Some good things were born from attempts at doing something greater, is good to aim high but still appreciate what was accomplished along the road i consider. Everyone can keep dreaming of their super alloy, perhaps they’ll make something interesting while trying to reach that goal and stop to appreciate how far they have come

@@drewnames651 coloboration

Nah I like the idea of smart electromagnetic turbine continuators.

The universe

Tesla had free electricity for his car . Certain of the Pyrimids , still produce energy which is measurable & benificial to humans . We can access the same energy that Tesla did , and which helps power the Pyrimids . Had JP MORGAN , not been so greedy , we would have that energy now , all of it unmetered , instead , greed won over common intrests .

Cringe

Best comment I’ve seen in a while.

Cat’s gory

shush

@@TheMasterashton L+Ratio

So did you saddle up right next to your friend in a creepy way, like he asked?

@@ballsrgrossnugly classic misinterpretation.

being at rest/ doing nothing, is perpetual motion....

As long as you have an energy gradient you can use it to do work... that's how ALL work is done, regardless of the mechanism. Human muscles, water wheels, car engines, nuclear reactors, stars... things happen as long as you have the gradient... but by using it to do work you reduce the gradient. So in the end every mechanism that does work stops unless you have an external energy source giving your system a way to "regenerate" your gradient.

@@HenningRogge ur statement defeats the whole purpose of discovering perpetual motion, it’s definitely possible and it’s stupid to believe the universal rules that we MADEUP would have to be the guidelines for such discovery

@@muz3307 yes... and it should help you to get a good estimate about the chance to succeed. If you are betting that every physicist was wrong in the most basic way and you will be right, good luck with it.

@@HenningRogge i mean that’s not a good argument. The fact is, is perpetual motion is possible. It’s just not very practical. Nicholas Tesla literally made an invention that has perpetual motion using electromagnetism… it’s just super impractical and the risk/reward ratio of covering the earth in tinfoil is less than 0%

Build one lol 😂👍

There needs to be a Dynamo gear system between the axles spinning the generators to get the alternators up to speed andthir needs to be a capacitor bank to hold the charge during stops With enough charge to last through stop and go trafic The Electric Motor needs to be rated to move your vehicle

Good on ye for building it despite the science! Are ye both successful inventors today!!???

@@tomkeegan3782 -- I am an engineer and my friend is a high school math teacher.

@@FrarmerFrank -- Even a large bank of caps would bleed off too fast to be useful and the only time you could charge them would be going down hill. Even if you added a flywheel it would not buy you much time, as soon as a load was put on the flywheel it would spin down.

when I was a kid, I did something similar, but without he go cart. starter, an generator, belts, and a car battery was my game. It really took off till the wires started getting HOT. VERY hot. I figured MORE power was needed toget it running so I hooked up the battery charger to it. Nope.. no perpetual motion, but it was a lot of fun.

What if, in a frictionless environment, the energy output of the perpetual motion device is enough to perform the work but not enough to expend the minimum energy needed to keep the device in perpetual motion?

@@acool6401 you would still be removing energy, ever so slowly. Which means it will eventually run out.

@@CODlogist …..Ok…Just to be clear and/or to put it another way….. Let’s say that the total energy output of the perpetual motion machine when not being accessed for work is always over “3x” (Remember that we are in a frictionless environment) Let’s further say the “minimum output” from the perpetual motion device needed to keep it in motion is “2x” ….. ……but the work consumes only “x” or less amount of energy anytime it’s accessed. So it follows that the only energy lost by the machine is “x” or less and that only happens when the machine is being accessed for work. Therefore the machine will always have at least “2x” net output when it’s accessed. (Remember that “2x” is the minimum needed to keep it in motion) and at least “3x” output when it is not be accessed. It follows that under these conditions, it would continue to stay in motion at all times, whether accessed or not. Am I right or wrong? Christian, would you like to chime in here?

@@acool6401 There is no output. It's literally 0. At perfect zero the machine never stops. Newton's first law of motion . The problem is we cannot truly achieve zero. It's always less than zero unless you cheat with some energy source, like sunlight, wind etc. To understand how that zero works -> When you throw a ball in space far from any planet - it could fly for centuries with constant speed of your throwing hand (depending on orbit, gravity of other bodies, the material and how sun's radiation affects etc.), but that ball despite flying constantly for centuries wouldn't really output anything. Perpetual motion, but no emission of energy of any kind.

@@kazioo2 In physics, the kinetic energy of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion. So you are saying that this perpetual motion device by virtue of its motion has no inherent energy? So can you explain what kind of kinetic energy is at work here? Surely there is "Kinetic Energy" here. No? Just remember that this hypothetical is downgraded to just a thought experiment since it is not possible to create a frictionless environment and frictionless is one of the premises submitted by the OP.

just listen to einstein. he will tell you that perpetual motion is the exact same thing as being at rest.

And every time I see a comment labelling something of that sort I instantly think I’m sure people said that same thing to the Wright brothers, Tesla and Einstein

@@616CC Except you could see examples of things like flight being possible. You know like, birds, and we were already ballooning. But by all means show an example of perpetual motion.

Also anyone who says “mechanics of materials” has no engineering background Could people see examples of flight before hand yup, doesnt argue against my point Couldn’t you call the sun a “perpetual motion machine” the problem I have with this phrase it means different things to people depending on their knowledge and understanding of the world What you would call a perpetual motion machine is definitely possible, you just don’t understand where the energy is coming from

@@616CC You could call the sun perpetual motion, but you’d be wrong. The phrase has a definition. If someone is arguing from a point of their own definition of it, that is their problem. No. What I’d call a perpetual motion machine is not possible because I understand its definition. At this point you’re just arguing it’s possible because some people call some things something different and make up their own meanings. That’s not how this works. And no, flight doesn’t help your point because again, we had examples that flight was something doable. Now if we never saw anything fly, or rise, or hop, or stay aloft, then you might have a point with it. The fact is we see no examples that perpetual motion, or over-unity is possible but we have a whole heap of evidence that it isn’t. Add to that that every single claim to have achieved it has been false, a scam, or a con, and we aren’t left with much. There’s no argument of what is essentially stoner syntax that is going to wiggle around science.

PPMEs: Pseudo-Perpetual Motion Engines.

Good thinking.....after-all, ....If it last your whole life time then it was perpetual for all practical purposes, at least in the context of your existence and the benefit gained. 😉

A car does work. You can't get something from nothing. That's the layman version of conservation of energy. Any real perpetual motion machine would be useless

I had space travel in mind. If our bodies can be cryogenically preserved in a perpetual motion spaceship, we could land on the Alpha Centauri star system in some thousand years.

@@tolkienfan1972 a lot of people are getting the definition of "perpetual" wrong. a SUPER SUPER SUPER HIGHLY EFFICIENT car is not a perpetual motion machine. its just super efficient

It is, energy can only be moved. Work to heat and heat to work, it's one of the fundamental laws of the universe, thermodynamics, and because of thermodynamics, the entropy in an isolated system always increases, which means you can never achieve perfect efficiency. It was the research in to those laws though that let us study ways to make things as efficient as they are now, however.

@@ExarchGaming My instinct tells me that 2nd law of thermodynamics/ entropy is incomplete. Take for instance “money” , an arbitrary concept, is in its own right, is a of form of energy. Like “money “, it is how it is spent that defines the outcome; gain, loss, or neither (equilibrium).

@@dmitrystepanov3902 -- Money is certainly not energy although it can be said that energy produces money. lol

@@dmitrystepanov3902 Money is not energy. But it can be if you burn it.

Since you're not expert physicist, try dispute the fact that theory of big bang saying every matter exploding out of Nothing. Yet no one seem to realise when arguing about energy from nothing. Matter Is energy. How did big bang even create anything in the first place if they are even trying to be logical.

not theoretical infinite. Practiaclly it will i guess

saved me 10 minutes thank you.

@@fersuremaybek756 it still would be pretty fucking cool though.

and even if they could place the device in a frictionless enviroment, in order to extract any usable energy, it would drain the energy per the second law. completely right.

Wait till you learn about how energy can be destroyed

@@GiraffeKing04 It can't lol, only transformed

@@prich0382yeah i Realized that energy can’t be destroyed, it’s matter than can be destroyed

@@GiraffeKing04 wrong again. One of the most famous equations of history, Einstein's e=mc^2 equation, shows that an inherent property of matter is that it is interchangeable with energy. If energy cannot be created nor destroyed and matter can be converted to energy, then that means that matter cannot be created nor destroyed by extension of the first law of thermodynamics. I suggest researching a bit before stating the next thing which you believe can be 'destroyed'.

Planets seems to be perpetual motion machines, or at least they lose energy so slowly as not to really matter on the scale that humans live on.

@@blazednlovinit the earth never looses or gains energy and the only time it can is in interplanetary travel where we take such a small amount of energy that the earth probably slows down by fractions of an atom per second. Everything that happens on earth that does not leave it takes no energy from it. And when things do leave it they either eventually come back or don't have an impact on the earth anyway

@@TheWorstBridger aye, I just got thinking of the definitions, objects in space can maintain "perpetual motion"

@@blazednlovinit orbits decay

@@TheWorstBridger It doesn't have to be an orbit to be moving, angular momentum is a thing.

Even if we could get it to go a year that would be major

@@nfg_racing7968 Absolutely. In my opinion they just don't want anyone to succeed because they've been trying themselves for centuries and failed so much that's in order to avoid the embarrassment of some nobody with no degree in his garage start get too close to succeeding, they start changing the definition to make sure he fails. In my opinion, as long as the device produces more energy than it uses to power itself, doesn't require refueling and it can continue to operate until its parts wear out or fail, that's is a perpetual energy machine. I also think the key to the problem with the off-balance wheel it frictionless magnetic bearings. An axle that levitates due to equal magnetic force applied around the axle using the opposite or opposing magnetic field.

What are You talking about??? Perpetual machines cannot be costructed EXACTLY becouse of law of physics. And You even named them. You may try for another billion of years, and you will still not beat the law of conservation of energy, and thermodynamics rules. BECOUSE IT'S SIMPLY IMPOSSIBLE. So, with your (very stupid) definition of perpetual machine, we could say we alredy made tons of them (for example Water energy plants, Solar panels etc - That can work for hundred of years. ) BUT IT IS NOT PERPETUAL MACHINE - becouse it requires external energy (foton's from Sun, Water gravitational energy) it CONVERTS one form of energy into another one - but it do not produces energy out of nothing. The closest thing that could work for thousends of years that i can imagine, is usage of Seeback's effect. All You need is just long wire, made of 2 different materials and any place with a difference of temperature. For example You could use just a stupid house, becouse ussualy there is some difference of temperature between shadowed/ sunny sides. As long as there is any difference of temperature on connections of those 2 different metals - it will be producing electical power. BUT STILL - NOT OUT OF NOTHING. No moving parts, can last thousends of years and producing power - but it do not beat the conservation of energy rule.

It is always a physics issue. You will never be able to design such a machine without either violating the first or second law of thermodynamics.

@@hellbent7062 No one made a machine that produces more power than it uses to power itself, not even one that can only power itself indefinitely. This definition or that, it's impossible. Why? Laws of physics that govern our reality. But you can keep fooling yourself with " they just don't want anyone to succeed because they've been trying themselves for centuries and failed so much that's in order to avoid the embarrassment of some nobody with no degree in his garage start get too close to succeeding, they start changing the definition to make sure he fails".

That is a flawed mindset.

@@Mahlak_Mriuani_Anatman we are part of the universe. if we could do it, so could the universe.

@@gercoa9148 well....... Shii

Is the rotation of the earth, not a perpetual motion with never ending magnets.? Both the single day rotation around itself and the yearly rotation around the sun.?

But the universe IS doing it. It's expanding and it's accelerating in its expansion. That means it's volume is consistently increasing and it's volume is filled with energy and thus ever increasing energy. Cosmologists all know this. All scientists agree that on the cosmic scale, energy is increasing.

no they dont. learn physics before making such ridiculous assertion. most of those "perpetual motion machines" get energy from the outside, if you try to harvest energy from those devices, you deplete their outside scource, which is either magnetism, electricity or potential energy. none of them break the laws of physics. people just didnt knew where the forces come from, buffoon

this is been worked on for thousands of years. can we simply stop this insanity ?

Sorry to burst your bubble but the first law of thermodynamics has no exceptions. Hence why it is a law. What can be achieved, however, is a high-efficiency conversion of matter into energy which can create an immense amount of usable energy for us. A great example of this are spinning blackholes (or technically blackholes in general) which convert the mass of stars and planets being consumed into energy to maintain their rotational motion and, as all blackholes do, their mass.

that already shows your insanity. how do you think the living parts will exist without the need of energy ?

The first law of thermodynamics is that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. A law of physics has no exceptions btw. Hence, perpetual motion machines are quite literally impossible unless you change the definition of what a perpetual motion machine is.

@@powergm7524 the laws of motion and relativity dictate that "perpetual motion" is the exact same thing as being at rest.

Unless we find a way to break the laws of nature I don't see it happening.

Sort of, It will take as much energy to ignite the reaction that powers stars, but the continuation of that reaction as long as fuel is fed in to it, means you can get more energy over a period of time, as it causes a chain reaction as long as there is fuel, and the rate at which that fuel is consumed, determines if it's a bomb, or a reactor. The same principle applies to fission even. Even the "real" idea of cold fusion (not the weird 80s notion of it.) if we could stabilize muons would allow fusion at much lower temperatures and at atmosphereic pressure, but they only last for microseconds in a particle accellerater, so we're probably a very long way from that.

