Perpetual motion vehicle

[public_folder]

Car of the future: No Fuel, unlimited range.

 

Check this out guys, go-n-motion.com. Is this anywhere near remotely possible? I mean a vehicle that runs on no gas…AT ALL..so like what’s it gonna run on? Creativity and imagination is great but there is a limit somewhere. :hihi:

 

Is it anywhere near doable?

[kalesh]

Car of the future: No Fuel, unlimited range.

 

Check this out guys, go-n-motion.com. Is this anywhere near remotely possible? I mean a vehicle that runs on no gas…AT ALL..so like what’s it gonna run on? Creativity and imagination is great but there is a limit somewhere. :hihi:

 

Is it anywhere near doable?

 

Yes its certainly doable. Now I do not know whether it can be done using their so called "unstoppable forward momentum" but it certainly can be done.

 

Reason? because it has been done.!!

 

check this out.

Fuelless Engine

This one certainly works as I have purchased the plans and built it. (It works at lower power than stated, and I'm getting some parts custom made so its power can be increased.) Although it isn't fitted in a car I don't see why someone can't just scale it to the energy requirement of a car, truck, plane, whatever.

 

Also check this out

Perendev Motor

I can't vouch for this one as the price tag of 38000 euro is out of my league, but they have been around for some time and if it wasn't workable someone would have brought it up by now. Once again its too big to fit in a car but I can't see why it can't be scaled down.

[Buffy]

:hihi:

This is either a joke site or it is an elaborate scam:

All of this takes a boatload of money because there is going to have be some new technology that has to be made. That’s where you can help us, with your membership and or donation we can start to get things done. As a startup company, we are in need of a lot of things. A place to build the car, people to build it, computers and software, tools and materials, testing equipment, and a whole host of other things.

If anyone is stupid enough to send the guy money when they have nothing but a cool Flash site, well, more power to him! Its pretty clear from reading what little content there is there that the guy--Kevin Pandil--knows absolutely nothing about physics, and sees creating a "perpetual motion machine"--which he thankfully disclaims as being impossible, just that he think he can get really close by "taking advantage" of the unstoppable power of momentum--as a mere implementation detail...

 

A foole and his money are soon parted,

Buffy

[public_folder]

Yes its certainly doable. Now I do not know whether it can be done using their so called "unstoppable forward momentum" but it certainly can be done.

 

Reason? because it has been done.!!

 

 

So seriously, a fuel-less, unlimited range car is a definite possibility? So like the site is not a hoax or anything? :hihi:

[kalesh]

So seriously, a fuel-less, unlimited range car is a definite possibility? So like the site is not a hoax or anything? :eek:

I am not sure if the site is a hoax or not. But I do know that with enough dedication, funding, and an open mind it can be done.

[pgrmdave]

The site is created by somebody who doesn't really understand the laws of physics. Don't waste your money or your time on it.

 

If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

[Buffy]

Reason? because it has been done.!! check this out.

Fuelless Engine

Uh, it appears to run on *batteries* http://www.metacafe.com/watch/333921/fuelless_engine/, so calling it "Fuelless" is strictly true, but would require quite a bit of energy input, so its hardly "free!"

 

Have you run any computations to show what your battery consumption to power output ratio is?

Also check this out

Perendev Motor

I can't vouch for this one as the price tag of 38000 euro is out of my league, but they have been around for some time and if it wasn't workable someone would have brought it up by now. Once again its too big to fit in a car but I can't see why it can't be scaled down.

These guys (two of them, one is just the "legal" guy), have a site where you can *order* the engine, but elsewhere they say they need funding in order to build a prototype.

 

Now, I have a *working* perpetual motion machine (that I will--like Perendev--only lease, not sell to you), for only 20,000 euros and I can deliver it to you next week! Just make your cashier's check payable to "Cash" and send it to "Buffy c/o Hypography, Oslo Norway" where Tormod will launder, er, forward it to me.

 

Unbelievably high performance from unbelievable minds,

Buffy

[pgrmdave]

I am not sure if the site is a hoax or not. But I do know that with enough dedication, funding, and an open mind it can be done.

 

This is a powerful misconception. Hard work will never let you break the laws of physics, merely bend them to your will. You will never get more energy out than you put in. You will never even be able to break completely even. That is why perpetual motion does not occur - all useful work has an efficiency of less than 100%, and cannot be more than 100% efficient.

[kalesh]

Uh, it appears to run on *batteries*, so calling it "Fuelless" is strictly true, but would require quite a bit of energy input, so its hardly "free!"

 

Have you run any computations to show what your battery consumption to power output ratio is?

 

I use a 12 volt battery, and have kept it running for 48 hours continuous with two 60 watt 240V light bulbs as load, at end of 48 hours battery is at 90% charge........ That should let you draw your own conclusion.

 

It can even be rewired so you can remove the battery once its running. (it doesn't tell that but I have done it and it continues to run after battery is removed.

 

This is a powerful misconception. Hard work will never let you break the laws of physics, merely bend them to your will. You will never get more energy out than you put in. You will never even be able to break completely even. That is why perpetual motion does not occur - all useful work has an efficiency of less than 100%, and cannot be more than 100% efficient.

 

Can you explain the working of the fuelless engine? I know it works because I have it.

[Buffy]

I use a 12 volt battery, and have kept it running for 48 hours continuous with two 60 watt 240V light bulbs as load, at end of 48 hours battery is at 90% charge........ That should let you draw your own conclusion.

I'll admit that electronics is a weak area for me, but I do know you haven't provided anywhere near enough information here: we need to know the amp-hour rating for the battery and its amp output and I believe there will be a difference if your bulbs are rigged serial or parallel.

It can even be rewired so you can remove the battery once its running. (it doesn't tell that but I have done it and it continues to run after battery is removed. Can you explain the working of the fuelless engine? I know it works because I have it.

It looked like from the video I saw that it has a flywheel in it, so yes, its working off of momentum, but that won't help, because you use the juice up front getting the flywheel to go at all. Once it's going, you could unhook the battery, but friction will eventually slow it down. If it has "capacitors" in it, you need to know that capacitors are simply batteries, so you'd just be transfering the electric power from the batteries to the capacitor.

 

There is no Naked Lunch,

Buffy

[kalesh]

I'll admit that electronics is a weak area for me, but I do know you haven't provided anywhere near enough information here: we need to know the amp-hour rating for the battery and its amp output and I believe there will be a difference if your bulbs are rigged serial or parallel.

 

I wasn't intending on calculating this but...........

 

Its a car battery having an RRC of 120 meaning it can give out 25 amps of current for 120 minutes at a minimum voltage of 10.2 volts.

Keeping the voltage at maximum (12.6 volts) you get 12.6v x 25amps x 2hrs (120 minutes) = 630 watts. The battery can give out a total of 630 watts of power.

 

Now the bulbs are connected in parallel. One bulb uses 60 watts of power in one hour so 60 x 48 hours= 2880 watts. so for two bulbs 2880 x 2 = 5760 watts.

 

So input is 630 watts and output is 5760 watts......

 

It looked like from the video I saw that it has a flywheel in it, so yes, its working off of momentum, but that won't help, because you use the juice up front getting the flywheel to go at all. Once it's going, you could unhook the battery, but friction will eventually slow it down. If it has "capacitors" in it, you need to know that capacitors are simply batteries, so you'd just be transfering the electric power from the batteries to the capacitor.

 

There is no Naked Lunch,

Buffy

 

It doesn't slow down and stop until you turn it off.

Yes it does have capacitors and I do know that capacitors are simply batteries. It has two sets of capacitors. One set (lets say set A) is used to fire up the flywheel every 120 degree turn. While another (set :eek: is used to store power for lighting the bulbs (or for use with the load).

 

I did an analysis (thanks to a physics professor at my university who got me access to instruments). Both sets of capacitors are fully discharged before starting the analysis.

 

The analysis shows the capacitors (set A) charge up during the "charge phase" before the motor starts, then they totally discharge within a 3 degree turn of the flywheel, then they charge up within the next 10 degrees. During the next 167 degrees the other set (set :phones: charges up. This is repeated for next 180 degrees.

 

Also note that although I use their plans and main schematic I have made some changes to both the design of the rotor and I have also somewhat changed the wiring.

 

I hope this gives you some idea of whats going on.

 

Also let me state that if someone purchases this and is unable to produce desired results I cannot be held responsible. Hmm.. maybe I should put a disclaimer in my sig.

[Janus]

I wasn't intending on calculating this but...........

 

Its a car battery having an RRC of 120 meaning it can give out 25 amps of current for 120 minutes at a minimum voltage of 10.2 volts.

Keeping the voltage at maximum (12.6 volts) you get 12.6v x 25amps x 2hrs (120 minutes) = 630 watts. The battery can give out a total of 630 watts of power.

Wrong. you get 630 Watt-hours. Watts are a measure of power or the rate of energy usage. Watt-hours are a measure of energy.( one watt-second is equal to 1 joule, so a watt-hour is equal to 3600 joules)

Also, what the Reserve Capacity Rating (RCR) means is that that the battery can produce the rated amperage for the rated time before its voltage drops below the minumum working voltage. In this case, under a 25 amp load, 120 mins will pass before the output voltage drops to 10.2 volts. So the actual energy stored in the battery is more than that calculated by this rating. If the load is not voltage sensitive (will still operate at less than 10.2v), it can still draw on this remaining energy.

