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

:
In an effort to prevent automatic submissions, we require that you enter both of the words displayed into the text field underneath.
Smilies

View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is OFF
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review

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

I Got It and just found this site to post it. . . . Use Bouyancy and Gravity. Similar to Float Belt model. This is only perpetual motion model that has energy present at start (in form or molecules in motion in the water, and I count the locations of all the buoyant objects). But change a few things. The shape of the buoyant objects need to be a hybrid of L or V shaped. Therefore, as one comes into the water, the next one is laying inside of the one before it, keeping up a barrier to keep the water on its side. Using the air bubbles that come in with the objects. The flow then needs to go diagonal, not straight up. This increases our ratio of objects in the water to out. Alleviate the pressure, of piling up water molecules in front of the rising buoyant objects, by placing tunnel like exits for extra water to go into. This is where the fact that water molecules are always in motion comes to our advantage...we won't need to make the current go that way, it will just happen, and will create its own flow (because water will move away where molecules were at its thickest. Make sure design is crafty enough to not bottle neck: aka: where the water from these smaller tunnels reenter matters. After the objects have gotten to the top of their diagonal run, them and the air bubble rise out of the water, and then drop (all this is pipe-like), then reentering at the bottom to go back across, completing the X shaped route of the objects and the air current. Ingredients will matter too, almost as much as the contour of the walls which will affect the water current. *it may need a crank start since design will be made for objects and currents to be moving at their most efficient speed. *******Perpetual motion, By Joshua Vernon (if someone quotes thermodynamics, consider that extra heat energy can be moved to a second stage of the machine that uses that). The reason im posting instead of patenting, is because blue prints are not accepted by patent office in this category, only working models and I have no funding for building it. Thanks for reading, and hopefully, you make it happen. GL. HF. The currents + buoyant objects + falling objects ...made capable because moleucules move, we just needed to find the way to accelerate them....btw:doing so by designing a tank with pipes that send buoyant objects thru water with air bubbles and then reinsert them into water using a technique that minimizes resistance and keeps water on its side.....excess water that drops will get swept back in. by x shaped route, I mean objects, air, and most of water current go diagonal and up, then air and objects exit water and drop, then reenter a water pipe and go other diagonal direction and up, then exits and drops, then reenters for repeats.

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

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'!

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

Oreocannon wrote:i cant make you believe....but i do...at 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.

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

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 do...at least in 98% perpetual motion

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

Oreocannon wrote:Alexrubic its really hard to believe you read all the 40 books posted plus rkobilans book.
I highly doubt you didnt find anything better then oil inside. From all the patents and blueprints...you are claiming all the scientists like tesla in rkobilans book were all false?
i think those high efficiency motors are a lot better then oil, but seriously...you read all 40 books?
well what can i say, if you didnt find anything good, i cant say i believe you.....but its for you.
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.

Are you being serious? I find it amusing that you are championing the cause without reading the associated material.
Thanks for the smile.

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

The57ironman wrote:.
you are bordering on ridiculous....

2h. Agenda posting: Do not use the site to promote an agenda. This often involves the starting of forum threads or making posts which appear to be legitimate in nature but which are aimed at surreptitiously promoting some political view, religious belief or to attack or criticise other members, beliefs or views in an underhand manner which detracts from unbiased and fair discussion.

3b. Harassment: Do not harrass, defame, threaten, bully or victimise other members, this includes but is not limited to sending harassing private messages or harassing members via posts, threads or profile comments.

3d. Trolling: Trolling is strictly disallowed. We define a 'troll' as someone who's purpose on the site is to create as much disruption as possible, offend as many people as possible or otherwise cause disruption intentionally for personal amusement. Behaviour that can be defined as "trolling" generally involves the posting of knowingly false or offensive comments or views designed to provoke, bait and annoy other members.

3e. Flamebaiting: Do not intentionally instigate "flame wars" or bait others in to making personal attacks.

3f. Abusive behaviour: Do not be rude, insulting, offensive, snide, obnoxious or abusive towards other members.

correct me if i'm wrong...

.......see ya'.....

.

