Added: 4 years ago
From: CrocaCoala
Views: 706,893
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (471)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • use magnetic bearings, use plexi to encase it, void the air. the flop-effect you have in some of those should yield more energy from the acceleration and motion termination so abruptly, vs the lift energy. capture the back flop energy with a gear and make the whole wheel a gear maybe... just may work or it maybe too late for me to be commenting on youtube. idk.

  • I see.....to much friction.....does not work......better go back to the fu"k(ng drawing board.....again.

  • If you want to get the Magnetic-Generator plans

    Just search Google for "Top Magnetic Generator"

    Click the First result (Skip the Advertisements) TopMagneticGenerator(dot)Com

    I found it to be a great resource

  • Crap. Every ball etc rises and falls the same amount on each rotation. If these worked we'd be looking at the working prototypes not stupid animations. Ha ha balls rising and falling now I see what lightboxes enjoyed.

  • noone of this works =)

  • I wonder which one would go the fastest.

  • this will never work, watch it from the fluid's perspectife it never really moves just change's shape.

  • lot of scientists on youtube .... bwaahahahhah .... go get an education ... :))

  • There is no perpetuum mobile..

  • @TTTStyle : Do you mean, other than the Universe?

  • Tricky...but I was finally able to masterbate to this video.

  • @Lightboxes dude that's messed up hahaha!

  • @Lightboxes you are my hero ! 

  • ma studiamoce 'n anticchia de termodinamica suvvia... interessante la musica.

  • Nice collection of samples/alternatives to De Vinci's toys.

    Thank for sharing.

  • nice background music!

  • These are all very stupid designs, and do not take into account that the device has to create more energy than it is able to generate (unless it is actually able to change it's own gravity from 1G to -1G for instance. Not to mention that all perpetuum mobiles are required to work in an enviroment with constantly changing gravity to work, they must be at 0 friction or less (equally impossible) to operate. They also need to be made of materials that never deteroriate (don't exist.)

  • nice song wt's the name ?

  • @shittyfuck Поебать дашь свою малолетнюю сестренку, скажу что это название этой песни.

  • @Matuha751 english ?

  • ___ w w w  diymagneticmotor com has interesting PLANS~

  • Which Bach fugue is this? (I'm assuming it's Bach)

  • One of the laws of psysics says that always a little bit of energy turns into heat so a perpetuum mobile. But when I see al these theories and machines I'm wondering or that's true. Can somebody explains it to me? ;D I really don't get it...

    Why ergy always turns into heat? There is no proof..right? ;D

  • @War4Skills not just heat but noise and (un wanted) movement, and some other stuff

  • @War4Skills

    There will always be losses due to friction at minimum. A spinning wheel must be supported by an axle, which in turn is supported by something else. The friction between the axle and supports converts the rotational kinetic energy of the wheel and axle into heat via friction, slowing the wheel down.

  • It is still a closed system and needs to be open to allow otyher energies and forces to ifluence it. Maybe youve applied for a patent and just left the other part out?

  • Dummes Zeug bleibt dummes Zeug!

  • Now all you guys have to remember : everything transforms, nothing is lost. In fact, here the inertia of the wheel transforms into heat via the friction force.

  • They kept overlooking the fact that the weights closer to the shaft on one side contains more weights than the other side which makes the wheel still in balance. A normal wheel would do even better in a frictionless environment.

  • Pepertual Motion and Free Energy will never be discovered. And because of that, we should make absolutely no efforts to develop energy that is more practical than what we currently have. We must always have energy sources that make the average consumer completely subservient to those in power because true free energy is not possible. If even the occassional push of the legs is required, it's not technically "free."

    (That was sarcasm. That seems to be an argument that some people make.)

  • this isn't perpetual motion. correct, it is moving perpetually, but i always thought that perpetual motion was constant motion with no energy loss or energy input. in all these cases, energy is being put into the components by gravity.

  • @TheMaster734 Gravity itself is a perpetual energy caused by objects having mass. It's just a son of a bitch to make it usable.

