Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: How would you improve this perpetual motion machine!

  1. Top | #1
    Member ***
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,242
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,904
    Rep Power
    0

    How would you improve this perpetual motion machine!

    Here is an opportunity for experienced engineers to put their technical expertise on display...

    Thanks to physicists, metaphysicists, metaphysicians and other people without the relevant expertise to abstain from posting, although you're welcome to look and take notes. It's never too late to learn from those who know these things.

    The rough sketch below explains a possible principle for a perpetual motion machine...


    Perpetual motion machine

    The magnet at the top pulls the metal ball up the ramp. When the ball gets at
    the top of the ramp, it drops through to the hole and returns by the curved slope
    to the bottom of the ramp, where it is again attracted up the ramp by the magnet.

    Question: What improvements do you think would have to be made to improve the contraption to the extent that the ball would do at least a few cycles?

    Please note that the general principle should not be affected by your improvements.

    Thank you to limit yourself to three or four modifications at most.

    Thank you also to explain the modifications you propose.

    Please note I already tried to have suggestions from engineers supposed to have an interest in logic but it turns out they don't understand the question to begin with. So, perhaps people here will be more practical in their approach to it.
    EB

  2. Top | #2
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    24,417
    Archived
    96,752
    Total Posts
    121,169
    Rep Power
    95
    How does this do anything at all? If the magnet is powerful enough to pull the ball up the ramp why doesn't it pull the ball up the curved path instead as that's a lower energy path.

  3. Top | #3
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    21,553
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,030
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    How does this do anything at all? If the magnet is powerful enough to pull the ball up the ramp why doesn't it pull the ball up the curved path instead as that's a lower energy path.
    So it will run backwards.

    This OP makes no more sense here than it did the first time it was presented - There's plenty of ways to make this setup 'run' - cycle the ball around the tracks - but none that don't involve either a concealed store of energy (battery, coiled spring, etc.), or an external energy source (Solar cell, human intervention, etc.), or breaking the laws of physics (paint the underside of the straight track with unobtainium, which blocks magnetic fields), or some other 'cheat'.

    There are loads of ways to give the strong impression that you have built a perpetual motion machine, and some are very subtle. Often engineers and scientists are the easiest people to fool with these things - they are used to dealing with clever but essentially honest people, and are therefore often suckers for cheating and misdirection, leading to the erroneous conclusion that if they can't spot the cheating, there isn't any.

    That's why the best debunkers of such nonsense are often stage magicians and 'psychics', whose livelihood depends on fooling people into believing things that are untrue.

    There's no way to make a similar machine to this one cycle even once without an energy store or energy source. There are loads of ways to fool people into thinking that you have - but fooling people (even very smart people) isn't difficult at all.

  4. Top | #4
    Member ***
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,242
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel View Post
    How does this do anything at all? If the magnet is powerful enough to pull the ball up the ramp why doesn't it pull the ball up the curved path instead as that's a lower energy path.
    And yet another one amongst the bright, smart and educated who can't even get himself to try and understand the bloody question to begin with.
    EB

  5. Top | #5
    Member ***
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,242
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    This OP makes no more sense here than it did the first time it was presented - There's plenty of ways to make this setup 'run' - cycle the ball around the tracks - but none that don't involve either a concealed store of energy (battery, coiled spring, etc.), or an external energy source (Solar cell, human intervention, etc.), or breaking the laws of physics (paint the underside of the straight track with unobtainium, which blocks magnetic fields), or some other 'cheat'.

    There are loads of ways to give the strong impression that you have built a perpetual motion machine, and some are very subtle. Often engineers and scientists are the easiest people to fool with these things - they are used to dealing with clever but essentially honest people, and are therefore often suckers for cheating and misdirection, leading to the erroneous conclusion that if they can't spot the cheating, there isn't any.
    Question: What improvements do you think would have to be made to improve the contraption to the extent that the ball would do at least a few cycles?

    Nothing else but the bloody question.
    EB

  6. Top | #6
    Veteran Member James Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,832
    Archived
    5,844
    Total Posts
    8,676
    Rep Power
    55
    There must be some point where the pull of the magnet is weaker than the pull of gravity. One might have to fiddle with the angles of the ascending and descending slides.

    But I expect that the upwards slope would end up being very shallow, which means the ball would start a long way away from the magnet, which means the ball would not be strongly influenced by the magnet.

    Gravity has a constant exertion on the ball throughout the entire mechanism, whereas the magnet's influence drops off the further away it is. So the magnet's exertion has to be stronger than gravity's exertion down at the bottom of the ramp. But it must be less than gravity's exertion plus the potential energy at the top of the ramp. Might be difficult finding that sweet spot.

    Other potential problems: the influence of the magnet would have to be strong enough to pull the ball up the ramp from the bottom, but not so strong that the ball jumps the hole at the top.

    Also, some design would be necessary so that at the end of the downward descent, the ball has a clear smooth path up the ramp, because at the full distance, even the slightest interference would block the ball from starting its upward ascent.

  7. Top | #7
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    21,553
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,030
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    This OP makes no more sense here than it did the first time it was presented - There's plenty of ways to make this setup 'run' - cycle the ball around the tracks - but none that don't involve either a concealed store of energy (battery, coiled spring, etc.), or an external energy source (Solar cell, human intervention, etc.), or breaking the laws of physics (paint the underside of the straight track with unobtainium, which blocks magnetic fields), or some other 'cheat'.

    There are loads of ways to give the strong impression that you have built a perpetual motion machine, and some are very subtle. Often engineers and scientists are the easiest people to fool with these things - they are used to dealing with clever but essentially honest people, and are therefore often suckers for cheating and misdirection, leading to the erroneous conclusion that if they can't spot the cheating, there isn't any.
    Question: What improvements do you think would have to be made to improve the contraption to the extent that the ball would do at least a few cycles?

    Nothing else but the bloody question.
    EB
    There are no ways to make the ball cycle even once that don't include the addition of a store of energy, or an external energy source.

    There's an almost infinite number of ways to make it 'work' if you allow these.

    I have already suggested a couple; Personally I think the electromagnet idea is my favourite, but lots of other options exist - a spring loaded ram to flick the ball up the ramp when it reaches to bottom would be fun.

  8. Top | #8
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,857
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Here is an opportunity for experienced engineers to put their technical expertise on display...Thanks to physicists, metaphysicists, metaphysicians and other people without the relevant expertise to abstain from posting, although you're welcome to look and take notes. It's never too late to learn from those who know these things.

    The rough sketch below explains a possible principle for a perpetual motion machine...


    Perpetual motion machine

    The magnet at the top pulls the metal ball up the ramp. When the ball gets at
    the top of the ramp, it drops through to the hole and returns by the curved slope
    to the bottom of the ramp, where it is again attracted up the ramp by the magnet.

    Question: What improvements do you think would have to be made to improve the contraption to the extent that the ball would do at least a few cycles?

    Please note that the general principle should not be affected by your improvements.

    Thank you to limit yourself to three or four modifications at most.

    Thank you also to explain the modifications you propose.

    Please note I already tried to have suggestions from engineers supposed to have an interest in logic but it turns out they don't understand the question to begin with. So, perhaps people here will be more practical in their approach to it.
    EB
    Ok. I read the post. As an engineer 'perpetual motion' is a non starter. If it is perpetual motion you are looking for it is not possible, many have tried. There is no possible modification that will result in a self sustain motion. That is the logic of it.

    If you apply for a US patent for a device that is self sustain once started and never stops it will be rejected outright.

    metaphysicists, metaphysicians and other people without the relevant expertise That's you all over.

  9. Top | #9
    Member ***
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,242
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,904
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    There must be some point where the pull of the magnet is weaker than the pull of gravity.
    There would be in infinity of them. So, where do you mean exactly?

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    One might have to fiddle with the angles of the ascending and descending slides.
    OK, that's acceptable, within reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    But I expect that the upwards slope would end up being very shallow, which means the ball would start a long way away from the magnet, which means the ball would not be strongly influenced by the magnet.
    Ah, fair point. The longer the ramp, the weaker the pull of the magnet at the bottom of the ramp.

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    Gravity has a constant exertion on the ball throughout the entire mechanism, whereas the magnet's influence drops off the further away it is. So the magnet's exertion has to be stronger than gravity's exertion down at the bottom of the ramp.
    If so the ball goes up.

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    But it must be less than gravity's exertion plus the potential energy at the top of the ramp. Might be difficult finding that sweet spot.
    What do you mean "potential energy" here?

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    Other potential problems: the influence of the magnet would have to be strong enough to pull the ball up the ramp from the bottom, but not so strong that the ball jumps the hole at the top.
    Fair point. Fast already suggested an elongated hole and a "plastic blade angled such that the ball will be caused to take a downward trajectory". I take it the blade would come across the path of the ball on the ramp, immediately above the hole. Seems an effective solution.

    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    Also, some design would be necessary so that at the end of the downward descent, the ball has a clear smooth path up the ramp, because at the full distance, even the slightest interference would block the ball from starting its upward ascent.
    Fair point.

    Still, for now, I don't see the ball even going ten cycles. You brought up a number of crucial points but not much in terms of solutions.
    EB

Similar Threads

  1. Help improve this perpetual motion machine!
    By Speakpigeon in forum Logic and Epistemology
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 04-18-2019, 04:55 PM
  2. How to Improve Capitalism
    By AthenaAwakened in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 06-03-2015, 07:52 AM
  3. How do you improve voter turnout?
    By Blahface in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 06-16-2014, 02:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •