(short video) Perpetual Motion Machines

[Farmhand]

Now someone still has to explain why a Water Level works as it does.
I know, when there is Air in the Tube, the levels dont match, it may has to do with the Densitiy.
But when you would have 2 Weights like you has at the Video above, Left a big one and right a smaller one, where the axis is at bottom, the Balance wouldnt be equal.
May the mass centre is moving at Fluid?

Yes your right Joit, I think the difference in level there could be explained by
the different density and to a much lesser degree the air is compressible as well, not
that that would play a big part in a small tube of water. Surface tension and
some other factors can play a part. But if used carefully a water level can be
used to build a very respectably level building. I use water levels a lot
because they are unbreakable and quite accurate over a fairly large span.

Good for water works like roofing drains and building sheds too, a laser level is
an overkill for a goat shack or paddock shed.

Cheers

[veproject1]

Hi all, didn't have too much time to investigate, site looks "real"
Visual Education Project
A compilation of old concepts built into working models - demonstrated:
Perpetual motion machines - YouTube

Ash

Hi Ash,
Why did you say my site looks real. It could be otherwise or I do not understand something?

Regards

[Joit]

Hi veproject.

'Real' as in they work like a viewer suppose they do,
not with hidden Pumps or any other Fakes and not without any Notes why it at last dont work or what is modified.
There are enough Guys out allready what works in that Way like Magniwork and what are only out the big $ with her Scam.

[Slider2732]

veproject1 !
Who better to ask about the actual builds

Can you lay to rest peoples thoughts and explain how those devices were created ?
Some techniques could be useful, regardless of what people would call fakery, if wishing to create desktop curios.

[veproject1]

veproject1 !
Who better to ask about the actual builds

Can you lay to rest peoples thoughts and explain how those devices were created ?
Some techniques could be useful, regardless of what people would call fakery, if wishing to create desktop curios.

Dear Slider2732,
Thanks for your post.
When I’ve published my video I didn’t have the aim to trick people and I’ve never expected such a heated discussion about obvious things: whether perpetual motion devices are possible or not. I just had in mind to show models that I use at my lectures of Impossibility of Perpetual motion.
As you can see from my website at my lectures/presentations at Schools and Universities I use more than 60 different models that I designed to demonstrate basic mechanical principles.

[Farmhand]

Dear Slider2732,
Thanks for your post.
When I’ve published my video I didn’t have the aim to trick people and I’ve never expected such a heated discussion about obvious things: whether perpetual motion devices are possible or not. I just had in mind to show models that I use at my lectures of Impossibility of Perpetual motion.
As you can see from my website at my lectures/presentations at Schools and Universities I use more than 60 different models that I designed to demonstrate basic mechanical principles.

Hi veproject1, I understand the purpose of the video. Right from the start.
And since you are not trying to trick anyone. Is there a pump in the self filling
flask ? And do the other ones rely on electric motors or inertia devices to
keep running ?

Your video description.
"Thanks for seeing my models and for your comments. Yes, I did all these
machines workable. Not to trick but to inspire...
Please come again and visit my Charity at www.veproject1.org"

And this from the video
" Perpetual motion machines are they impossible ? or..... The best way to be
sure to try to build one"

It's ok to speak in questions when teaching a class. But to be helpful, a public
video should have an explanation if the contents are not obvious and
discernible to the average person.

So will you say publicly that all the devices are powered by stored energy or
the energy you impart to the devices when you spin them ?

Cheers

[veproject1]

Hello, veproject1 is back with new model of PMM: Perpetual Motion Machine. Magnetism & Gravity. - YouTube

[blackchisel97]

Hello, veproject1 is back with new model of PMM: Perpetual Motion Machine. Magnetism & Gravity. - YouTube

Now, seriously, you got me puzzled
I really enjoyed watching this video.

Thanks
Vtech

[BooneyLiving]

I saw that video too. It's fascinating but since he included the word "hypothetical" in the title, I assumed that these models had a bit of hidden help.

Sure get's the mind thinking though!

[wyndbag]

[QUOTE=Joit;169243]Now someone still has to explain why a Water Level works as it does.
I know, when there is Air in the Tube, the levels dont match, it may has to do with the Densitiy.
But when you would have 2 Weights like you has at the Video above, Left a big one and right a smaller one, where the axis is at bottom, the Balance wouldnt be equal.
May the mass centre is moving at Fluid?[/QUOTE

I think the fluid in the flask has two different weights. So when the demo guy
pours it in, he covers the lighter fluid with the heavier and the heavier pushes the lighter out the top. So it is not a siphon based effect but more of a momentum effect. Eventually it will quit working... of course ... but for filming purposes it is pretty impressive.


Or i could have it wrong......

[lamare]

Now someone still has to explain why a Water Level works as it does.
I know, when there is Air in the Tube, the levels dont match, it may has to do with the Densitiy.
But when you would have 2 Weights like you has at the Video above, Left a big one and right a smaller one, where the axis is at bottom, the Balance wouldnt be equal.
May the mass centre is moving at Fluid?

I think the fluid in the flask has two different weights. So when the demo guy
pours it in, he covers the lighter fluid with the heavier and the heavier pushes the lighter out the top. So it is not a siphon based effect but more of a momentum effect. Eventually it will quit working... of course ... but for filming purposes it is pretty impressive.


Or i could have it wrong......

If that were the case, then the heavier fluid would immediately "crawl" underneath the lighter fluid and the party would be over very fast.

Besides, in the vid he pours a single fluid into an empty bottle....

[rickoff]

Hi, folks. I guess I missed this thread when Ash first posted it. I've always been fascinated with such machines, or rather the possibility that a working machine could be built. Probably the greatest number of such concepts center around the overbalanced wheel effect. I've never seen one that actually worked to sustain revolutions, or to increase speed of those revolutions, but I won't go so far as to say that it cannot be done.

I was looking through some pictures drawn as magazine covers, by Norman Rockwell, a few days ago, and came across one that he did for the cover of the October 1920 issue of Popular Science magazine. It features an inventor standing in his workshop and holding a device which is obviously a perpetual motion design, and an interesting one at that since it utilizes not only an overbalance mechanism, but also the hammering effect of sliding weights. At the top of the cover, we see the words, "Perpetual Motion? See page 26."



If you go to this link, you will see page 26 of that magazine issue, and see an artist's sketch of the same sort of device built to be about 35 feet tall, and the interconnections are more easily understood. We can see in the illustration on page 26 that the sliding weight is connected to a cable which pulls one of the overbalance ball weights to a fully upright position at the 12 o'clock position of the wheel. That's actually quite ingenious, as all other such designs I have seen have to wait until the overbalance spoke has moved well past the 12 o'clock position before it is capable of doing useful work. Still, though, this design is said not to work and was invented by a man named James Ferguson, who was a fellow of the Royal Society. Ferguson said of the device, "Whoever makes it will find it to be only a mere balance."

On pages 27 through 29 there are several other sketches of interesting old device designs. I love looking through old technical magazines and books and rediscovering these concepts. There's probably no perpetual motion design one could come up with that hasn't been built, or at least envisioned, in the past, and there would be almost endless possible variations of the overbalance wheel. With that in mind, is it really all that far fetched to think that at least one such design may actually have worked? Not in the sense of being a true perpetual motion machine, of course, as that would be a virtual impossibility, but to at least revolve continuously for an extended period of time while being capable of doing some kind of useful work. Johann Bessler is said to have accomplished exactly that in 1712, with a wheel that was officially tested, and which ran for 54 days. I'd say that any inventor would be overjoyed to achieve similar results. How about you folks?

[Peter Lindemann]

Great Demonstration!

Hello, veproject1 is back with new model of PMM: Perpetual Motion Machine. Magnetism & Gravity. - YouTube

Dear Veproject1,

I have watched this demonstration on YouTube for over a year, and even tried to run some basic experiments to verify it. I quickly learned that like all physical phenomena, the "window of opportunity" for this effect is quite narrow.

My offer to you is this: if you have a real working model of this phenomena that propels the wheel to turn using only magnetism and gravity, as the demonstration supposedly shows, I will pay for you to bring it to our Conference this June and show it to our attendees. I'm sure there would be a great deal of interest in knowing exactly how to duplicate it.

Sincerely, Peter

[Farmhand]

At 57 seconds into the video I can hear what sounds like a short leak of
compressed air.

Cheers

[boguslaw]

As I can understand you fascination of such devices they are merely a simple toys and even scaled up would provide not so much excess powere compared to complication of design. Do not forget also that every mechanical device will fail soon or later and the more complicated tend to fail ealier...

One last comment - I'm a bit jealous about all your knowledge and technical abilities to make mechanical devices. If I could have them i would construct perpetual motion toy during next weekend and show you here with details...