phaedrus@eneevax.UUCP (The Sophist) (03/13/85)
This is weird stuff. I hope you have had your morning coffee. Maybe
you should go get another cup before you read this.
This morning (Wed. 3/13/85) I heard on National Public Radio's
"Morning Edition" about some inventor in Louisiana who applied for a
patent for a machine that puts out more energy than it takes in (don't
start laughing yet). He claims that it is *not* a perpetual motion
machine; he says that it gets its `energy' from the `magnetic field'
(quotes are mine). Well, understandably the patent office said very
loudly, "No bloody way!" So, this guy takes them to court with a whole
bunch of "expert witnesses", including some scientist from
Sperry-Univac in Minnesota (I think). This scientist and a former
patent official support this inventor's claim (i.e., they say, "it is
true!"). So, the judge told the patent office to write up a patent.
But they still refused...and that is all I remember.
Since, I heard this at five o'clock in the morning, my recollection of
the story is kind of sketchy. What I would like to know is:
First, has anyone else heard the story?
Second, does anyone believe this? If (so/not) (why/why not)?
Third, is the Sperry-Univac guy on the net? If so, you
want to explain yourself?
Third, was NPR making a joke, and I was just too sleepy to
catch it or, should everybody start selling their Public
Utility Shares?
--
Pravin Kumar
Don't bother me! I'm on an emergency third rail power trip.
ARPA: phaedrus!eneevax@maryland
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!eneevax!phaedrusjhs@houxa.UUCP (J.SCHERER) (03/16/85)
I saw the same thing in today's paper. The court didn't order the patent office to issue to patent, they ordered the inventer to demonstrate the "device" first. The inventer refused saying that he's offered to show it earlier and had been laughed at - also that the law doesn't require a demonstration. No, I don't believe it (but I'd be happy to be proved wrong). John Scherer Bell Labs
sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) (03/17/85)
I've heard of this before, that it's being suppressed, and no wonder, you
think the oil companies want it manufactured? We wouldn't be their slaves
any more!
Sunny
--
{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn <gwyn>) (03/17/85)
> I've heard of this before, that it's being suppressed, and no wonder, you > think the oil companies want it manufactured? We wouldn't be their slaves > any more! And how about that pill that you could dissolve in a tank full of water for fuel, instead of gasoline? My, those oil companies also suppressed that invention! (Which is why we never heard about it.)
root@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) (03/18/85)
I may be completely wrong but I thought in my reading of a gov't pamphlet on obtaining patents a few years ago that the *only* patent applications which they would require a working model were those that claimed to be 'perpetual motion machines' [I think that was followed by some generalized definition which would cover the aforementioned item...like produces more energy than it consumes.] Patent lawyers: comments? -Barry Shein, Boston University
csw@ulysses.UUCP (Chris Warth) (03/18/85)
<>
Seems this guy has been around for quite some time. The inventor
of this machine had a "demonstration" a few years ago at Tulane
University (New Orleans). Since the room was packed wall-to-wall
people, I did not get in to see the machine, but I did hear several
stories from people who managed to sqeeze in.
The inventor claimed no formal training in physics or electronics.
As I recall, his explanation of how the machine worked relied upon
"cosmic forces" and the like. He repeatedly evaded questions from
physics professors who were present. There were a couple of other
inconsistent things about his presentation but it was so long ago I
that am fuzzy on the details. I'm not sure but I think there was
something about an unexplained electric cord entering the machine. My
roommate at the time, a mechanical engineer, was not impressed at all
by the demonstration.
I do not see what this guy hopes to gain by perpetrating this
fraud. There was no admission charge to the demonstartion I
mentioned. If this were truly a perpetual motion machine then the
thing to do would be to sell the plans to Mobil or Shell and forget
about it. Didn't something happen similar lines with the invention of
an "everlasting" car battery? Something about Firestone buying the
inventor out and burying the plans.
Chris Warth
ATT-BL
Murray Hill, NJ
ulysses!cswclewis@mnetor.UUCP (03/18/85)
The idea of gathering electrical energy in this fashion is not new.
Tesla himself claimed feasibility for such a system (1890's?). Sorry,
I don't have a reference for it, but it is frequently brought up in
various semi-(or completely) crackpot/conspiracy magazines (eg: the
Peach-pit, runless nylons etc. types). Not that I read 'em, but
sometimes the cover catches you eye. Tesla's idea probably would
work, but I think that it was impractical unless you had Sinclair
Molecules/tethered satelites - and didn't mind ozone/severed tethers
in your air.
The "inventors" experience with the patent office is typical. A couple
of years ago a one-man electric radiant-heater company was forced out of
business. He claimed 100% efficiency - one of our government departments
took exception to this - because it was "impossible". I always thought
that the loss of efficiency in electrical devices was due to some
of it being wasted as heat (eg: wiring resistance etc). What if
the desired product IS heat (and you don't let any of the light escape?).
I suppose that even then it wouldn't be 100.000000000%, but isn't
it close enough?
--
Chris Lewis, Motorola New Enterprises
SNail: 560 Dennison, Unit 9, Markham, Ontario, Canada, L3R 2M8
UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!utcs!mnetor!clewis
BELL: (416)-475-1300 ext. 321mat@amdahl.UUCP (Mike Taylor) (03/19/85)
> This is weird stuff. I hope you have had your morning coffee. Maybe > you should go get another cup before you read this. > > This morning (Wed. 3/13/85) I heard on National Public Radio's > "Morning Edition" about some inventor in Louisiana who applied for a > patent for a machine that puts out more energy than it takes in (don't > start laughing yet). > > First, has anyone else heard the story? > Second, does anyone believe this? If (so/not) (why/why not)? > Third, is the Sperry-Univac guy on the net? If so, you > want to explain yourself? > Third, was NPR making a joke, and I was just too sleepy to > catch it or, should everybody start selling their Public > Utility Shares? > -- 1. Yes 2. Do I believe the story - yes. Do I believe the device works - no. Anybody who refuses to demonstrate is in the vaporware business. 3. Not me. 4. It was in the paper (San Jose Mercury) also. Either not an NPR joke or a conspiracy (unlikely). As to sale of shares, I see no reason to be precipitate. -- Mike Taylor ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,sun}!amdahl!mat [ This may not reflect my opinion, let alone anyone else's. ]
rastaman@ihdev.UUCP (Biding my time) (03/19/85)
> > I've heard of this before, that it's being suppressed, and no wonder, you > > think the oil companies want it manufactured? We wouldn't be their slaves > > any more! > > And how about that pill that you could dissolve in a tank full of > water for fuel, instead of gasoline? My, those oil companies also > suppressed that invention! (Which is why we never heard about it.) The pill's perpetrator, a guy by the name of Guido Something-or-other, claimed that the UFO that he got the fuel pills from was going to land one night in a field in Warrenville, Illinois. Hundreds of people showed up, but not the UFO. It should be noted that the field was just across Warrenville Road from *AMOCO's Warrenville Research Center*!!!!!!!!! And just to show you the power of these running dog capitalist oil-mongering slavers, Guido was imprisoned for FRAUD after the Amocoites obviously scared off the benevolent aliens and Guido's investors got mad. (Guido is in prison; he really did find some dupes to invest. The field is on Herrick Lake Road between Butterfield Road and Warrenville Road in Warrenville. Sort of a glowing testimonial to Dupage County, isn't it?) ihnp4!ihdev!rastaman Give me all your money, I'll make you immortal.
bob@cadovax.UUCP (Bob "Kat" Kaplan) (03/19/85)
From: phaedrus@eneevax.UUCP (The Sophist) <261@eneevax.UUCP> > This morning (Wed. 3/13/85) I heard on National Public Radio's > "Morning Edition" about some inventor in Louisiana who applied for a > patent for a machine that puts out more energy than it takes in (don't > start laughing yet). He claims that it is *not* a perpetual motion > machine; he says that it gets its `energy' from the `magnetic field' > [...] I didn't hear the NPR article, but the invention sounds a lot like Bruce DePalma's "N-Machine," a device based on the theories of Tesla and particularly Faraday. I heard DePalma on a late night talk radio show. He sounded like he knew what he was talking about, and he's interested in sharing the idea with others. He says he'll send plans of his machine to anyone who asks, but I wrote to him about two weeks ago and haven't heard anything yet. Bruce DePalma is very much against the institutionalized scientific orthodoxy as is generally found in universities, as they are generally uninterested in any evidence that their deeply held beliefs are incorrect. He has apparently encountered a few physicists who have told him that his machine can't work (in spite of the fact that it does) because the laws of physics don't allow it. In other words, "My theory disproves your facts." For more information, contact: Bruce DePalma P.O.B 4056 Santa Barbara, CA 93140 -- Bob Kaplan "Where is it written that we must destroy ourselves?"
