electromagnet equilibrium motor:just to clarify a well known idea about unity engines

[praise the suuun]

Haha some of you may have heard of the second law of thermodynamics which rebukes all nonsense such as over-unity machines and a free lunch. while this science may be over and done with long ago i was thinking about ways around this problem and thought of electromagnets. would just like to confirm if this idea is a definite and resounding NO or worth discussion.

As far as i know there are three types of magnets: an electromagnet, a temporary magnet and a "permanent" magnet. permanent magnets are not 100% but just take a long time to lose there magnetic field. If one did devise any form of device that put permanent magnets in a state of equilibrium where the repulsive nature of same sided magnets creates motion, the device would only run until the magnets eventually lose there field. I'm sure if we added all energy stored and generated this permanent magnet motion design would not have created excess energy; only transferred and lost small amounts of energy somewhere.

My thought was if an electrical charge was run through these same permanent magnets..... just enough to maintain there field at a constant level... would the electrical charge generated reach the same level as was used to store a magnetic charge in the magnets + the electrical charge that is constantly maintaining the magnets fields at a certain level? perhaps this would generate more electricity then is going in! i highly doubt it based on the thoughts ive read.

Edited January 17, 2014 by praise the suuun

[tavert]

If you had perfectly lossless electronics, bearings, and no air friction, you could maybe put something together that would sustain any initial motion (which would need to be initiated by an external input of energy) indefinitely. Otherwise, no.

[Technical Ben]

The main idea is to think of where energy comes from. Any generation. Any, is always less than the power you put in.

So take any function, matter, device in existence. Any. Then you "take out energy from it". You never do anything else. All devices that "generate" energy, do not generate anything. They take the energy from somewhere.

So for you example, we have to ask "where are we taking the energy from?"

A car takes it from the petrol. The petrol took it from the organic matter (trees etc). The organic matter and trees took it from the light from the sun. The sun took it's energy from hydrogen atoms (through fusion). The hydrogen atoms got their energy from the gravitation pull to cause fusion. The gravitation pull was started with the motion and pull of gravity from the beginning of the universe.

So to find the solution to your example, we ask, where are you going to get energy from? The only place is "the electricity to power the magnet". We get the electricity from the wall socket, which comes form the power plant, which comes from organic burning (coal etc) or nuclear power etc. But here is the problem, we can take away your magnet, and still get power out of the wall socket. So does your magnet improve or reduce how much power we get?

If we "increase" the magnetic power, we loss electricity too powering the magnet. We did worse. If we reduce the magnetic power we gain electricity to it, but the magnet eventually "runs out" of magnetic power and becomes just a bit of metal. So we never get "free" or "eternal" energy. It all comes from a place, and every place has a limited amount.

[Streetwind]

Magnetism is a fan favorite when it comes to speculating about over-unity machines because it so handily produces a force without spending any "fuel".

The problem with electromagnets, however, is that they need a lot of electricity to generate and maintain a significant field. This is not a trickle power application, it needs real wattage. That's largely what prevents this particular trick from working.

[K^2]

If one did devise any form of device that put permanent magnets in a state of equilibrium where the repulsive nature of same sided magnets creates motion, the device would only run until the magnets eventually lose there field.

There are no arrangements of magnets where magnets "create" motion perpetually. And it has nothing to do with magnets losing field. In fact, a good feromagnetic won't. Neither would a superconducting magnet.

[J.Random]

[praise the suuun]

magnets do lose the power of their magnetic field over time. its part of magnetic domain theory which explains how magnets are made of infinitesimally small fragments of metal that align into the same direction. sever knocks, sever heat, and an opposing magnetic field can all knock the dipoles completely out of alignment over time.

http://www.intemag.com/faqs.html#howperm

this idea that any generation is always less than the power consumed is an interesting law but extremely restricting. perhaps there is potential to find an over unity method but we are not yet sophisticated enough or have not progressed far enough with experiments to have found it? its more likely i have not researched enough to fully understand the powerful simplicity of this law but i continue on.

do permanent magnets lose their fields when continually repulsed by another?

can electricity maintain a magnetic field at one level on a permanent magnet or is the magnet not being recharged and the electromagnetic effect is taking over?

can permanent magnets in some clever configuration repulse into motion until their fields subside?

if all of the previous are true, can the electricity generated from the motion exceed that which is being used to maintain?

compartment questions make easier research (if experiments have already existed for them) and here's what I've found to add to the discussion:

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae472.cfm

http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2009/04/28/the-lure-of-perpetual-motion/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagnetizing_field

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_induction

i cant seem to easily find if electromagnetic induction prevents the decay of a magnetic field. i need a little help researching that man the wiki page on electromagnetic inductions gonna take a little longer than a day . but i do know that its magnetic phenomena disappears when the current is switched off. when i consider a one wheel generator design in my mind obviously to me it has problems because the magnets would not repulse each other in one direction; not perpetuating a clockwise motion. the magnets would seek to find the least resistant position inside all the other repulsive fields of the other magnets.

i think a two wheel design may be worth investigating and researching a little more. imagine two wheels with one magnet per wheel, when the wheels spin with gravity to bring the magnet closer to the ground the two magnets repulse each other, giving both wheels just enough force to spin up to the top and letting gravity takes it course again for another spin.

Edited January 18, 2014 by praise the suuun

[Nuke]

you might make a device that can spin indefinably, but the second you try to convert any of that angular momentum to usable energy, its gone (unless you put it back). a low entropy system might make a good energy storage device (see flywheel storage), but its not going to give you unlimited energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel_energy_storage

Edited January 18, 2014 by Nuke

[Skyler4856]

My thought was if an electrical charge was run through these same permanent magnets..... just enough to maintain there field at a constant level... would the electrical charge generated reach the same level as was used to store a magnetic charge in the magnets + the electrical charge that is constantly maintaining the magnets fields at a certain level? perhaps this would generate more electricity then is going in! i highly doubt it based on the thoughts ive read.

No because of Ohm's law. Any resistance the magnets apply will always lead to a loss in electricity.

[K^2]

magnets do lose the power of their magnetic field over time. its part of magnetic domain theory which explains how magnets are made of infinitesimally small fragments of metal that align into the same direction. sever knocks, sever heat, and an opposing magnetic field can all knock the dipoles completely out of alignment over time.

Saying magnets lose power over time and saying that they demagnetize if taken above Curie Temperature are two completely different things. In a strong permanent magnet, magnet's own magnetic field keeps domains aligned.

this idea that any generation is always less than the power consumed is an interesting law but extremely restricting. perhaps there is potential to find an over unity method but we are not yet sophisticated enough or have not progressed far enough with experiments to have found it?

No. Over-unity is prohibited by some extremely fundamental theorems. Not theories. Theorems. As in, mathematically proven.

do permanent magnets lose their fields when continually repulsed by another?

No. Which makes the rest of your questions completely pointless. You can't build a PM device out of permanent magnets. Can't. Even with perfect magnets which will never lose their strength. Again, there are theorems that say so.

i think a two wheel design may be worth investigating and researching a little more.

No, it's not. Because there are proofs for general configuration. Doesn't matter how many wheels, magnets, and so on you have.

[TheDarkStar]

Saying magnets lose power over time and saying that they demagnetize if taken above Curie Temperature are two completely different things. In a strong permanent magnet, magnet's own magnetic field keeps domains aligned.

No. Over-unity is prohibited by some extremely fundamental theorems. Not theories. Theorems. As in, mathematically proven.

No. Which makes the rest of your questions completely pointless. You can't build a PM device out of permanent magnets. Can't. Even with perfect magnets which will never lose their strength. Again, there are theorems that say so.

No, it's not. Because there are proofs for general configuration. Doesn't matter how many wheels, magnets, and so on you have.

Basically, perpetual motion machines don't work, no matter how ingenious your solution.

[OdinYggd]

Saying magnets lose power over time and saying that they demagnetize if taken above Curie Temperature are two completely different things. In a strong permanent magnet, magnet's own magnetic field keeps domains aligned.

In the short term, yes. Long-term the field does indeed degrade through a variety of factors even if kept . For example the magnets used in the ignition systems of vintage engines- many of these engines have lost their magnetism and have to have the magnets recharged. Devices exist for doing this easily enough, but it is necessary mainly because the field strength does decay. To prevent this phenomena, magnets should be stored with their field lines forming a closed loop- in a horseshoe magnet this is as simple as storing it with a piece of soft iron between the poles to conduct most of the force.

No. Over-unity is prohibited by some extremely fundamental theorems. Not theories. Theorems. As in, mathematically proven.

Very much so. Anything that appears to give off more energy than it takes in is taking it from somewhere unconventional. This can be as simple as stealing heat from a cup of coffee for a low-delta sterling, or as sophisticated as rubbing off static electricity from moving air and using that to operate an electronic device.

No. Which makes the rest of your questions completely pointless. You can't build a PM device out of permanent magnets. Can't. Even with perfect magnets which will never lose their strength. Again, there are theorems that say so.

The problem nearly every magnetic device has is on one side the fields are always attracting. But it takes just as much force to pull them away again as you get from their attraction- and people forget that. These magnetic wheel devices will happily set to a position and resist being changed- requiring enough force to overcome the attraction to make them move. If you set one spinning at speed, it will coast until friction slows it down sufficiently far that the remaining momentum can no longer overcome the attraction- and it stops in place. Could actually have applications in game show wheel-spin gimmics, as it would spin freely without an obvious ratchet or clicker yet still stick cleanly in place as it slows down.

No, it's not. Because there are proofs for general configuration. Doesn't matter how many wheels, magnets, and so on you have.

This. You can very easily draw diagrams for a 2-dimensional section of a magnetic field, the lines of force will always attempt to go from pole to pole and will be concentrated by ferromagnetic materials that they happen to come across.

The same concepts apply to a 3-dimensional field, but modelling this is a little more complicated and requires either advanced math or a computer model.

[K^2]

In the short term, yes. Long-term the field does indeed degrade through a variety of factors even if kept . For example the magnets used in the ignition systems of vintage engines- many of these engines have lost their magnetism and have to have the magnets recharged. Devices exist for doing this easily enough, but it is necessary mainly because the field strength does decay. To prevent this phenomena, magnets should be stored with their field lines forming a closed loop- in a horseshoe magnet this is as simple as storing it with a piece of soft iron between the poles to conduct most of the force.

You mean magnetos? The reason magnets in magneto lose their field has more to do with engine heat, vibration, and impacts that are all part of normal operation for a magneto. By the way, not just vintage engines. Some modern airplane engines use magnetos for better reliability. It also lets you kill all of the power in case of electrical fire, and still have the engine keep going. Of course, this only makes sense with carburetor engines.

And yeah, an iron magnet, especially something with a needle shape, can lose its strength over time. The field near end points is very weak, allowing domains to drift over time. But if that's a concern, all you have to do is use stronger magnets. Neodymium magnets are, for any practical purpose, absolutely permanent. At any rate, they can certainly outlast any machine you'd build with them.