24 replies to this topic

[nutsnvolks]

ok, i have had this idea for some time now but seems a little bit 'simple' to be viable, on the other hand the best ideas are usually the simplest. Well see what you think about the following idea i had ,its in a very basic form just to try and make it understandable...

To start off you will need a small electric motor 2 or more dynamos bulbs and battery.

ok i will assume this is a 12v system, i.e. battery bulbs dynamos ect

if you conect the battery to the motor it spins right?

so...

if you connect the motor to a dynamo via a small pully on the motor and a large one on the dynamo then you can use the dynamo output to power a bulb right?

so...if you add a pully and dynamo to the motor and connect the dynamo to the battery it will charge wont it? Thus giving you free energy via the bulb!

The reason I think this will work is because the motor should spin no slower having 2 pullys so each dynamo will produce the same amount of power, i accept that 1 dynamo wont charge the battery but it was to get the point across, you could add another 3 or 4 pullys and dynamos in theory thus creating enough combined energy to power the bulb for free

can anyone give there opinion? am i wrong?

[juice]

Yes you are wrong sorry . No one (maybe I'm wrong) has yet to prove perpetual motion or energy if you like. If your your theory works then it would have been giving us free energy since the invention of the dynamo.

[matak]

You should try do drive a bicycle...

[rvalkass]

Sorry, but I think you are wrong

The process is not 100% efficient, so the dynamo would never produce the same amount of energy as is being fed into the motor. The motor makes a small humming or buzzing noise while its running, and it also heats up. The energy for this is provided by the battery, and is being passed to the useful kinetic output of the motor.

Connecting more dynamos would make it spin slower, as each one is creating friction, a resistance to the spin of the motor. The more you add, the more resistance you create, until eventually it would be unable to spin.

[communitykat]

You should try it anyway, and keep on trying things that might work. People keep saying that it is impossible, but it isn't (at least that is what I think). Nothing ever was done by a person who said it couldn't be. There is much more energy in the universe and even on our planet than we need, we just need to change our perspective of what is out there and how it can be harnessed. Even if it doesn't work, you will have a better idea of what might when you are done. Here are some good quotes from good old Thomas Edison:

"Just because something doesn't do what you planned doesn't mean that it was useless"
"Results! Why man I have gotten a lot of results. I know several thousand things that will not work"
"We don't know a millionth of one percent of anything"

Society always wants to cage a person into norms and an accepted paradigm of "what is" and "what isn't", but we have to remember that we can walk in and out of that cage anytime we want to. Any genius has aqainted him/or herself with the outside of the cage.

[hts]

As you might now (or not) energy cannot be created, nor be destroyed. It can only be transformed (brought) to a different form of it.

Therefore, you cannot create energy (out of nothing), simply because the output you would get (with your mechanism or with any other invented up until now by man) cannot be higher than the quantity of energy that was used in the process (especially because of the friction involved - but not only)

Lets put it clearer: think of a car that uses fuel to power the engine. If you use X amount of energy (generically speaking) to power the car, you cannot output more than this X quantity.
Hope it is quite clear enough... It is a simple law of physics that contradicts your theory..Sorry for you (and probably for the humankind )...

[nutsnvolks]

ok, well, i was kind of aware of the law that you cant get more energy out than what you put in. So whilst i am reasonably happy that the idea has fallen flat on its face, i have another twist to the same theory. Now i already think i know what you are all going to say...BUT... going back to the same battery dynamos motor and bulb...

If you connect a 12v battery to a 12v motor which powers the dynamo which in turn powers the bulb it will power it for 12 hours (all just for arguments sake) now if that 12v battery powers the same sequence of things along with another dynamo charging the battery how long will the battery last?

Whilst it is quite obvious that you will say the same again i really am not sure you are right because whilst i know the extra dynamo will slow the motor slightly it will not "half" its speed therefore it will surely make the battery last longer?

[matak]

Why don't you try it. You can talk and think it is possible, but try to make something like that...
If you are into that free energy than you need to start testing your ideas and inventions, as communitykat adviced you.
Don't be discouraged by us making your ideas worthless. go to local hardware store buy battery, dynamo, pull and try to make it yourself..
Maybe, and who nows maybe you just might invent something.
Also check out some basic formulas for electricity and how it goes. Using parallel or serial connections of batteries, try to find pullies with as less fraction as possible.

If you make 2V from 1.5V battery you will be famous, and rich of course. Just think it through, and be smart.

also you might check out jutube for videos of perpetual motion devices. There is some really fun(ny) devices there, so don't feel alone in your try to make free energy...

Edited by matak, 08 January 2007 - 10:49 PM.

[communitykat]

I knew someone would say that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but seriously, who needs to create MORE energy...the planet and the universe are full of it. We need to change our perspective from finite sources of energy to infinite sources. How can we pull energy out of the air? Sounds crazy, but I am sure it is possible. What about the universe/planets etc. They are friction free in space and create all kinds of energy. Magnetism/vibrations, these are age old elements for making energy...there is an answer...use the force.

[salamangkero]

Bill Bryson, the author of A Short History of Nearly Everything, once said that within an average adult human lies an energy far more than a trillion hydrogen bombs. Of course, you'd probably have to be suicidal and strongly inclined to make a point, if you wish to liberate that energy.

Einstein's equation E=mc^2 implies that even an infinitesimal mass is enough to liberate tremendous amounts of energy. We, humans, do this with metabolism but so much is dissipated as background heat. The sun, or the stars, on the other hand, do this quite efficiently that they can keep burning for quite a long while.

We don't need to create more energy, per se. What we do need is more energy in a more easily manipulated form, say, electricity. Everyday, we get bombarded by heat and light energy from the sun. However, what use is it to us, as technology dependent individuals, if so much of it is lost as heat and only a small part of it can actually be converted to electricity? (I know the sun is central to powering life but let's not get into that, shall we ?)

I've heard from a friend of mine, though, that there are plans to build a particle collider that will generate a very small blackhole, which has the potential to liberate more energy from matter. Any thoughts on this?