Permenent magnetic motors...

Mark Eatherton

<a href="http://www.rexresearch.com/minato/minato.htm">http://www.rexresearch.com/minato/minato.htm</a>



If you Google Magnet Motors, there is a LOT of information out there on these new, up and coming devices.



I was introduced to the concept while touring the heating systems at Breitenbush, a magnificent natural marvel in and of itself. More on that later.





Comments on the magnets?



ME

Tim McElwain

Very interesting

a lot of reading to look over. I will comment after I finish reading all of it.



My son has a good friend who lives in Japan and married a Japanese girl. I will have to see if he knows of this as he is very involved in electronics in Japan.

TonyS

I remember an australian friend of mine

telling me about someone in Australia who built a machine that makes more electric than it consumes. Here is the info http://www.heyokamagazine.com/HEYOKA.13.Lutech.htm



Even if its true, "they" will buy you out or have you killed. Until we can rid the world of the "money handlers" we will never see this stuff.

TonyS

Here is the website

for the chinese that paid the Australians 30000000 for their intellectual rights.

http://www.evergreenltd.com.hk/index.html

Mike Kusiak_2

Sorry, but I dont buy it....

Anyone who claims an input-output efficiency of 330% is violating the laws of physics. You cannot create more energy than you put in to a device. Otherwise perpetual motion would be easily attainable. So far no one has even attained a break even efficiency of 100%, which would be equivalent to perpetual motion.



Conspiracy theories aside, this stuff falls into the same category as the 1000 MPG carburetors that the oil companies have suppressed for years.....

Mark Eatherton

Skepticism is always healthy...

But it appears that there are numerous working models on the open market.



I agree however, that IF they have figured out a way to produce more energy than they are consuming, why isn't it on the main front of all energy producing/consumers?



Too good to be true?



ME

Tim McElwain

Interesting that many years ago

when transformers were first invented skeptics said it would not work. The principle of induction was thought to be 1 to 1 we of course know today we can step up voltage or step down, we can put two transformers in series and have them be out of phase.



It sounds from the information that he is simply ( not really) reproducing magnetic fields and by doing so with small amounts of power applied going beyond the individual capability of each magnet. With precise positioning at the edge of each magnetic field it sounds to me that this may be possible. It has obviously impressed someone to make an investment.



Let us not always think inside the box.

Mike Kusiak_2

Too Good to be true?

That's the problem with all of these devices. They all claim to put out more energy than they take in. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed from one form to another. Any invention which proposes to generate more useful energy than it takes in violates this fundamental law, a basic principle which has never been disproven.





What if I came to you and said that I had invented a remarkable new boiler with an efficiency greater than 100%. I claimed that for every 100,000 BTU of gas that it burned, it generated 330,000 BTU of useful heat to the load. Wouldn't you be sceptical? Well, that's exactly what these folks are claiming, that they can actually get more useful energy out of their inventions than they put in. Regardless of how they claim to do it, whether with magnets, falling weights, or cryogenic condensing coils, they still claim to be able to get something for nothing, a feat that has never been accomplished.





None of these inventions has ever been independently confirmed to actually accomplish what they say they will do. It is easy to fake a demonstration in ones own lab, or incorrectly make measurements which seem to prove the desired results. Only by independently reproducing the device and testing it by impartial observers can any of these claims be verified. Remember Cold Fusion? Seemed like a amazing breakthrough until no one else could reliably reproduce the results.





Because perpetual motion has gotten a bad name as quack science, inventors now call their creations " over unity devices" or "energy amplifiers" which seem somewhat more plausible to prospective investors. But it really still comes down to the fact that you can't  violate the fundamental laws of nature.





Here are some links to sites describing the history of perpetual motion machines and their more modern reincarnations.





http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html





http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm





http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Electromagnetic#Commercial





http://commons.bcit.ca/physics/rjw/pmm/text/history.htm

Mark Eatherton

Ah yes, but....

There in fact ARE devices that move more energy than they consume, to the tune of 3 to 5 times as much. They are called heat pumps :-)



But to be sure, they don't create the energy, they only MOVE the energy.



Point well taken.



As always, thanks Mike.



ME

Gordy

All the things that were thought to be true.

Through out the history of human existance, that have been proven to be false.



Mans biggest threshhold is not believing in the impossible to be possible.



How can one think outside the box, if they never let themselves out??



50 or less years from now think what that generation may be wondering what we were thinking in theories of science, and physics what we believed to be set in stone.



No one ever changed much of anything significant in this world saying it can't be done.





Gordy