And slows down over time.

radio frequency's are the key.

yes because perpetual motion is the same thing as being at rest.

some of the best mechanical artworks tend to use very low energy-consuming motions to make a seemingly perpetual mechanism with fancy patterns. obviously, the system stops moving eventually, but the spectacle of having something make fun patterns for you for a little while after a small push or crank makes for a nice project

There are several ways to store and extract work from a black hole (even if Hawking Radiation turns out to be invalid).

@@zachcrawford5 Right!

@@zachcrawford5 hawking radiation is so tiny you might as well be harvesting empty space. what you need to do is harvest rotational energy, and convert it to kinetic energy. Kind of like how rockets use the moon as a gravity boost to get to Mars. You do not take rotational energy inside the event horizon, because you can't escape, but you can take energy from the ring around the event horizon, called the "ergosphere", and with enough additional energy pushed into the system, you will steal an enormous amount of kinetic energy, and put in a tiny amount yourself. Another way to steal rotational energy is to shoot light waves into a mirror-covered black hole. The waves become amplified by the rotational current of the black hole, and you can open a door and collect the newly amplified energy. Again, only the light outside the event horizon will be secured, because even light can't escape the event horizon. Kurgesagt made a great video about both these methods, you should watch it.

@@altaccount5330 I have, Kurzgesagt is awesome:)

They don’t produce energy, but also don’t lose it… no fuel crisis solution, but still a perpetum mobile.

You're not wrong, actually, but as another commenter pointed out you wouldn't be able to access the machine for work--since accessing the energy of the machine to do work will drain it of that energy. For instance, you can fly an object out into orbit around the planet and if your orbital trajectory was 100% accurate then it will continue orbiting the Earth forever with the same energy, never losing or gaining anything. However, the moment you attach some kind of device or generator to the orbiting object to capture that energy the object will slow down and fall back to Earth. So, perpetual motion machines aren't impossible in the *right environment*, we pretty much use them all the time with satellites, but they are utterly useless for producing useful energy (luckily, it is not the point of a satellite to produce energy, but to produce/transmit signals over massive areas without building the world's tallest skyscraper). That's also pretty ideal conditions, as I bet all of our satellites were set on imperfect trajectories and will eventually either fly away from Earth or will fall back down to it unless they have a small source of propulsion to make small adjustments (or we simply accept its limited lifespan and allow it to fall down after a few decades of faithful service). It's one thing to create a machine that perfectly conserves its energy in a perfect environment that only exists in an undergrad physics textbook or outer space, but it's entirely another thing to create a machine that perfectly conserves its energy AND produces enough excess energy to do useful work without losing its conserved energy. The first is well within our grasp and frequently used for the useful task of keeping satellites orbiting the Earth (though they aren't "perpetual" in the purest meaning of the word), but the latter is basically impossible with current technology until we can find some kind of universal energy source that never runs out (and if anyone discovered such a thing then creating perpetual motion machines would be the *least* of our cares).

Don't you have alot less friction if you trap what is moving in a vacuum? I heard that's how the hyperloop was supposed to work removing air making air resistance not a problem allowing there vehicles to go extremely fast

@@TheOfficialChannelOfChannels hyperloop is scam. it does not work, it is super slow, and most of all building and running costs are beyond our economy.

@@mitjapintar4609 I'm not saying it's good. I'm just saying a perpetual motion machine deals with friction and eventually slows down but what if the moving part was trapped in a vacuum where it would deal with alot less wind resistance

@@TheOfficialChannelOfChannels because the fundamental science behind it, is the state of entropy always increases. So you will drain energy from the isolated system, when transforming it to work. As you can neither create or destroy energy. So you could have a nifty spinning object that kept moving per the conservation of momentum, but to actually gain anything from that system, you have to apply some sort of force to it to extract energy. But even in a frictionless enviroment you would only retain the energy given to start the machine, it would not accelerate

da vinci and most other historian figures, arent the perfect geniuses, they most of the time get portrayed. dont get me wrong, most of them did the great things they are known for, however they have many failures with them. davinci has many bluebrints that just wouldnt work at all. were gears are counterplaced etc.

You mean the engine of the vehicle? It's not totally relying in electricity it is relying through gasoline or diesel then it will run the alternator to recharge the battery .

Prove it.

@@ksc1406 To whom, and why just now?

the laws of motion and laws of relativity prove that "perpetual motion" is the same thing as being at rest. you have 0 understanding of physics

@@adswers6900 I get that alot from the highly edumacated ones.

@@techstuf4637 oh sry you highly educated creature xD im sorry i havent gotten your high education of reading the bible xDxDxD

"People" never stop dreaming of controlling the source of infinite free energy. Greed would quickly ruin it.

@@Been.Here.Since.2007 just i am gonna comment it

A lot of uneducated and lazy people like to fall for the trap and then perpetuate its useless history. It started off with a great idea for a solution to energy, but after the first law of thermodynamics was determined it was practically just a pissing contest to see who makes the coolest engineering project to run for a while.

@@powergm7524 great comment. Wish it wasn't being shadow banned.

@@Been.Here.Since.2007 truly a shame

We will. Heard of self regenerating material? You need to be optimistic

@@aurelianspodarec2629 where does that material get its energy from? If it needs energy to regenerate then it's not perpetual.

@@Razor-gx2dq Its a reaction with the air or something. As long as its inside the world its going to work xd

And in perpetual motion ♥️

Spot on! It's crazy how right you are! Many of the skepticism comes from current leaders in the industry. They just want that money. Look at companies like Twitter, Meta, YT, and so many others. They're so morally corrupt and have a disgusting ideological agenda they're pushing, that anything that is right and contrary to their agenda is banned and called hate speech. Look at gender dysphoia. They don't address that for what it is; a mental illness. They just want control. Gotta look at who's all the way at the top. Not even Zuck the cuck. It's like Tic toc, and the State of California. All controlled by communists in China. Hell Diane Feinstein Chief of Staff for 20 years was a confirmed Chinese government agent. That evil witch said he was her Driver. Yeah. Drove all the classified information right into our enemies hands. You wanna know why that's not top of the news cycle? They control our media. Unfortunately, these videos are merely a good distraction

Elon Musk is a conman.

Not saying it will be possible to break the laws of physics. Saying, we will find out either (A) the laws of physics was not what we thought it was, or (B) we will find a way with technology to circumvent the laws.

That line of thinking steps into the debate of who or what made the universe, or if something even made the universe at all.

@@Razor-gx2dq yes, I'm aware. Philosophical, or religious line of thinking

Nothing, just absolutly nothing can stop the machine from loosing energy. friction, is only one of many many ways how machine is loosing energy. For example, as long as it's temperature is any higher than 0 degrees at kelvin's scale - it would be loosing energy by thermal radiation. And ANY movement of ANY part of the machine would automaticly rise it's temperature above 0K.

kind of, it can mean many things, but you arent wrong. just to make a simple thing clear : perpetual motion is the same thing as being at rest. if you try to get energy out of this rest or motion you will change it state and it wont be in "perpetual motion" or at rest anymore.

No, a fly wheel slows down over time and is thusly not perpetual.

@@quijybojanklebits8750 Why do you think I said "technically"? Read properly before replying. God why do I attract arrogance?

@Once Was evergy isn't infinite.

iirc liquid oxygen has also shown to be capable of having perpetual motion. Shame that you can't really demonstrate that property due to opposing external forces

perpetual motion is possible. but it is the same thing as being at rest. if you try to get energy out of that state, you will change the state.

@@adswers6900 Well yeah, it is possible in a way, but it would be useless. For it to be perpetual it would have to be left alone in perfectly devoid conditions forever. Any interactions with anything at all ever would cause energy to be lost, regardless which way the energy is being transferred

@@julianemery718 there is no such place in our universe, that we know of. its only theoretically possible. every thought about it is useless in my eyes.

except you forget the part where there is a literal law of physics called that states energy cannot be created nor destroyed, suggesting that perpetual motion machines quite literally cannot exist. as neat as it would be to assume that this motor will run forever and energy can be extracted from the system is nonsense. so to answer your rhetorical question, yes. in fact, it's impossibly difficult and your theoretical solution will fail.

isnt the earth kinda a perpetual motion machine

Cool...so why aren't you powering your home with all this free energy you know about? ...there are no self running generators. And here's a good clue...if there were self running generators, your power company would be using them. You'd still be getting billed, but like nuclear energy was thought to be too cheap to meter, they'd figure out how to meter you for it.

@@AveragePicker no they wouldn't. Have you seen what they have been covering up? Electric vehicles that don't need to be plugged in, has been possible for about 8 years. The government stops anything that threatens their fake power and money.

@@caseyford3368 The government stops it, but you know all about it from all these "many versions" that exist...yet you won't use. You don't see a problem with your "reasoning" there? And if you think a company wouldn't generate power for free, which they could then sell..then you really aren't thinking.