Delburt Phend

Jay Angler wrote:I had to look up a bit of physics to get the wording right:

the law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed. When people use energy, it doesn't disappear. Energy changes from one form of energy into another form of energy.

https://www.eia.gov/kids/what-is-energy/laws-of-energy.php

To me, the real benefit of perpetual motion machines, is what they teach us about converting energy with the fewest losses possible. Normal losses in getting "work" out of a machine are things like residual heat from friction which often can't be reused effectively.

I have seen some incredibly creative "perpetual motion" machines or low input machines that teach us a lot about how to build machines that are as efficient as possible. Some of this information was known by my ancestors, but in my life, wasn't needed because an electric winch was cheaper to buy than a properly designed block and tackle and the rope to operate it.

So please post the work you do, regardless of how effective the outcomes are, because there is learning to happen through that work. Personally, I wish the conservation of energy bug would bight a few people who create computer programs, so they would be more streamlined and use less energy!

Laws are opinions: human opinions. Newton’s opinion was that mv is a conserved quantity. Leibniz opinion was that mvv was a conserved quantity. mvr is someone’s opinion of a conserved quantity.
Newtonian Laws of Motion have been experimentally  proven so many times we now call those opinions Laws.
On the other hand we know that kinetic energy is not conserved in the interactions of masses.
And if mv is correctly conserved then how can multiplying by an number of r’s still be a conserved quantity?
I appreciate your thoughts on conservation of available energy resources. My thought is that we can us gravity instead of fossil fuels. I have no problem with peaceful use a nuclear energy: but there lays the problem ‘peaceful’.

Glenn Herbert wrote:Physics classes were a long time ago for me too

While the equations do appear to give the lighter mass more kinetic energy, *all of the energy had to be put in from the outside to start*. You are not getting more energy than you put in. Also, the masses are not independent, but a single system that must move together and contain a single amount of total kinetic energy.

There are three theories of motion. Kinetic energy: Newtonian linear momentum: and angular momentum.

Newton’s theory was F = ma and it is based upon force ‘F’ being applied for a time ‘t’ causes a mass ‘m’ to obtain a velocity ‘v’. a = v/t so Ft = mv.
Once the mv exists in a system(a system is the masses in motion) the mv remains constant as long as there is no outside forces acting upon the ‘closed’ system.
The force that produces Newtonian momentum doesn’t care if it produces 1 unit of momentum in the form of 1 kg moving 1 m/sec or if it produces 1 unit of momentum in the form of .1 Kg moving 10 m/sec. This is why the long rod makes energy.

And Newtonian momentum conservation has no problem transforming ‘1 kg moving 1 m/sec’ into ‘.1 Kg moving 10 m/sec’. This is why the ‘cylinder and spheres’ experiments (on YouTube under Delburt Phend) produce energy.

.1 kg moving 10 m/sec has 10 times the energy of 1 kg moving 1 m/sec. You merely throw the .1 kg up and the descending force (gravity) can restart the original motion 10 times over.

There are several ways to amplify this quantity of free energy. The .1 kg could be 1 ton being thrown by a 300 metric ton wheel moving 1.4 m/sec that is accelerated by a suspended 30 tons. The one ton only need 24.26 units (per kg) of momentum to rise 30 m. And it has 420 kg m/sec of momentum. 24.26/420 6%. The other 94% is free energy. Sorry this is probably going too fast. But I just want to show that this is not a toy.

Nancy Reading wrote:

Delburt Phend wrote:
Please be patient: I have several energy producing experiments. And I will start with the simple and then  the moderately complex.

Please be patient -it's late here and it's a long time since I studied physics at school!

You can take a light tube such as an arrow shaft and balance it at its center. You can then suspend 1 kg 2 cm from the center of the shaft, on one side. On the other side you can suspend .1 kg at 20 cm from the center of the arrow shaft.

The long .1 kg side rotates just as easily as the short heavy side. If you bring the heavy side to 1 m/sec then the light side is moving 10 m/sec.   1/2 * 1 kg * .1 m/sec * .1 m/sec = .005 J and 1/2 * .1 kg * 1 m/sec * 1 m/sec = .05 Joules This is an energy increase to 1000%

I think you may have a decimal place out, I make the kinetic energy of the 1kg mass one tenth that of the 0.1kg mass:

for 1kg mass: kinetic energy =1/2 x 1 x 0.1 x 0.1 = 0.01/2 = 0.005 J
for 0.1kg mass ke=ineteic energy = 1/2 x 0.1 x 1 x 1 = 0.1/2 = 0.05 J

I have conducted experiments and this is exactly what happens. I also used multiple radius pulleys to increase drop distance and mass.

The speed that the 1 kg mass can obtain is shown to use by Atwood’s machines. An extra 1 kg on either side will give an acceleration of 1/3 * 9.81 m/sec/sec. To get to a speed of 1 m/sec the extra 1 kg has to drop .1529 m.

I'm not familiar with Atwood's machine but from wikipedia it is a perfect pulley system to "verify the mechanical laws of motion with constant acceleration"

If two .1 kg are on each end and are moving 10 m/sec they both will rise 5.097 m, that is .2 kg at 5.097 m = .2 kg * 5.097 m * 9.81 N/kg = 10 J. And you used 1 kg * .1529 m * 9.81 N/kg = 1.5 J

This is where you've lost me I'm afraid. what ends are the 0.1kg masses on? The Atwood pulley machine? But I think one will rise and one will fall.
I wonder if you have forgotten that work done is also proportional to distance moved? Or perhaps I have missed something in your arrangement.

I am thinking of a light weight tube 2 m long that is rotated in the center. That would leave two lever arms that are both 1 m long. On the end of both of these arms is .1 kg.
Now I have done these experiments and this is how it works.
The .1 kg at 1 m can be rotated as if it were 1 kg at .1 m.
If we have an Atwood’s that has two 1 kg masses at .1 m (each side) and we apply an extra 1 kg mass (9.81 N of force) to one side at .1 m; then the acceleration will be 3.27 m/sec/sec. After the extra 1 kg has dropped .1527 m the speed is 1 m/sec at the .1 m location. This means that the extra kg is moving 1 m/sec and the two .1 kg masses on the ends are moving 10 m/sec.
The two .1 kg masses are not being raised or lowered their center of mass remains in the same place. This is true if they are moving up and down on the sides of a pulley (as in an Atwood’s machine) or moving around on the ends of a rod.
As you have noticed I have substituted a rod for an Atwood’s machine’s pulley. You can use a pulley with two radii; one radius at .1 m and one at 1 m. Or you can substitute a rod for the long radius of the pulley.
I have experiments posted on YouTube under Delburt Phend. These are experiments that prove that energy can be made without the long rod.
These posted experiments prove energy can and has been made from gravity. But they are a little more complex. And the rod also makes energy.
Any spinning rim or wheel can make energy by simply wrapping the wheel with a weighted string and throwing the mass on the end of the string. This works much like the long rod.

Glenn Herbert wrote:We are always listening However, we will not uncritically accept any old claim; it needs to be backed up with evidence (preferably a working model). What is your idea, and what sites are you finding information from?

Please be patient: I have several energy producing experiments. And I will start with the simple and then  the moderately complex.

You can take a light tube such as an arrow shaft and balance it at its center. You can then suspend 1 kg 2 cm from the center of the shaft, on one side. On the other side you can suspend .1 kg at 20 cm from the center of the arrow shaft.

The long .1 kg side rotates just as easily as the short heavy side. If you bring the heavy side to 1 m/sec then the light side is moving 10 m/sec.   1/2 * 1 kg * .1 m/sec * .1 m/sec = .005 J and 1/2 * .1 kg * 1 m/sec * 1 m/sec = .05 Joules This is an energy increase to 1000%

I have conducted experiments and this is exactly what happens. I also used multiple radius pulleys to increase drop distance and mass.

The speed that the 1 kg mass can obtain is shown to use by Atwood’s machines. An extra 1 kg on either side will give an acceleration of 1/3 * 9.81 m/sec/sec. To get to a speed of 1 m/sec the extra 1 kg has to drop .1529 m.

If two .1 kg are on each end and are moving 10 m/sec they both will rise 5.097 m, that is .2 kg at 5.097 m = .2 kg * 5.097 m * 9.81 N/kg = 10 J. And you used 1 kg * .1529 m * 9.81 N/kg = 1.5 J

John Wolfram wrote:

Greg Martin wrote:Nature does "perpetual" motion all the time.  Diffusion, electrons traveling around in their orbitals, planets zipping around their stars.  It's just a question about how to make a device.  No, I'm not saying I have any ideas for this Perpetual motion is one thing, getting work out is quite another.

Each year as it travels around the sun, the earth slows down by about 3 nanometers per second.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/12/04/ask-ethan-does-earth-orbit-the-sun-more-slowly-with-each-new-year/?sh=242fa0e75b8f

I am still trying to figure out how to use this site. I have energy producing experiments that I would like to introduce to anyone interested.
This is the newest of the sites mentioning perpetual motion. These experiments produce extremely large quantities of energy and they are moderately simple.
But it would be nice to know that someone is listening.

[quote=Delburt Phend]
I have an energy producing experiment. I am trying to figure out how to post on this forum..  ??[/quote]

Lever arms can produce energy. A 1.0 m lever arm with 1 kg on the end can be brought into rotation as easily as 10 kg at a .1 m radius. But the 1 kg has ten times the energy.

I have an energy producing experiment. I am trying to figure out how to post on this forum..  ??