The57ironman : I have been following pacman's threads in here, and if I try to see things from his point of view, I think I know why he talk about the moderators in here as he does, not judging anyone, just trying to see all view points here.

A few of the links pacman posted was wrong, he make a mistake but can't edit the post to correct it (he told me at his website) but don't dismiss what he is saying because a site turn out to be a scam, because as others in here have pointed out, there are real sites with real magnet engines too.

I noticed that one of the first post at one of pacman's topics was from a moderator that only posted a picture, clearly just to provoke or troll from reading the site rules in here, he didn't even write anything at all in that post, and I do not believe that it is only pacman that begin to question the motives of moderators when they engage them self in these kind of things, because it is obvious other members copy and do the same.

I believe pacman is trying to have a serious debate in here and spend a lot of time trying to get his message out with sites like youtube deleting his films and other things, so it must be frustrating to keep be called names, keep having these "picture" posts only and just see how the moderators in here award them by keep banning pacman and let everyone else continue the insults.

I don't realy try to have an opinion here, just put my self in pacman's shoes.

Peace. Love & Freedom

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

Alexrubic its really hard to believe you read all the 40 books posted plus rkobilans book.
I highly doubt you didnt find anything better then oil inside. From all the patents and blueprints...you are claiming all the scientists like tesla in rkobilans book were all false?
i think those high efficiency motors are a lot better then oil, but seriously...you read all 40 books?
well what can i say, if you didnt find anything good, i cant say i believe you.....but its for you.
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.

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

Here is your free Energy Generator without Perpetual Motion. Note 1: Free means collecting / producing energy by means other than from an electrical grid in this post. Note 2: The cost to create this generator is under \$3.00 US May not be Free but pretty damn close to it. This unit can be used to slow charge a 12 volt battery or more can be linked to generate more voltage for charging banks of batteries.

I also agree with Pacman's comments regarding what is taking place around this Earth. What is unfortunate is that the masses are entranced by the Hollywood wand of deception instead of using their minds to create the most needed changes to support Earths growing community. Instead of culling you and me.

What I see taking place here is we are at a round table discussing what is at the center of the table. The Issue. I use a Golf Ball sitting on a Tee reversed with base on the table to represent that Issue. As we sit looking at this golf ball that is now the issue we see there are little half holes all around the ball. Those represent our different points of view. Still the Same Issue, just seen with a different point of view. Get up and look at the other points of view before you make your assessment to better understand where the others are coming from rather than pointing out their ignorances.

What is interesting is that as we are looking at the golf ball and reading each others point of views, we (All of us) do not see that one of the half holes is colored in black. That is the correct point of view that we collectively haven't seen. Even as we sit here reading this post we cannot fathom the simplicity that Tesla technology creates energy out of thin air. Westinghouse couldn't meter it so Mankind got screwed.

My Point !!!!
You say tomaeto I say tomahto, He says tomatillo

It is all the same as we are all correct in our points of view. However, Can our point of view be changed to see and understand others points of view?

It is time to stop the quibbling over nit noid perceptions and progress this into a thread that can be used change this world.

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

@oreo: The written information linked, thus far, doesn't appear to be all that pertinent and the videos, while interesting, are not, in themselves, overwhelming evidence. Unless someone can post a 100 year real-time video of one of these devices running, then they do not prove perpetual motion or free energy. A device that appears to be running smoothly for a few seconds or minutes of airtime can easily be manipulated (I'm not saying they are, I'm just saying they don't constitute indesputable proof) or may be indicative that they run well that long but might fizzle out beyond the duration of the video.

One of the videos showed the construction of a permanent magnet rotor within a permanent magnet stator that was static until powered up by a small fan motor. There was no verifiable indication given that this would continue to run without the constant input of the fan motor, that there was any greater speed, torque or power coming from the rotor other than was supplied by the fan motor and the rotor did stop once the fan motor was turned off.

If you have just one good written source of information, then by all means post a link to it here and I will look at it. Wading through all the posts on this and other associated threads to find one good source is not my idea of a productive use of my time. I've read too many promised revelations about perpetual motors and free energy only to find they were talking about high efficiency (but not over-unity) conventional DC electric motors!

Top