# Science forums corruption

Explained further , once the magnet leaves the coil so does the induced electricity simultaneously .
Yes.

You are converting between forms of energy. You are converting kinetic energy of the moving weight into electrical current. The magnetic field is nothing but a go-between. You could eliminate it and have the weight movement converted to current by other means (as a spurious example, direct contact with a piezo-electric crystal)

It doesn't matter how you convert the energy. The point is that any energy used to create current will come from the KE/PE of the weight, slowing it down.

There is no extra energy you can use. Your device will work for one swing of the weight, just like dropping an apple. The apple does not contain any energy to lift itself back up. And neither gravity nor magnetism nor a magnetic apple will change that.

This is what thermodynamics is about. You might want to at least skim the definition of it before assuming its about "hot and cold". It isn't. It is what powers the universe.

Yes.

You are converting between forms of energy. You are converting kinetic energy of the moving weight into electrical current. The magnetic field is nothing but a go-between. You could eliminate it and have the weight movement converted to current by other means (as a spurious example, direct contact with a piezo-electric crystal)

It doesn't matter how you convert the energy. The point is that any energy used to create current will come from the KE/PE of the weight, slowing it down.

There is no extra energy you can use. Your device will work for one swing of the weight, just like dropping an apple. The apple does not contain any energy to lift itself back up. And neither gravity nor magnetism nor a magnetic apple will change that.

This is what thermodynamics is about. You might want to at least skim the definition of it before assuming its about "hot and cold". It isn't. It is what powers the universe.
Well , I'm just speaking in basic form and don't feel there is a need to always discuss things using scientific definition that not all readers understand.
If I was to consider all the aspects of my notion, thermodynamics , electrodynamics , gravitation forces , motion and field dynamics are involved.
A single innovation does need a variation of physics thought to be developed into something that might work .
If I call recall somebody said at an earlier time in history this notion had been tried before , does anyone know who tried it so I can look them up ?

Well , I'm just speaking in basic form and don't feel there is a need to always discuss things using scientific definition that not all readers understand.
This has nothing to do with terminology. You are misunderstanding a basic physical principle. The same one every PMM idea before you has misunderstood. The device will not work for the reasons stated.

If I was to consider all the aspects of my notion, thermodynamics , electrodynamics , gravitation forces , motion and field dynamics are involved.
You only need concern yourself with one: thermodynamics: i.e.: the conversion, conservation and loss of energy in a system.

If I call recall somebody said at an earlier time in history this notion had been tried before , does anyone know who tried it so I can look them up ?
Far too many to count. Pretty much every armchair idea guy of perpetual motion devices has come up with a gravity/magnetism device, and every one of them fail.

Simply Google "gravity magnetism and perpetual motion machines".

That is incorrect , a true scientist can simplify their own interpretation for easy understanding
Yes. You can simplify things. But then you don't understand them very well. Science is complicated, and simplistic understandings, while useful for high school physics, do not work well in the real world.
Thermodynamics is as simple as hot and cold , obviously we can elaborate more than the basic principle but the subject is easy.
Nope. It is clear that you don't understand thermo. (As an example - where does work fit into your simplified explanation?)

That's not accurately true with my notion as the induced electricity is not a constant , it is a pulse device . An electromagnetic field can't sustain itself for that reason I should think or are you saying that even after the short pulse of induced electricity as left the coil , fed back into the system , that the coil will become magnetised without the electrical current ? Explained further , once the magnet leaves the coil so does the induced electricity simultaneously .
Nope. It's not the magnet causing the current flow - it's the magnetic field. (And that is not the same as the magnet.) You will get effects even when the magnet isn't in the solenoid.

How can anyone not understand the function of hot and cold ?[/qs]
If that's all you know about thermodynamics, you know nothing about thermodynamics.

XKCD is uncannily current and on-point.
This is today's:

(Title text: Well, there's one right here at the bottom, where it says "53.")

Even if the laws of thermal dynamics can be broken perpetual motion via a man made machine is not possible simply because things wear out and fail.
The water cycle ( rain) is perpetual but requires energy from the Sun which has a finite life span and so at some point the motion stops.
However at one point in my life (11years old) my father said perpetual motion was impossible...I thought..we shall see about that..I will be the first to show that perpetual motion is possible..I invented an electric motor..I did not realise such things were common place but even as a kid I could realise that wear and tear prevented perpetual motion...and also realised the unit required an external input of power to overcome resistance...
But in presenting an "impossibility" my father triggered my interest in science and machinery...and the realisation that he was usually right.
I encourage those with the idea for any perpetual motion device to build one and show the world how clever they really are..I mean if they are clever enough to formulate the grand idea building one should be a snap...
Alex

You understand that ideas can't be copyrighted or patented?

neither can natural laws or theories, but
their embodiments, method and apparatus can.