Home Exotic Energy Magnetic Power

A REAL and WORKING Magnetic Motor Spinning Indefinitely

7775
147

Working Magnetic MotorOk, I saw this on Gizmodo (unexpectedly), and despite the fact that I’ve been blogging for five years now I’ve never actually seen something this amazing – the famous magnetic motor spinning by itself indefinitely, like this video shows.

Now, I don’t think there’s any trick involved, there couldn’t be, could it? Just watch the whole movie. If you see anything suspicious, let me know.

Magnetic motors have always fascinated me. I’ve even endorsed schematics of magnetic motors hoping that someday, someone will find the proper recipe and post it on youtube without being called names and accused of scamming people.

Of course, those magnets you see in the video will eventually wear out in years, but the concept is great – it could be applied even further with stronger magnets. Just see the video and shout your opinions out. I urge you to.

(Visited 49,713 times, 5 visits today)

147 COMMENTS

  1. This self propelled generator that for 10-30k could give you a lifetime of power. Also I didn’t understand this part either, it has the ability to clean sea water, contaminated water and all water while generating and tricking eddy loss current into gains. If they had successfully got this into energy sector could of caused mass company losses or outdated methods like oil, electrical power company, all energy classifications, when you have a generator the size of your ac on you house, that can power the entire system, once paid off generator free power for life, mines maintenance needs. I almost Hopful might still have 1% of world power when secretly planning a way to bring this into The economy, without hurting mid class economics and company caos, with to big of change to fast, and to many depending people, working class takes hit.

    Hopefully someday I own 1% of world power haha

  2. If this actually works, then why haven’t we hooked it up to some kind of generator, this would be the perfect kind of renewable energy.

  3. What if you had a sphere that you encapsulate with a larger hollow sphere causing the internal speere to be in a state of suspended animation. The internal sphere you could put a little ammount of force causing it to spin this would be a way to create propulsion. Idk just a thought havent seen anyone anywhere show this.

  4. What if we made a machine much like sun and earth ,With the earth spinning around it With it’s own spin..The sun’s magnetic field pulling and pushing and the earth pushing and pulling and then have magnets pulling and pushing the earth ,Which would create energy And with this energy ,Ply some back into the motor to keep the magnets charged And the other you run through a coil to charge the electricity for our use.Would this work ? I know friction would slow it down.Could we cool it down to work.

    • Hi Mark, I posted a longer reply to this in another comment, but I wanted to address you directly as well.

      So, there’s a couple of angles to this. What you’re talking about is putting an inductor into a spinning magnetic field.

      First off: would it work? Well, depends on what you mean. With the Sun and the Earth, no… it wouldn’t work. The Sun’s magnetic field and Earth’s magnetic field don’t play in a way that we could really pull this off. There exists some places in the solar system where it would though! I can’t remember which, but there are moons of Jupiter that rotate within their host planet’s magnetic field just right that you could make a loop of wire that would “magically” sip electricity out of that spinning. On such a moon, you’d be able to generate power just be sticking an antenna into the air. Pretty cool

      This isn’t free energy though. That antenna will put a drag on the moon and if you made enough antennas and had them sipping power long enough, the moon would slowly stop spinning. It’s just that the amount of power behind the spinning of the moon is incomprehensible compared to what you’d be extracting, like stealing sand off the beach. You ARE depleting the beach, but who’s going to notice? If you do it every day for 80 years… eventually there’ll be a hole someone will notice.

      The second part of the question: could we make a machine like the sun and earth. Ummm, depends on what scale you envision. Making a star or stellar sized body, and a planet, and then making that planet orbit the star would take a mind boggling amount of power. More power than exists in the solar system. We’d probably need to consume a black hole to pull it off. As you scale it down, then you can extract less and less power without bringing the system to a halt. The first part above explains why, roughly.

      In essence, what these spinning magnetic wheels, and your hypothetical planetary spinning magnetic field generator (if that’s not a name for a device for a super villian, i don’t know what is) are are energy storage devices. The reason we don’t build things like this in practice is that we have better ways. The spinning magnetic field idea is VERY inefficient. You’re blasting a lot of your power out into nothingness projecting that magnetic field, and the orbital body only extracts a little bit at a time, so most of your power goes to waste. The same is true of the spinning wheel. It stores power by spinning, and this power is drained by the friction of the bearing. Even fi you made a perfect bearing with no friction and put it in a vacuum, you in essence have a spinning battery. Batteries are nasty, dangerous things but they don’t risk taking someone’s hand off it you touch em 😀

      • I have read all the comments on the magnetic motor area and done lots of experiments that have been demonstrated in many videos. Some of the videos are obviously fakes. You can even see wires leading to the fake machine. I have one big comment! Show me someone, on the internet, that can sell me a working magnet based machine, for any price. There is none available, anywhere, I repeat, anywhere. If there was, then, that seller would be fantastically wealthy, because millions of people would by that machine, no matter how small or large, or expensive, it would be.

  5. Nobody is saying magnets are creating energy? All they are suggesting is that magnetic attraction and repulsion, in the right configuration, could be used to drive a flywheel which has a pulley to a generator which THEN creates the electricity. It’s just a matter of finding a way to get the wheel to continue after one turn. This guy demonstrated by hand-holding the “stator” and moving it in and out causes the cycle to reset. Then he developed an automation for that mechanic — a cam which pushes the stator slightly in-out at the crucial point, which starts a new cycle. Scale this model up with more powerful magnets (watch your fingers!), heavier flywheel, appropriate generator — why not be able to generate enough electricity to power appliances, lights, a house?

    • born 1962 have been working on this magnetic attraction and repulsion, at age 17 with no too little resources, the magnetic attraction and repulsion, would always cancel itself out and stop how was this worked out would love to know to further my research

    • Hi Corry
      You may have received many answers to your suggestions? Firstly you can not generate energy out of nothing. If you can take out energy it is coming from somewhere. In order not to confuse things let stay with the magnetic motor. At first examination it looks like a miracle. When I was asked by an inventor about thirty years ago to test his combined motor/generator assembly I was stunned as I could not find a fault in it at first glance and it was not connected to a battery or mains. I made exact measurements of outgoing power both with Amp and Voltage but most importantly using accurate calorimeter measurements which verified that power was taken out.
      As the only power ever entering the system was the magnetizing of the magnets when they were made, but I couldn’t find any literature telling me how much power is needed to make one of these magnets. So I decided to start in the other end by putting a heavy load on the generator and see if I could measure a degradation in the Voltage generated. It was running for several hours before I started to measure a degradation. I also continually checked about a dozen of the hundreds of button magnets in the motor and started to see a clear degradation in the magnetic flux. After a couple of days the system stopped as the demagnetizing of the magnets had reached a point where the motor no longer was able to drive the generator.
      Over the years I have been asked to test dozens of similar devices using magnets and they all falter in the same way. Some inventors say that they take the energy from the aether but a normal magnetic motor has no means to do it. In the future we may be able to find a way to utilize the aether for power generation but not today. So to summarize: You use masses of power to magnetize the magnets…you then use means to demagnetize these magnets and that power is what is driving the motor.
      Best regards
      Chris Stonehill
      PhD Nuclear Science

      • “You use masses of power to magnetize the magnets…you then use means to demagnetize these magnets and that power is what is driving the motor”.

        As I understand it, magnets are not “magnetized” but they are subjected to a strong magnetic field to align the magnetic particles, and the pinning material that surrounds the magnetic particles holds the alignment of magnetic particles in the magnet to “shine” outward. Therefore we can not put energy into a magnet to draw out. We can produce work using magnets which can be used to generate electrical power.

    • hey man…I made one that works completely without frictional problems like most encounters… its actually more about arrangement of magnet and play on mass and magnetic strength, acquiring a patent is almost impossible in my world here… which makes me kerp much of my invention in secret, I might
      die with this great invention if know salvation comes…(contact: [email protected])

  6. There are literally thousands of people out there in the world who have invented magnet devices which can rotate on their own power and thereby drive a generator without any help from external power sources. There are also people exploring plasma coil schemes which “induct” extra electrical current from the limitless potential we are swimming in. The use of these devices will be commonplace in 40 years — the need for a power “grid” and paying for energy will be obsolete.

    The truth is, the entire Universe is made of electricity and we have only to learn how to harness it, motivate it, channel it. Don’t worry — it will come to us when we’re ready (just about now). Just as archeologists have, with some chagrin, had to retract their previous beliefs on how old intelligent man really is (millions, not thousands, of years), electrical science will have to retract on the Law of Conservation — it is simply not true. Or I should say, it “will no longer be true once the previously undiscovered energy types are discovered.”

    Regarding this magnet motor — you do see that the little “cam” solves the self-cancelling effect at the finishing point of each rotation? If it’s that easy to get around a previously “impossible” problem, think how much more stuff is coming. Home inventors — CARRY ON!!!

    • Hi Corey,
      I do agree with your thoughts,Its dissapointing the human kind of people closing the eyes on coming events in technology, when ion Lithium to day is 1/3 of graphene range in Electric Cars,???Galileo was condemned to fireby church,Columbus died in poverty,Stirlings step by step is going on,free piston STRG,by Nasa is doing well.I am an old Master,FEA Professor,for 50 years,Electromechanics and some electronics are very familiar all my life, nobody said nothing when Siemens beated world record with a 260 kW acrobatic plane, electric AC 3PH Induction motor, nobody said nothing when Swiss engineers in Solar Impulse went the world around with solar fed electric solar plates?It is more the good people, with faith and hope, negative ones I make this question to skeptics, show me your Title Certificates, yr resume and achieveents, conversation is finished.Bye.Dont pay ears to that garbish of persons, the Inquisition burnt thousands of innocents in fire, thats our world?hurch is dissapearing at last.Johann Wegmann

    • Ive found a way to make an engine run using electromagnetic energy i was told it couldnt be done but it only pushed me to try harder i do believe in unidentified flying objects and i believe its a magnetic drive from the circular motion in which we all create and where created from so thats my next project

        • What if I told you that I have defeated perpetual motion in the sense of permanent magnet motion using only permanent magnet’s . 3 working models accelerated to there own destruction. The Equation that I have Invented to make this work is Memorized in my head.

  7. Magnetism was and has been well known, for centuries, as a direct source of energy, independent of electrical generation or storage. Tesla did not see electricity as a requirement for creating motion or work, but as only one possible source of energy. A 17th century windmill creates work without electricity, and sunlight through a lens creates heat without electricity (unless one wants to create steam to turn a turbine or driveshaft and create electricity for storage in a battery.)

    Why isn’t there already a “magnetic car” using two opposing permanent magnets shaped like a brake shoe, directly and silently turning a metallic turbine or driveshaft, without the need for an electrical generating or storage system? A set of mounting arms would simply move the magnets towards each other, and make the driveshaft spin faster. It would look like this at rest from above

    ( o ),

    If you wanted to increase speed, simply move the magnets together like so
    (o)

    Seems kind of simple and obvious. What am I missing? Elon Musk’s cars seem so old timey.

    • Hi Eli,This is a subject of language,Engineering conversation relies on Physics and Mathematics,both at highest levels, skeptics are usually ignorants, as an example to me, AIRBUS won the Aviation competition respect to USA, just with the development of advanced computers able to run NAVIER STOKES equations, eliminating expensive investments in wind tunnels of 25000 HP as in USA.The world power in Mathematics and Physics is France,thanks to Napoleon envision to create Universities and hand abilities tecniques,he said Praxis and Theory must go together.I studied proudly in a daughter University of first French college, to day 185 years old,I never saw an skeptic argument against free energy explained in Tensorial Analysis,in Einstein Notation, in FEA Codes, or in Finite volumes codes,I will be working to improve Penderev Mag Motor, to me is feasible,requires adjustments, a minimum, with FEMM or any FEA code,and also Finite Volumes simulations, is preferably to design and simulate a Mag Motor or any design,for instance, I suggest to restart since backwards to forwards, first B,magnetic flux density field with shielding as boundary condition,flywheel is absent, and planetary gears to synchronize PM rotor relative to stator, electronics solid states will make all controls feasible,Mag motors are so simple ,and more there are many running,for skeptics I let the task to send to Eli, the whole system of corresponding equationsplus boundary conditions to solve Penderev, and go to the heel crying and screeming like women.Bye Eli.Johann Wegmann

  8. two questions:

    1. How can it be argued that perpetual motion does not exist, considering the perpetual spinning of the earth, and orbit around the sun?

    2. If a permanent magnetic motor will only spin for 10 years, or 1 year, or 1 week for that matter, isn’t that enough to keep working on the concept? Isn’t “perpetuality” besides the point?

    • Being able to optimize something to spin a long time isn’t the point. Put it in a vacuum to eliminate air drag and it will spin longer. Give it more mass so it has more rotary inertia and it will spin longer. (Those two, by the way, explain why the planets keep spinning). Lubricate your bearings so they have less loss and it will spin longer.

      The point, though, is that all of those things cause longer spin by *reducing the amount of energy removed*. If you want to *use* this thing for something you will need to extract energy from it, and it will stop in short order: as soon as you’ve extracted all of the energy that was initially in it.

      So you’re quite right – “perpetuality” (that doesn’t seem to be a word, but it sort of ought to be) is not the point. Storing and delivering energy is the point.

      Magnets do not supply energy. Period. Full stop. End of story.

      To all of you who see this and become excited over it: crafting your beliefs based on what you wish could be true is folly. Educate yourself.

      And to all of you who create videos of this nature: you are faking them, and that makes you DIRT.

      • Its a simple question. Quite self explanatory. My point is this….It may be easier to justify magnetic engine research by pointing out the fallacy of the prohibition of perpetual motion claims by the PTO then in arguing about net energy loss or zero point energy. Permanent is long enough, as in permanent magnet. Thats long enough . I get that. So its asymptotic to infinity but not infinite. So whats the best source of permanent but not infinite magnets to build my almost perpetual magnetic engine?

        • Eli, permanent magnets do not deliver energy in this way. Magnets, like all physical objects, have potential energy in their structure, but you can’t extract that energy via magnetic effects. The permanent magnet does not “change as you withdraw energy from it.”

          We don’t have machines that “create energy.” We have machines that convert energy from one form to another. Real motors take electrical power as input and deliver mechanical power as output. This device has no energy input (well, clearly it DOES, since it spins, but it’s a power input that’s being hidden from viewers of the video).

          The wold has done a HUGE amount of research on magnetics and electromechanical energy conversion – it’s extremely well-understood technology. Efficiency of energy conversion can be quite high for particular types of motors. But it is, and always will be, the case that energy must be put in before it can be taken out.

          Pretending that something like this is worthy of research does nothing but show what you don’t know. I sincerely urge you to get a book on basic physics and read. You will see.

          • Beware of paralysis by analysis. The inability to explain something is logically irrelevent to its existence or non-existence. And don’t put your hand between two 100 year old magnets from some old vaudville era woofers. Your hand will be surprised how much energy they still expand after a century. You can’t imagine those suckers turning a drive shaft instead?

          • It’s not paralysis – the analysis consists of applying conservation of energy, and it’s finished.. 🙂 And yes, obviously magnets will pull themselves together, and that is mechanical work. But to have a CYCLIC motion also requires that you separate them again, and you will DO just as much work separating them as they did coming together.

            I’m done trying to help you. Lead a horse to water…

          • Besides , you never addressed my original question. Doesnt the orbit of the earth violate the rule against perpetual motion?

          • The earth is slowly falling in to the sun. If something that obvious violated a fundamental law of physics then we would re-wright the law. That is the point of science to test assumptions.

          • I dont care whether it creates or destroys energy. You can measure that if and when i construct a working prototype. After all “if it works good and tests bad, youve tested the wrong thing.”

      • Can you please simplify, I don’t understand. Couldn’t you push the magnet (in the video) to start it and use the whole setup as a windmill but there is no wind and instead the magnets are powering it? surely over time you would gain more energy than you spent.

        • You may gain more energy than YOU spent, but the energy gain is coming from the magnetic field, which means the net energy gain of the entire system is still zero, as mandated by conservation of energy.

      • At one point in the past, man thought the earth was flat, man thought flight was impossible, and Ext Ext. Man does the impossible all the time if you need proof, Watch a birth, watch a plane fly, watch a rover explore Mars. how many times did they say the atom couldn’t be split, if man gave up, every time some one said it cant be done, we would still live in caves, and getting fire from lightning strikes.

        • The converse of this is, of course, that the definition of insanity is trying to same over and over and expecting different results.

          There is no harm in experimentation and I often sigh internally at how some skeptics treat people so poorly, fueled by righteous indignation. That being said, there is a difference between the great achievements of you cite and simply trying over and over and over. There are theories that are involved and refined, new laws of physics are refined or postulated or invented.

          Trying to squeeze energy out of a spinning wheel using magnets is not one of these. This is a very well studied and debunked area of science. Arranging the magnets differently does not constitute a new theory, and that is what separates this from flight or splitting the atom. Nobody has a great new theory of magnetism here, it’s just different configurations of a design that is already proved not to exist. Don’t let go of that adventurous spirit, be sure, but you will make no progress if you simply retread the same ground over and over. Look at the early days of flight. There was a lot of very silly and often down right stupid designs for aircraft. We would never have unlocked flight if we had kept wasting time trying the same failed designs over and over, and this is a very important part of the scientific method: learn from your failures and move on.

          This next section is not necessarily directed at you, but i’ve seen it crop up in multiple places and I have my soap box here, so why not: To answer a lot of the questions I’ve seen floating around about orbital mechanics or using spinning magnetic fields or why the spinning magnetic wheel doesn’t work: people are ignoring the input energy. That wheel does nothing by itself. You give it a spin. That simple movement of spinning the wheel with your hand imparts energy. Sure, you can maybe make a wheel that spins for a bit and extracts a small trickle of energy, but if you contrast that output energy with the amount of energy you would get just manually spinning the generator yourself, you’ll see the futility. On a toy example, it’s hard to see why it’s so bad. It’s just a little push, right? Scale it up to a massive multiton flywheel with huge magnets like you’d envision in a power plant then answer me: how do you start it spinning? It will involve a lot of input energy, and that energy could be better spent directly creating power.

          How does this apply to orbital mechanics? Actually, the theory of constructing a device that extracts electrical energy as an orbital body moves in and out of a magnetic field is very sound and would work. Sadly, Earth’s magnetic field prevents this from working on earth. A moon of Jupiter, however, could pull this off. Many have said, “but this violates the conservation of momentum! The planet keeps spinning!” Actually, it doesn’t. There’s two sides to the story of orbital mechanics.

          One, is that the input energy is forgotten. The energy that put the planets into motion in the beginning is an insane, mind boggling amount of power. More energy the mankind has collectively used over the course of civilization, and probably for the next several centuries even. We can calculate it, and count the zeros, but you really just can’t comprehend the sheer enormous amount of power that set that in motion.

          Secondly, well… they DO stop spinning, you just can’t perceive it. The Earth has a rotational kinetic energy of 2.138×10^29 J. That’s 2 with 29 zeros. A Megaton nuclear bomb has 4.18 x 10^15. 29 vs 15 doesn’t look like a lot, but remember each digit is actually a power of ten. 10^16 is 10 times more power, and 10^17 is 100 times. This is ONLY the spinning of Earth around it’s own axis. The energy of Earth spinning around the sun is much greater. Why does this matter? Let say we CAN generate power by spinning magnetic fields on Earth. That magnetic field will place a drag on the planet that slows it’s spinning. It’s spinning slows equal to the amount of power you pull, but as you can see… even pulling a Nuclear Bombs worth of power out of the spinning of the planet is like stealing a grain of sand from the beach. It happens, and if you do it longer enough there will eventually be no beach, but you can’t really tell in the heat of the moment.

          This is not to say that we SHOULDN’T employ these kinds of methods. I mean, ultimately that is what fossil fuels are. A HUGE amount of energy went into making the Sun. It blasts out a lot of energy in the form of light that fed plants that died and made oil. The amount of light the Sun will blast out is less than it took to make it in the first place, and this is the depression truth of our universe. It is slowly dying. Not a violent death, but a quiet fading to nothingness.

          • You certainly waste a ton of energy to try to convince people that this concept is impossible. You should be posting at a different forum where there are similar attitudes to yours.
            It may take people like us a long time to replicate the work of others. But I can assure you the covert military has had free energy reverse-engineered from offworld tech for decades now.
            You’re not opening your mind and never will. So please move on. No one will ever change your mind– and you will not deter determined minds.
            Just please shut up

      • In my opinion, it is possible to use an electronic device to replace the “lever of the magnet”. It can reduce friction. By attaching a rotating disc to a spy unit, and a device that monitors that part, to identify the rotation of the rotating disk, there is no need for “lever of the magnet” anymore.

        The magnet will now be changed magnetically from an AC voltage. So make sure the system will work forever, if enough power is supplied. This power source must be free (no need to be too big). Can relate to radiation energy in the universe: bit.ly/waterfreedomsystemhtml

    • Perpetual indicates infinite. Even if you could argue perpetual motion is possible (which it is) it’s not possible within earths atmosphere. Heard of a little thing called friction?

  9. Looking at the design and how fast magnetic repulsion strength dissipates compared to distance, I question if the top magnet can generate enough repulsive force to completely turn the wheel. A 1/2″ diameter x 1/8 thick neodymium magnet loses almost a 1/3 of its power in an 1/8″ of distance. It loses 75% of the force at a 1/4″. I am not saying this design will not work. I am questioning the present configuration based on magnetic attraction/repulsion and distance.

  10. It seems to me that if the magnets on the wheel are facing north and the other magnet is facing south torwatrd the north facing magnets this would work

  11. An uncalculatable number of astronomical bodies are floating in space, being pushed and pulled on the same path, rotating in the same direction without ceasing for billions of years at a time. However, we have a hard time beliving that the same electromagnetic and gravitational forces can spin a small wooden wheel? Humans have a long way to go; it’s about time we open up our minds a bit. “That’s impossible!” Is it really? Look around you.

    Some of these videos may well be faked experiments, but to say this is impossible? Naivete.

    • well…. astronomical bodies are spinning and moving slower and slower each second. Sun is getting colder. And big bang, which caused all those movement, was a reeeeeeeeeally strong bang. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but prove me wrong please, I’d like a perpetual motion device.
      p.s. im a pro creationist evolution theories fusion

  12. Lol, guess all of you by now have seen this exposed on YouTube. This model DOES NOT work. However, I done some research and experiments myself with a slightly different magnet. Magnet’s work best when made to push each other, NOT pull. I’m sure some of you are familiar with speaker magnet’s. They have a doughnut shape. Their north and south very different in many ways. Depending on how you lay them when flat they will push or pull each other. If you lay them in the pull position on a disc and spin them they WILL stop. However, if you lay them in the push position and spin them in opposite directions of each other they will run in opposite directions of each other until you stop them. I used two small biscuit motors out of an old CD player and they put out 2.5v at the speed the magnet’s were turning. I hooked them hot to ground leaving myself one pos+ and one neg-. Off these I was able to get 5v. Enough to make a device to charge my wife’s cell phone. She takes it showing it off to everyone. It’s about the size of the small CD player I started with. I personally DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU NAY SAYER’S THINK, I know this one work’s.

    • Àlvin could you supply a schematic for your device? I would like to try and replicate it. Do you think that this concept would work if the magnets were magnetically suspended to minimize friction? Thanks, Gary

  13. It takes just as much force to bring a magnet close to the same pole as another magnet as what you get when you allow it to push away. 1 + (-1) = 0, it never will equal +1. Just not possible!

  14. People I’m sorry. I want to believe that machines like this exist but they just can’t. The sooner people realize this and start devoting their curiosity to furthering real alternate forms such as wind and solar the faster our technology will progress. Don’t take my word for it though, I was obsessed with believing this type of machine would work and wouldn’t believe skeptics at all for a great deal of my life. In fact the word I would use to describe my feelings towards them would be hatred until I started taking physics classes in college, learned a little about magnetic fields, and attempted to make a magnetic driven motor myself. It’s a simple design, if you really want to know the truth just make one yourself. Until then do the scientific world a favor and stop verbalizing your assumptions. Since doing the study and finding out that I was wrong I have taken my own advice and only discuss my opinions aggressively after I have proven to myself that what I believe is the truth. The technology doesn’t work because no matter what you do you can not make a uni-pole magnet, meaning that you can not make a magnet with a positive end without a negative and so what happens is that yes the wheel is technically propelled by the equal polar end of the still magnet but almost just as instantaneously it is attracted to the opposite end. The wheel not only stops, it becomes locked into place from the attraction of the two magnets. And before you tell me that I don’t know what I’m talking about or that I didn’t do it right I urge you to conduct the experiment yourself. It doesn’t matter how simple or how complex you design it, it won’t work!

    • lol its so simple its mind boggling I completely agree Landen^^^.To everyone else: IT DOES NOT WORK. The friction produced by the arm hitting both movable magnets would slowly decrease the amount of force given by the first spin. Gauss principle is very interesting but does not provide perpetual motion. Familiarize yourself with it and it may make more sense. Also there is no engine that runs on “anything” in Russia and there is no such thing as e+ cold fusion(yet) and yes we have landed on the moon. Also no you do not need that aluminum foil hat. I cant stop laughing Landon!!!! This made me ACTUALLY LOL!!!! Why did we waste this much finger movement?????

      • Again why do I waste the ATP in my fingers on this…

        LOL! You really think ATP is the source of energy?

        What do you think of “high-energy phosphate bonds”?

    • Is there a way to change the change the attraction of a magnet. Sorry in advance if this is a dumb question, im a 9th grader in high school

      • Louie, no question is a dumb question. The universe has a comical way of keeping things in check. Their are certain laws that many scientists claim to understand but at the end of the day we just have to accept that they are what they are (although I’m not one to believe that these laws aren’t meant to be broken; every now and then someone comes along and changes the way we look at things and if you pursue a career in the sciences you could become one of these people) anyways as far as your question I will answer it with a story. Let’s say I had a simple bar magnet( the most generic of magnets) and I were to break it in half right down the middle. Instead of having 1 positive pole and 1 negative pole like I did to start with I will now have 2 separate magnets, the broken sections becoming the compliment of the unbroken sections. So now I will have 2 positive poles and 2 negative polls. I can keep doing this over and over but every time I do it will just be squaring my current amount of magnets.

        What you’re suggesting actually has a scientific term, or rather I should say science fiction, because the fundamental laws of the universe forbid it from happening. It would be a uni-pole magnet.

        • So I have a ridiculous sounding question but isn’t it true that our current laws of physics has a chance of being wrong? Like we still haven’t found that one time that it was false yet?

          Please don’t make fun of me i’m a junior high student that hasn’t learned much about physics yet.

      • As Landon alluded to, it depends what you mean by “magnet”. I’ll start at the beginning.

        Most magnets we see are made up of lots of tinier magnetic regions; and the smallest of these magnetic regions is that of a single atom. Magnetism comes from moving electric fields; that’s why we can create electromagnets by passing electricity through a wire at very high speeds. In atoms, magnetism comes from the way electrons naturally spin around the nucleus of an atom, and the magnetic-ness of any particular molecule or metal or substance is going to be affected by all sorts of different things, including the chemical bonds between atoms and so on.

        Iron is a cool element because its atoms are naturally very strong magnets, strong enough that we can see it anyway. But other elements can combine together to make magnetic metals: Alnico is a good example of a non-iron magnetic metal; it’s made of ALuminum, NIckel, and CObalt, AL-NI-CO. The electrons in alnico interact with the aluminum, nickel, and cobalt nuclei in a way that makes the metal magnetic.

        So why isn’t normal iron magnetic? Each atom combines with its neighbors to form tiny magnetic regions, but in large chunks of iron, these tiny magnetic regions don’t all necessarily align in the same direction. If you put these magnetic regions into a magnetic field, they will all slightly realign themselves with the other magnetic field, temporarily turning themselves into a magnet; but once you take the iron out of the magnetic field, it reverts back to its normal non-magnetic self. This is why magnets will stick to, say, the iron in a refrigerator; it’s because their magnetic field temporarily turns the iron in the refrigerator into a magnet itself.

        In order to turn iron into a permanent magnet, you have to force all these magnetic regions to point naturally in the same direction. It’s possible to do this by just putting it into a super-strong magnetic field and forcing all the magnetic regions to point in the same direction; but it’s easier if you first melt the iron into a liquid, putting the molten iron into a strong magnetic field. Then, as the iron cools within the magnetic field, it forms magnetic regions that are all pointing in the same direction.

        So, to answer your question: if you want to change the attraction of a magnet, you have to make its tiny magnetic regions all line up in a different direction. To do that, you have to put the magnet in a stronger magnetic field and force all those regions to realign in the direction you want.

        Hope that helps!

        • “they will all slightly realign themselves with the other magnetic field,
          temporarily turning themselves into a magnet; but once you take the
          iron out of the magnetic field”

          So what exactly is it about moving the field away that causes them to revert? Would this represent that the actual field wasn’t strong enough to “physically” align the atomic polarity and instead created an effect like stretching a spring?

    • what if you used two still magnets? with ONLY the positive poles facing the centre magnet? that way the positive force would be greater than that of the negative force (because the ratio would be 3:1)

        • EXACTLY! Build it, test it and conclude what the principles behind it are or are not.

          The build above uses the max point to force the repelling magnet up, gravity however does the work of returning the magnet back to the original position. I’m not sure why everyone keeps thinking that this would be “Free” energy. It’s clear that there are external and internal forces working here although they may not be fully understood.

          The classical model of physic uses Einsteins theory of relativity. Which I don’t believe is fully correct but does apply to several areas of science studies. The dynamic theory of gravity is more accurate. But hey, we are learning more and more everyday! That’s what really counts in the end.

    • If you look at the little spinning-magnet toy from the end of the video, it seems to work on the same principle as a metal ball resting on two steel rod tracks where the tracks aren’t quite parallel but wider on one end. Gravity is uniformly directing the ball down, and so because of the ball’s shape, it moves towards the wider end of the tracks where it can dangle down more than it can at the skinny end.

      Everything I’ve ever learned about magnets (in actual physics courses, mind) tells me that the way they’ve arranged their magnets in the video *should* create a global maximum of magnetic field strength at the point where the two neodymium magnets are closest together and thus overlap the most; the global minimum should be at the point where the magnets overlap least, and the region between should form a gradient between these. They’re def not creating a unipolar magnet, just a really fancy loop magnet, where one end emerges uniformly out of a circular belt region and the other emerges from both poles of the resulting cylinder. I don’t see any physical reason why a magnet, while being brushed up against this belt pole and placed on one side of the local maximum, would move through the local max instead of away from it; gravity def doesn’t work that way and I don’t see why any other fundamental force of nature would.

      I mean, yeah, you’re right, I haven’t actually tried making one (and I don’t care to: everything I’ve ever learned about magnets tells me that you can’t get “free energy” from them, no matter where you put them, and everything I’ve ever learned about magnet manufacturing tells me that using them as an energy storage mechanism would be extremely, extremely, extremely, extremely inefficient).

      But none of that changes for me the idea that the little spinner toy in the video should be possible, and if it’s not, then I’m hella more concerned with explaining to myself where my theoretical thinking went wrong than wasting time playing santa for myself.

      • It’s not possible, because it violates conservation of energy. That’s enough to rule it out right there.

        • World was flat. Wrong. Sun, planets and stars rotated around earth. Wrong. Pyramids were built 3500 years ago. Wrong. Conservation of energy law. Wrong. We can only invent when we perceive the more subtle causes/effects. Perception is advancing/evolving. Allow new ideas to replace old ideas. They will anyway, sooner or later :D.

          • Nice words, but you’re dreaming. Science gains knowledge, but doesn’t go backwards. The things you mention weren’t scientific theories – they were guesses and often based on what people “wanted to believe” for religious reasons and so on. We’re not going to discover suddenly that the world is flat after all.

            Obviously we’d all like to believe we can cheat the conservation laws – it would make for a nice world. When you’ve built one of these *yourself* talk to me again. And I still won’t believe you unless you run it in my presence and let me kick its tires. Short of that I’ll just believe you are trying to scam me the same way you’re letting these people scam you.

            If this sort of thing worked, do you really think no one would be selling devices based on it? Do you really, honestly believe that there is some world conspiracy that is so powerful that it can suppress something *completely* that would utterly change the world?? We may be far gone, but we aren’t *that* far gone yet.

            If you really believe this then you should be building one to power your home, trying to figure out how to power your car with it, etc. They don’t look that hard to build in the video, do they? GO FOR IT. If it works, you can do it.

            I think what you really want is to complain. To spew forth about the evil oil companies and the evil rich that are hiding things like this to hold down the common folk.

            It’s easy to fall for the “energy from magnets” thing because you can FEEL them pull on each other.e That magnet is definitely doing work when it pulls another magnet to it – that’s a force through a distance and that is work. But a boulder sitting at the top of a hill can do work as it rolls down the hill as well. That amount of work – and no more. Then you have to lug it back up the hill to use it again – you have to put exactly that much work (plus some because you’re not 100% efficient) back in.

            Our electric motors and generators are able to do continuous work because we basically remove the magnetic field while we move thing back into the “starting position,” then re-engage the field so that it will do another increment of work for us. It produces continuously positive *mechanical* work. But the process of removing and re-establishing the magnetic field requires electrical work. There is energy in that magnetic field – but it’s a fixed amount of energy that you can calculate. To get the field to “be there” you must do work of one sort or another.

            I don’t know why I beat my head against this wall – people like you don’t listen. It just pains me to see gullible fools letting charlatans pull the wool over their eyes. But you can’t be protected from your own foolishness.

    • Shame on you. Using Tesla’s picture and dismissing this all as a trickery is wrong. Tesla was a man of science and even went as far to state that actual testing and scientific hands on research is the best method to obtain true results. Your post it’s self it’s hypocritical in the fact that you say to “stop verbalizing your assumptions.” Yet above you’ve clearly inserted your assumptions. You really need to change your picture to Edison and leave Tesla out of your life. Clearly out of respect for Tesla. Congrats you took a Physic’s class in college. Those classes are based of old scientific models.

      • You speak rubbish stuff..and have NOIDEA abot what opinion Tesla had. Study a little his views before you speak

    • ” I want to believe that machines like this exist but they just can’t.” They do exist. Dry cell batteries. You don’t “charge” them. They are made of zinc, carbon, and ammonium chloride, and manganese dioxide and they “produce” electricity until the energy used to make them runs out. They produce electricity because the chemicals contain potential energy. The potential energy becomes kinetic energy when the circuit is completed. This machine is an energy storage device. The magnets contain potential energy. It won’t run forever, but stores the energy that was used to start it. It runs because of gravity, energy applied to start it, and the potential energy contained in the magnets. It likely has very little power, and will eventually stop and need to be restarted.

      Now, consider this: Most of the energy we get here on earth comes from the sun. There is heat energy from the earth also. Where does the sun it get its “input energy” to output what it sends to us? Where does geothermal energy come from? What is the input to cause the output of geothermal energy? These things are just as “mysterious” as this device; unless one considers gravity. Gravity is what ultimately gives us geothermal energy, and gravity, combined with and causing hydrogen fusion, is what makes the sun hot. There is not an “external” energy source being applied to the sun, but something started it, and it puts out massive amounts of energy. Explain that.

      • Well, dry cells do store energy as chemical potential energy. But that energy is converted to electrical energy on connection, not kinetic. To get kinetic energy you need a further step (a motor, a solenoid, whatever). Magnets do not release energy in this way – you don’t “deplete” a permanent magnetic (though you can destroy its magnetism, for instance by heating to the Curie temperature).

        Explain the sun? A cloud of gas in space pulled itself into a tighter and tighter space due to gravity. Eventually the pressure and temperature of compression reached a level that would support nuclear fusion. Once it started it was self-sustaining due to the energy released by the fusion process itself.

    • I have conducted the experiment and it WORKS. You tell me that a steam-engine don;t work because you have no idea about the VALVE-concept.. pff…

    • Landon: Consider that most Scientists prior to WWII did Not believe Nuclear Energy could ever be harnessed or controlled ; even “Albert Einstein” was one of those ignorant disbelievers.!! It took the Manhattan Project to convert their arrogance & the atomic bomb to expose their level of ignorance ; so people not accepting what is possible today, are just as likely to be proved wrong , in the fullness of time.
      ……………………..
      Advancing Technology provides the possibility for more inventions & Magnets continue to improve in ways that makes breakthrough innovations possible. I respect anyone making an honest attempt at building new technology ; more so than those that live in a stagnant world of what can’t be done.
      ……………………..
      Others out there will go on to succeed,,, despite you giving up…

      • There’s a key difference: there is actually is energy to be had in nuclear reactions. To whatever extent those physicists you mentioned stated that we’d never be able to harness nuclear energy, they were stating opinion as to feasibility, not claiming that the energy wasn’t there.

        In this case the energy simply isn’t there. Wasting one’s time on ideas like this are just that: wasting one’s time.

        • Education even in failed experimentation isn’t a waste of time. In fact it can drive someone to be more creative, Innovative, and or come up with an answer no one else has thought of to fix the issue.

    • I do not think you need to have a single pole magnet but a momentary blockage of a magnetic field. At first I agreed with your logic because I was taught in physics you cannot block a magentic field and that has turned out to be false. There has been a material called mu metal around for a while that will disperse a magentic field and I think using mu metal a clever engineer could come up with a toy such as this however, powering a generator and producing a decent amount of force would be a significant intellectual obstacle. In otherwords ” never say never” it “may” possible but we will most likely discover multidimentional space travel first and this blog just gives true meaning to “spinning your wheels”

    • huh………… maybe you should google the lockridge device ! & get your head out of the sand…………………sheeple………Lol………..

    • Landon you are correct in the basics of this but unfortunately you didnt think out of the box. for one you structure the magnets in the wheel in such a way that you wont use the attraction at all. just the push. also the correct angles are very important.

      I know this because I did it myself and it only took me just over an hour to figure it out. Im still shocked as to how easy it is and yet some many educated people on the internet say its nots possible. Im really shocked. maybe you need to put the books down and forget everything you’ve learnt about it. just use push and angles right and you will see it works.

  15. If friction is an issue why not make the main wheel levitate magnetically so there’s no friction? And I don’t see any evidence that it’s a hoax, the basic idea seems to me to make sense…

    • Tsu, that’s the right line of thinking if your goal is to have a wheel that spins for a long time. Remove as many sources of loss as you can. Run it in a vacuum to get rid of air drag. When you mention magnetic levitation you’re really saying “use magnetic bearings to reduce bearing loss.” That’s a perfectly valid idea, though even magnetic bearings would not be perfect; you’d just lower the losses, not eliminate them.

      That said, the claims around this thing are not that you can make something spin forever. The claims are that you can make something DELIVER ENERGY OUTPUT forever. Once you start taking energy out (via losses or for “useful work”) it will stop, and the amount of energy you get out will be less than the amount you originally put in.

      I find it rather astounding that we are in the 21st century and yet there are still people who haven’t “gotten it” that energy conservation is in fact a feature of reality.

      • If i could make a generator that stopped after a day of running and i had to go crank it up to start again. This to me is as perpetual as we need. Of course anything over time is going to wear down and need new parts. How long does something need to run to be called perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is all around us as electrons rotate around the Nucleus of an atom.

        • Yes, and the planets also rotate and revolve around the sun “perpetually enough.” The “no perpetual motion” rule is really not stated well – in theory perpetual motion IS possible – if you can eliminate all sources of energy loss in the system so that its energy level says constant then it will go forever. Our inability to design such that will work outside of a laboratory environment is more of an engineering limitation than a scientific prohibition.

          But a device like that would just be a play toy – a novelty you could put on your desk and enjoy looking at. What is really forbidden scientifically is a system that can *provide energy* for external use permanently. Let’s say you beat all the engineering limitations and you have a flywheel that will spin forever. The minute you start using it to turn an electrical generator or something like that you’re extracting energy, and it will immediately slow down and stop.

          Flywheel energy storage is a real thing, and absolutely does not violate the laws of physics. The amount of energy you can get out is some “less than 100” percentage of the amount of energy the flywheel can store without flying apart due to internal stresses and so forth. There are companies that make “flywheel batteries,” so the technology is good enough for some applications. But not good enough, for example, to let you drive a car around all day.

          Contrary to what many people seem to think, magnets don’t “store energy” that can be extracted for use. The structure of the magnet will have internal energy, but you can’t extract it using a method like the one presented here. Permanent magnets are, basically, *permanent*. They can lose their magnetism, but usually only over a very very long time.

          I understand how great it would be if something like this would work, but it just won’t. What I don’t understand is how people can really think that “mainstream science” is suppressing this sort of thing. You can’t keep a group that large “on point” in a conspiracy for any sort of long period of time. There would be every incentive for one of them to “leave the club” and go get rich by “discovering” the truth.

    • The friction isn’t the issue; devices that produce energy can still work even with friction (like, your car for example). Pushing the friction from “small” to “very very very small / zero” would only gain you a small bit of energy. The issue is that you can’t extract energy at all from the system without stopping it, because there’s no new energy coming in from anywhere. Permanent magnets used in this way will not deliver steady state net energy to a system – the implication in the video that they do is fraudulent.

      If you really have a viable source of energy you don’t have to make friction zero – you only have to make it small.

      On the other hand, if there is no energy source and you’re relying on the thing to just “coast,” and you want it to coast “forever” or “longer,” then getting the friction down as low as humanly possible is vital.

      You have to be clear on what you’re talking about here. If you just want something to spin forever, without delivering any energy, that’s not a violation of the laws of physics. It would make a great desktop novelty. But if you want something that delivers energy to you forever, without energy coming in from any source (or that delivers MORE energy than is coming in from a source), that’s not going to happen. Period, full stop.

  16. To all the narrow minded, this is not perpetual motion, energy is continuously repleted in the magnet from the magnetic field of the Earth. It will last about 400 years for the magnets to wear off.
    Just tell me why the magnets on your fridge do not fall off? There is much energy required to stick on the metal, where does it come from? Magnetic energy is amazing!
    This motor is speed limited by the gravity driven upper magnet. On a bigger design, with lets say 4 or 8 generators in parallel, with a little electric gate with feedback to control the speed, coupled with a dynamo, the output electricity would be greater than the small input, maybe 4 to 6 times greater as we can find on youtube… On other kind of design…. Surely enough for a hair blower! 😉

    • Oh my….. Energy is all around us you just have to see it through the right lens. I think those of us in need of power and paying for it are the ones blaming the “big energy companies”. I have my home built batteries and solar array. I skimped and bought a windmill. There are solutions you just need to open your eyes. I do not pay one cent for my power 🙂

  17. You REALLY don’t see how there could be any trick involved? In what is the most well understood hoaxes around? A simple air compressor off camera blowing the wheel to make it turn. Which is why they NEVER allow you to hear the sound.

  18. Hey I was wondering what that thing is with metal loop circles around it with a ball or something in the middle of it there may not be a ball in it but I know it’s a model and it sets up and spins

  19. This is fake, what you dont see is the compressed air blowing on it to spin it. you can clearly see it slow down right before the video ends.

  20. valveman00 gemmakermz Do you want to get something for nothing?  Then tap into that big ole fireball in the sky and artificial photosynthesis, storing the hydrogen gas.

    • Why waste 70% of the energy just to store it in a novel way (hydrogen)? Hydrogen is not an economically viable or efficient way to store energy. Also, compressed hydrogen is extremely dangerous. HFC vehicles have a large powertrain taking up much space inside a vehicle reducing practicality, their performance is abysmal, their safety is dubious, and their efficiency is no better than a gas-powered vehicle’s.

      Solar? Yes. Hydrogen? Absolutely not.

  21. i would like to buy a small moter like this for fun.
    is there anywhere a site where i can buy those small devices.
    i don’t have the time to do the handicrafts by myself.
    thanks for link

  22. so rather then the two i’ll call them kick magnets top and bottom would having more, ie: either side, increase the speed or help with smoother spin.

  23. Would like to add some info here if it helps.  All of the magnets in that device operate in the repulsion mode.  The top magnet is polarized at its ends and repels the “armature” magnets.  The repulsion is strongest for the most widely spaced spaced armature magnets and weakest for the narrowest spacing.  If the top magnet were not raised, the armature would abruptly stop rotating at the transition from narrowest to widest spacing.  However, when top magnet is moved upward by the cam at the transition point, it is also repelled in the upward direction by the widely-spaced magnets.  As the armature passes that point, gravity pulls the magnet downward, repeating the cycle.  Note a similar process for the cam-operated shorter magnet at the bottom of the armature.  The magnets are all neodymium-iron-boron.  It would take thousands of years for them to be demagnetized down to half power.

    • IT doesn’t matter. The amount of energy required to life the arm is more than you get out. Which is why…without compressed air blowing on it…this won’t spin even one time.

  24. ahahahahahah! I’ve just seen the oak on google. It was like I suspected. No Nobel price this time but a very good oak though!

  25. I read more comments and someone argued that the motion is produced by the white weight being dropped down after having been lifted by an external force (the experimenter’s hand). That makes sense but you have to account for frictions there too so the device should stop at some point and it doesn’t in any reasonable time in the video so I believe there is a trick. Some external hidden power sources like a compressor or airflow. But it’s very well disguised I must admit. By all accounts if such a device works the author should be applying for a Nobel prize. Why doesn’t it come out for the honour?

    • Jamie, you’re right on target. Something is being hidden; this is a falsified video. If anything like this worked our world would be filled with gadgets based on the principle.

  26. I’m thinking: wouldn’t be possible that the video is genuine but as soon as you start to extract some power from the device you stop it so it doesn’t run any longer? I’m not versed in Physics so don’t make fun of me. I know this is against the 2 principle of Thermodynamic

    • No..it is not possible at all. Perpetual motion is not possible. Therefore, any device claiming to be perpetual motion is not genuine.

      • Agreed. It may turn out that cold fusion does, in fact, work, and it may even turn out that there’s a way to capitalize on zero point energy (though I doubt both, especially the latter). But even if we do figure it out, we will be getting the energy from a well-defined origin.

        I used to work at a university research facility that dealt with electric / magnetic energy conversion. We got lots and lots of… “interesting” letters.

    • You could design a system such that the “pinned” location is a state of high potential energy (think of pinning a ball near the top of a “valley”). Then when you pull the pin the system will fall toward its lower potential configuration. It might overshoot that position, climb the potential gradient in the other direction until it stopped, and then do the same thing in reverse. Back and forth. With rotary motion that could be made to work so that you had a continuous motion in one direction. But all the time there would be friction losses, so you’d gradually lose your energy of motion and eventually the thing will come to rest at the bottom of the potential “valley.”

      You can make devices like this if you use an electromagnet instead of a permanent magnet, and you manipulate the strength of the field so that it adds energy to the moving piece in one direction but doesn’t remove the energy in the other direction. That’s the basic principle of electric motor design. But to manipulate the field the right way requires that you put electrical energy into the thing via the electromagnet coil. Permanent magnets don’t turn on and off the right way, and they *don’t change*. You could imagine that we lived in a world where magnets actually stored energy and would give that energy up in a system like this one, but in that case you’d “use up” the magnet’s energy just the same way you use up a tank of gasoline. We don’t live in that world; magnets do not release energy in a way that makes such a thing possible.

      And hey, don’t be ashamed of your state of education; everyone has to start learning somewhere. My education does equip me to analyze this thing in a highly detailed way, but I didn’t. It’s enough for me to know that energy is conserved, so if I see something that professes to deliver energy without consuming any I know that I don’t even need to bother with a detailed analysis.

  27. for those whom say not posible to make a magnetic motor– your living on one. our solar syster is run/controlled by magnetic forces. the earth itself is a magnetic motor, its been running for a VERY long time taking 24hrs to revolve and 365 days for the travel around the sun. dont forget gravity is also magnetic in a different form. so mag motor already exists, now put your brains to work and make one that will put the oil barons out of buisnes.

    • Gravity is not magnetism, sorry but you are very wrong here, based on current scientific knowledge. Newton’s Law of universal gravitation states that bodies of matter attract other bodies of matter, known as gravity (not magnetism). However this was later trumped by Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, which states that matter distorts space-time itself and therefore smaller bodies of matter, such as our Earth compared with our Sun, are actually falling straight into the space-time distortion (bending of space) caused by the body of matter.

  28. I was imagining how you could advance the timing of the upper magnet in order to create much more momentum. This seems like a reality to me.

  29. Your not creating energy, it’s is changing forms. Magnetic energy to mechanical energy. As long as the momentum has enough energy to lift the bar magnet to complete the cycle it would work. If lifting the bar magnet uses up all the stored momentum energy, it will not work.

    • There is no such thing as “magnetic energy.” Know why? Because magnets are not batteries. They don’t store energy. They have magnetic fields…which is a FORCE. IT is not energy. Since they don’t have energy, there is no energy you can extract from them. If there was, there would be a mathematical formula to determine how much energy you could get out of it. But there isn’t a formula like that.

      What is crazy is that this is a JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL concept. And if you don’t even understand that level of science, then why are you commenting on this?

  30. Isn’t there a film of a guy who has a larger magnetic engine driving his car. 90 per cent of the energy drives the wheels and lights etc and the extra one p.c goes to keep the engine running. I’ve seen film of his car driving across America and wold be very sad if it was a hoax. He will send details of how to build one if his engines to anyone who cares t write to him.
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Magnet_Motors

  31. In the description on the Youtube page for that video, the uploader added the following, explaining it to be a hoax:

    “ACTUALIZACIÓN (20/03/2013) En las fotos se observa que tiene un compresor de aire:
    https://www.youtube.com/redirect?q=http%3A%2F%2Fgoo.gl%2Fk5Wja&session_token=j3q63ZFR30jDY6CgiZhhxH1iO5F8MTM4ODYzNjUwOEAxMzg4NTUwMTA4
    Gracias por los comentarios.
    El aparato tiene un compresor de aire encima, dando la ayuda necesaria para que gire.
    It has an air compressor above it.”
    Google Translate:
    “UPDATE (20/03/2013) In the photos is seen to have an air compressor:
    http://goo.gl/k5Wja
    Thanks for the feedback.
    The apparatus has an air compressor on top, giving the necessary help to rotate.
    It has an air compressor above it.”

  32. REALLY? Indefinitely? 5 seconds? Sorry old thing this video has been around far longer than Feb 2013 and has been debunked by millions (although grasped at by …sadly….many more). It is a hodge-podge (as are sthe majority of these either fraud or crackpot claims) of “stuff that does work”..that illustrates nothing, “stuff that LOOKS as if it works” (which may or may not support the final claims) and….utter garbage, which IS used to support the final claims. You are obviously looking for that5 pot of gold and it MAY be found, but I doubt that ib these days it will be in a garage. Those days have passed.

  33. You guys are talking about two different things. Yves is talking about manually lifting and lowering the magnet, which _arguably_ makes that machine work, I want to see a real demo and try for myself….Lone, you are talking about the cam-operated one. It does not work and is a fake. And it IS doing work…anything that moves requires energy, so IF that machine actually kept going, WITHOUT outside energy applied, it would be creating energy. Bujt we see a few seconds of video (hardly perpetual) of a machine that has quite erratic speeds, while supposedly under the influence of a constant force (its own system).

  34. But surely the “motor” can run backwards if you use repulsion intsead of attraction. But yes I agree that the last one is a fake, because (apart from the obvious)  I have DLd this video and looked at it frame by frame, confirming what seems to happen: the rotor changes speed erratically throughout….and not just over each revolution.

  35. from Bob the builder…  Didn’t anyone notice that the working model in the video was running backwards?  The principle of the hand powered model is that the magnets want to be closer together, so in the influence of the metal bar that closes the magnetic field, the force pulling the magnets toward the bar rotates the drum to the place where the magnets are closer together.  Picudo is correct about where the energy comes from in the hand powered model.  The working model is obviously a fake, easily done with a jet of air or some more complicated method.  On another note:  permanent magnets don’t run down, that’s why they are called permanent!  Heat will damage them by melting the structure and collapsing the alinement, but making them do work, if possible, wouldn’t damage them.

    • Permanent magnets are not called permanent magnets because they don’t run down. They are called permanent magnets to distinguish them from electromagnets that can be switched on and off, or reversed at all.

  36. The energy to move the wheel simply comes from the kinetic energy of the moving hand, not “from” magnetism.   If the person did not move the magnet the Wheel wouldn’t move.  It’s simply like pushing the Wheel with your hand, only through magnetic forcé.  No strange miracle here.

  37. Interesting, however the magnets themselves unless “recharged” using a renewable source just become a form of energy storage.
    One possible workaround would be the use of a radioactive isotope such as 63Ni in the magnet to continuously regenerate the field..

      • I was confused by your statement at first, and then I realized. Just like other potential energies, the energy isn’t exactly stored by the item itself, but by the situation. Much like water in a high reservoir is used to “store” potential energy for later conversion to electricity, the water by itself, removed from the high reservoir doesn’t store that energy. Similarly, the magnet doesn’t store energy per-se, but can be made to have potential energy by virtue of its’ situation by placement near another magnet or a magnetic material. The magnet does store something – a potential – the separation of magnetic poles which creates / defines its’ magnetism and it is this, when in a particular situation, that has the potential energy.

        • You are confused by a lot more than that. Magnets have no energy. They don’t have kinetic energy and they don’t have potential energy. They don’t have energy period. Magnetic have a magnetic field…that is a FORCE. Force is not energy. It is NOTHING like water being stored at a higher elevation waiting to be used when it falls to a lower elevation.

          Tell me something…if magnets are stored energy, then give me the formula for converting a magnet’s strength to energy. Because if it had energy, they would be one. Just as you can tell how much energy you would get from a set quantity of water if you know how far it will fall.

          I know a lot of non-scientists such as yourself see two magnets move away from each other when you push one closer to it. But do you know what is making that second magnet move? YOU. The energy YOU put into the system with your hand moving the first magnet.

          Magnets can only be used to CONVERT energy from one form to another. It is GREAT to use magnets to convert that falling water energy (that is in a form that humans generally can’t use all that much) into electricity via a magnetic generator. But again…that generator is using the energy from the falling water..NOT the magnets. And, of course, the energy that you get out of the generator is less than what the falling water puts in.

          I honestly don’t understand why people still comment with statements like yours. IF you think that, then you clearly are not interested in science. You clearly haven’t taken a science class since junior high school. So if you are not interested in science, why are you commenting on a science article?

  38. Yves Laurin that’s why it looks so compelling. i think i would try to change the cam arrangement, which seems to take too much away from the motion of the rotor. perhaps some shielded portion of the top magnet? i don’t know.
    on the other hand, even IF this works, what good is it unless you can attach something to it to make use of the motion? unless that happens, it remains a visual oddity. :/

  39. In a way it make sense, he start with a linear motor, we all know it does work, the problem happen when you fold it to make it round, as it reach the end/start point, it will normally just stop there and that is why he his lifting the other magnet, if the force to lift the magnet is small compare to the momentum, it could work in theory

  40. Genius, however how to create enough force to convert to energy that can be used.  It will need to be 100 tines larger.  A perpetual turbine.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.