I define a perpetual motion device as either a heat engine
which violates the second law of thermo, or an electrical
or mechanical device which violates the conservation of
energy.

Usually these emerge as patents or investment opportunities
from people who incorrectly analyze the mechanics or physics.
(Sometimes intentionally as method of scamming investors.)

From what I've seen they fall into three categories.

1 Confusing percent of optimum efficiency with total efficiency
in percent, when considering heat engines or heat pumps.

I've seen a video tape with just this scam
along with the paranoia speech about how the oil
companies are trying to suppress it.

2 Ignoring some of the forces in analysis of mecanical
contraptions.

3 Using DC power formulas with rms volts & amps for AC circuits
where you should integrate power over the cycle using volts and
amps at a given instant.

I've seen a couple of these on the internet, ditto with
the oil company paranoia.

Can anyone add to this list?

Regards,
J. Baugh

Baugh wrote:

I define a perpetual motion device as either a heat engine
which violates the second law of thermo, or an electrical
or mechanical device which violates the conservation of
energy.

Usually these emerge as patents or investment opportunities
from people who incorrectly analyze the mechanics or physics.
(Sometimes intentionally as method of scamming investors.)

From what I've seen they fall into three categories.

1 Confusing percent of optimum efficiency with total efficiency
in percent, when considering heat engines or heat pumps.

I've seen a video tape with just this scam
along with the paranoia speech about how the oil
companies are trying to suppress it.

2 Ignoring some of the forces in analysis of mecanical
contraptions.

3 Using DC power formulas with rms volts & amps for AC circuits
where you should integrate power over the cycle using volts and
amps at a given instant.

I've seen a couple of these on the internet, ditto with
the oil company paranoia.

Can anyone add to this list?


http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
Perpetual motion machines
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University of Utah
and Martin Fleischmann. What happened to them? I understand that tests were
falsified, was it at MIT? My memory fails me.
Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!
The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in a
vacuum and worked. Whatch this space.
If you want to see some real present day long term suppression search the
net for Robert Adams. He builds these "over unity devices" that you are so
ready to slag off. (We are going to need these things sooner or later. But
of course if science says something is impossible you brainwashed thicko's
swallow it wholesale.)
And finally there is Nichola Tesla; probably the greatest inventive genius
in history. What became of his car that ran without fuel ( in all the news
papers at the time) and all the rest of his altruistic inventions. I will
answer that one . They were suppressed because there was no profit in them.
Have a good one
Al
PS I use this name not because I wish to associate myself with you, but
because it happens to be my name

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Baugh wrote:

I define a perpetual motion device as either a heat engine
which violates the second law of thermo, or an electrical
or mechanical device which violates the conservation of
energy.

Usually these emerge as patents or investment opportunities
from people who incorrectly analyze the mechanics or physics.
(Sometimes intentionally as method of scamming investors.)

From what I've seen they fall into three categories.

1 Confusing percent of optimum efficiency with total efficiency
in percent, when considering heat engines or heat pumps.

I've seen a video tape with just this scam
along with the paranoia speech about how the oil
companies are trying to suppress it.

2 Ignoring some of the forces in analysis of mecanical
contraptions.

3 Using DC power formulas with rms volts & amps for AC circuits
where you should integrate power over the cycle using volts and
amps at a given instant.

I've seen a couple of these on the internet, ditto with
the oil company paranoia.

Can anyone add to this list?


http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
Perpetual motion machines
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Al wrote:

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University of Utah
and Martin Fleischmann.

[snip]

Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!

The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in a
vacuum and worked.

[snip]

Ignorant idiot.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Ignorant idiot is not a very scientific answer. It lacks finesse, what you
would call elegance?
Do some research for a change and get your head out of the text books or
your arse. Ever tried thinking for yourself?
Al
"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University of
Utah
and Martin Fleischmann.

[snip]

Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!

The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the
official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in a
vacuum and worked.

[snip]

Ignorant idiot.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Al wrote:

Ignorant idiot is not a very scientific answer. It lacks finesse, what you
would call elegance?
Do some research for a change and get your head out of the text books or
your arse. Ever tried thinking for yourself?
Al
"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University of
Utah
and Martin Fleischmann.

[snip]

Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!

The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the
official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in a
vacuum and worked.

[snip]

Ignorant idiot.

1) Don't top post.
2) Diamond has a negative work function into vacuum. Aim a metal
plate covered with boron-doped diamond point cathodes at an anode, the
whole in a vacuum tube, and run the [(current)(voltage)] forever, for
free.
3) http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
4) Time is homogeous. Mass-energy is conserved through Noether's
theorem.
5) Ignorant idiot.


--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Ignorant idiot is not a very scientific answer. It lacks finesse, what
you
would call elegance?
Do some research for a change and get your head out of the text books or
your arse. Ever tried thinking for yourself?
Al
"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University
of
Utah
and Martin Fleischmann.

[snip]

Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!

The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the
official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in
a
vacuum and worked.

[snip]

Ignorant idiot.

1) Don't top post.
2) Diamond has a negative work function into vacuum. Aim a metal
plate covered with boron-doped diamond point cathodes at an anode, the
whole in a vacuum tube, and run the [(current)(voltage)] forever, for
free.
3) http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
4) Time is homogeous. Mass-energy is conserved through Noether's
theorem.
5) Ignorant idiot.


--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

1) Don't top post. How's that?
2) Diamond has a negative work function into vacuum. Aim a metal
plate covered with boron-doped diamond point cathodes at an anode, the
whole in a vacuum tube, and run the [(current)(voltage)] forever, for
free. Why don't you build a diamond power station? This knocking of much
needed alternative power sources is illogical.
3) http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
I looked at this and it's a bit basic! Over balancing wheels? Is this what
you call research? Did you look at the ones that I suggested? What exactly
is your objection to what Adams is trying to do? Is it just that your
version of science is incapable, through its own constraints?
4) Time is homogeous.
A slight, but typically scientific, error of logic here. Clocks are
homogenous. Clocks do what clocks do. How do you know that what a clock does
is an analogue of what we call time. How do you know what time is?
4a) Mass-energy is conserved through Noether's
theorem.
Have I said that it's not. You cannot pull energy out of nothing.
As I said in a past thread Newton knew nothing of electricity and as you
pointed out he knew of the EM spectrum and it can be derived. He was
probably too busy with the 'black arts'. But you know all this and you are
not prepared to envisage a further element to the EM field, namely, the
gravitational one. The reason for this is the brain washing you have
received at the hands of the exponents of relativity. They revel in
complexity.

5) Ignorant idiot.Do you want an answer to this one?

This arrogant closed-mindedness will be the death of science. This
pathological need to have an explanation for everything is a sickness. The
assumption that everything can be quantified is a mistake. It is even being
applied to us. We are told that all our good qualities are nothing but memes
for jungle survival and reproduction and that we can shed them and be like
the perfect, soulless scientists that imagined them. Even our conscience is
a ploy to make us appear caring when we have nothing but selfish genetics as
the final reality.
Have a good day
Al

Al wrote:

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Ignorant idiot is not a very scientific answer. It lacks finesse, what
you
would call elegance?
Do some research for a change and get your head out of the text books or
your arse. Ever tried thinking for yourself?
Al
"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Al wrote:

Hi
All good alternative energy devices are suppressed!
Let me give one or two examples:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University
of
Utah
and Martin Fleischmann.

[snip]

Eugene Podkletnov and anti-gravity, now there is an example!

The Biefeld-Brown effect, What happened to that? If you read the
official
version it was down to ion wind effects. In reality it was tested in
a
vacuum and worked.

[snip]

Ignorant idiot.

1) Don't top post.
2) Diamond has a negative work function into vacuum. Aim a metal
plate covered with boron-doped diamond point cathodes at an anode, the
whole in a vacuum tube, and run the [(current)(voltage)] forever, for
free.
3) http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
4) Time is homogeous. Mass-energy is conserved through Noether's
theorem.
5) Ignorant idiot.



1) Don't top post. How's that?

Better.

2) Diamond has a negative work function into vacuum. Aim a metal
plate covered with boron-doped diamond point cathodes at an anode, the
whole in a vacuum tube, and run the [(current)(voltage)] forever, for
free. Why don't you build a diamond power station? This knocking of much
needed alternative power sources is illogical.

Hey stooopid, I am being dreadfully scarcastic. It's a heat engine as
much as any IC engine is. You don't know any physics.

3) http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm
I looked at this and it's a bit basic! Over balancing wheels? Is this what
you call research? Did you look at the ones that I suggested? What exactly
is your objection to what Adams is trying to do? Is it just that your
version of science is incapable, through its own constraints?

Hey stooopid, adding liquid nitrogen fog, strobes, superconductors,
magnets, and a manual transmission from a 1965 Honda doesn't change
the physics.

4) Time is homogeous.
A slight, but typically scientific, error of logic here. Clocks are
homogenous. Clocks do what clocks do. How do you know that what a clock does
is an analogue of what we call time. How do you know what time is?

Hye stooopid, Look up Noether's theroem and how it ties every symmetry
(but one) of physics to a conserved observable, and vice-versa,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm#b21

4a) Mass-energy is conserved through Noether's
theorem.
Have I said that it's not. You cannot pull energy out of nothing.
As I said in a past thread Newton knew nothing of electricity and as you
pointed out he knew of the EM spectrum and it can be derived. He was
probably too busy with the 'black arts'. But you know all this and you are
not prepared to envisage a further element to the EM field, namely, the
gravitational one. The reason for this is the brain washing you have
received at the hands of the exponents of relativity. They revel in
complexity.

Hopeless idiot. Gravitation does not unite with EM, not even if you
are wearing Kaluza-Klein jeans.

The source of monopole radiation is a changing monopole moment for a
charge q or for a mass m. Since charge and mass are conserved, there
can be neither monopole electromagnetic radiation nor monopole
gravitational radiation.

The source of dipole radiation is a changing dipole moment.
(Punctiliously, you need a second time derivative of the dipole
moment.) For a pair of charges

d = qr + q'r'

and there's nothing special about the derivatives. For a pair of
masses, the gravitational dipole moment is

d = mr + m'r'

and its time derivative is

mv + m'v' = p + p'

By conservation of momentum the second time derivative of the
gravitational dipole moment is zero, and you can go to a center of
momentum frame and set the first derivative to zero as well. There
is no gravitational "electric dipole" radiation.

Consider the analog of "magnetic dipole" radiation. The gravitational
equivalent of the magnetic dipole moment for a pair of charges is

M = mv x r + m'v' x r'
("x" is the cross product, "mv" is the "mass current")

But M is the total angular momentum, which is also conserved. There
is no gravitational "magnetic dipole" radiation.

The next moment up is quadrupole, with no relevant conservation laws,
so gravitational quadrupole radiation is permitted. You can use this
argument to advocate that gravity must be a tensorial (spin-2)
interaction. Electromagnetism is mediated by spin-1 photons.

5) Ignorant idiot.Do you want an answer to this one?

This arrogant closed-mindedness will be the death of science. This
pathological need to have an explanation for everything is a sickness. The
assumption that everything can be quantified is a mistake. It is even being
applied to us. We are told that all our good qualities are nothing but memes
for jungle survival and reproduction and that we can shed them and be like
the perfect, soulless scientists that imagined them. Even our conscience is
a ploy to make us appear caring when we have nothing but selfish genetics as
the final reality.
Have a good day
Al

Theory must be internally self-consistent. Theory cannot violate
observation. Your soapbox is the basement of an outhouse.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

"Al" wrote in
:

Stanley Pons former chair of the Department of Chemistry, University of
Utah and Martin Fleischmann. What happened to them? I understand that
tests were falsified, was it at MIT? My memory fails me.


Nothing was suppressed.

Pons and Fleischmann made three errors.
1) they didn't understand the experiment they were running
2) they went public rather than letting scientific review take its course.
3) their initial publication did not give necessary details to allow
checking their work.

They were/are electrochemists.
They didn't understand the thermodynamics of calorimetry.
They thought they had over unity energy output. They didn't.

They had stored hydrogen in their electrode, over a period of time. When it
oxidized suddenly, a burst of heat was produced but it was not more heat
than the watts of power they had pumped into the cell over time.

It took quite a bit of work to figure out from their published figures,
exactly where they had missed. If I remember right, they had neglected some
of the IR drop in the cell and neglected work done in evolving a gas. But I
could be wrong as it has been years since I looked at their papers and went
through calculating everything.

Millions of dollars have been spent and hundreds of labs have duplicated
their experiment.

No reproducable, verifiable 'table top cold fusion' has been observed using
Pons/Fleishman's methods.

Some are still trying. There have been some experiments giving some signs
of fusion but no where near breakeven.

Anyway there was no suppression of P&F.

--
bz

please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.

remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap