This is not a paradox at all and can be explained by simple high school physics. There is magnetic potential energy built up in the balls and when released, that energy is converted into kinetic. This is no perpetual motion machine idea though, it's simply the basis for a Gaussian accelerator.
@phthisicy If you look more closely, you may notice that the ball on the end goes flying farther than the conservation of momentum could take it. There are magnets involved with this demonstration, making it operate differently from the Newton's Cradle, the product to which you are referring.
@EducateInnovate What are you trying to say, exactly? Clearly, the ball on the end could not possibly go any further than momentum could take it. It is momentum that is responsible for its motion. If not momentum, then what do you propose is making it move? The original ball achieved a higher momentum than an unmagnetized ball by being accelerated toward the magnet, so it had a higher velocity when the balls collided. That higher velocity means more momentum, so nothing seems at all unusual.
@phthisicy I must have misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were saying this was identical to a Newton's Cradle, just without the suspension and strings. Yes, the end ball goes very far because of the magnetic force. I was simply clarifying that this was not just the momentum gained from gravity and potential to kinetic energy.
@phthisicy something worth noting, however, is that if there were no third ball, between the magnetized one and the one that goes flying off at the end, then the end ball would lose as much momentum as the initial ball gained from the magnet, and it would look just like Netwon's Cradle
@thesourceofx Yes. You can set this up to act just like a Newton's Cradle without the strings! It just has more friction, so it might not go for as long.
@TheKaylub I'd love that. It's just that no one has even come close to demonstrating it. The energy has to come from somewhere. But even using something like the Earth's (weak) magnetic field would look just like "free" energy, even though it wouldn't be. Good as.
I'm tired of "Free Energy" people, especially the ones who just can't wrap their head around magnetic systems with logical ends. It's physics: it's not that complicated but it's easy to miss things.
If you make a circle, the system stops accelerating after one revolution because there will be a ball in the way of the first magnet to keep it from accelerating rapidly right up to the surface of the magnet.
the energy for this is stored by pulling the magnets apart, just like lifting an object against gravity. there's no perpetual motion here...
aomimezura11 1 week ago
What just happened at the last three seconds? The last ball flashed and then it stopped completely?????
Gunbardo 1 week ago
@Gunbardo The last ball shot off the end very quickly. It disappears off the edge of the frame.
EducateInnovate 1 week ago
put thousands of these now...
mondonem 1 week ago
the magnet accelerates the trigger ball, making more perpetual motion, creating more energy. :/
guitpla304 2 weeks ago
its called a gauss gun
XxcoomiekidxX 3 weeks ago
This is not a paradox at all and can be explained by simple high school physics. There is magnetic potential energy built up in the balls and when released, that energy is converted into kinetic. This is no perpetual motion machine idea though, it's simply the basis for a Gaussian accelerator.
Booth272 1 month ago
gaussian acc ?!
Frotty33 1 month ago
would a circle actually work?( or why not?) like could someone try it and give/show us a video?
lopelipo 2 months ago
they are magnetic, this is a simple use of the gauss principal. BUT I LOVE IT!!!!!!!
tatertottheawesome 2 months ago
This is how a rail gun works, right?
debs222 3 months ago
como funciona, alguien sabe?
H3NEKK3N 4 months ago
Get it to go up a ramp the other side, so when it comes back down... Free Energy
Films4You 5 months ago
what if you made a circle track ?
radulica 9 months ago
@erexon
use english please
ikschrijflangenamen 10 months ago
I guess I don't get it. What is this supposed to be? The balls hanging from strings show the conservation of momentum just as well, or better.
phthisicy 10 months ago
@phthisicy If you look more closely, you may notice that the ball on the end goes flying farther than the conservation of momentum could take it. There are magnets involved with this demonstration, making it operate differently from the Newton's Cradle, the product to which you are referring.
EducateInnovate 10 months ago 9
@EducateInnovate What are you trying to say, exactly? Clearly, the ball on the end could not possibly go any further than momentum could take it. It is momentum that is responsible for its motion. If not momentum, then what do you propose is making it move? The original ball achieved a higher momentum than an unmagnetized ball by being accelerated toward the magnet, so it had a higher velocity when the balls collided. That higher velocity means more momentum, so nothing seems at all unusual.
phthisicy 10 months ago
@phthisicy I must have misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were saying this was identical to a Newton's Cradle, just without the suspension and strings. Yes, the end ball goes very far because of the magnetic force. I was simply clarifying that this was not just the momentum gained from gravity and potential to kinetic energy.
EducateInnovate 10 months ago 2
@EducateInnovate i wus readin these comments till the vid above wus over, lol, i relayed XD
nextblain 4 months ago
@phthisicy something worth noting, however, is that if there were no third ball, between the magnetized one and the one that goes flying off at the end, then the end ball would lose as much momentum as the initial ball gained from the magnet, and it would look just like Netwon's Cradle
thesourceofx 4 months ago
@thesourceofx Yes. You can set this up to act just like a Newton's Cradle without the strings! It just has more friction, so it might not go for as long.
EducateInnovate 4 months ago
it' s a Gauss Gun
Exeregon 11 months ago
this could be used to make infinite free energy
TheKaylub 11 months ago
@TheKaylub I'd love that. It's just that no one has even come close to demonstrating it. The energy has to come from somewhere. But even using something like the Earth's (weak) magnetic field would look just like "free" energy, even though it wouldn't be. Good as.
phthisicy 10 months ago
what if you made it a circle of speed?
Gwillz15 1 year ago 36
@Gwillz15 it's impossible because the sistem is subjected to a irreversible trasformation
Exeregon 11 months ago
@Gwillz15 That would be.......epic.
CanadianSpectator 3 months ago
@Gwillz15
I'm tired of "Free Energy" people, especially the ones who just can't wrap their head around magnetic systems with logical ends. It's physics: it's not that complicated but it's easy to miss things.
If you make a circle, the system stops accelerating after one revolution because there will be a ball in the way of the first magnet to keep it from accelerating rapidly right up to the surface of the magnet.
hellomate639 1 month ago
build one up and lets see what happens...
Isaiahritchey 1 week ago
@Gwillz15 i believe its happened
gpoquiztube 3 weeks ago
@Gwillz15 You would get a miniature LHC except with balls instead of atoms
boredalex1 2 weeks ago
try to use magnet balls
vbi2dd103Abgr 1 year ago