Free Energy - No Fuel Magnetic Motor

[Carole]

This is another example of what people are capable of doing. The "energy" companies have and will continure to kill to suppress these types of technologies.

Free Energy - No Fuel Magnetic Motor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvB3PiPBozU

[RideTheDirt]

I need more proof.

[jacross]

In this house we obey the laws of THERMODYNAMICS!

[noxagol]

In this house we obey the laws of THERMODYNAMICS!

I was about to say. There is no such thing as "free" energy. You can't make energy out of nothing. You can convert it from one form to another but you can't make it or break it.

[asgardshill]

Conservation of energy is not just a good idea. Its the law.

[moostraks]

Interesting...you have to love how the end of the video was very sceptical and imho dismissive. Why is it so difficult for people to think beyond convential means of power??Would love to know more about the how it is working...

[noxagol]

Interesting...you have to love how the end of the video was very sceptical and imho dismissive. Why is it so difficult for people to think beyond convential means of power??Would love to know more about the how it is working...

It's not. It defies the LAWS of physics. Not just theory, but law, which is proven 100% to be true. This machine is a fraud. You cannot get any more energy out of a given system then you put in. The best you can hope for is an equal return, which is impossible due to friction. If you got more energy out than you put in, then you could just have the machine run itself and generate infinite energy, and a perpetual motion device. Such a thing is just simply not possible!

[pcosmar]

Yet another one.
You don't/can't get something from nothing.

If someone wants to harness an untapped energy there is one available.
Harness and store lightning.
That could supply all our power needs, however none has been able as yet.
Tesla has some ideas, but it has yet to be done.
keep workin' on it.

[acptulsa]

Sail power is an obvious example of harnessing free energy that exists in nature. It would, no doubt, be a great thing to harness the earth's magnetic field. I am, however, skeptical that these people have done it.

[noxagol]

The Earth's magnetic field is really weak. It can't influence anything worthwhile. If it could, then it would be much harder to pick up ferrous objects and your computer would not work, nor would most electronic items.

[amy31416]

Science education in this country really needs some improvement.

[steve005]

i'm surprised to see so many negative replies, I mean I'm not a scientist, and i'm sure you're not either, so how could you say it dont/cant work?

[asgardshill]

i'm surprised to see so many negative replies, I mean I'm not a scientist, and i'm sure you're not either, so how could you say it dont/cant work?

I can say that it won't/can't work because there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine, which proponents of this gizmo claim that it is. Perpetual motion machines are an impossibility.

[acptulsa]

i'm surprised to see so many negative replies, I mean I'm not a scientist, and i'm sure you're not either, so how could you say it dont/cant work?

About amy31416 (and, I'm sure, some others on this forum) you'd be wrong. Besides, how much of a degree does someone have to have before you'll believe that they understand Newton's Laws? My sister has a PhD in physics and still listens to my views on the subject, but no, I have no degree in it, so feel free to assume I'm ignorant and waste your money investing in this scam.

A force has to act on an object at rest before it will motivate. That force has to come from a real source of energy. If these people cannot or will not positively identify this source of energy, or if the source of energy they name is clearly not sufficient to move the amount of mass in question, something is rotten in Denmark. Simple, really...

[noxagol]

i'm surprised to see so many negative replies, I mean I'm not a scientist, and i'm sure you're not either, so how could you say it dont/cant work?

Read an entry level physics book that covers Conservation of Energy.

[pcosmar]

i'm surprised to see so many negative replies, I mean I'm not a scientist, and i'm sure you're not either, so how could you say it dont/cant work?

OK, your right, I am not a "scientist" but I did get some Physical science education in school as well as basic chemistry.
I have spent over 30 years building machines, hot roding cars and fabricating everything from tools to vehicles.
I have a little practical knowledge of how much energy (horsepower) it takes to move an object at a given speed. I know several ways to apply power for varying purposes, and have built engines that run on several types of fuel.
I have hands on real world experience.
But no, I am not a scientist.

How come so many people that don't even understand how or why the car makes noise when they turn the key, are suddenly experts at applying energy or building vehicles?

[acptulsa]

How come so many people that don't even understand how or why the car makes noise when the turn the key, are suddenly experts at applying energy or building vehicles?

I suppose the same reason so many people who don't know how the Constitution's three branches check and balance each other are convinced they know who the best candidate is--and who's a kook...

[Acala]

Conservation of energy is not just a good idea. Its the law.

Hahahaha!

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

I'd like to know they define overunity.
Let's say this device outputs 5kW of power for every 1kW put in.
This may be true because of the magnets, which do "free" work until the magnets lose strength.

However, the laws of physics are not set in stone, they have changed before and could change again, and just because a potentially infinite and therefore "free" energy source isn't readily apparent (dark energy, Casimir effect/zero-point) doesn't mean it doesn't exist and these guys haven't tapped it.

Though I highly doubt it.

[amy31416]

About amy31416 (and, I'm sure, some others on this forum) you'd be wrong. Besides, how much of a degree does someone have to have before you'll believe that they understand Newton's Laws? My sister has a PhD in physics and still listens to my views on the subject, but no, I have no degree in it, so feel free to assume I'm ignorant and waste your money investing in this scam.

A force has to act on an object at rest before it will motivate. That force has to come from a real source of energy. If these people cannot or will not positively identify this source of energy, or if the source of energy they name is clearly not sufficient to move the amount of mass in question, something is rotten in Denmark. Simple, really...


I can say that it won't/can't work because there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine, which proponents of this gizmo claim that it is. Perpetual motion machines are an impossibility.


OK, your right, I am not a "scientist" but I did get some Physical science education in school as well as basic chemistry.
I have spent over 30 years building machines, hot rodding cars and fabricating everything from tools to vehicles.
I have a little practical knowledge of how much energy (horsepower) it takes to move an object at a given speed. I know several ways to apply power for varying purposes, and have built engines that run on several types of fuel.
I have hands on real world experience.
But no, I am not a scientist.

How come so many people that don't even understand how or why the car makes noise when they turn the key, are suddenly experts at applying energy or building vehicles?

+1 to all of you. You don't have to be a scientist to understand the basics, and just understanding the basics will prevent you from being scammed. I'm no economist, but I understand the basics reasonably well enough to avoid Ponzi schemes.

First lesson: even in a 100% ideal state (frictionless, absolutely insulated) you always have to put energy in to set an object in motion. In the ideal state, that energy is not lost and thus you could have perpetual motion with only the initial energy expenditure.

The problem? The ideal state does not exist, and never will. You will always lose energy in the form of heat and mass. The proponents of perpetual motion machines claim that such a system will produce more energy than it consumes, which is absolutely impossible. Anybody who tells you otherwise is a charlatan or a fool.

[Trance Dance Master]

It's not. It defies the LAWS of physics. Not just theory, but law, which is proven 100% to be true. This machine is a fraud. You cannot get any more energy out of a given system then you put in. The best you can hope for is an equal return, which is impossible due to friction. If you got more energy out than you put in, then you could just have the machine run itself and generate infinite energy, and a perpetual motion device. Such a thing is just simply not possible!
I'm sure that everybody who seriously works at building a perpetual motion device realizes that conventional science says that it is impossible. Conventional wisdom has been proven wrong before.

[pcosmar]

Let's say this device outputs 5kW of power for every 1kW put in.

Saying it is easy.
How about proving it.
Lets see some independent tests. How about having a team of electrical engineers look at it to make sure there is not a set of unseen wires through the floor.

You want to buy a bridge? Folks will try to sell you one.

[acptulsa]

I'm sure that everybody who seriously works at building a perpetual motion device realizes that conventional science says that it is impossible. Conventional wisdom has been proven wrong before.

Einstein made his name by, if not exactly disproving, then refining and perfecting Newton's laws. In so doing, you could say he proved the conventional wisdom wrong. What he did was to devise equations that, irregardless of conventional wisdom, explained the observations.

What are the odds these people have found a form of energy no one has ever detected before? And if they are tapping a source of energy that has been detected before, why won't they name it? Surely no one can use that tidbit of information to beat them out of their patent?

Invest in this if you want. But if you do, do not give me a chance to say I told you so. I will.

[Trance Dance Master]

Invest in this if you want.
I'll invest my imagination at least.:p;)

[amy31416]

I'm sure that everybody who seriously works at building a perpetual motion device realizes that conventional science says that it is impossible. Conventional wisdom has been proven wrong before.

The problem with your train of thought is that this is not simply conventional science, this is natural law. The only being that can violate this law would be god, if you believe in that sort of thing.

And scientific law does not equal, in any way, government laws. Violation of these laws is both mathematically and physically impossible. Time travel is much more likely than creating something out of nothing.

Perhaps the only scenario where this is possible is if we evolve to the point where we are god, and can manipulate the universe at will. I think I read a sci-fi/fantasy book like that when I was a kid. Until then, with the exception of Wile E. Coyote, we are all bound by these laws.

[Trance Dance Master]

Perhaps the only scenario where this is possible is if we evolve to the point where we are god, and can manipulate the universe at will.
I've long believed that man is god. Or rather, god is an invention of man, devised to separate himself from his own godhood.

If you've ever been a lucid dreaming enthusiast, you would know exactly how it feels to manipulate the universe at well.

The problem with your train of thought is that this is not simply conventional science, this is natural law.
It's also natural law to eat food uncooked as all animals in nature do, yet man has defied that law since the beginning of man.

Free energy today is considered the stuff of science fiction. As was spaceships and test tube babies not too long ago.

[acptulsa]

As was spaceships and test tube babies not too long ago.

If we could run our cars on hyperbole no one on this forum would complain about gas prices. The natural world doesn't care about these arguments. And both spaceships and test tube babies fell into the realm of "theoretically possible" even then. To say that it is impossible that they either get more out of their system than anyone else can or that they found a way to tap a source of energy would be foolish. To say the odds favor that over this being a scam, on the other hand...

[pcosmar]

GOOD LUCK

I am all for tapping and using presently unused energy.
I am all for using known energy more efficiently.

I am not interested in scam artists selling "Magic Beans".

[amy31416]

I've long believed that man is god. Or rather, god is an invention of man, devised to separate himself from his own godhood.

If you've ever been a lucid dreaming enthusiast, you would know exactly how it feels to manipulate the universe at well.

It's also natural law to eat food uncooked as all animals in nature do, yet man has defied that law since the beginning of man.

Free energy today is considered the stuff of science fiction. As was spaceships and test tube babies not too long ago.

There has only been one violation, ever, of the law of conservation, and that is that matter and energy exist at all. So to equate breaking that law with a spaceship or a test-tube baby being possible is comparing two entirely different things.

If we can figure out how to create energy from nothing, we've unlocked the secret of the universe. And I doubt that this guy trying to hawk an engine has figured out one of the eternal mysteries of existence. If he had, he wouldn't be trying to sell you something.

[acptulsa]

Science education in this country really needs some improvement.

Is there a most understated post of the day award?

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

"nothing" is just an explanation for the limits of human understanding.
What was "nothing" 20 years ago is now dark matter/energy.
Just because something is not readily apparent doesn't mean it does not exist.
You don't know what you don't know.

[amy31416]

"nothing" is just an explanation for the limits of human understanding.
What was "nothing" 20 years ago is now dark matter/energy.
Just because something is not readily apparent doesn't mean it does not exist.
You don't know what you don't know.

Dark matter is not "nothing," hence the name dark matter. And we first had evidence of it in 1933, so that's 75 years that we've known about it.

[Trance Dance Master]

"nothing" is just an explanation for the limits of human understanding.
What was "nothing" 20 years ago is now dark matter/energy.
Just because something is not readily apparent doesn't mean it does not exist.
You don't know what you don't know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30x8VTCaOws

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

Dark matter is not "nothing," hence the name dark matter. And we first had evidence of it in 1933, so that's 75 years that we've known about it.

thanks Captain Obvious. My point is it was nothing once.

[RideTheDirt]

Einstein said
E=mc² I doubt these guys proved him wrong.

[amy31416]

thanks Captain Obvious. My point is it was nothing once.

Another message from Captain Obvious: It was never nothing, we just didn't know about it.

It's the difference between saying Franklin discovered electricity vs. saying he invented electricity.

[Trance Dance Master]

I doubt these guys proved him wrong.

Did you know Einstein was a plagiarist?

http://www.aulis.com/albert_einstein.htm

[acptulsa]

Did you know Einstein was a plagiarist?

Cute. No scientist of the last four thousand or more years started from scratch. All built on the body of existing knowledge. Why wouldn't they? As for the subject in question, the scientific community has long awarded the one who comes up with the equations that actually work with the win. You have a better way?

[Danke]

This reminds me of Dennis Lee and his free energy machines I read about ~10 years ago.

http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Dennis_Lee/index.html

[amy31416]

Did you know Einstein was a plagiarist?

http://www.aulis.com/albert_einstein.htm

Einstein also used some of the work of his first wife, also a physicist, but that doesn't make the theory of special relativity wrong, it just possibly means that Poincare and Lorentz did not get the recognition they deserved. I'd have to research that more.

It, unfortunately, happens all the time in science and other disciplines. Many have never heard of Rosalind Franklin, but they've sure as hell heard of Watson & Crick.

[Trance Dance Master]

Cute. No scientist of the last four thousand or more years started from scratch. All built on the body of existing knowledge. Why wouldn't they? As for the subject in question, the scientific community has long awarded the one who comes up with the equations that actually work with the win. You have a better way?
I see you support the way ridethedirt makes it like "what, you think you're smarter than Einstein?" as if he was so smart. You take the body of knowledge from the scientific community and make it "Einstein's truth" that can't be proven inaccurate.

Here's the better way: don't give Einstein more credit than he deserves. He didn't come up with E=mc^2, as you would know had you read the article.

The most recognisable equation of all time is E=mc2. It is attributed by convention to be the sole province of Albert Einstein (1905). However, the conversion of matter into energy and energy into matter was known to Sir Isaac Newton ("Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another...", 1704). The equation can be attributed to S. Tolver Preston (1875), to Jules Henri Poincaré (1900; according to Brown, 1967) and to Olinto De Pretto (1904) before Einstein. Since Einstein never correctly derived E=mc2 (Ives, 1952), there appears nothing to connect the equation with anything original by Einstein.

It's the whole equation that is the basis of the argument against the possibility of perpetual motion, so it behooves one who makes that argument to get the facts right about it.

[amy31416]

Okay, so say Einstein didn't come up with the equation. I have no problem with that. How does one create matter/energy out of nothing?

It essentially gets into the realm of metaphysics, which I actually enjoy, but we're talking thought exercises. And so long as you understand this much about physics, at least you won't get taken by the guy selling you a perpetual motion/energy machine.

[Trance Dance Master]

And so long as you understand this much about physics, at least you won't get taken by the guy selling you a perpetual motion/energy machine.
I'll buy one if the price is right. If it doesn't work as advertised, perhaps I can get a refund. Or try to turn around and sell it to the next guy for a profit. Greater fool theory, it's what keeps the federal reserve note in circulation.

[Mesogen]

I'd like to know they define overunity.
Let's say this device outputs 5kW of power for every 1kW put in.
This may be true because of the magnets, which do "free" work until the magnets lose strength.

However, the laws of physics are not set in stone, they have changed before and could change again, and just because a potentially infinite and therefore "free" energy source isn't readily apparent (dark energy, Casimir effect/zero-point) doesn't mean it doesn't exist and these guys haven't tapped it.

Though I highly doubt it.

1. Magnetic Fields do not do work.

http://stupac2.blogspot.com/2007/04/magnetic-fields-do-no-work.html

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=130549

2. When someone says "the laws of physics" they don't usually mean the descriptive laws that humans have come up with. They usually mean the laws that energy and matter obey. From what we know, these don't change.

[Truth Warrior]

In each breadbox size volume of empty space there is enough energy to boil all of the oceans on Earth. :)

[amy31416]

2. When someone says "the laws of physics" they don't usually mean the descriptive laws that humans have come up with. They usually mean the laws that energy and matter obey. From what we know, these don't change.

Spot-on.


In each breadbox size volume of empty space there is enough energy to boil all of the oceans on Earth. :)

That's true. Isn't that an amazing concept?

[Truth Warrior]

That's true. Isn't that an amazing concept?
Amazes me! :D Even more so once I almost grasp it. ;)

[OptionsTrader]

Free Energy

It makes me sad when otherwise intelligent people fall for these hoaxes.

[Trance Dance Master]

They usually mean the laws that energy and matter obey. From what we know, these don't change.
Those who study quantum physics have determined otherwise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rQiF2cRKdc

[Truth Warrior]

It makes me sad when otherwise intelligent people fall for these hoaxes.
Hey, the whole freakin' universe is energy. How much does it cost? :D

[acptulsa]

It's the whole equation that is the basis of the argument against the possibility of perpetual motion, so it behooves one who makes that argument to get the facts right about it.

I did read the article. And whether or not he came up with E=m(c squared) he did find that relationship and reveal it in other equations, I do believe.

But, no, I don't know enough about it to say for certain that he built on, rather than falsely claiming as his own, the state of the science at the time.

In any case, I must say I appreciate you more than the guy who was on this forum a while back claiming (sixty years after Hiroshima) that Einstein was wrong and Bohr was right!

