• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Perpetual Energy

baldrick

Student
B
Joined
May 25, 2003
Messages
36
Hi, I'm working on plans for a Perpetual Energy machine (I know people say it's impossible, but they thought that aeroplanes were impossible a couple of hundred years ago, and that was proved wrong wasn't it?). What I want to know, is, if I could build such a machine, would I be eligible for the prize? It would violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, and I think the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, but I can explain how it works scientificly.

What do you think??
 
Yes, a perpetual motion machine would win the Million Dollar Challenge for the same reason that telekinesis would: neither can actually exist according to everything we know about science.

But good luck, though.
 
but I can explain how it works scientificly.
Click to expand...

Can you run it by us first? Not that I want you to lose out on your patent or anything, but (and I mean this sincerely) there are plenty of users here who can point out the (probable) flaw in your thinking.

David

PS I don't claim to be one of them!
 
Just a few thoughts on your claim for the prize.

What exactly do you mean by "perpetual energy machine? Do you mean something like a pendulum that never stops swinging or some machine that actually generates more energy than it consumes?

Before you make you claim for the prize, you need to have a definate, objective and demonstrable ability or device. You need to be able to come to an agreement with Randi, in straight foreward terms what your machine can do. If you can do that, and it is a working free-energy/perpetual motion device, then the tests will be administered for the prize.

If all you have are vague claims about sorta being able to do something or orther, on Tuesdays, and usually by yourself, I wouldn't even bother.
 
Why on earth are you bothering with a piddling $1 million dollars? If you were able to make a machine that works, it would be worth billions, even trillions. You will have overturned one of the most basic assumptions of science, and have paved the way for all new technologies. There really is no limit to what you could achieve with such a breakthrough.

Anyhoo, Randi reserves the right to not test any claim he considers far fetched. For example, he refuses to test a guy who claims to live on air alone. That claim is much more believable than perpetual motion, so don't be suprised if you are summarily rejected. Of course, I am not, and cannot, speak for Randi.

My honest advice is to learn why perpetual motion is impossible, so you don't waste a lot of time and money pursuing what is impossible. This site is a great place to start gathering this information.
 
Roger, while it is true that Randi often ignores blatantly stupid claims, I've seen him complain about alleged free-energy machines enough that I'm pretty sure he'd test one. After all, with the breatharians, there's the legal risk that they might die if tested. The same would apply for people who think they can fly if they jump off a building, etc. Free-energy machines have no such legal risks.
 
perpetual-thinker said:
Hi, I'm working on plans for a Perpetual Energy machine (I know people say it's impossible, but they thought that aeroplanes were impossible a couple of hundred years ago, and that was proved wrong wasn't it?).
Click to expand...
Nobody a couple of hundred years ago thought that airplanes were impossible. Just Really Really Difficult.

And even if they did think they were impossible, that doesn't mean that PE machines are possible.
 
Go for it. You might learn some neat stuff about magnetism and such in the process. Couldn't hurt. Yup, I'd say you'd win a million, but that would be chump change by comparison.
 
perpetual-thinker said:
Hi, I'm working on plans for a Perpetual Energy machine (I know people say it's impossible, but they thought that aeroplanes were impossible a couple of hundred years ago, and that was proved wrong wasn't it?). What I want to know, is, if I could build such a machine, would I be eligible for the prize? It would violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, and I think the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, but I can explain how it works scientificly.

What do you think??
Click to expand...

Well I think that plans are one thing and a working proto-type will be quite another.

In any event, if your machine actually works, then you could wind up being richer than Bill Gates so good luck!
 
In answer to your questions:

The machine is based on a widely-accepted scientific principle. Unfortuanatly, I cannot tell you what scientific principle it is, because it would tell you the basics of how the machine works.

I havn't actually built the machine yet, because I need funding.
The machine itself will cost less than £500 to make, but then you've got the cost of flying to America to qualify for the $1,000,000. I am not looking for investors though.

