perpetual motion machine?
545358
i don't know about perpetual motion, but i am trying to make perpetual energy. it involves a motor turned into a generator, another motor, and a transformer. \nhere is a funny joke about perpetual motion.\ntoast always falls butter-side down, and cats always land on their feet, so if you attach a piec of toast to the bottom of the cat's feet with the butter facing up and drop them, you would have a perpetual motion machine because it would spin and never hit the ground.\n\nfunny, huh.
1179954
Yes, it could be done, but you would need a very large field. Even so, scientists have allready created super electromagnets to levitate stuff.
563271
You can patent the idea alone; they don't make you prove that it works.  Patents exist for devices that are physically impossible, such as perpetual motion machines.
71764
There is a perpetual motion machine in the Smithsonian Institute. I creates more energy than it uses. The key is to reduce friction to a level that keeps the spinning weights spinning while producing more energy. the one in the Smithsonian Institute does this but not on a scale that would be of use in todays world of high energy consumption.
149138
A machine that makes zogs...
380796
simply no. it is not possible to have a perpetual motion machine because there will always be some energy lost. fusion is fantastically efficient in terms of mass to energy and has none of the radioactive problems of its fission counterpart. however it still uses up fuel and you cannot then reuse this. also the technology at the moment uses more energy than it produces meaning that this is still quite a long way off. this is perhaps the most realistic way of powering the spacecraft that you appear to visualise however there is still the problem that it cannot go fast enough and unless a way is found of bending space itself you cannot go faster than the speed of light or indeed reach the speed of light so the answer is no at the moment and no for the foreseeable future.
37315
yes, a perpetual motion machine is one that requires not external energy input in order to keep working. The laws that a perpetual motion machine (PMM) would violate would be either the 1st or 2nd law of thermodynamics.\n\n1st law: the conservation of energy -> energy that goes into a system = energy that goes out. Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Has to go somewhere. A machine that keeps producing energy as work without energy input would violate this law.\n\n2nd law: I can't think of how the examples I've seen of perpetual motion violate the 2nd law (the total entropy of any isolated thermodynamic system tends to increase over time, approaching a maximum value), but wikipedia states that some proposed PMMs are ok with the first law and would violate the second.\n\nWikipedia has this to say about almost perfect PMMS:\n\n"By minimizing friction and other causes of dissipation, it is possible to produce a good approximation to a perpetual motion machine of the second kind. Planetary systems (such as the earth and moon) could be considered an example. Planets, moons, and stars spin without any fuel, batteries, muscle, cost, or other limited power. Planets don't rotate forever however - the rotation ends when the planet dies. (Energy in such system are dissipated via tidal effects and presumably also very slowly via gravitational waves.)\n\nIn an otherwise completely empty Newtonian universe, a single particle could travel for ever at constant velocity with no violation of the laws of physics -- though of course no energy could be extracted from it without slowing it down. For example, an electron can spin around a nucleus in an atom of matter for thousands of years until it degrades or is knocked out of orbit. A further example is light bouncing between two parallel mirrors, assuming those mirrors to be perfectly reflective (so that no light is transmitted or absorbed), perfectly parallel (so that it really does bounce for ever), and perfectly smooth (so that it isn't scattered). Making the mirrors into a closed box eliminates the need for them to be perfectly smooth or perfectly parallel, but not the need for perfect reflection. Perfectly reflective mirrors do not exist."\n\nAlways had wondered why light bouncing between mirrors would not constitute a PMM, now I know :)\n\nThe only diagram I remember of as a PMM from my readings as a youth was a Bhaskara's wheel, which I found a description on wikipedia, and a link to an image in the sources:\n\n"unbalanced moving parts arranged around a wheel fall, releasing energy which enables the wheel to turn; as it does so, the moving parts are returned to their original positions. The unbalanced parts may be hammers on pivoted arms, or rolling balls, or globs of mercury in tubes; the principle is the same."\n\nThe attempt to create a PMM has performed over the years, and you can find a history of PMMs using the second link.\n\nAbout the answer that spinning electrons constitute a PMM: see the above quote from Wikipedia - it seems that they will not spin forever.
