wasser@viking.DEC (John A. Wasser) (10/14/85)
>From: decwrl!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!akgua!akgub!tulane!kpc >Subject: Joseph Newman's Energy Machine > >...Joseph Newman ... has invented a motor that has a production efficiency >of over 800% ... >...this rather small (less than 2 feet high and 1 foot wide) device >consisting of over 200 pounds of copper wire ... > >The machine which I saw operate today used several lantern batteries >for a power source... connected to the machine's output leads were a neon >sign and about 12 fluorescent tubes (each 5 feet long). >When Newman threw the switch, the lights and sign started to blink on and >off... the only movement seen in the machine itself was a spark every >tenth of a second or so. A "motor" with no moving parts? (Please note that the sparking implies a high voltage) >Obviously, 12 fluorescent tubes cannot be powered by a few lantern >batteries Not obvious to me. You can make a hell of a Tesla coil with 200 pounds of copper. Not only would it light up all the tubes and the neon sign but it would do so at a distance and not need wires. I suspect that what the "motor" is doing is generating a high voltage that will ionize the gas in the gas discharge tubes and make them light up. This can easily be done with one lantern battery and an old Model-T Ford spark coil... but it wouldn't be as big and impressive as 200 pounds of copper wire. >, and there was NO trickery to be seen... Wrong! There was no trickery SEEN! There may have been trickery that was NOT SEEN (the most effective kind). Think about it... if no one detected trickery does it prove that there was none? >it seems that the machine was actually putting out more energy than it >was taking in... How much energy was it putting out? Did you have a power meter attached? How much energy was it taking in? Once the "motor" was going, did Mr. Newman connect the output to the input and take away the battery? >the energy being generated by the machine was coming directly for the >conversion of copper to energy (E=MC^2). Did you check for the mass loss or were you taking the word of the inventor. If his explanation is not correct, would you know it? How can you know his explanation is correct? (think about it) > Kevin P. Centanni > Dept. of Computer Science > Tulane University > New Orleans, Louisiana -John A. Wasser Work address: ARPAnet: WASSER%VIKING.DEC@decwrl.ARPA Usenet: {allegra,Shasta,decvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-viking!wasser Easynet: VIKING::WASSER Telephone: (617)486-2505 USPS: Digital Equipment Corp. Mail stop: LJO2/E4 30 Porter Rd Littleton, MA 01460
jp@lanl.ARPA (10/15/85)
> >...Joseph Newman ... has invented a motor that has a production efficiency > >of over 800% ... > > > > >The machine which I saw operate today used several lantern batteries > >for a power source... connected to the machine's output leads were a neon > >sign and about 12 fluorescent tubes (each 5 feet long). > and not need wires. I suspect that what the "motor" is > doing is generating a high voltage that will ionize the > gas in the gas discharge tubes and make them light up. This > can easily be done with one lantern battery and an old Model-T > Ford spark coil... but it wouldn't be as big and impressive as > 200 pounds of copper wire. > Hey, I think you're on to something there. You figure out the power output by adding up the wattages of the bulbs that it lights up! Jim Potter jp@lanl.arpa
tmb@talcott.UUCP (Thomas M. Breuel) (10/15/85)
In article <824@decwrl.UUCP>, wasser@viking.DEC (John A. Wasser) writes: > >the energy being generated by the machine was coming directly for the > >conversion of copper to energy (E=MC^2). > > Did you check for the mass loss or were you taking the > word of the inventor. If his explanation is not correct, > would you know it? How can you know his explanation is > correct? (think about it) The machine seems to yield so little energy during the performance that you would probably not be able to measure a mass difference. I wish to point out, however, that the energy source of the machine (probably the battery or the power line :-) indeed becomes lighter during the performance, since it is loosing internal energy which contributes to its rest mass. In principle, the same thing happens when you use your flash light or even when you put an Alka Seltzer into a glass of water: the system becomes lighter as energy is released from it. Thomas.
carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) (10/18/85)
( This is a followup to all that junk about machines with
efficiency >>1 )
There was a show on PBS a couple years ago, NOVA or SCIENCE, or something,
which spent a delightful half hour with an admitted liar. This gent
spends his time building perpetual motion machines, which he puts in a room,
turns on, and says:
" THis is a fake perpetual motion machine. You may measure it with
any instrument you like, but you may not touch it, disassemble it, or
stop it. Try to find out what really makes it go."
The TV show had teams of MIT or some tech school students go at it
with marginal success.
My point is : it's much harder to find the fakery than it is to create it.
Darwin's Dad (Carl Witthoft)
...!{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!aoa!carl
@ Adaptive Optics Assoc., 54 Cambridgepark Dr.
Cambridge, MA 02140 617-864-0201
" Buffet-Crampon R-13 , VanDoren B-45, and VanDoren Fortes ."