Perpetual Energy machine

Not heard of it before. Will it not take more energy to heat than it will produce? Although the liquids have a low boiling point it seems.
 
No. Surely this is limited in the same way other systems are? IE it relies on a cooling the liquid/gas and the air surround is re-warming the contents.

You could go large scale, but you need bigger surface area to warm and cool the contents, then you need to cool the condensation tank to make it go faster. Basically it will won't gain efficiency from being bigger.
 
I thought it was scientifically proven years ago that you cannot make a machine that produces more energy than it uses.
 
Phenomenologica said:
Of course not. Perpetual motion/free energy is absolute ****. And incidentally Larkspeed, that would be a power station. :p
Click to expand...

Actually no

Without getting all techy at this time of the morning a power station is an entirely different type of process than what the OP is talking about.

And I'm pretty sure that a power station actually uses more heat energy than it produces electrical energy
 
Last edited:
For a start its not free energy/perpetual motion. Its a renewable energy device source.
The amount of energy you could extract is absolutely tiny and pointless/ Connect that upto a dyno and it wont be moving.
Just build a wind turbine, you'll get far more energy out.
 
From the vaguaries of what I remember, a certain Mr I Newton set this out some time ago? Conservation of energy or some such? It's is impossible to create energy from nothing, which is what I think a 110% efficiant motor is claiming to do. If this were true, you are making the universe bigger, and our current understanding is that all matter (and thus energy) in the universe was present at it's creation, and introducing more is impossible.

I could be wrong, but that's my understanding.
 
no your right , but of course its all theories

until now no one has shown evidence of perpetual motion though and imo never will

for example the one in OP the water/liquid needs heating , by energy


AcidHell2 said:
Just build a wind turbine, you'll get far more energy out.
Click to expand...

pffft still a waste of time and space !

nuclear and burning things for the win. everyone loves burning things
 
sorry for the thread hijack, but ive always wondered about this little number from trollphysics. i know it shouldnt work, but this is the only infinite energy machine that i genuinly cant understand why it wouldnt work:

infiniteenergymagnets.jpg


anyone care to enlighten me why i wouldnt be able to get energy out of this, assuming the bearings are frictionless and its in a vaccum. i have a fairly decent knowledge of physics, but im stumped by this one.

the part of the magnet that gets you power will always be closer to the big magnet than the part of the magnet that is losing you power (or it will be equally distant). only idea ive got is the difference in leverage of the attracting and repelling parts of the little magnet might stop it being an infinite energy machine
 
Last edited:
Reaper 392 said:
anyone care to enlighten me why i wouldnt be able to get energy out of this, assuming the bearings are frictionless and its in a vaccum. i have a fairly decent knowledge of physics, but im stumped by this one.

the part of the magnet that gets you power will always be closer to the big magnet than the part of the magnet that is losing you power (or it will be equally distant). only idea ive got is the difference in leverage of the attracting and repelling parts of the little magnet might stop it being an infinite energy machine
Click to expand...

Surely for that all you'd get was a state of equilibrium from the magnets as the ones on the horizontal beam would in effect balance each other.
 
The thing you are all trying to overcome here is the effects of Entropy. The concept of entropy is not only provable, but also entirely logical. Everything tends to chaos and disorder.

Assuming something doing work consumes energy (and so far, this has been a universal constant in everything we have observed and documented), then there is nothing that can put more energy back into a system than it takes out. One system can "feed" another of course, and perhaps feed the second system more energy than it is using to do "work", but the "feeding" system will be using energy!

That said, I do not write off the idea that human ingenuity can come up with a way of harnessing say two systems that use some form of renewable energy such as different potential energies, or the effects of magnetic dipoles etc. in such a way that they create a feedback loop between them, producing a system which produces lots of free and clean energy for a long time. But the idea of perpetual energy isn't achievable, it can't be!

Even if it were, the "perpetual" machine would invariably break down or wear out, so it wouldn't even be perpetual in that sense!
 
Reaper 392 said:
sorry for the thread hijack, but ive always wondered about this little number from trollphysics. i know it shouldnt work, but this is the only infinite energy machine that i genuinly cant understand why it wouldnt work:
Click to expand...

That's essentially the core structure of a motor. The design like that wouldn't work because there'd be an equilibrium reached where the bottom magnet on the wheel would be stuck between being attracted and repelled. In a motor, you essentially switch off the south pole as the wheel is passing, then switch it on again, and momentum carries the wheel round while it is not being attracted/repelled. Of course there are lots of different types of motors with the magnets and electromagnets in different places, but that's the basic principle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom