Though not a 'free energy' device (I do not accept such devices are remotely possible), a recently published UK patent application (Application No: GB1314002.5, Publication No: GB2505082) uses cylindrical neodymium magnets in place of conventional engine cylinders. These magnetic cylinders are attached to connecting rods which move up and down inside a copper solenoid (inside a coil of copper wire). The magnetic cylinders are attached to connecting rods at the end of which the connecting rods are attached to an eccentric crankshaft.

Motive force is supplied (when in alternator motor mode) by the shared crankshaft being itself supplied with motive force by an internal combustion engine (because the connecting rods of the magnetic cylinders and the connecting rods of the internal combustion engine cylinders are all connected to the same eccentric crankshaft (though either may be disconnected using prior art clutch mechanisms). So what?

It would appear (leaving aside mechanical power losses for the moment) that in this way, a piston based magnetic alternator motor may generate electricity when connected to the same crankshaft as a conventional internal combustion engine.

The idea behind the invention is that more rapid more violent changes of voltage per unit time are proposed (per I = dv/dt). If this is correct, higher current output in amperes may be generated per unit time than from conventional rotary alternator motors. The absence of stators is alleged to reduce friction as well as entrophic heat dissipation.

However, it is the 'electric engine only' mode that is interesting. If the cylindrical magnets are not housed in a copper soleniod but allowed to move freely, that is, when the internal combustion engine is disconnected from the shared crankshaft and no solenoid surrounds the cylindrical magnets...in that event static upper and lower switching electromagnets (above and beneath each magnetic cylinder) supply pulses of power to the moving magnet cylinders. In this way the crankshaft may rotate purely using electrical power from the upper and lower static electromagnets. If this works, pulses of power to the static electromagnets could mean in theory that continuous operation is not required, and therefore that energy efficiencies may be possible.

Magnetic cylinder timing (that is, the timing of when the upper and lower electromagnets deliver their pulses) is acheived using a laser photo diode array wherein a laser beam connected to a pin junction photodiode is broken by the moving magnetic cylinder as the magnetic cylinder moves up and down. A microprocessor connected to the pin junction photodiode controls the operation of the upper and lower electromagnets, essentially telling them when to apply pulsed power to the moving magnetic pistons (when they are at the closest possible point to the static electromagnets - giving more bang per buck.

I have not taken the time to calculate mechanical power losses (which may be non-trivial) but the ideas may be worthy of closer analysis and perhaps even a prototype. The inventor supplies quite a lot of detail on how to build it, including schematics.

Here is the link to the UK Intellectual Property Office:
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-ipsum/Case/ApplicationNumber/GB1314002.5

You can view the documents section on the right hand side of the page to see chapter and verse on the invention.

Permanent magnets do not like either shock or heat.  The highest temperature NdFeB magnets can work up to 200C before suffering permanent demagnetization.  They are also very brittle.

No one has found a free lunch with electrodynamic mechanisms.  Before fiddling with machining engine blocks it would be a good idea to come up with and test whatever basic concept is supposed to find a cheat that has eluded all comers to date.

I concur to some extent. The inventor has proposed using a low magnetic permeability engine block to house the magnets. Entrophic heat dissipation is minimised using aerogel (to prevent heat from the internal combustion engine causing the magnets to hit their Curie temperature, thereby losing their magnetic properties due to hysteresis). Prior art automotive cooling techniques (the same techniques used to cool conventional combustion engines) are deployed. Accordingly, overheating should not be a problem not least as he uses aerogel (which has remarkable heat insulating properties) to keep the internal combustion part of his engine thermally insulated from the electric engine.

As overheating appears to have been covered, coating his magnets in some sort of polymer or thin plastic might deal with shock, though he could overcome this simply by using larger magnets that do not need to move as fast and carry a degree of momentum (albeit that momentum is not power).

Your objections make perfect sense but it would appear he has already dealt with them in his description (in some detail). In fact, he actually begins the patent description by describing the means by which hysteresis and shock are to be minimised. Accordingly, the potential problems you identify are in fact the primary problems his invention was directed to solve in the first place.

This is not to say that I disgree with you. Your objections are entirely worthwhile. I merely point out that the inventor was aware of these issues and covered them in his invention.

I add for the sake of completeness that he does not claim more energy can be derived from the system than is originally supplied to it. Accordingly, he is not asserting a free lunch of any sort. Just a different method of attempting efficiency improvements.

His main candidate enemies here are not hysteresis or shock. They are (1) mechanical ineffiency arising from the linear motion of the cylinders and connecting rods and/or (2) inefficiencies arising from the delivery of pulses of power from the static electromagnets. I would characterise the invention as an series of ideas rather than as an attempt to cheat nature

If you allow a regular car engine to overheat, the cylinder block warps and you will need a new engine. If you allow his magnetic engine to overheat, you will need to replace your magnets. Not much difference here except that magnets are probably cheaper to replace than an internal combustion engine. As for shock, the technology exists to coat magnets with protective polymers or plastics.

I think you can do a better job of making objections to this hybrid electric engine. Read his patent properly. When you have readi it, I think you just may be able to do a better job of finding objections to it than I have been able to do.