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

Posts: 507
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:35 pm

PostMon Oct 08, 2012 8:56 pm » by Oreocannon

ive seen enough blueprints to believe, sadly i dont have a degree in physics.
What i want is for those books to be seen by more people.
I havent seen one guy to debunk the blueprints with anything other then screaming second law of thermodynamics.
I would believe the sceptics if they pick a blueprint and say exactly where the mistake is.
But its not about me, i shared books, i cant make you believe....but i least in 98% perpetual motion

Posts: 2313
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 11:34 pm

PostMon Oct 08, 2012 10:08 pm » by Cia212

Oreocannon wrote:i cant make you believe....but i least in 98% perpetual motion

What is it you mean by 98% perpetual motion? I have to ask because the definition of "perpetual" keeps changing in this thread.

User avatar
Posts: 909
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 2:06 pm

PostTue Oct 09, 2012 3:42 pm » by Alexrubic

Oreocannon wrote:Alexrubic its really hard to believe you read all the 40 books posted plus rkobilans book.

Where did I say I had read ALL 40 books? I said, of the links to information so far posted that I have read, none have really thrown any accurate, factual light on the topic. They have either been pseudo-scientific gobbledegook, about conventional motors and generators using permanent magnets (neither perpetual, over-unity or free energy) or just plain wrong!

Oreocannon wrote:i havent checked the books yet but i have high hopes.
im not a scientists, so i cant start proving to you, i think you can see for yourself enough.

It's a bit rich for someone who has not read ANY of the books he has posted as proof of his position to then question someone else about how many they have read!

It is obvious you are not a scientist - it is obvious that many of the PM/FE proponents posting to this thread are not scientists either - or have any grasp of even the most basic principles! So you are right, I have seen for myself and so far I am left wanting...and waiting!

Incidentally, the solid state device in the video posted a little while back does not pluck electricity from 'thin air'. The parts and the final circuit is nothing more than a very simple transducer/amplifier and bridge recification/smoothing circuit. I suspect what it is picking up is the background EM radiation produced by the mains wiring and elecrical appliances in the immediate environment. Since the gadget and it's antenna are static - and you can only induce a current in a conducter if it moves in a magnetc field or if the magnetic field is moving through the static conductor - then the EM fields it is picking up must be in motion. Mains electricity is AC and any electromagnetic fields they produce are in constant flux (growing and collapsing/changing polarity at 60 cycles per second - US mains electricity frequency). This is what that antenna is picking up, converting into a tiny AC current, which is being collected by the capacitors on the antenna side of the circuit, passing through the bridge rectifier (the four connected diodes in the circuit) then being smoothed into a DC current via the capacitors on the outgoing side of the bridge rectifier.

The fact that it is little more than 2 volts at probably a few microamps is hardly world-changing: so you might recharge your mobile phone battery if you kept it connected to this gadget for long enough - big deal! If 'free energy' is going to change the world and the way we live to any meaningful and practical degree, we need something that's going to produce hundreds of volts at hundreds of amps.

This is not free energy because someone is paying for the electricity that is running the appliances that are producing the EM fields this device is picking up. Even if it is someone else's electricty, you may be getting it for free but only because it is 'theft of someone else's paid-for service'!


  • Related topics
    Last post
Visit on Facebook