[driller80545]

It was people with no imagination that kept inisting that the world was flat.

[amy31416]

Amazes me! :D Even more so once I almost grasp it. ;)



When I first learned this and then did the calculations to back it up, I was absolutely hooked. To me, there are few things more stunning than doing the math that accompanies such notions. Prior to calculating stuff like that, I thought I hated math.

Another amazing thing about science is how atoms are mostly empty space. And fluorescence. And how electrons "behave." Photons too.

I don't understand why everyone doesn't want to study science. Try a little particle physics and quantum mechanics, that's where the serious crazy fun is.

Man I love that stuff. So much.

[Trance Dance Master]

Hey, the whole freakin' universe is energy. How much does it cost? :D
Whatever you're willing to pay for it.:D

[Truth Warrior]

Fibonacci series rabbits?

After about a hundred generations, without predators, you get an Earth size ball of rabbits increasing exponentially, at the speed of light! :D

[OptionsTrader]

Don't make be break out my EE books to show why this is bullshit.

[driller80545]

Doesn't one of the axioms of quantum physics state that if you can imagine something that you can create it?

[aravoth]

He's not taking something from nothing. Jesus Christ, don't any of you fuckers know a thing about electromagnetism?

[Mesogen]

Those who study quantum physics have determined otherwise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rQiF2cRKdc

So which part of this video shows that the laws of physics changed?

I see a video that describes particle/wave duality and how our understanding of the laws of physics had to change, but nowhere does this talk about anyone observing the laws of physics changing.

[OptionsTrader]

He's not taking something from nothing. Jesus Christ, don't any of you fuckers know a thing about electromagnetism?

This "fucker" does. And to generate current in the presence of a magnetic field you need relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field. Wind, falling water, a crank, a motor, a brake system in a hybrid car coupled to the generator, anything that produces relative motion. And this fraud has no relative motion input.

[Trance Dance Master]

So which part of this video shows that the laws of physics changed?

I see a video that describes particle/wave duality and how our understanding of the laws of physics had to change, but nowhere does this talk about anyone observing the laws of physics changing.
What is the difference between a change in the understanding of something and change itself? Our understanding of anything in this universe or others is based entirely on our perception. Truth changes. In fact, truth passes through stages before it becomes understood as truth. Do we have to understand electricity to use it? Of course not. Nobody understands electricity really-where did it come from and how does it work? We really only understand how to use it, that's where our laws regarding it come from.

[amy31416]

He's not taking something from nothing. Jesus Christ, don't any of you fuckers know a thing about electromagnetism?

It's some healthy skepticism, sunshine. The video was put up in August of last year, if it does what they said it could do then where is it now and why haven't we heard of it?

Plus, this turned into more of a discussion of the possibilities of free energy, not electromagnetism.

[amy31416]

This "fucker" does. And to generate current in the presence of a magnetic field you need relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field. Wind, falling water, a crank, a motor, a brake system in a hybrid car coupled to the generator, anything that produces relative motion. And this fraud has no relative motion input.

Thanks for the detail, makes sense.

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

This is their description of how it works
http://www.lutec.com.au/how.htm



DESCRIPTION AND WORKING PRINCIPLES OF: THE LEA ELECTRICITY PRODUCING DEVICE.

In order to gain an understanding of the operation of a LEA (Lutec Electricity Amplifier) it must be understood that there are actually three separate and completely individual events occurring in the one machine. Each of the three is equally important because without one of them operating in a completely synchronistical manner with the others, the end result would not achieve the efficiency levels required.

Each of the three events should first be viewed in isolation and then when they are drawn together as they are in the LEA, an understanding of the operating principles will become clear.

The First Event is a Pulsed DC Motor.

The Second Event is an AC generator.

The Third Event is the result of the impact of the Second on the First.

THE FIRST EVENT: A Pulsed DC Motor.

A DC input current either from a battery bank or from rectified AC mains is supplied to a DC motor comprised in this case of four fixed position stator coils, and a rotor with four equally spaced imbedded rare earth permanent magnets of a particular strength.

The input is pulsed by a rotating switch (commutated) allowing the DC input current to flow through the motor coils for a percentage of one cycle as dictated by the actual ON period of the commutator contacts. In most cases this is around 0.2 of a cycle. The electron flow in this DC circuit is negative to positive and so the negative lead is permanently connected to the coil/s.

The DC pulse causes a magnetic effect in the coil core so that the temporary polarisation of the coils laminated steel core has the effect of repulsing the magnetically aligned permanent magnet embedded in the rotor so causing it to rotate.

The DC pulse is completely consumed by this action which is the cause of the rotor spinning.

So the single result of the consumed DC input pulse is that it initiates the motor moment.

THE SECOND EVENT: An AC Generator.

The same coils used for the motor section in the first Event are used to generate the Second Event that being an AC power output. The rotor containing the permanent magnets is caused to be driven past the stator coils by the motor, at which time induction occurs in the coils producing an alternating current (AC) output. The only force being used to cause the movement of the rotor is the motor torque. The AC generated in the coils is done so independent of the input DC pulse and is strictly the result of the induction effect.

Evidence of the Second Event being able to operate independently and still provide the same AC output result is proven by causing it to produce the same output without the LEA motor section connected.

This is done by disconnecting the DC input wires and using an outside power source such as an electric motor connected to the axle of the generator and spinning it up to 750 revolutions per minute speed. This will cause a 50 Hz AC output result, a result that is identical to that with the LEA motor connected.

This proves that the AC output is produced purely by and controlled by the speed of rotation of the motor having an induction effect on the coils, nothing else, and especially no part of the DC input power component can be attributed as adding to the generated AC output.

THE THIRD EVENT: The Effect of Event Two on Event One.

Events One and Two happen independently of each other in the same machine. The only similarity shared in the Events is that they share the same coil to enable each to perform their independent functions.