gnome@oliveb.UUCP (Gary Traveis) (03/20/85)
> start laughing yet). He claims that it is *not* a perpetual motion > machine; he says that it gets its `energy' from the `magnetic field' > (quotes are mine). Well, understandably the patent office said very > loudly, "No bloody way!" So, this guy takes them to court with a whole > bunch of "expert witnesses", including some scientist from > Sperry-Univac in Minnesota (I think). This scientist and a former > patent official support this inventor's claim (i.e., they say, "it is > true!"). So, the judge told the patent office to write up a patent. > But they still refused...and that is all I remember. > Sounds a lot like the infamous Free Energy box that Tesla built many years ago -- but that device is nowhere to be found... I hope that inventor doesn't wind up the same way. Gary
inc@fluke.UUCP (Ensign Benson, Space Cadet) (03/20/85)
*** REPLACE THESE ASTERISKS MESSIEUR *** I suggest this discussion be moved to net.modern_myths. Reading about the pill you put into water to make a gasoline-equivalent reminds me of a few others: the carburetor that a "friend of a guy I used to know" sold to GM and never heard of since. You know: the one that was so fuel-efficient you had to drain the tank every other day? Then there's the one about the guy who bought a car that actually had one installed on it, and when he brought it to the attention of the manufacturer, they send a team of factory reps out to replace it... These fantasies bring to mind the 99 dollar Jeep, too. Still in cosmoline! -- Ensign Benson -Space Cadet- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- The Digital Circus -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
bobd@zaphod.UUCP (Bob Dalgleish) (03/21/85)
> > And how about that pill that you could dissolve in a tank full of > > water for fuel, instead of gasoline? My, those oil companies also > > suppressed that invention! (Which is why we never heard about it.) > > The pill's perpetrator, a guy by the name of Guido Something-or-other, > claimed that the UFO that he got the fuel pills from was going to > land one night in a field in Warrenville, Illinois. Hundreds of people > showed up, but not the UFO. It should be noted that the field was > just across Warrenville Road from *AMOCO's Warrenville Research > Center*!!!!!!!!! And just to show you the power of these running > dog capitalist oil-mongering slavers, Guido was imprisoned for > FRAUD after the Amocoites obviously scared off the benevolent aliens > and Guido's investors got mad. > ihnp4!ihdev!rastaman The pill was real; it's effect on the engine was also real. The pill contained a chemical based on a halogen that reacted mightily with the water producing a volatile substance suitable for burning - however, engine life was under a thousand hours. Apparently, one or more con-men made off with some life savings as a result. This story has been circulating as a rumor since the 1920's. There was a film based on the rumor starring Cary Grant (or an equitable substitute). The price of gasoline in the movie was 10 cents a gallon, so the age of the story certainly has an upper bound. -- [The opinions expressed here are only loosely based on the facts] Bob Dalgleish ...!alberta!sask!zaphod!bobd ihnp4! (My company has disclaimed any knowledge of me and whatever I might say)
rick@tekfdi.UUCP (Rick Wilson) (03/21/85)
There is already at least one patent issued for a motor whose only power source is a permanent magnet. It was written up a couple 3 years ago in, I believe, Popular Science. Think about it. There really is a lot of energy in a permanent magnet. One little magnet you pull off the bottom of a lady bug that's holding a shopping list to your refrigerator door will pick up a hell of a lot of nails (one at a time) before it wears out. I have never actually witnessed one of these magnets show any signs of wearing out, though I suppose they could. Here's the touchy part. Isn't that energy already in the material before it's made into a magnet? It's all in the atoms/molecules. All you do to make a magnet out of it is to align the atoms/molecules so they all face the same way. Even water is electromagnetically polar. The molecules just move around too easily for a whole ice cube to stay polarized. Now, how much enery does it take to align the atoms/molecules? Does it take more than you can get out of a magnet before it wears out? I don't know. Someone must. Someone tell us. Does this make sense at all? Let's remember how many brilliant inventors of the past got laughed out of town before they got rich, and give this some serious thought. Rick Wilson Beaverton, Oregon tektronix!tekfdi!rick
hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) (03/25/85)
In article <135@tekfdi.UUCP> rick@tekfdi.UUCP (Rick Wilson) writes: > >One little magnet you pull off the bottom of a lady bug that's holding >a shopping list to your refrigerator door will pick up a hell of a lot >of nails (one at a time) before it wears out. That little magnet won't pick up _any_ nails. It will attract a nail and probably hold its weight if brought into direct contact. Any lifting energy comes from an outside source (e.g.: your hand and arm). -- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe) Citicorp TTI 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 (213) 450-9111, ext. 2483 {philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe
jeff@rtech.ARPA (Jeff Lichtman) (03/27/85)
> In article <135@tekfdi.UUCP> rick@tekfdi.UUCP (Rick Wilson) writes: > > > >One little magnet you pull off the bottom of a lady bug that's holding > >a shopping list to your refrigerator door will pick up a hell of a lot > >of nails (one at a time) before it wears out. > > That little magnet won't pick up _any_ nails. It will attract a nail and > probably hold its weight if brought into direct contact. Any lifting > energy comes from an outside source (e.g.: your hand and arm). > > The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe) Imagine suspending a magnet by a string, and then sliding a nail underneath it. The magnet will pick up the nail, and you haven't provided any lifting power. Here is what happens. When the piece of metal was made into a magnet, potential energy was stored in it. This energy is changed to kinetic energy when it moves nails. It only enough energy to pick up a finite number of nails at one time; a magnet that has a lot of nails clinging to it won't attract any more. When you pull the nails off the magnet, you do work. This work is returned to the magnet as potential energy. Thus, the little refrigerator magnet isn't a perpetual motion machine. It will do a finite amount of work (the amount of work done on it to magnetize it, assuming perfect efficiency), and you must perform the same amount of work (thus putting energy into the system) in order to restore the magnet's former ability. -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) aka Swazoo Koolak
hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) (04/03/85)
Touche', one and all. I concede, I blew it. Serves me right for shooting
from the hip. Yes, a magnet will do work in lifting a nail a small
distance. The image I had in my head (and erroneously responded to) was of
the nail being moved a fair distance -- say several inches or so. That
would require an outside source of energy. I will now go sit in the corner
and write 100 times "Engage brain before setting mouth (or keyboard) in
motion.".
--
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe)
Citicorp TTI
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(213) 450-9111, ext. 2483
{philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe