Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Free Energy Mylow Magnet Motor

MikeHedge said:
magnetic energy motors..
Click to expand...

Funny ... there's nothing special in magnetic energy. It's about the work done by a generator when building up currents in a circuit. And just because of this energy conservation principle one says the energy is stored in the magnetic field.
 
MikeHedge said:
well.... lets hope that somehow the laws can be stretched a bit to include people making magnetic energy motors..

http://www.steorn.com/orbo/technology/

Mike
Click to expand...
Mike, there are plenty of magnetic motors out there. The fan in my bedroom uses AC power and magnets to make the fan blades spin. Tesla coils power HMI ballasts. Magnetism is already highly exploited in many types of motors. Spinning a magnet inside a coiled wire induces a current inside a wire. My point is there's no such thing as FREE energy. Power output equals power input, you can't get something for nothing, there is always a cost to any energy source. You can't pull it out of your ass. This nerd on YouTube has done nothing but make a fancy Lazy Susan.
 
Jonathan Stevenson said:
Mike, there are plenty of magnetic motors out there. The fan in my bedroom uses AC power and magnets to make the fan blades spin. Tesla coils power HMI ballasts. Magnetism is already highly exploited in many types of motors. Spinning a magnet inside a coiled wire induces a current inside a wire. My point is there's no such thing as FREE energy. Power output equals power input, you can't get something for nothing, there is always a cost to any energy source. You can't pull it out of your ass. This nerd on YouTube has done nothing but make a fancy Lazy Susan.
Click to expand...

Damn!
No free energy! It would have been a timely item to coincide with the release of "Atlas Shrugged" LOL
 
Google "Thomas Moray" and "Radiant Energy". An interesting topic, because his claim was not about over-unity, rather tapping cosmic energy. A radio receiver for high-frequency energy that is pervasive throughout space.

Unfortunately, in a similar situation, no one has been able to successfully reproduce his work.
 
Roger Penrose, preeminent mathemetician who worked with Stephen Hawkings on black hole theory, commented in a footnote that the principals of thermodynamics while interesting did not rise to the level of proven physical law. From his book " Road to Reality, the Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe".
 
Atlas Shrugged! ya one of my favorite books!.

Fee energy. I guess we are talking about several things.

Free can mean something that we don't have to pay for. Like wind and solar. Once we set up the capturing device (solar panels and wind mills/turbine)

I think Magnetic will fall into this category once we set up how to capture the energy, it will be a form of free energy.

As far as the "law" of energy can't be created or destroyed.

I guess we will see. Some how the universe got created from somewhere.

Mike
 
MikeHedge said:
Some how the universe got created from
Click to expand...

Mike, this is a side issue, but you know, that's quite a profound issue. In my view, science, such as physics, does not yield answers to why questions but instead science aims to reveal causality. For example, I think physics does not give an answer why there is gravitation, but instead it tells what is the interaction of gravity to objects. So, in this light it's all about cause and reason. Still, sure, physicist would love to say what is the reason for gravity, but then the beginning of the chain of causality is just set to another level.

What comes to energy conservation, in my understanding it is the foundations of all physics. So, it's one if not the key issue physics from which everything starts. However, physics itself is a model of the nature, so I always found it bit trivial when people say the nature obeys the rules of physics. The finger pointing to the moon is not the moon. So, in this light, who knows, but if I had to bet, I would put quite a lot of money on the energy conservation principle.
 
Justin Kirchhoff said:
Yes, I know it sounds ridiculous when you say it that way, but I'm not necessarily talking about the electric motors they have thought about putting into cars or have in cars right now.

There are a bunch of different ways to build a motor to produce electricity as we all know, I was more thinking about powering a car with magnets. I'm pretty sure it's possible, especially after seeing videos like this.
Click to expand...

The guy that mostly started this "working" electromagnetic power generation craze off in the 70's (maybe there have been others before that though) reportedly drove the American version of a Purvis Eureka (forget the name but might have been the "Eagle" component car) over a bridge in California with something like a 7KW version, very slowly mind you, I actually have plans or a booklet somewhere. never really bothered to read it so don't even remember how it worked.
 
Most people do not know how to think, and that includes many of us here.

Science does not know what physics is yet, it is still not neatly defined, but big ego's included, they like to make out that most of it is, except when they think they have a solution of course. We guess at the quantum level, but do we know how the quantum level works and is driven. Like Newtonian physics we just assume a statistically probably effect is there that drives things not thinking about what drives those effects. Then Einsteins work came along and people assumed, then quantum physics came along and improbably introduced statistics as a basis. We now are at the stage of assuming we have the answers through Quantum effects, but we see such a large generalised view (that has it's own skewed tastes) but what at a deeper smaller, or simply deeper, level is driving these effects. Then we have to ask what is driving them in turn. Modern research is exploring ever lower scales, but really are these glimpses of particles just glimpses of the physics down there. I have seen some pretty bizarre theories and predictions from quantum mechanics that almost are as if the universe could suddenly come into existence as we experience it today and as it is today, with civilisations, skeptics, life, and even our past memories ad histories intact a second ago by some chance out of the quantum background, with all we knew and ever experienced never having happened, and even every split second the universe dissolving into the background with a identical one reforming the next instance, but one spit second in the future continually over and over again, and how would we know?

I hate to get deep dark and philosophical here (or deep light and philosophical as it turns out) but it looks like at least some of you understand it from past posts. But the "impossible" existence of the universe from seemingly nothing also implies the potential of infinite energy. I am not getting into the scientific debate on it, that breaks down into a impossibility if you think about it correctly, but I agree that despite the the possibility of infinite energy, within our closed system there is normally limited energy and from a closed system you will probably not get out more than is already in there. However, the debate has moved on into tricking the energy surrounding the system into the system, and that from background energy. Apparently, scientifically for space to even exist requires energy to make it. 'nature abhors a vacuum', draw this energy from space and it likely would draw energy from surrounding space to compensate, thus a chain of "non" free energy is formed. Going back to the original "free" energy idea, if there is unlimited energy outside the system, then it would need some trick in physics to draw in that energy from outside the system into the system. As far as producing energy inside the system, see tricks again, but would that not be the same thing. In the next split second you could turn into a duck, but has anybody ever seen a probability happen at large scales not involving effects at the quantum scales, what does that tell you, that there might be something driving the seeming randomness below. If energy is not produced at the quantum scales these effects operate in, when, if things were truly random, it should (past the even average mutual annihilation of vacuum energy) what does that tell you, maybe they are not truly random. At sometime randomness must produce skews in the data, as skewed data is in the set of randomness. 'Ohh, we .. just haven't seen it yet, it takes a long time to come across..", well what have you seen? Theory without proof, so which theory does the actual data suit better.

Well that is how I write when it is really late and I hardly know what I am writing about, so good night, and play well kids.
 
so no more news? fake or not, I've enjoyed following it. The part I don't understand is why there haven't been new people "faking" the result. As has been discussed, it shouldn't be too difficult to make fake "mylow motor", and yet no one in the whole world has posted a video on youtube? Am I the only one that finds that strange? You'd think with all the attention Mylow's received, there would be other making their own fake motors to steal some of his glow.
 
yeah, I continue to watch the videos he puts up, but of course there's no new info. Not that you'd expect there to be, since he's explained how it works, so there wouldn't be any new info until we find out it was a hoax.

But I can't find any videos of anyone else's motor working. Please post a link for me if you know of one. I understand that it's "impossible", but I would have assumed people would be posting lots of videos with their own fake motors. I can't find any though.
 
Maybe I`m beating a dead horse, but how can anyone prove something via youtube? As long as it`s not independently (non-youtube) tested it`s a hoax. Period.
 
Danish P.V. said:
Maybe I`m beating a dead horse, but how can anyone prove something via youtube? As long as it`s not independently (non-youtube) tested it`s a hoax. Period.
Click to expand...