 

Now the bulbs are connected in parallel. One bulb uses 60 watts of power in one hour so 60 x 48 hours= 2880 watts. so for two bulbs 2880 x 2 = 5760 watts.

No, for one thing, you are confusing power and energy again, the other is that your 240v 60w bulb only uses 60 watts if it is being supplied 240v. at 12v it only uses .15w, .3w for two in parallel. .3w x 48hrs = 14.4 watt-hours.

 

So in 48 hrs, you have only used 14.4 watt-hrs of the 630 watt-hours of reserve capacity.

 

Now in practice, your results may vary. One reason for this is that the amperage used by the bulb at 12v compared to 240v is not directly porportional. As the voltage increases, the element heats more, and with this, its resistance changes. Therefore it will have a different resistance at 240v than 12v and this effects the amperage being drawn.

[kalesh]

Wrong. you get 630 Watt-hours. Watts are a measure of power or the rate of energy usage. Watt-hours are a measure of energy.( one watt-second is equal to 1 joule, so a watt-hour is equal to 3600 joules)

 

You are correct but if you continue the units cancel out.

Lets see .... 630 watt-hours = 3600 x 630 = 2,268,000 joules or 2,268 kilo-joules.

 

Also, what the Reserve Capacity Rating (RCR) means is that that the battery can produce the rated amperage for the rated time before its voltage drops below the minumum working voltage. In this case, under a 25 amp load, 120 mins will pass before the output voltage drops to 10.2 volts. So the actual energy stored in the battery is more than that calculated by this rating. If the load is not voltage sensitive (will still operate at less than 10.2v), it can still draw on this remaining energy.

 

Correct again but battery reads 11.3 volts after 48 hours so I guess it doesn't use up all of that 630 watthours or 2,268 kilo joules.

 

No, for one thing, you are confusing power and energy again, the other is that your 240v 60w bulb only uses 60 watts if it is being supplied 240v. at 12v it only uses .15w, .3w for two in parallel. .3w x 48hrs = 14.4 watt-hours.

 

So in 48 hrs, you have only used 14.4 watt-hrs of the 630 watt-hours of reserve capacity.

 

I get what you are trying to say. But where did you get the idea that the bulbs are connected to 12 volts? If I wanted to do that I would use 12 volt bulbs.

Voltage across the output terminals from the "Engine" fluctuate between 238 volts and 243 volts depending on whether the capicators are being charged or not. So I guess it uses approx 60 watts/watt-hours every hour 120 for two so its still 5760 watt-hours for 48 hours....

[Jay-qu]

Whichever way you decide to put it, you get no free energy, you are just storing then transfering and storing again - but each time you will loose a little in friction etc.

 

Perpetual motion machines are forbiden by thermodynamics. If one existed (which it cant!) then the inventor would be very rich and known to all.

[kalesh]

Whichever way you decide to put it, you get no free energy, you are just storing then transfering and storing again - but each time you will loose a little in friction etc.

 

Perpetual motion machines are forbiden by thermodynamics. If one existed (which it cant!) then the inventor would be very rich and known to all.

I get what you are trying to say.

But the fact remains that input is at 630 watt-hours maximum and output is at at 5760 watt-hours.

 

To prevent all of you scracthing your head over this all night let me state that the same physics proffessor who got me access to the instruments also scracthed his head over this or a week and also did all tests he could think of (He kept the machine in the lab for that week). At the end of the week all he had to say was "Well it works but I don't know how the hell it works".

 

If it was something like putting energy in and transsferring it out I think that being a physics proffessor he would have caught it in the first place let alone spend one week doing all imaginable tests on it. And I would be asking for my money back instead of spending more money getting parts custom made to increase power output.

[Boerseun]

Consider a planet. You might say that it's a perpetual motion machine 'cause it's been spinning non-stop for billions of years. But only because it's not doing any useful work. The moment you extract any energy at all from any kind of machine in order to make it at all usefull, you're taking energy out of the system, the machine will run down and you'll have to add fuel.

 

If the Earth's rotation was only used to light up a single 60W light bulb, it, too, will eventually run down.

[Jay-qu]

Well then, I cant say much for that physics proffessor! Because he could have ran with that machine and made himself a millionaire.

 

Kalesh if your not shamelessly promoting that link.. then I dont know why you are posting about physical impossibilities!