  • @TheMaster734 perpetual motion refers to indefinite movement as you said, a perpetual motion machine is one that creates more energy than it produces, giving it the ability to operate perpetually although it can be considered a perpetual motion machine even if it operated for a second. Gravity can't put energy into the system.

  • @mattymuck yes it can. it stores energy in objects as potential energy.

  • @TheMaster734 It is not putting energy into the system, energy is being transformed by gravity in the system. Much like that of a magnetic field.

  • This method does not work. Its moment of inertia is a oval, and not a circle, so it does not rotate freely

  • Unless the bearing at the middle is friction free and the laws relating to the conservation of energy didn't exist this might work, however this is an epic fail.

  • Pets and Animals

  • What human wants is not the perfect perpetuum mobile. We want something super-close to it. A machine that would work for so long as a single human can live.

    We need a machine that would gain energy from gravity and magnets, powering it self.

    IF there would be a car, you give it enormous amounts of energy and then give one joule every engine start/wheel delock/wheel spin/whatever it would be _perfect_

    And what's awesome? We've almost come to it!

  • not just friction. ive tried many of these...if you pause any of these kinds of videos (variable distance of the weights) and count the number of weights on the upside vs the number going down, youll see its not feasible anyway

  • Yes we did, there was a magnet generator build. It costed 1000$, all magnets, big like a microwave, generating 1kW/hour.

    And it's really going to spin forever! Because it generates more energy then human puts in! Of course, it's all natural energy, but who cares?

  • never think that science is allways right, 380 years ago galileo was having house arrest for the rest of his life, beceause he said that the earthy was turning around the sun, and the earth was not the middle of the universe. It is very good that some people try to find alternative ways for what we use now

  • i tried all of them and more than them and i wasted my money =no result

    any way this is a beautiful dream

    dont listen 2me and go on

    maybe iam loser

  • NOTHING CAN MAKE ENRGY FROM NOTHING!

  • @MRoesterreicher1 Then how does the universe exist?

    WRT to this video, there is no work being done by these devices so they do not violate any laws of physics. Gravity pulls all of the weights/bearings down with equal force but the weights that are farther from the centerline produce more torque and therefore spin the wheel.

  • @nunayafb if u was good in physics then you should know that a machine that creates energy from nothing, is called perpetuum mobile

    BUT it doesnt work.

  • interesting. I saw the one at 18 seconds go for quite a while in a prior video. One thing that I wonder: might not an intelligent processor added to an efficient robot gently assist the unfolding arms, and slow the sudden drop of the next arm, make this work? This machine fails when it picks up speed, yet the arms can't take advantage of the new speed (they can't fold back in fast enough, while they extend too quickly). An intelligent processor, with min. effort can nudge the thing to last

  • perpetual motion isnt positionable it may go for a long time but it will stop sometime. It goes against the first two laws of thermodynamics

  • No matter how clever the conservation of energy will always get you.

  • no offense but none of these would work unless in the perfect environment and even then they would be pointless

  • Вечные ТОРМОЗА!!!

  • Science is not infallible. It has been proven wrong by those who have dared to think outside the text books {box}. I truly believe that where others failed to make certain theories or methods work, others will succeed.

    The only limit to anything is ourselves...

  • The weights moving to the outside have more leverage on the fulcrum but the weights coming up closer to the center are more concentrated or closer together. It always comes out equal. Bottom line is you're just spinning a wheel and it will coast to a stop.

  • what instrument is playing in the video?

  • @Straightsix76 Sounds like a Harpsichord to me!

  • @rebirth3X Kind of like being beaten to death with a set of silver spoons, isn't it?

  • well couldn't you sustain them in the air with magnets? That wouldn't have nearly if not, no friction at all.

  • @AnonymoussourceL0L Air resistance. You can approximate a perpetuum mobile, but not make it. Cause even a vacuum isn't empty xD. Some things 'll go on for longer than others, but it has no use anyway... You have to put energy into it to start moving it, and if you'd want to harvest it it 'd lose it again anyway...

  • @TakesTwoToTango Damn laws of physics

  • Very amusing and quite relaxing.

  • All we need to learn to do is block a magnetic field and we will have perpetual energy... problem is blocking a magnetic field... lol

  • They seem to work just fine in the animated versions! I thought about all of these as a little kid.

  • Notice you will see endless diagrams and simulations of "perpetual motion" machines but no actual functioning examples.

  • well, if you create some vacuum chamber and put the device in, you'll get quasi 0% friction of oxygen, then in a certain level under the sea you'll minimize gravity and get better performances from the device

  • I have a question

    would these machines work if there'd be no friction at all?

  • @Rboysblaster

    Depends on what you mean by "work". With no friction they could run forever once started, but so would a plain wheel with no gadets at all. If by "work" you mean energy out of nothing, they wouldn't work. Gravity is a conservative field, not an energy source. Each particle on these wheels travels in a closed loop, gaining X energy moving from the highest to lowest point, and requiring X energy to be raised from lowest to highest. It makes no difference what machine they're in.

  • @jagger2888 ok, what I meant with 'work' was going on in perpetual motion like they should if there was no friction

    so gravity does not slow these machines down at least a little?

  • @Rboysblaster

    No, gravity wouldn't slow it down because each part of the wheel gains as much kinetic energy going down as it loses going up (becomes gravitational potential energy). If you gave these machines a push in a perfect frictionless environment they'd spin forever, neither gaining nor losing energy. But as I pointed out before, so would an ordinary wheel, so there's absolutely no point to making these machines, even in an ideal situation.

  • @jagger2888 ok

    then actually the point of these machines is to be slowed down as less as possible by friction, though the name perpetual would always be wrong :P

    they should make a competition in reallife instead of pretending they overrule physics with stupid animations

  • @jagger2888 perpetual motion is the universe itself

  • @jagger2888 Aldo Costa, a French inventor, has one that is 18 meters high and has been spinning for years. It has no current application, much like the Finsrud Mobile, but it effectively proves that the 4 fundamental forces can be used to perform work. The 2nd law of thermodynamics allows this, as the application of force is what is causing motion- it is not "free energy", but simply using an alternative force, that just happens to be constant.

  • @jack91x if thats true, i wnna see it...

  • Comment removed

  • people say the difference is when the weight is farther from the center it can apply more torque to keep it spinning but i don't understand that. talk to any gymnast or ice skater and they can spin way faster with their arms and legs pulled in towards their center not stretched out as far as possible.

  • @jagger2888 as a question would they be able to spin turbines to produce electricity ?

  • @quatro8745 infinite, clean and cheap energy... sure, thats the reason why we use coal, oil and nuclear power plants to destroy our world. xD

  • @OnkelKunibert XD thanks

  • @jagger2888 But of course some of the energy is lost as noise and friction slows it down more, shame we don't live in an ideal world.

  • it's wery posible

  • I love how there are hudreds of thausand of perpetual motion machines working in animations, and absolutely 0 of them working in the real world.

  • @thebby1205 How about Earth. Is that perpetual enough for you?

  • @ourtrashcans

    No it isn't, earth will eventually stop due to tide effects. BTW, even if somebody moves forever doesn't mean that you can use it to produce energy.

  • th n° 4th can work

  • i love the song!

  • It would have to generate more power than it needed to continue running which is impossible. If it managed to it would accelerate to the speed of light which again would mean an infinite amount of energy would be needed...

  • That would work IF gravity is as strong as a black hole

  • @TheDatvinh999 that would still affect the other side and put you back at square one, if it wasn't ripped apart first.

  • @TheDatvinh999 have you got ANY idea what you are talking about?

    "gravity as strong AS a black hole"? it's not like a b.h. is a force or something!!!

  • Nice animations. Call me back when you actually build one

  • Hi, well done, but you can only get something to work, if you use the virtual centrifugal forces and convert them somehow into rotational forces. Also use springs with it to store the forces and movements. Only with levers and torque arms you will never get anything selfrunning ! This is from my own research. P.S: Please subscribe to my youtube channel. Just click on my username and the subscribe. Many thanks. Regards, Stefan.
  • PFFT, YOU GUYS ARE ALL SQUARES!

    THE LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS ARE JUST CORPORATE... um...ELITIST...err...

    9-11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!?

  • even in zero friction none of these would work. if they could generate enough power to turn freely. then they would have enough power to accelerate to infinite velocity.... RUBBISH

  • not much friction in zero g....these things would do

    much better in space

  • All these people trying EVERY SINGLE iteration of a possible perpetual machine end up failing. They'd be better off (or at least equally futile) trying to find a frictionless material.

  • friction it was a bitch in his time :))) lol guys all of these are real of chourse it requires time and money but are as real as we are

  • As fantastic (mechanically) as these all are I thought the quest for perpetual motion ended years ago...

  • @jamesraward Nope. Just a few years ago, I found myself cleaning out some sheds and garages who's owner died. Apparently he was working on his own fairly large perpetual motion water machine. It was about 5' square and about 3' wide with a paddle wheel looking thing inside, but with tubes and chambers and such. It took me a while to figure it out, thinking first it had a practical application. I finally realized what it was (and that it wouldn't work). Obviously, it didn't.

  • If it has moving parts, it can't be perpetual. I like the water one. The rest are pretty much copies of the water design.

  • yay for gravity.

  • in my opinion, the 4th one is the one who seems the most realistic

  • @BlueSta1n when you say "too", do you mean to say "to"

  • @azzy314159 im not the one who wrote that buddy, it's thing2liv

  • looks good on paper.

  • i made everyone it all boils down to having one arm. now control it make it do what you want

  • i made everyone it all boils down to having one arm.

  • crap

  • Electromagnetic Mindcontrol perpentum mobile theory

  • lol this is crap in six ways

  • fica de enfeite então ué.... kkkkkkkkkkkk

  • Da Vinci tried pretty much all of these, and it didn't work. Friction is a bitch.

  • @SMFApples hmm why don't we do it in a zero gravity envieronment?? damn i'm smart

  • @basketBallboy235 There would still be friction on the axel.

  • @SMFApples make it vacuum?

  • @dylandionrakiman A true vacuum can never be achieved. A vacuum would only make the air resistance on the legs be zero. There would still be friction on the axel. Also if you ever wanted to actually use this for turning a generator or something, energy would be extracted thus slowing down the wheel.

  • the ideas are interesting if nothing else

  • Villard de Honnecourt Beat you too it about 780 years ago

  • Da Vinci Beat you to it.

  • this would work really well if u don't know physicz

  • There is a french engineer, who lives in france of course who has one of these built. It's massive and has been running for years.  Discovery channel did a special on it. The problem is.........as massive as it is and as long as it can run, it STILL doesn't produce enough useful energy to do anything, not even light a small light bulb. Perpetual motion is almost irrelevant. Producing large amounts of useable energy is the key.

  • There's a small thing called friction...

  • god **** physics! you screw us again!

  • phun! from algodo

  • the gravity is too strong and without gravity it wouldnt move , so impossible

  • It's a rare pleasure to hear Scarlatti on U-Tube.

    It is Scarlatti, isn't it?

  • So the existence of a free energy process would compromise the stability of the universe, would it not? Or can someone point to a case in my thought experiment where it would not?

    The case of zero net energy loss or gain doesn't fit in this thought experiment though. So perpetual motion (simply because I cannot think of a good way to rule it out, other than basic thermodynamics) may be possible but I feel that free energy is not.

  • I had a thought once. If there exists some process in the universe which yields more energy than it consumes then lets assume there is some non-zero chance of the process randomly occurring somewhere in the universe. Once a single cycle occurs then it would yield enough energy to begin another. Then it would continue to infinite yielding more energy and everything in the universe would eventually be heated into destruction.

  • you are forgetting that gravity would just stop the machine

  • @smiley7890

    Oh please. Gravity? Gravity never yet stopped anything. It makes things gaining speed. It's called falling. And most things are stopped because of friction.

  • we all know it can't work. But besides that: This video is SO LAME.

  • 0:01 not possible

    0:12 the same

    0:21 COULD work, but the abrasion, maybe in 50 years with a new material...

    0.30 NEVER ever...

    0:45 NEVER ever...

    so all in all, none of these ist possible NOW! But in my opionen its possible to make energy from "nothing"

  • @TheHuphi oh come on.. law of conservation of energy....

  • @Fr000b future=new possibilities! 150 years ago they though that if you are faster than 30-40 miles, your head would explode...^^

  • to the people who are skeptical of this machine is that it uses the concept that the longer the lever the less force needed to move the load while a shorter lever requires more force. because the shorter the lever the the more energy is required to move the load, example you have a see saw 2 children weigh exactly the same and both are exactly 5 feet from the axle move one of the children 1 foot closer and he will be energy-wise lighter

  • it amuses me how the first scheme is sheer faggotry

  • There is such a thing as self contained perpetual motion (a planet's spin in frictionless space continues until acted on by another force) but relatively speaking self contained motion is essentially still (since it's movement is only relevant to itself) it is when a moving entity interacts with another entity or greater or lesser motion that energy, friction, and therefore entropy occur. These machines, ideally crafted would spin themselves but would power nothing else.

  • bullshit all this oneas aren't Perpetuum Mobile's

  • Ha,ha,ha....

  • I loved it, really funny. You won't believe it but some people have actually built these and are astounded that they don't work.

  • @danie1murphy "You won't believe it but some people have actually built these and are astounded that they don't work." -- Oh yes i will beleive it, I will never stop beliving in the dumbness of these people :D Just watch here on YT, *lots* of people are convinced they can build perpetual 'magnet motors' and other stupid things. I am not sure if it hilarious, just sad, or outright scary that they can actually think these devices would work.

  • On a planet for example earth this would not work because of the gravity if there was such a thing as !! e.g. = a gravity spot on the top left side and a gravity spot on the lower right side this would work :D or in vacume :D

  • Friction always wins.

  • friction. nuff said.

  • there is no such thing. YOU CANNOT GET ENERGY FROM NOTHING. THE FRICTION WILL ALWAYS OVERCOME THE GAIN.

  • 2-4 acualy work but not enof to creat electricity

  • PMM of the 2nd kind: converting environmental warmth into usefull energy.

    This we do all the time by using heatpumps, and in time we will convert warmth into electricity as well. The Carnot cycle isn't ironclad.

    PMM of the 1st kind: converting dark energy into usefull energy.

    Dark energy is partly responsible for global warming. We tap heat from the core to power steam turbines, hence creating a PMM of the first kind.

    And energy from the earths spin? Tidal machines.

    Nothing is black&white.

  • Would lots more leverage on right hand side, for starts.

  • @henrykay why the hell would you post that on Youtube lol

    Also, perpetual motion is possible, however perpetual acceleration is not...it's the same argument as the chicken and the egg...which came first, motion or a starting force? Except in this case, the answer has to be the starting force

  • how can u tell people to stop thinking! science is philosophie putted on pratice! try miss and one day....

  • dont forget friction :D

  • You can make a computer graphic do anything,but if you draw a vertical line through the axis you will find that there is more weight fighting the direction of spin than supporting it,@ 6.5 to 5.5.

  • lol entertaining.

  • There is no such thing as a perpetuum mobile, so stop fucking about it xD

  • none of these would work

  • pero vamos a ver, una pregunta, ¿por que coño si esto funciona tan bien no se utiliza en todos los lugares del mundo?¿algun problemilla debe de tener, no?

  • Si, no funciona... lol

  • the closest thing to a perpetual motion thing is the pressure vaiation clock and it still is not it

  • ahahahaha

  • @leopoldvs lmao! viagra warning: if your erection lasts more than 4 to 6 hours, consult a doctor.

  • @ryan50ryan So, putting cocaine in your penis to keep it hard is out of the question!...I've heard during the 70's some guys used to do that!!!

  • oh wow, you're so fucking sad.

  • God bless him AAAAAAmennnnn......

  • counterweight + friction > weight

  • They are all "overbalanced" wheels. there is no such thing as "overbalanced".

    If you work out the torque, you'll find out they'll never keep spinning. In fact, they will spin nowhere near as long as a properly balanced wheel of similar weight and eccentricity.

    People who believe this need to take a single lesson in classical mechanics.