I have looked at the plans over and over for the last 6 months, and within the next month plan to show the plans to some trusted people to analyse, and tell me what they think.

Someone said something about a patent. I don't plan on getting one of these because there is no point. There is no point spending thousands on world-wide patents, just so that everyone knows how the machine works.

Someone also asked why I would need the $1,000,000 when my machine could make "trillions". The answer: I'm going to need some money to develop the machine, and maybe build a Perpetual Power station.

I don't want to plan to far ahead though, because even though I can't see any problems with the machine, other people might do, so we shall see...
 
perpetual-thinker: Hi, I'm working on plans for a Perpetual Energy machine (I know people say it's impossible, but they thought that aeroplanes were impossible a couple of hundred years ago, and that was proved wrong wasn't it?). What I want to know, is, if I could build such a machine, would I be eligible for the prize? It would violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, and I think the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, but I can explain how it works scientificly. What do you think??
Click to expand...
As others already observered, Randi has offered the million dollar challenge to other inventors of so-called "free energy" machines, including Bearden's MEG. And you won't need to explain how it works to win the prize, just demonstrate (with an actual working device) that it generates more energy than it consumes.
 
perpetual-thinker said:

Someone said something about a patent. I don't plan on getting one of these because there is no point. There is no point spending thousands on world-wide patents, just so that everyone knows how the machine works.

Someone also asked why I would need the $1,000,000 when my machine could make "trillions". The answer: I'm going to need some money to develop the machine, and maybe build a Perpetual Power station.
Click to expand...
I think the U.S. patent office requires a working model of a perpetual motion machine before they will grant a patent. Others have somehow gotten around at times this by using obfuscatory language.

If you can demonstrate a working perpetual motion machine, you won't need Randi's million. You will have investors throwing money at your feet.

Here's the web site of one of the more recent 'free energy' cranks, Carl B. Tilley. His outfit was raided on 2003-05-29 by Tennessee law enforcement officials, but there's been no word yet on any sort of indictment.

Good luck,
 
perpetual motion resources

You might want to join the aforementioned Eric Krieg's Yahoo group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free_energy/

If you see your idea discussed by 10 other people, consider that it's been tried and failed before.

These days, most perpetual motion machine claimants don't claim to violate conservation of energy, the first law of thermo, but rather the second law of thermo. Is your machine supposed to get cold? Then it's second law violator, or PMM of the second kind.
 
The latest fad is to deny even violation of the 2nd law of thermo and claim that the device is not technically a 'perpetual motion' device but draws energy from a mysterious unknown source, typically the 'zero point energy'.
 
The aptly named zero-point

A machine that extracted useful work from zero-point energy would be a type 2 PMM. I guess that by saying that they are tapping ZPE, rather than ambient heat, they make their clame more mysterious. But if you could tap ZPE, you could tap ambient heat too. Some claimed ZPE devices are even type I PMMs. The ZPE is just to add confusion. Read about Hawking Radiation to get a non-kook intro to ZPE. Then read the kookstuff again.

spelling
 
Try Googling the web - it's really tough to get a straight story on the real physics of zero point because it has been thoroughly confiscated by woowoos.
 
Doesn't Randi have contacts in other countries with whom one could take the challenge? I know that there's a group in Australia who have tested some people for the Randi Challenge, so you might not need to fly to Florida after all. Anyone know better?
 
perpetual-thinker said:
What I want to know, is, if I could build such a machine, would I be eligible for the prize?
Click to expand...

Yes. Not only would you be eligible for the prize, you would win it! And put ExxonMobil, Texaco, BP, GM Ford, Chrysler, etc. out of business.

perpetual-thinker said:
It would violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, and I think the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, but I can explain how it works scientificly.
Click to expand...

Ummmm....to be honest, we're a bit tired around here of "explanations". Why don't you build the thing, and then demonstrate it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom