is repelled by the north force that is being displayed by the fixated magnets.</i></font>/i><br /><br />Although I dont exactly understand how you propose the arrangement, keep in mind that while north poles repell, south and north poles attract. And each magnet has a north and a south pole (they are inseperable). Your free-to-move center rod will find a position where it will be in equilibrium, i.e. where all the forces will be equal.<br /><br />Give me more details and I will know what kind of system you have.
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
Think of the spin being induced as a slipping spin. The poles on the magnets have to be at an angle which allows for the repelling forces to repell the on a perpetual spin. I know it is hard to imagine or get a mental picture of it. But the best way that I can give to describe it is this. Think of the push-pull effect that a magnet has. Also "remember that a magnet can last for hundreds or even thousands of years". Now think of having a cylinder with the inside walls lined with magnets whose poles (say the North) are all angled in the same direction (say clockwise). The center rod is positioned so that it ends up in spin. But sense the magnets are angled on the inside of the cylinder, they will exert more than what would be exerted in the magnet if it was alligned at a 90-degree angle in relation to the absolute center of the cylinder. All of this creates a "slipping" effect. And sense the center rod is free to fully rotate, it will be (pulled) with just enough force to get the magnets on the center rod to spin towards the magnets in the cylinder. But remember that present forces inside the cylinder are UNeven. This is where the (push) effect comes in. The (push) is more powerful than the pull, and because of this a slipping effect is created. And with magnets, the forces do not allow the center to travel in reverse to the relation of the magnets inside the cylinder.<br /><br /> It's just FREE energy. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
V

vogon13

Guest
Go to the hardware store, buy some magnets, (they are cheap) build it, and get back to us.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
Exactly....... With the magnets angled correctly, they produce the "slipping" effect. But, my only real worry is nature. If a power plant were built using this design, How would lightning affect the powere plant? Would it affect it at all? But the picture you have is a great example. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
I did once have a model, and yes I took it apart. The only reason that I am thinking of it again, is because of a tv show I recently saw. It was called "Alien Tech" on the History Channel. There was a guy on there who figured that aliens might use this type of generator to power a ship. He built a model too, but I noticed that his magnets were simply flat (not angled) and produced no spin. This is why I am trying to push this technology, because magnetism is a power that seems to have been over looked thru time. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
P

pioneer0333

Guest
They are not cheap. The type of magnets I used were EXTREMELY strong, and nearly 12.00 for a pack of 6. I need at least 85 to build a full scale model that can turn a turbine in an electric generator (ex:retro-fitting a gasoline powered electric generator to use the power produced from the magnetic spinning rod instead of the combustion of gasoline). It is easy to demonstrate the spin, but everyone only wants to see it produce electricity. Word of mouth is not enough. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
V

vogon13

Guest
If the principle is sound, cheap puny magnets will work just fine, you just won't be able to run 10 cement mixers off the output shaft.<br /><br />Magnets are cheap, run down to the hardware store, buy some, build it and get back to us.<br /><br /><br />{btw, in all of human history, do you think you're the first one to come up with this? Why isn't our entire civilization powered with these devices?}<br /><br /> <br /><br />Did you spend last night at a Holiday Inn Express?<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<i>It's just FREE energy.</i><br /><br />Don't magnets lose their magnetism over time? On a mass scale, you would need to create a new industry of magnet making. Not sure what that all involves, but I'm guessing alot of energy and resources would be required not only to build them, but <i>maintain</i> them. Not sure if you can consider that free energy. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
A

alek_a

Guest
Well, it is a complicated arrangement and calculations that I tried to make will take some time.<br /><br />It looks like the non-moving magnets may create a circular field inside that will result in a net torque on the axis. But I still need to check this. Very tough vector calculus... <br /><br />I am however pretty sure that it will not rotate by itself.
 
Q

qso1

Guest
Pioneer0333:<br />They are not cheap...<br /><br />Me:<br />Therein lies the problem, and why magnets proposed for this type of use have not been looked at too strongly. There is also a good reason why everyone wants to see it do something more than spin. Some of those folks might be investors and they want to know what they might invest in actually works.<br /><br />Having said that, good luck to you if you are seriously intending to build your project. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
I'm sorry to say that your idea has been tried before, Pioneer0333. Magnets will not produce free energy. They are very good at transferring energy, but they do not magically create energy.<br /><br />For instance, if you have the magnets moving, so their magnetic fields move as well, they will create motion in the rod. But it's not free energy. Something has to move the magnets -- or move their magnetic field. The latter is far more common. With an electromagnet, you can move the magnetic field just by adjusting the current. So electrical energy can be converted into kinetic energy this way. This is the basic principle behind all electric motors.<br /><br />But not only is not free energy, it loses energy. You put in x amount of work (in the form of electricity) and x amount comes out -- but only some of it comes out in the rotation of the rod. The rest is lost to heat and friction and electrical resistence. A perfectly efficient motor is just as much of a holy grail as the free energy machine. But despite a lot of effort to try to build one, none has ever been produced.<br /><br />The fundamental problem is that your system will never be ideal, no matter how much money you spend on powerful ferromagnets. It will lose energy somewhere along the line. Even the ambient air will sap energy from it (by producing aerodynamic drag), as will the Earth's magnetic field (by tugging gently on the magnets). There are ways to reduce friction: lubricants such as WD-40, or more sophisticated concepts such as electromagnetic levitation.<br /><br />Maglevs are so efficient because they have almost zero drag from the track itself. They still must face other forms of drag, but the track makes most of the drag on a train, so it's a huge energy savings. The drawback is that the magnetic levitation itself consumes an enormous amount of energy. For it to be financially viable, the cost of levitating the train has to be offset by the greater capacity -- and ticket sales -- the <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
A

agnau

Guest
My concern is still for energy production. It is called the Electromagnetic force for a reason. In order to generate Electricity, some portion of the EM force must be transferred to the wire -- in this case (presuming the calculations work out), through drag on the rod used in the power generation. This drag can convert to direct electricity or to direct mechanical motion. When the drag reaches a critical level, the spin will cease regardless of net torque. The critical level is based on the strength of the magnets, amount of drag, and speed of spin. Have fun creating that graph.
 
A

alek_a

Guest
The thing is that even if there is a net torque on that axis, he already violates the energy balance law. If there is a net static torque (i.e. a force but nothing is moving, you hold the axis), then it represents the potentiality to make work which is equal to potential energy.<br /><br />It can turn out that the axis wil indeed spin, but it will induce currents in the magnets that will ultimately de-magnetize them. Then the axis will slowly stop spinning and the energy you will get out of it since it started spinning will be equal to the energy required to make (magnetize) the magnets and place them in the shown arrangement. This is probably what will be true if there is a net torque.<br /><br />It will take some effort to integrate the field produced by the magnets, I will post a result when I get around to it.
 
S

science_man

Guest
Oh, I think I know one way that might work. <br />Lets say we're in a vacume. <br />Theres a rope attached to a heavy ball.<br /> If I were to swing the ball so it goes all the way around (makes a circle)<br /> then it would keep on spinning untill any thing interfears with it (Newtons 1st law).<br /> sooo.. the ball keeps spinning (fast) forever. <br />In the same vacume if we add about 49 more of those ball on a string circles<br /> then it might create enough energy to power a house.<br />right? Am I right?? I probably missed some thing important here so tell me.
 
L

larper

Guest
How do you extract energy from the system AND keep the balls moving? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY