PERPETUAL MOTION IS A FACT - So why don't you know?

Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm » by **Oreocannon**

i see your post perfectly. Energy is not made in the universe right? It is simply changed from one from into another right?
Just because of that law doesnt mean that a magnet motor that s 99% sufficient and works for 10 years is not free energy.
It might be 99% free energy, but its a lot better then everything we have right now.
COAL? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

oh and let me tell you something, i consider solar panels free energy devices, because the sun aint going away soon.

Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:22 pm » by **Oreocannon**

so just because of the stupid law of energy only being able to change forms you are ready to say all magnet motors presented dont do shit?! yea its a 99% free energy device, not good enough to be looked at? just swept away as good for nothing?
And you are the same guy that gave me so much fluoride info to use when i free peoples minds.
how can this be?

Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:45 pm » by **pacmanpacks**

Oreocannon : It is pretty frustrating to continue getting the same questions from people who might or might not even care what so ever about the subject at hand but just want to say something, so I am glad that it SOUND like you try to back me / what I am saying up . . .

But seriously dude:

Oreocannon wrote:Just because of that law doesnt mean that a magnet motor that s 99% sufficient and works for 10 years is not free energy.

You really got my attention with that sentence and was looking forward to read more, not that the motor stop working after 10 years but e.g. slow down and have to be started up again -but then what happens??? THIS:

Oreocannon wrote:It might be 99% free energy

WHAT? This is not the first time you do stunts like these, what are you up to? Or even worse? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

It is of course 100% free energy, since it is generated "out of thin air".

Bottom line: efficiency do NOT have ANYTHING WHAT SO EVER to do with the energy that DOES get generated - I'm shocked if you were serious about your post to be honest, please say it was just for fun or something comforting.

Oreocannon wrote:yea its a 99% free energy device, not good enough to be looked at?

Nope - it actually looks as if you were serious!?! :-O wtf. . .

Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:50 pm » by **Oreocannon**

relax pacman. the reason i am saying it might be 99% is because i dont know if the magnets used will get demagnetized, or the device will corrode/wood will break after 100 years. Frankly i dont know, i dont care.
I mean all machines have to have parts repaired/oiled at some point right?
So 100 or 99% i dont care either way its still free energy to me.
I just dont know if the magnets ever run out of juice, if they dont great! if they do still not a problem as i heart here are ways to recharge them back, and of course the output the free energy device produces is far more then required to recharge a magnet.

Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:52 pm » by **Oreocannon**

what im trying to say is the guy is claiming free energy isnt real just because the device may need some repair after 200 years.
Oh even if its so, does that mean we should dumb the whole technology even though its 2000% times better then fucking OIL?

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:06 pm » by **Mhillebregt**

This is the definition of the word perpetual.

per·pet·u·al (pr-pch-l)
adj.
1. Lasting for eternity.
2. Continuing or lasting for an indefinitely long time.

---------------------------------------------------------------

mo·tion (mshn)
n.
1. The act or process of changing position or place.
a. A mechanical device or piece of machinery that moves or causes motion; a mechanism.
b. The movement or action of such a device.
---------------------------------------------------------------
perpetual motion
n
1. Also called perpetual motion of the first kind motion of a hypothetical mechanism that continues indefinitely without any external source of energy. It is impossible in practice because of friction
2. Also called perpetual motion of the second kind motion of a hypothetical mechanism that derives its energy from a source at a lower temperature. It is impossible in practice because of the second law of thermodynamics.

******************************************************

Now you can see the argument on both sides. It contradicts itself, so stop fighting over this.

About free energy: if u can make a device with materials straight out of nature ( that would be almost everything ) i call it free. U can get wood out of nature (duh)... u can get natural magnets out of nature...
and the motion is perpetual...but if u want to patent it, u cannot say lawfully that it's perpetual motion.
The definition is changed, just like the law of the land. Words don't mean in court what it means in our daily life.

And i think everybody cares about how they get mislead by tptb for not letting this out.
But ignorance is bliss... some people only care if it hits them directly in their lifestyle.

There is a lot of technology and knowledge about everything that the kept, like anti-gravity, cures.. and so on. If we could just look beyond that and find out where it originates and attack that part, all those inventions and knowledge will come out bigtime...

Be well guys

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:13 pm » by **pacmanpacks**

Oreocannon wrote:relax pacman. the reason i am saying it might be 99% is because i dont know if the magnets used will get demagnetized, or the device will corrode/wood will break after 100 years. Frankly i dont know, i dont care.
I mean all machines have to have parts repaired/oiled at some point right?
So 100 or 99% i dont care either way its still free energy to me.
I just dont know if the magnets ever run out of juice, if they dont great! if they do still not a problem as i heart here are ways to recharge them back, and of course the output the free energy device produces is far more then required to recharge a magnet.

Ok ok, you are free to do and say what ever you want - And I am free to say it feels like trolling to me, but I don't think you are and I don't want you to be.

I am just running circles with people in here, getting no where, no one get what I am trying to say, not even when I at first think they do - Maybe it is because I do not have English as my main language, who knows? Maybe I am just stupid since we are getting absolutely NO where !!!

If I try to rephrase what you write, it would be the same as me drinking 10% of a soda, and then say only 90% of the taste is left - It just doesn't make any sense, and I am getting too tired and too old for all these "misunderstandings" all the time.

Oreocannon wrote:what im trying to say is the guy is claiming free energy isnt real just because the device may need some repair after 200 years.
Oh even if its so, does that mean we should dumb the whole technology even though its 2000% times better then fucking OIL?

YES, THANK YOU - THAT was GREAT !!! NOW we are back on track here, NOW we understand eachother again.

The current definition of "perpetual" would be EXACTLY the same as "science" went out and said: It is IMPOSSIBLE to build a house, it can NOT be done - Why? Because it might not last - It could collapse / it could stop working - So: SIT DOWN, SHUT UP, DO NOT MOVE because EVERYTHING is just IMPOSSIBLE / it COULD go wrong !!!

Mhillebregt wrote:This is the definition of the word perpetual.

per·pet·u·al (pr-pch-l)
adj.
1. Lasting for eternity.
2. Continuing or lasting for an indefinitely long time.

OMFG - Yes, lets just start ALL over again . . .

So: "lasting for eternity" or "indefintely" - And? WHAT !?!?!? Just like love, right? "Eternity" together??? Naaaa, so the conclution:

You will NEVER get married EVER according to this here, you're well aware, right?

Why? Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to get married and live together for "eternity" anyway, right? So it is a scam, it is not working, no one can get married, everyone who think they are married now are living on a lie ALL because "science" say so:

INDEFINITELY ..... lol, give me a break.

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:17 pm » by **Oreocannon**

their stupid law.....might make it patent is an a non perpetual, but we all know its pretty much perpetual.
What do you expect? we have done all we need. We have released books and links/videos on free energy.
A lot of people have readed. perhaps some of us will build one for themselves, because i doubt they would let me alive if i try to make it popular, besides i dont want to make money as im not the first to discover it...its stealing.

The important part is that we let people know, and now everyone can make one for themselves, thanks to all the blueprints.
btw my forum goed down.....and i still dont know why

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:42 pm » by **pacmanpacks**

Oreocannon wrote:their stupid law.....might make it patent is an a non perpetual, but we all know its pretty much perpetual.
What do you expect? we have done all we need. We have released books and links/videos on free energy.
A lot of people have readed. perhaps some of us will build one for themselves, because i doubt they would let me alive if i try to make it popular, besides i dont want to make money as im not the first to discover it...its stealing.

The important part is that we let people know, and now everyone can make one for themselves, thanks to all the blueprints.
btw my forum goed down.....and i still dont know why

SHUT UP YOU IDIOT, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ? YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW BY SAYING THAT, THE UN WANT YOU DEAD NOW !!!

Lol, sorry, not kidding, more like satire:

"perpetual motion in an isolated system would violate the first and/or second law of thermodynamics."

So: If you DO create perpetual motion YOU BREAK THE LAW but not only that: You are also an idiot for doing something that "everyone know mate" is IMPOSSIBLE !!! Earth if FLAT, and magnet motors are running on petrol - Anything else is just impossible, end of story from me today.

Oreocannon wrote:besides i dont want to make money as im not the first to discover it...its stealing

How can you steal something that no one can even get a patent on? (officially anyway, secret military patens are all over the world) IS IT A CRIME TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE BY LAW !?!?

NO: If you already did jail time for murdering someone who turned out to not be dead after all, YOU CAN KILL THAT PERSON WITHOUT GETTING IN TROUBLE !! Why? Because the "LAW" the "science" say that the person IS already dead AND the killer already did the jail time once - you can't get convicted for the same "murder" TWO times, right?

THIS IS A FACT TOO, LOOK IT UP - why? BECAUSE ALL OF THIS LAW-BS IS CONNECTED AT THE TOP !

Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:51 pm » by **Alexrubic**

pacmanpacks wrote:Alexrubic : ok, sorry for me laughing a bit over your george orwell doublethink approach to things - Its like you haven't made up your mind, figured out what to "believe" - I would like to provoke you to study your self, but all I did was to recognize that you are at least on the way - no harm done, move along.

I don't need you or any scientific authority to tell be what i should 'believe' - belief does not come into it. Belief is based on faith not fact. I am more interested in fact - which is what your thread title says. Obviously you were misleading us if you expect us to take things on faith and believe something is true without any facts to back it up.

pacmanpacks wrote:
It is you who are playing games with words and their definitions.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, WRONG: What I do is telling you what the official definitions SHOULD be if the REAL world and logic should kick in !!!

I know it is easy for you to just stick with what "science" say because you doesn't have a clue - you want to trust authorities and do what ever they say.

There you go again judging me without even knowing me! I don't accept, at face value, what anyone tells me - people like you or scientific auntorities. I can think and reason things out for myself thank you very much!

pacmanpacks wrote:My point is: WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR LIMIT? If I told you that now "science" say you can prevent cancer by jumping off a cliff WOULD YOU DO IT !?!?! It is science, they know best, right !?!?

I know what is best for me. So no, I wouldn't do that - it's ludicrous! As above, neither laymen nor scientific authorities are the sole arbiter of what I think is appropriate or factual.

pacmanpacks wrote:THINK, that is ALL I freaking ask of you before posting, thank you.

Again, you should take your own advice!

pacmanpacks wrote:Grow up, we do this over and over again in here because you do not READ what I write - You just THINK you know, when in fact you only brainstorm atm. come back with something better thank you.

Yet again, a pity you don't follow your own advice!

@oreocannon: Yes, permanent magnets do become demagnetised over time depending on the conditions in which they operate. Some deterioate at high temperatures, some can lose magnetism due to vibration, etcetera.