974804
It won't work.  You can look at it this way:\n\nOne of the basic laws of physics is Conservation of Energy.  You can't create energy, nor is energy lost.  It is always constant, but it may change form.  Let me give several examples.\n\nThe energy associated with a swinging pendulum changes from kinetic (moving) energy at the bottom of the swing to potential energy at the top of the swing.  Back and forth, kinetic energy, potential energy, kinetic energy, potential energy, etc.  The swing of the pendulum does slowly die down, but that is due to the gradual transfer of kinetic energy to the surrounding air in the form of heat.\n\nIn the second example, the kinetic energy of a moving car is converted to thermal energy (heat) when you hit the brakes.  That's why your brakes get hot if you've been doing a lot of braking.  Of course, to get the car moving in the first place, the engine converts chemical energy from gasoline to thermal energy, which expands the gases in the pistons, pushing on the pistons to make the mechanical energy that turns the wheels.\n\nBack to your problem.  To charge a battery, the energy must come from somewhere.  The amount of energy coming from your voice is small, and certainly the amount of energy picked up by a microphone is much smaller, since most of the energy goes right on past the microphone.  It would take a very strong voice and a lot of talking to charge a battery, even if the charging circuit were perfect with no losses.\n\nNow, if your voice could turn a windmill.........
420332
Gravity travels at the speed of light and is therefore inescapable. The force of gravity would eventually cause your device to quit moving. This might be an eternity but it would eventually stop. Sorry, but no arrangement of magnets and gravity will result in a perpetual motion device. The only thing you might ever consider a perpetual motion device is the entire universe itself and that in itself is debatable.
1185123
The only motionless electromagnetic generator I know of is a solar panel.  While you can generate energy with coils you need a strong changing magnetic field.   The only way I know how to make one  without a preexisting current is spinning some kind of a magnet by wind, water or steam.\n\nNo something does not have to work to get a patent.  It is not the patent offices job to make sure something works.\nA patent is only good if you can successfully sue someone for infringing on it.\nI can patent an teleportation device right now if I want too but unless builds one almost exactly like the one I describe I am just wasting my time and money.
284291
If you could shoot a rocket into outer space with enough force to cause it to leave our solar system, perhaps it would exhibit "perpetual motion" and travel forever.  But that would be deceptive.  It would continue to move unchanged only because it meets little matter or force to overcome.  On earth, to set something into motion you must add to its kinetic energy which equals one half times its mass times its velocity squared.  It doesn't matter how you add the energy (or that it gains more say by falling) we are interested only in the energy you added to create perpetual motion.  It could revolve say suspended above powerful frictionless magnets within the vacuum inside an evacuated bell jar for a very long time.  However, there is no perfect vacuum on earth and there would still be atoms or molecules that would collide with and slow down the rotating item whether that took hours or days or years.  Perpetual motion must last forever(!) without you or Nature adding to its original kinetic energy.  If you hold your hand outside a moving car you will feel wind on your hand and some reasoon it could be harnessed (like a sail boat) to propel the car, neglecting the fact that the wind exists solely because the car is burning fuel.  Out of gas = out of wind.\n\nI would encourage you to pursue your theory for the lessons involved but carefully account for all the energy.  Consult with any engineer (especially mechanical at first) or any physics teacher (professor) and remember that your theory could involve a better use of energy if not perpetual motion.  You must patent most devices within a year of public disclosure (which would not include a witness to your theory or device).  Good luck.
686726
Actualy there ARE free energy solutions out there, such as a self sustaining magntic generator the problem is noone will fund building these power sources becuz there is no profit in free power and we all know everything is about money and profit.
872411
Yes.  We had mechanical voting machines for decades.  You disappear behind a curtain and pull the crank to clear the machine when finished moving levers.  I've read those old monsters are the most precise.
561277
MAGNET THATS POWERED BY ELECTRICITY
1009948
perpetual motion is a concept that a machine, wheel or what ever will continue in motion forever from the initial energy that is input.\n\nperpetual motion cannot exist due to the law of conservation of energy. this is because all mechanisms have some form of energy loss from friction, heat, light, radiation.\n\nthis means that no matter how efficient a machine is you will always have some energy loss somewhere and you will always have to input more energy periodically.
856860
You would need to have the magnet moving, and the power it would take to make it move would be more than any advantage you get out of it. Laws of Thermodynamics.
1115739
Roomba\n\nIts a mini vacum that just goes around randomly and vacums all by itself :) Like a mini robot...and what's better than that?