English version      

 

Ask a Question
Contact person*:
Phone:
E-mail*:
Message*:

* indicates a required field

My perpetual motion machines

My perpetual motion machines

Hundreds of inventors worldwide created, create and will attempt to create a perpetual motion machine. Without commenting on the already invented perpetual motion machines, I want to describe my path in this direction, and the conclusions I have reached.

But first of all about the conclusions (I would like only to note that there is nothing new in the very conclusions).

In physics (read in nature) there are laws of conservation, they are few, but they are fundamental they are laws of conservation of energy, momentum, angular momentum, charge, and some others.

The conservation laws are not scientists imagination. This is a "skeleton", a sort of "aquarium" in which our universe is, and we cannot go through "its" ("the aquariums") walls.

Laws that hold the structure and harmony of our Universe, otherwise the world would turn into chaos. And I think, if at least one fundamental law of nature were violated all the rest would be violated too.

In my opinion, we should not invent a perpetual motion machine, but try to find "those" events or effects, which would cause violation of at least one of the fundamental laws. And on the basis of an open event or effect it wont be difficult to invent a perpetual motion machine.

PERHAPS SUCH PHENOMENA OR EFFECTS ALREADY EXIST IN NATURE, I CAN NOT DENY, though the search path I followed, says "no".

Now about the very perpetual motion machines

Permanent magnets. Few of the inventors were not "drawn" with their properties to perpetually draw metal (magnetic) objects and draw together or repel each other. The same happened to me. I have been seized with the idea to create a machine on the basis of permanent magnets since school. While I was gaining knowledge and experience machine designs based on permanent magnets became more complex. And not only did I come up with different designs, but most importantly I decided to make an experimental model of a machine. Let such a machine would not be large, let it produce not kilowatts or watts of energy, but only the energy for its needs, that is bearing friction, air friction, etc.

BUT ITS ROTOR MUST RUN NONSTOP

I made various constructions of such a machine, I improved and perfected them, but ...  they refused to run NONSTOP.

And then I decided to find "the effect of excess energy," in the simplest terms coefficient of performance above 100%. For example, a metal object is drawn in one direction to a permanent magnet and a certain amount of energy is allocated, and in other direction we remove "that" object and spend the energy respectively.

So, the energy that allocated must be more than the one we spent, that's it, everything is simple and clear.

I carried out dozens of experiments with different configurations of the magnet-magnet, the magnet-ferromagnet (steel), where I measured the energy allocated and spent, and compared the values of these energies. UNFORTUNATELY THEY WERE EQUAL.

Although I found one effect ... well talk about it at the end of this article

A lot of other structures based on other natural phenomena, such as gravitational attraction, Archimedes force (you can find out about one of them right now), surface tension of liquids, and many other things have been tried (in theory, and some in practice).

Unfortunately, I have encountered in all cases with as if an invisible boundary, its name is fundamental laws of nature, namely, the law of conservation of energy.

"Well, the author of these lines is a real crank" many people might think, and I will probably agree, but unfortunately this is my path covered. Path of reflections, search, experiments, trial and error, a search path of truth.

And NOW let's talk about one effect that I have discovered. Omitting a lot of experimental and theoretical details, I will focus on the key points that are indeed confirmed experimentally

  1. I have discovered (not directly but indirectly) the effect of excess energy in a certain configuration of interaction between permanent magnet and steel elements (both electrotechnical and "usual"). The magnitude of excess energy was basically 2-5%, in some experiments it was up to 8%, that is the lower limit is 2%, the top limit is 8%.
  2. I have taken the next step. Instead of electrotechnical steel I have used ferrite plates (which the magnetic antennas are made of). The effect is clearly preserved, although it was slightly smaller from 1.5 to 4%. (It will not work to write off the errors in favour of the percentage, the errors are included). However, the experimental data have been obtained indirectly. Why indirectly? Only because the very design of the device is greatly simplified.
  3. But the direct and indirect data is not the same thing. And then I made up my mind to carry out a direct experiment, because the effect was clearly observed. I invented and manufactured a device to test it (photos of the device you can see here). When everything was made, balanced and fixed, I was ready to take the very measurements. And at the first measurement the result was negative. The second, third, fourth and subsequent measurements only confirmed a negative result. Unfortunately, there was not any effect of excess energy.

However, in previous experiments (period of the performance of the experiments: 2001-2002), there was an effect it is absolutely clear, both using electrotechnical steel (and "normal"), and ferrite plates.

It seems to me that there is a sort of phenomenon hiding behind that effect either already known to science, or perhaps not yet known, or some "clever hidden" error which I simply cannot "see." And so far, despite repeated attempts to interpret the results of those experiments I havent succeeded in finding the cause for that effect. I did not carry out further experiments.

Although there are two facts: experimental data obtained indirectly, they are positive, direct experimental data, they are negative. How do we reconcile two facts?

I think sooner or later Ill find the answer, but I do not think that I will discover something new. But who knows ...

That is all in brief

I also want to note: We know a lot of facts about our world, but we do not know a single answer to the question why these facts exist. The facts are the following: there is substance, energy, space, time, arrow (vector) time, fundamental laws, the rate from zero to the speed of light, and other facts. But why do these facts exist? Unfortunately, we do not know it.

G Analytics

Copyright 2010-2014 - Vladimir Oleynik site
When using the materials from the website link to www.ollejnik.com is obligatory

The English version of website may be some semantic differences. PRIMARY SOURCE
THE RUSSIAN VERSION OF THE WEBSITE

site was created by