Independent testing is merely verification that it works or not, it does not cause it to start being true or not (as I keep pointing out to pointless skeptics in the past, in reference to other people, nothing personal, I do not know you, as much of this will be. I just get sick of second rate 'spock' level logic). Something that exists, exists, wherever we know about it or not, wherever we prove it or not. We don't make it exist apart from actually making it exist (for the skeptics, in our imaginations or not).

People keep acting like if something is not verified it can't be true (usually skeptics with a axe to grind, with personal pride and prejudice) I thought that was more like cynicism. As long as we have the nuts on both sides ruling the debate, how can we forge ahead.

--
A cynical person will not even objectively attempt to prove something right or wrong.

Anyway, I am not saying this invention is at all right. There is one possible 'trick', but after several attempts to download the video to see his explanation, I gave up (better things to do, which is why so few people are here). I saw a different type of contraption proposal recently that might be trying to exploit this trick, but forget where it was. It is a trick that I have been wanting to explore for years (well decades in reference to what we are talking about here) and it just occurred to me that it may well occur by drawing energy from surrounding space as people have been talking about here (which means that it has engineering problems at certain scales as it will starts absorbing it's own energy). Anyway, it still means conservation of energy, just that the walls of the system are not as closed as it might appear to the blind.
 
http://xkcd.com/373/

It isn't cynicism. It's practicality. If every nutjob on youtube warranted our attention we would spend our entire lives disproving them. Instead we assume they're nutjobs until they prove otherwise. If they aren't nut jobs they'll be on the cover of newsweek by the end of the year. If you invested $0.50 to every supposed perpetual motion machine that claims to be a new energy source then you would be broke before you made even $1 back. That's just not good business sense. It's not good use of your time. Especially considering if it's true then it'll be easy to prove.

"Oh I also have a fusion reactor in my garage. But I won't let anyone into my garage to verify this claim. If you doubt me you're just a cynic. And all you haters have made me decide you won't ever see." Yeah. That's a great way to convince people!
 
gotcha, are you saying that you don't watch videos? or believe that somehow even though he has shown people the entire invention, and now, even built a new one from scratch on camera, that somehow you still don't believe it?

Also Steorn is making progress. the next few months will be exciting.
 
Those guys need some video help. Every time I see his videos I can't get past how odd he seems to be, and the old ladish-ness of his house. I know I should be excited by the possible technology here but I just can't get past some of these trivial things. I keep wanting to think it's a hoax.

It's so freaking simple you think someone would have done it by now. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
I currently rank Steorn on the same level as last year's "quantum computer". Steorn has all sorts of BS on their site about licensing, blah, blah, blah, yet nothing tangible yet. Of course, the proof is in the pudding. They're nobody until they can repeatedly demonstrate a functional unit. Just like RED, they're a scam until they have something to show. I hope you're right that it will get very exciting, but it seems that every year we see claims like this for something new. Rarely does it ever materialize. I know people who are still eating their hats over that whole Quantum computer thing.

As for Mylow. There are tons of devices just like that and so many patents on many variations of that same concept it's laughable. So many of them are even available with free license. As for the magnetic wheel motor... Been there, seen it, done it. Call me when it's more than a lazy-suzan with some bench magnets glued to it. He hasn't even progressed it to the level of various kits that were available in the 70s-80s that also used switching electromagnets or moveable drive magnets to time the repulsive and attractive forces with the magnet clusters on the disc. Shin-Etsu Chemical, Ltd. has re-patented their version of this concept many times over the years, the past few times in '06 and just October of last year. If Mylow actually starts trying to market this and claiming it's "his invention", he's in for a world of hurt.

OK, maybe I'm a cynical ass, but there's nothing in his videos that suggests any sort of "free energy" or perpetual motion. Nor is it a unique design or "invention". If this Mylow is really discovering this design on his own, kudos to him, but If he's really trying to accomplish something worthwhile, he should present himself a bit more seriously, do some real research and get off of YouTube. Then again, maybe he's right where he belongs.

Ethan Cooper said:
It's so freaking simple you think someone would have done it by now. Maybe I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

It's been done, you want me to start referencing patent numbers? Never mind that both Pike and Edison pioneered these wheeled designs for permanent magnet motors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top