If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo) Video This awesome perpetual motion machine may not be perpetual but it's awesome for sure   (gizmodo.com) divider line 107
    More: Video, perpetual motion machines, neodymium magnets  
•       •       •

11763 clicks; posted to Video » on 06 Feb 2013 at 2:56 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



107 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-06 06:28:02 PM  

Tigger: Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: Tigger: timujin: It may not be "perpetual", but it looks like it'll run for quite a while.  If you can use it to generate power, which seems pretty straightforward, it'll be a hell of a cheap source.

Guess what happens when you rig it up to a generator.

Explosion? I'm not an expert.

It will stop because of the resistance introduced by the generator.


Yep. If you've ever done anything with wind-powered generators, one of the first things they tell you is NEVER to allow the blades to spin unless the generator is hooked up to it. If you do, the blades will spin too fast, and that can be dangerous. The generator itself creates enough resistance to slow the blades down to a safe level, even as the windmill generates power. The same thing would happen here: a generator would slow down the rotation, probably enough to stop the machine completely.

The laws of thermodynamics don't actually render perpetual motion truly impossible. What's impossible is extracting energy from such a device. In practical terms, this means that if a perpetual motion machine exists, then it cannot produce any heat, light, electrical current, or even sound. If it does, then energy must be "leaking" out of the system to produce those things, and so the machine will eventually run out of energy and stop. You could add energy to the system in some way to keep it going, but then it wouldn't be a perpetual motion machine.
 
2013-02-06 06:38:12 PM  

Lumpmoose: It would have take into account the cost of rare-earth metals and how often the magnets have to be replaced.  Prices have fallen recently but by definition, mineral-based energy is not renewable.


OK, I won't go into why motors that use only peramanent magnets can't do any work, but what do you think happens to magnets when they lose their magnetism?  They don't evaporate.  The rare earth elements are still there.  They can be re-magnetized.  Yes, that does take energy, but my point is that the rare metals can be reused indefinitely.
 
2013-02-06 06:50:42 PM  

Necronic: many times more efficient than a simple flywheel


Many times more efficient at what, exactly?
 
2013-02-06 07:03:37 PM  

profplump: Necronic: many times more efficient than a simple flywheel

Many times more efficient at what, exactly?


Flying or wheeling, obviously.
 
2013-02-06 07:10:32 PM  
what if you tape a piece of buttered toast onto the back of a cat?

if only the stupidity of farkers produced energy

UNLIMITED POWARR!!!!!!
 
2013-02-06 07:13:17 PM  
People that think the only thing keeping things like this from working are the magnets wearing out really need to get their head checked.

If I were to create a device where an object rolled down a hill, then a mechanism at the end pushed the object back to the top, would you believe that this device would keep running forever?  Of course not, it's obvious that to push the object back to the top the system needs some kind of external force applied, even if we're clever and only have to worry about overcoming frictional losses.

Why, then, are people so inclined to believe that magnetic force behaves any differently from gravitational force?  After all, all this device does is create a "hill" of magnetism.  The rotor is driven by the magnets to a position where it has the lowest amount of potential energy, and then the lifter pushes the bar magnet away ever so slightly while the rotor turns back to the starting position with the highest potential energy.  Do you believe that lift takes less energy than was used to spin the rotor in the first place?  Why?  Are you functionally retarded?

So yeah, obvious hoax is obvious.  I had seen this before and wasn't clear on the how, I assumed a small motor hidden in the side supports.  The air nozzle though, that's brilliant.
 
2013-02-06 07:15:11 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org

Drinking bird frowns at his magnets.
 
2013-02-06 07:15:25 PM  
A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.
 
2013-02-06 07:53:43 PM  

RatOmeter: timujin: It may not be "perpetual", but it looks like it'll run for quite a while. If you can use it to generate power, which seems pretty straightforward, it'll be a hell of a cheap source.

Hmmmm, you "work for a company that puts robots on other planets" and you seriously entertained the thought that some useful energy could be extracted from that thing (before the hoax revelation, of course)? I hope you aren't directly responsible for applying physics at work ;)


Yes I do,. No, not "seriously", had I been serious I would have taken the time to find out of it was real or a hoax,. And, no, I'm not, thankfully.  It's never been something I've ever studied, a giant hole in my education really.

So, due to that, I'm still not sure why (if, in reality, you could make something spin for any real length of time using magnets) it would be any more difficult to have it spin a generator than it is to do so with a wind or watermill as long as the force created by the magnets was greater than the opposing force created by the generator.

/I mean, technically, you could hook this up to a tiny generator (DC motor) and "create" power, since it's really just a very, very inefficient windmill.
 
2013-02-06 08:05:06 PM  

dennysgod: It's driving me nuts...what the hell is the name of the song playing in the background. I know it, but can't recall from where.


If you've ever been to Cedar Point, one of the arcades there blares it as loud as they can all day.
 
2013-02-06 08:53:04 PM  

timujin: I mean, technically, you could hook this up to a tiny generator (DC motor) and "create" power, since it's really just a very, very inefficient windmill.


Are you forgetting the "this is a hoax" part?

But, for all those PM machines that do actually run for a long time, you will find that the time that the time they run is inversely proportional to the amount of work you get out of them. Rendering them useless for power generation.
 
2013-02-06 08:59:27 PM  

dennysgod: It's driving me nuts...what the hell is the name of the song playing in the background. I know it, but can't recall from where.


It is also on one of the stations in GTA IV. Journeyis the name of the channel.
 
2013-02-06 09:33:55 PM  

Ed Grubermann: dennysgod: It's driving me nuts...what the hell is the name of the song playing in the background. I know it, but can't recall from where.

Jean Michele Jarre. Oxegene Part IV.


FloydA: dennysgod: It's driving me nuts...what the hell is the name of the song playing in the background. I know it, but can't recall from where.

The song is  Oxygene (Part IV)by Jean Michel Jarre.  You might be familiar with it from the soundtrack to the movie Gallipoli.



Thanks guys.
 
2013-02-06 10:06:07 PM  
As usual, gawker-site doesn't work even after allowing all 80 trillion different scripts running on the page.
 
2013-02-06 10:20:37 PM  

timujin: RatOmeter: timujin:


Admitting: as a kid I was snared by the "power of magnets."  I tried all sorts of things, within my limited resources, to break through the mystery of magnetics.  Then I got older, was taught a little, read a lot, then mostly understood.

Recently my own son has been berating me about "why do you think magnets can't work [such and such way]?"  I try to tell him in terms of the Laws, but I guess I haven't devised and given proper demonstrations yet.  And he hasn't finished 6th grade.

No worries... he appears to be more interested in Minecrap now.
 
2013-02-06 10:28:50 PM  
Here is a direct Youtube link to the video if like me you can't see it on Gizmodo's shiatty web site: Linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TwTPwIcSDp g
 
2013-02-06 10:36:04 PM  

Skyfrog: Here is a direct Youtube link to the video if like me you can't see it on Gizmodo's shiatty web site: Linkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TwTPwIcSDp g


Thanks, very interesting.
 
2013-02-06 10:47:53 PM  
Speaking of interesting machines (so this isn't a total threadjack), but does anybody have a link to that video of the engineer who rigged up this swinging-bar contraption that would balance itself along a moving track? I think it was posted on Fark within that past couple years. He does it with a rigid bar connected to a motor on a horizontal track. Initially the bar is hanging below the track and whatever sensors he's hooked up allow the motor to swing the bar back and forth until it's upright. He then does it with a bar that has a swiveling joint in the middle, so the machine has to make significantly more movements to get it upright. I remember posting in the thread, but I can't seem to find it. THANK YOU.
 
2013-02-06 10:51:17 PM  

natazha: Please go back to high school physics class, you obviously skipped the day they taught the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

You probably don't know who you are though.




At best, a clock.
 
2013-02-06 11:10:54 PM  
Frozboz

Hoax:

And we're done.
 
2013-02-06 11:16:56 PM  
There are several people on Fark who run their mouths with no signs of ever slowing down.

If we could harness that energy, the hot air alone could generate enough power to light up Las Vegas.
 
2013-02-07 12:09:03 AM  
Magnetic fields do no work. I'll show you the math if you want. It's really easy. Hoax.
 
2013-02-07 01:04:46 AM  

xelnia: Speaking of interesting machines (so this isn't a total threadjack), but does anybody have a link to that video of the engineer who rigged up this swinging-bar contraption that would balance itself along a moving track? I think it was posted on Fark within that past couple years. He does it with a rigid bar connected to a motor on a horizontal track. Initially the bar is hanging below the track and whatever sensors he's hooked up allow the motor to swing the bar back and forth until it's upright. He then does it with a bar that has a swiveling joint in the middle, so the machine has to make significantly more movements to get it upright. I remember posting in the thread, but I can't seem to find it. THANK YOU.


Not sure if this is the video you were looking for, but what your describing sounds like a double or triple inverted pendulum.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E
 
2013-02-07 01:09:49 AM  

CrissX: xelnia: Speaking of interesting machines (so this isn't a total threadjack), but does anybody have a link to that video of the engineer who rigged up this swinging-bar contraption that would balance itself along a moving track? I think it was posted on Fark within that past couple years. He does it with a rigid bar connected to a motor on a horizontal track. Initially the bar is hanging below the track and whatever sensors he's hooked up allow the motor to swing the bar back and forth until it's upright. He then does it with a bar that has a swiveling joint in the middle, so the machine has to make significantly more movements to get it upright. I remember posting in the thread, but I can't seem to find it. THANK YOU.

Not sure if this is the video you were looking for, but what your describing sounds like a double or triple inverted pendulum.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E


That's the exact same concept, just a different video. Thanks!
 
2013-02-07 01:15:57 AM  

xelnia: CrissX: xelnia: Speaking of interesting machines (so this isn't a total threadjack), but does anybody have a link to that video of the engineer who rigged up this swinging-bar contraption that would balance itself along a moving track? I think it was posted on Fark within that past couple years. He does it with a rigid bar connected to a motor on a horizontal track. Initially the bar is hanging below the track and whatever sensors he's hooked up allow the motor to swing the bar back and forth until it's upright. He then does it with a bar that has a swiveling joint in the middle, so the machine has to make significantly more movements to get it upright. I remember posting in the thread, but I can't seem to find it. THANK YOU.

Not sure if this is the video you were looking for, but what your describing sounds like a double or triple inverted pendulum.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E

That's the exact same concept, just a different video. Thanks!


That was pretty awesome, thanks guys.
 
2013-02-07 01:23:31 AM  

CrissX: xelnia: Speaking of interesting machines (so this isn't a total threadjack), but does anybody have a link to that video of the engineer who rigged up this swinging-bar contraption that would balance itself along a moving track? I think it was posted on Fark within that past couple years. He does it with a rigid bar connected to a motor on a horizontal track. Initially the bar is hanging below the track and whatever sensors he's hooked up allow the motor to swing the bar back and forth until it's upright. He then does it with a bar that has a swiveling joint in the middle, so the machine has to make significantly more movements to get it upright. I remember posting in the thread, but I can't seem to find it. THANK YOU.

Not sure if this is the video you were looking for, but what your describing sounds like a double or triple inverted pendulum.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyN-CRNrb3E


gahhhhh horrible flashbacks to my controls class..... never did get a single pendulum somewhat stable let alone 3.

/fun and interesting classes but my mind does not work that way.
 
2013-02-07 02:45:26 AM  

emotion_lotion: rufus-t-firefly: Since he used "awesome" twice, subby must really like "awesome."

[24.media.tumblr.com image 500x282]

Holly cow, when was C.K. on fox?


He wasn't.. it's from a scripted interview scene that was in an episode from his tv show.
 
2013-02-07 03:56:24 AM  
My best friend is a perpetual looking for for a wife machine.  But that was covered already in Newton's banned section of thermodynamics.
 
2013-02-07 03:56:24 AM  

Rezurok: People that think the only thing keeping things like this from working are the magnets wearing out really need to get their head checked.

If I were to create a device where an object rolled down a hill, then a mechanism at the end pushed the object back to the top, would you believe that this device would keep running forever?  Of course not, it's obvious that to push the object back to the top the system needs some kind of external force applied, even if we're clever and only have to worry about overcoming frictional losses.

Why, then, are people so inclined to believe that magnetic force behaves any differently from gravitational force?  After all, all this device does is create a "hill" of magnetism.  The rotor is driven by the magnets to a position where it has the lowest amount of potential energy, and then the lifter pushes the bar magnet away ever so slightly while the rotor turns back to the starting position with the highest potential energy.  Do you believe that lift takes less energy than was used to spin the rotor in the first place?  Why?  Are you functionally retarded?

So yeah, obvious hoax is obvious.  I had seen this before and wasn't clear on the how, I assumed a small motor hidden in the side supports.  The air nozzle though, that's brilliant.


I was thinking it was some combination of springs, elastic bands, and counterweights.
 
2013-02-07 04:15:51 AM  
Anyone guess a woman's mouth yet? My guess is a woman's mouth.

/i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-02-07 05:57:53 AM  

nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.


Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.
 
2013-02-07 05:58:59 AM  

nmemkha: Anyone guess a woman's mouth yet? My guess is a woman's mouth.

/[i0.kym-cdn.com image 140x130]


You think of women as machines to give blowjobs?
 
2013-02-07 06:01:58 AM  

DrGunsforHands: Rezurok: People that think the only thing keeping things like this from working are the magnets wearing out really need to get their head checked.

If I were to create a device where an object rolled down a hill, then a mechanism at the end pushed the object back to the top, would you believe that this device would keep running forever?  Of course not, it's obvious that to push the object back to the top the system needs some kind of external force applied, even if we're clever and only have to worry about overcoming frictional losses.

Why, then, are people so inclined to believe that magnetic force behaves any differently from gravitational force?  After all, all this device does is create a "hill" of magnetism.  The rotor is driven by the magnets to a position where it has the lowest amount of potential energy, and then the lifter pushes the bar magnet away ever so slightly while the rotor turns back to the starting position with the highest potential energy.  Do you believe that lift takes less energy than was used to spin the rotor in the first place?  Why?  Are you functionally retarded?

So yeah, obvious hoax is obvious.  I had seen this before and wasn't clear on the how, I assumed a small motor hidden in the side supports.  The air nozzle though, that's brilliant.

I was thinking it was some combination of springs, elastic bands, and counterweights.


I was thinking it was something like maxwells demon. (except magnetic)
 
2013-02-07 07:19:04 AM  
Perpetual motion?  This must be the a**hole causing global warming.  Someone tell him to stop dumping infinite amounts of waste heat into the universe.
 
2013-02-07 07:23:08 AM  
www.lghs.net
 
2013-02-07 08:40:39 AM  

dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.


Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".
 
2013-02-07 08:49:15 AM  
You know how if you put the batteries in a toy car backwards, it drives forward in reverse?
Try putting the batteries in a flashlight backwards.
Instant black hole!
 
2013-02-07 09:42:51 AM  

FlashHarry: the music and style make it look like some british industrial film from the 1970s.


I think that was Tangerine Dream.
 
2013-02-07 09:43:22 AM  

nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".


Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)
 
2013-02-07 09:51:51 AM  

karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)




No it isn't.

More like, it's closest to being the best slice of pizza.
 
2013-02-07 09:58:00 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

No it isn't.

More like, it's closest to being the best slice of pizza.


per·pet·u·al /pərˈpeCHooəl/ Adjective - Never ending or changing.

There is no grey area here.
 
2013-02-07 09:58:48 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: More like, it's closest to being the best slice of pizza.


Actually, yeah, I get what you mean.
 
2013-02-07 10:04:10 AM  

karmachameleon: StoPPeRmobile: More like, it's closest to being the best slice of pizza.

Actually, yeah, I get what you mean.




Our language limits our thinking.
 
2013-02-07 10:25:50 AM  

karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)


You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.
 
2013-02-07 10:34:51 AM  

stonicus: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.




Some people call that a god, knucklehead.
 
2013-02-07 10:47:06 AM  

stonicus: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.


Which still isn't perpetual.
 
2013-02-07 11:00:57 AM  

karmachameleon: stonicus: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.

Which still isn't perpetual.


Pedantic much? I bet you're a riot at parties.

How about you stop looking down you smug nose at being "technically correct" and actually contribute to the discussion?
 
2013-02-07 11:28:26 AM  

stonicus: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.


I could imagine  hundred otters in a small aero-plane.
 
2013-02-07 01:21:38 PM  

Uchiha_Cycliste: stonicus: karmachameleon: nmemkha: dready zim: nmemkha: A spinning black hole is probably the closest thing to perpetual motion I can think of.

Nope. They evaporate. If you know the mass you can estimate how long it will take as well.

Really? Amazing. That is why I said "the closest thing".

Why is that probably the closest thing?  Why not, say, a galaxy, which probably spins on average a lot longer than a black hole?

(Hint:  there is no such thing as "close to" perpetual.  It's the same as saying someone is a little bit pregnant.  It's either perpetual or it isn't.)

You could conceive of a device with a power life span greater than the remaining life of the universe.

I could imagine  hundred otters in a small aero-plane.


Otters prefer helicopters.  Don't be stupid!
 
2013-02-07 01:28:08 PM  
The complicated futility of ignorance.

/shouldn't be obscure
 
Displayed 50 of 107 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report