rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
Permanent Magnet Generators are very real. You take a permanent magnet and spin it around really fast inside a stator. Most synchronous generators, though, use electromagnets as then you can actively manage the voltage.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
TeleforceOne Perpetual Motion
- Thread starter TeleforceONE
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Off Topic
There's another thread involved, but they were never directly connected.
The OP in this thread posted another thread shortly before this one in which he asked if Tesla was pursuing using PMGs to replace the battery pack, and had a bunch of people tell him that they didn't think the PMG he described and the supporting patent he offered were physically possible.
This story is presumably offered as a parable to tell us that we are being closed minded and that the only reason free energy isn't everywhere is that we are refusing to drop all of the known solutions to pursue PMGs.
PMG in this case is being used for 'permanent magnet generator' - which for this discussion apparently means not a conventional mechanical generator with permanent magnets providing the magnetic field (which describes many EVs during regenerative braking,) but a new device which uses electromagnets to change the polarity of permanent magnets.
Although I didn't see it spelled out in the patent and have never seen supporting data, the OPs opinion seems to be that this can be accomplished with far less energy than the magnetic field of the permanent magnet contains - and that one could therefore build a device which surrounds the magnets with electric coils and generates net energy in solid state by switching the magnets back and forth and collecting the electricity resulting from the magnetic field crossing the coils.
Where exactly that energy would be coming from has never been spelled out that I've seen. A lot of people believe it is a high tech form of perpetual motion...
Walter
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
Ah, his abandon ship parable is actually pretty dumb. The junior engineer should have at least said, "I think <solution> might work, though I'm not sure why"
Or the junior engineer had no idea how things worked, and the ship was actually doomed, and Jane lost her life because she wouldn't talk/listen.
There are many places on the internet where one may promote his or her various ideas about perpetual motion. This is not one of them.
Scientific theory, in the case of a legal challenge to the validity of PMGs, will not be allowed to be entered into evidence. This is because such evidence: is opinion testimony, and not fact; would not tend to allow one (a juror) to draw a reliable conclusion one way or the other, were competing scientific theories alone to be considered, on any issue of material fact; would be unnecessarily cumulative; could not establish any applicable material fact, at issue, even if allowed; is vague; is misleading; fails to address the issues before the court; is being presented insincerely and for ulterior motives, other than to reach the truth on the issues before the court; is being presented in spite of the fact that the presenter has full knowledge that such theories are false; is secondary to the empirical evidence available, on the issues; and, would contradict established empirical knowledge proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the contrary is true, even in the absence of a supporting scientific theory, or regardless of whether a scientific theory could be drawn to support that incontrovertible evidence.
If your so called scientific theories about patented PMGs aren’t going to be allowed by a court of law to be entered into evidence, because they are not relevant to any of the issues as to the validity of patented PMGs; well, they’re just garbage. Just as a court of law would, I’m going to throw them out into the trash, too.
You physicists really should get out more; like, maybe, taking a class or two in patent law.
If your so called scientific theories about patented PMGs aren’t going to be allowed by a court of law to be entered into evidence, because they are not relevant to any of the issues as to the validity of patented PMGs; well, they’re just garbage. Just as a court of law would, I’m going to throw them out into the trash, too.
You physicists really should get out more; like, maybe, taking a class or two in patent law.
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
deonb
Active Member
Yeah, ok. But that's not the device in question here. TeleforceOne contends that you don't need to spin the magnet around at all, you can merely control the path of the flux by using a coil.
"This invention relates generally to permanent magnet devices and more particularly, to a permanent magnet control component in which the flow of flux from a permanent magnet is controlled between two or more flux paths by utilizing timed delivery of electrical signals through one or more coils placed along at least one of the flux paths."
Let's be clear about several things:
- a patented idea is not necessarily a commercially viable idea. In fact, very few are.
- Tesla Motors is not a tech development company. It succeeds by taking off-the-shelf tech and tweaking it to make a great product.
- the laws of physics are immutable. Energy is conserved. I've used about 8 MWh since I if there were no battery, where would that power has come from? It is impossible to does not need a power source, and the PMG has not such source.
- a patented idea is not necessarily a commercially viable idea. In fact, very few are.
- Tesla Motors is not a tech development company. It succeeds by taking off-the-shelf tech and tweaking it to make a great product.
- the laws of physics are immutable. Energy is conserved. I've used about 8 MWh since I if there were no battery, where would that power has come from? It is impossible to does not need a power source, and the PMG has not such source.
Similar threads