The pulsed DC input to the coil has no effect on the AC being produced because there is no return path for it through the AC load of the coil. The AC is being generated continuously, and has no direct electrical contribution to the input because it too has no return path to enable it to do so.

The DC input runs the motor supplying current through its own defined circuit for around 0.2 of a cycle. (The ON period)

The DC input circuit has nothing to do with the AC output circuit; remember all the DC input is exhausted in the First Event so there is absolutely no DC input power left to do anything else.

The DC current is driven into the motor coils as long as there is a potential difference in voltage between the DC voltage and the AC voltage. This potential voltage is what carries the input current. When this potential voltage difference falls to zero the ON period of the electrical cycle is ended, and then no input current can flow.

The input voltage that carries current (amps) into the motor coils is a resultant voltage. This can be seen on oscilloscope traces as a variable voltage. It can also be called a differential voltage because the current is able to flow for a brief period before the lesser voltage becomes equal, and so prevents the flow from continuing.

SUMMARY

The LEA has been designed to maximise and exploit Events One Two and Three in a synchronous manner so as to produce a highly efficient means of generating electricity. It could be described as a tri-brid system.

This harmonious triumvirate result has been accomplished by identifying and controlling the precise timing of input and output voltages; so to allow the separate Events to operate within the same space, using minimal shared components while retaining their original individual effects.

The patent over this technology already granted in many countries including the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Russia, Eurasia, Africa, Poland, China, South Africa, Vietnam, Brazil, Singapore, Turkey, Israel and pending in many others is titled;

“A Means of Controlling A Rotary Device”

The reader may now understand why it has been called so.

There are many uses for the technology; it can provide electricity in a manner more highly efficient, environmentally clean and cost effective than any other currently known.

Other applications for this technology could be water desalination, hydrogen production, highly efficient motors for plant, pumps, and machinery, or as a more efficient and cost effective drive for anything that turns spins or rotates.

Contact Lutec by email

[Ninja Homer]

There has only been one violation, ever, of the law of conservation, and that is that matter and energy exist at all. So to equate breaking that law with a spaceship or a test-tube baby being possible is comparing two entirely different things.

If we can figure out how to create energy from nothing, we've unlocked the secret of the universe. And I doubt that this guy trying to hawk an engine has figured out one of the eternal mysteries of existence. If he had, he wouldn't be trying to sell you something.

The thing that needs to be kept in mind when dealing with the laws of physics is that it is a model for how we observe the universe to work. The universe does not look at our laws of physics and decide to obey them, we look at how the universe works and try to create a model that describes it. In other words, it's entirely possible (and probable) that our model is incomplete and/or has flaws in it.

When something occurs that breaks a law of physics, every scientist's first reaction is to say, "that isn't possible, it's just a scam," rather than considering the possibility that this may demonstrate a flaw in their model.

Now, I'm positive that this magnetic motor is not creating energy from nothing. If it is, in fact, over unity, then it has to be taking in existing energy from somewhere. My guess would be (if it does indeed work) that it takes in energy from the vacuum.

There's an almost infinite supply of energy in the vacuum. A quantum physicist will tell you that there's enough energy within any given cubic meter of space to boil every ocean on the planet. I think it's only a matter of time before somebody learns how to efficiently tap this energy source.

When somebody does figure out a way to tap energy from the vacuum, I guarantee it won't be a physicist or an electrical engineer. They've already given up on the possibility, because they believe their laws and don't bother experimenting with things that aren't supposed to be possible. It will most likely be a garage mechanic, who's mind is still open to infinite possibilities and not afraid to test against what the textbooks say.

If anybody is interested in experimenting with this stuff for themselves, I strongly recommend spending some time at this forum:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/
There are people there from around the world building a lot of different devices, some of which claim to be over unity. It's kind of an open source alternative energy project, and you'll find plans there to build some of these devices relatively inexpensively.

[OptionsTrader]

Thanks for the detail, makes sense.

There are 4 equations that govern all of electromagnetics, Maxwell's equations. One of them is Faraday's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction):

A practical demonstration of Faraday's law which governs electromtive force generated by the relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stUDqGzpev8

[amy31416]

The thing that needs to be kept in mind when dealing with the laws of physics is that it is a model for how we observe the universe to work. The universe does not look at our laws of physics and decide to obey them, we look at how the universe works and try to create a model that describes it. In other words, it's entirely possible (and probable) that our model is incomplete and/or has flaws in it.

When something occurs that breaks a law of physics, every scientist's first reaction is to say, "that isn't possible, it's just a scam," rather than considering the possibility that this may demonstrate a flaw in their model.

Now, I'm positive that this magnetic motor is not creating energy from nothing. If it is, in fact, over unity, then it has to be taking in existing energy from somewhere. My guess would be (if it does indeed work) that it takes in energy from the vacuum.

There's an almost infinite supply of energy in the vacuum. A quantum physicist will tell you that there's enough energy within any given cubic meter of space to boil every ocean on the planet. I think it's only a matter of time before somebody learns how to efficiently tap this energy source.

When somebody does figure out a way to tap energy from the vacuum, I guarantee it won't be a physicist or an electrical engineer. They've already given up on the possibility, because they believe their laws and don't bother experimenting with things that aren't supposed to be possible. It will most likely be a garage mechanic, who's mind is still open to infinite possibilities and not afraid to test against what the textbooks say.

If anybody is interested in experimenting with this stuff for themselves, I strongly recommend spending some time at this forum:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/
There are people there from around the world building a lot of different devices, some of which claim to be over unity. It's kind of an open source alternative energy project, and you'll find plans there to build some of these devices relatively inexpensively.

What you seem to be talking about is something different from the concept of free energy as it's understood by most people, not creating energy from nothing.

If this guys motor works, then the energy does come from somewhere, it's just a matter of measuring how efficient it is. Given that the company is listed all over the place on "free energy" sites, I am highly skeptical.

[amy31416]

There are 4 equations that govern all of electromagnetics, Maxwell's equations. One of them is Faraday's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction):

A practical demonstration of Faraday's law which governs electromtive force generated by the relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stUDqGzpev8

Thanks! I studied all that stuff, but that was a while ago in undergrad.

[hypnagogue]

I wonder at what point they'll just start moving all these free energy threads into Hot Topics.

[Truth Warrior]

I wonder at what point they'll just start moving all these free energy threads into Hot Topics.Why? Are you getting hot? :D

[aravoth]

This "fucker" does. And to generate current in the presence of a magnetic field you need relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field. Wind, falling water, a crank, a motor, a brake system in a hybrid car coupled to the generator, anything that produces relative motion. And this fraud has no relative motion input.

Yes he does. And he has experimentation that proves the result. And has invited people to come and study it.

[Truth Warrior]

There are 4 equations that govern all of electromagnetics, Maxwell's equations. One of them is Faraday's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction):

A practical demonstration of Faraday's law which governs electromtive force generated by the relative motion between a conductor and a magnetic field :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stUDqGzpev8 Heard a rumor that the equations were "cooked" quite a while back, at power utility company request. ;)

[drew1503]

This is funny, everyone here will say that this defies the laws of physics, etc. Yet so did 9/11 and the buildings falling, 1st time in history, I am not a conspiracy theorist, but when something stinks.

[OptionsTrader]

This is funny, everyone here will say that this defies the laws of physics, etc. Yet so did 9/11 and the buildings falling, 1st time in history, I am not a conspiracy theorist, but when something stinks.

Nice attempt at a thread hijack. However, it must be said that 9/11 didn't break any laws of physics...that is an ignorant statement.

[Ninja Homer]

What you seem to be talking about is something different from the concept of free energy as it's understood by most people, not creating energy from nothing.

If this guys motor works, then the energy does come from somewhere, it's just a matter of measuring how efficient it is. Given that the company is listed all over the place on "free energy" sites, I am highly skeptical.

I frequent a few of the "free energy" sites, and for the most part, they all know that they are not able to create energy. They are trying to come up with ways to tap into currently unused energy sources, such as from the vacuum or h2o.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/ is a good read, with a lot of very intelligent people. Somebody has an improvement to a device almost daily, and they freely give all the info on how they do everything, and put up a lot of youtube vids. I may try making this one:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2003-free-energy-last-step-step-must-see.html
It's an easy to make Bedini device made from a computer fan for under $50.

[amy31416]

I frequent a few of the "free energy" sites, and for the most part, they all know that they are not able to create energy. They are trying to come up with ways to tap into currently unused energy sources, such as from the vacuum or h2o.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/ is a good read, with a lot of very intelligent people. Somebody has an improvement to a device almost daily, and they freely give all the info on how they do everything, and put up a lot of youtube vids. I may try making this one:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2003-free-energy-last-step-step-must-see.html
It's an easy to make Bedini device made from a computer fan for under $50.

Cool. I've gotten the impression (maybe from this board and some other sources) that the free energy sites were chock full of people who believe that energy can be created from nothing and that the government conspires to keep such technology from the people.

I'll check it out.

[asgardshill]

Hey noob, piss off with your attempted thread hijack.

[amy31416]

Hey noob, piss off with your attempted thread hijack.

Seriously. There are plenty of 9/11 threads in hot topics. Check 'em out if that is your topic du jour.

[stilltrying]

I am not a physicist but have a few questions on some things. People thought that newtons mechanical universe was the end all be all of physics and yet einstein came up and blew that apart. then someone added to einsteins physics (quantum physicis) and blew einsteins mind (god does not play with dice (chance)). Read on quantum physics, things are created from seemingly out of nowhere. so first off the law of thermodynamics is just a theory and not a 100% law. science is always progressing so considering that anyone who states that thermodynamics, energy can neither be created or destroyed, etc... i suggest you not close your mind like everyone throughout history seems to when theyre alive that their current science is the pinnacle and highest achievement that can be achieved.

science is never finished and anyone who states that it is not possible needs to be debunked because you are directly opposing science in its search for the truth in physical phenomenon. by your very nature you have accepted what is, is and is not is not and never needs to be tested again with different hypothesis and tests to deduce further truth. why bother with studying or reading science any longer for by your very nature you seem to imply that nothing more needs to be studied, the law is set and cannot be broken. its not possible for this or this, this is the law and the laws are never broken. whether its human law or natural law, they both are always broken

[driller80545]

I am not a physicist but have a few questions on somethings. People thought that galileos mechanical universe was the end all be all of physics and yet einstein came up and blew that apart. then someone added to einsteins physics (quantum physicis) and blew einsteins mind (god does not play with dice (chance)). Read on quantum physics, things are created from seemingly out of nowhere. so first off the law of thermodynamics is just a theory and not a 100% law. science is always progressing so considering that anyone who states that thermodynamics, energy can neither be created or destroyed, etc... i suggest you not close your mind like everyone throughout history seems to when theyre alive that their current science is the pinnacle and highest achievement that can be achieved.

science is never finished and anyone who states that it is not possible needs to be debunked because you are directly opposing science in its search for the truth in physical phenomenon. by your very nature you have acepted what is, is and is not is not and never needs to be tested again with different hypothesis and tests to deduce further truth. why bother with studying or reading science any longer for by your very nature you seem to imply that nothing more needs to be studied, the law is set and cannot be broken. its not possible for this or this, this is the law and the laws are never broken. whether its human law or natural law, they both are always broken

I agree. I call it the flat earth syndrome. People that already know everything cannot learn anything.

[hypnagogue]

Why? Are you getting hot? :D Yes, but that has nothing to do with this thread and everything to do with the weather in Texas.

It's just that... these threads are ridiculous. Does no one else feel the slightest embarrassment that when you put a bunch of libertarian individuals together and let them discuss things freely we end up with an overabundance of discussions supporting quack science, fad diets, convoluted conspiracies, hyperbolic generalizations, rebellion drama, religious lunacy, etc. ad infinitum

*sigh*

[pcosmar]

This may be helpful for some.
http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/power.html

I would love to power my whole house on a 12v car battery run thru a mythical machine.
I would love to get enormous energy form air.
It would be great to power my tractors on water.

Unfortunately I live in Reality.
These claims of something for nothing are

Bovine Poop

[Truth Warrior]

Yes, but that has nothing to do with this thread and everything to do with the weather in Texas.

It's just that... these threads are ridiculous. Does no one else feel the slightest embarrassment that when you put a bunch of libertarian individuals together and let them discuss things freely we end up with an overabundance of discussions supporting quack science, fad diets, convoluted conspiracies, hyperbolic generalizations, rebellion drama, religious lunacy, etc. ad infinitum

*sigh*
Ah, kinda like life. "sigh" :D

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

This may be helpful for some.
http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/power.html

I would love to power my whole house on a 12v car battery run thru a mythical machine.
I would love to get enormous energy form air.
It would be great to power my tractors on water.

Unfortunately I live in Reality.
These claims of something for nothing are

Bovine Poop


An overunity device isn't making something from nothing.
It's making more from something not readily apparent or understood.
Hard to believe, yes, but not impossible given quantum theory.... though I don't disagree with looking at this device with skepticism.

One of the EE's should chime in on the description I posted above and explain the shortcomings in the design.

[OptionsTrader]

One of the EE's should chime in on the description I posted above and explain the shortcomings in the design.


FALSE:

The pulsed DC input to the coil has no effect on the AC being produced because there is no return path for it through the AC load of the coil. The AC is being generated continuously, and has no direct electrical contribution to the input because it too has no return path to enable it to do so.

Big time false.

This hoax is an inefficient DC to AC converter.

[pcosmar]

One of the EE's should chime in on the description I posted above and explain the shortcomings in the design.

I am not an EE, but i have had considerable experience with both electric motors, generators(both AC & DC) and various typed of switches and sensors.
The device described in the patent( yes I looked it up and read it) is for a motor control switch. Though it may have some applications and may increase efficiency in a DC motor, it does not explain the system he describes on his web page.

[youngbuck]

Well Einsteins Law of Relativity violates Newtonian physics, so it's not like there aren't out-of-the-box breakthrough yet to be discovered. I'm sure there are other things out there that will violate aspects of Newtonian physics, and maybe something that will put into question the Law of Relativity.

You gotta think big... remember, question everything?

[OptionsTrader]

A wise man once said, "if you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit."

[pcosmar]

Here is his patent, read it yourself.
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6630806

BTW, a device or invention does not need to actually work to receive a patent.

[Ninja Homer]

A wise man once said, "if you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit."

My ex-boss said that... he was a complete dipshit.

One who says it can not be done must not say so to one doing it. - Ancient Chinese Proverb

[Ninja Homer]

Here is his patent, read it yourself.
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6630806

BTW, a device or invention does not need to actually work to receive a patent.

For that reason, most major invention patents are deliberately ambiguous. They patent just enough to cover their invention, but not enough to give away any secrets that could be further developed and stolen from under them.

[jyakulis]

meh i believe in zero point energy. i believe tesla tapped into it. i believe it's been tapped into MANY MANY times and suppressed by the power structure. shit my colleague invented a magnetic motor that has an efficiency of 90% and ended up getting fucked over pretty bad.

this guy gives a great lecture:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5738531568036565057

if anyone is actually interested in this check it out. how do we even know that everything in this area is known? it's so arrogant.

[constituent]

For that reason, most major invention patents are deliberately ambiguous. They patent just enough to cover their invention, but not enough to give away any secrets that could be further developed and stolen from under them.

or vague so as to claim that anything even remotely close infringes upon their patent "rights."

patents = b.s. imo

[asgardshill]

The odd thing is, the real state-of-the-art in AC-powered small motors can be found in Dyson vacuum cleaners of all places.

[jyakulis]

BTW, a device or invention does not need to actually work to receive a patent.

uhh i'm a patent examiner. in short: WTF.

[Truth Warrior]

What was Tesla working on? Where are his "missing" notebooks and papers?

[freelance]

Interesting...you have to love how the end of the video was very sceptical and imho dismissive. Why is it so difficult for people to think beyond convential means of power??Would love to know more about the how it is working...

Probably because we go through these free energy spells every time oil spikes. :rolleyes:

[pcosmar]

uhh i'm a patent examiner. in short: WTF.

That explains a lot.

[OptionsTrader]

Probably because we go through these free energy spells every time oil spikes. :rolleyes:

THANK YOU...................

[Carole]

I do not take "free" literally. The point is that entrepreneurs can find better ways to provide energy than just the same two or three alternatives we always hear about. Disney is a good example of that.

The closest to free energy might be watching your electric meter run backwards if you have a windmill in the right situtation such that it runs so much the power company has to buy your excess energy.

.

[Carole]

And I do what I can to obey that law. :D LOL

[FindLiberty]

This complex breakfast machine has more potential than that "free energy" (back-EMF pulse) motor that was hyped-up earlier in this thread...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsgV0P0CDwM

Even the politicians living in Washington (there in the belly-of-the-beast) can forget about running their toasters on 120V Alternating Current (AC), 'cause it's now legal to own one of these in DC!

[Carole]

I think I read something "somewhere" about the combination of air and magnetics. Isn't this in use on some new roller coasters and transit systems. No friction to speak of if the vehicle (either mass transit or auto) rides on air and nothing touches the road for example. Tires wear out, must be properly inflated, and of course there is the friction. I dream of seeing an automobile that rides on a cushion of air just above the ground or mass transit that is suspended just above its rails or whatever.

We just need to allow imagination to help solve some of our problems. So I do not pooh-pooh new ideas even if they are not quite perfected or not quite reasonable. That is very old-fashioned thinking to me. And I do not want to think old-fashioned. It is the twenty-first century. We should already be a quarter of a century into some new ideas and answers.

We are leasing our roads to Spain and planning newer bigger roads. Does not that suggest that the people runing this country have no clear vision for newer, better ways to transport people and cargo? They are still stuck in the past and yet they have all the power to run our country as they please.

My main point is that bright, intelligent people can solve much of our energy and transportation dilemmas if given the opportunity. The old energy providers will always try to suppress new ways to provide energy. Instead, they should be investing in R&D to be first on the block with new, more sustainable forms of energy.

Frankly, I hoipe some very clever scientific types and engineers come up with the answers first. The old energy providers have had their turn and bled us dry with their greed.

What? We can go to the moon or Mars, but we cannot harness a reasonable form of energy, nor build a viable new form of transportation. Sorry, I simply do not buy that.

[OptionsTrader]

I think I read something "somewhere" about the combination of air and magnetics. Isn't this in use on some new roller coasters and transit systems.

It is called a MagLev (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_levitation_train).

[Carole]

Listen folks. Don't get hung up on the "free" energy part. That was just the title of the video. Nothing is free. One has to pay something for the R&D that went into developing it at least. Nothing is free. Even the windmill costs something to build and maintain.

The whole point is simply that it is way past time that we should have been looking deeply into new ways to solve energy and transportation problems. There are brilliant, talented people out there somewhere who can do it. I want them to do it. If I were rich, I would find those people and pay them to do it.

What has happened to this country is that our imaginations have been hijacked and stifled. We are not supposed to think and dream. We are supposed to be lemmings and sheeple. I refuse to submit to becoming a robot.

To all the doubters, I say you sound so old and old-fashioned. I am sixty-three, but I like to think the PTB have not completely destroyed my brain and my imagination and my desire to see someone succeed in coming up with new solutions for our problems.

Regardless of conventional science, I believe. I believe people are wonderful and brilliant and bright and clever and ingenious. Success does not come with the first or early prototypes. Success comes with perserverance and dogged determination to solve problems. Success comes with some person who thinks outside the norm and maybe, just maybe has a brainstorm while flying a kite. Maybe that someone just keeps trying over and over and one day he succeeds.

Why not think outside the box? Columbus did not fall off the face of the earth after all. Were it not for dreamers, we would likely still be living in Europe, or Asia, or Africa, or wherever.

Sheesh! Dream people. Only by dreaming of better ways to do things will they ever happen.

Skeptics and doubters offer nothing of real value by going in circles or backwards or standing still. Dare to dream. :)

I guess I am just plain bored with the status quo, of doing things the same way for so long. It feels so imprisoning and I just like to feel free. :)

[Carole]

Perpetual Motion Found!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvRzWYCZ2e0

:D:D

[Paul.Bearer.of.Injustice]

What? We can go to the moon or Mars, but we cannot harness a reasonable form of energy, nor build a viable new form of transportation. Sorry, I simply do not buy that.

This is because all of the "easy" breakthroughs have been tapped out.

The days of breakthroughs in small labs is over.

Major breakthroughs now require millions or billions in investment and many minds,
not a bunsen burner and a flask in the basement of Cavendish.

Every 20th century breakthrough has been by Bell Labs, Los Alamos, the DoD etc - i.e. all big gov't and huge corporation collusion. Lord knows what has been shelved by these conglomerates to perpetuate the status quo. Free or cheap energy would shatter the power structure and organizational hierarchy.

If the gov't knew what their DARPA computer networking system would have turned into (the Internet), I wonder if they would have ever released it?

[amy31416]

This is because all of the "easy" breakthroughs have been tapped out.

The days of breakthroughs in small labs is over.

Major breakthroughs now require millions or billions in investment and many minds,
not a bunsen burner and a flask in the basement of Cavendish.



They've been saying that for years and I don't buy it for a second, there are still plenty of things to be discovered in small labs/garages/basements/kitchens and things to be dreamed up.

This guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kanzius is from my hometown and developed a potential cancer treatment using his knowledge of radio waves and his garage/lab. The treatment is now being tested by universities. From Wikipedia:


As of 2007-04-23, preliminary research using the Kanzius RF device at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston (by Dr. Steven A. Curley, Professor in Surgical Oncology[7][8]) and The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (by Dr. David A. Geller, co-director of the Liver Cancer Center[9]) has shown promising results. If federal approval is granted, testing on human patients would be the next step.[6] [10] [4]

So all you scientists and engineers (and I don't just mean the ones with degrees) keep on tinkering and thinking outside the box.

[Dr.3D]

Perpetual Motion Found!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvRzWYCZ2e0

:D:D

Yes, imagine an array of butter or jelly backed cats hovering in mid air. The energy would be emense. :D

But alas, there would probably be objections from PETA. :(

[driller80545]

Well, you know, there are some nuts who say man can invent a machine that flies. Lol, man can't fly. If man was supposed to fly, he would have wings.
Alternative energy, bah!

[Acala]

I have no problem with alternate energy. But the proponent of a free energy machine needs to be able to explain the source of the energy. He also needs to be able to demonstrate the system under transparent conditions and give people the design so they can replicate it in their own labs. Now that isn't too much to ask for, is it?

[acptulsa]

Now that isn't too much to ask for, is it?

If it is, my investment in the company is too much to ask for as well.

[mconder]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4qjZocje0c&feature=related

[mconder]

[QUOTE]However, the laws of physics are not set in stone, they have changed before and could change again

The laws of physics do not change, only our understanding.

[mconder]

If someone were to hook my house up to one of these and I went from paying for electricity to not paying for it, I would contentedly use it, not caring that I was violating the laws of physics.