# Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

## Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: NathanCoppedge on January 01, 2018, 02:52:34 AM

Title: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: NathanCoppedge on January 01, 2018, 02:52:34 AM
Diagrams readily available under Wikimedia Commons and 'Quora.com nathan coppedge perpetual motion'.

Concerning new art of free energy, you may verify these equations...

With leverage ratio of 10.8 to 6.25 running to 14 to 6.25, I have shown that when a super-lightweight lever is run through an ultra-smooth, ultra-straight slightly inclined slotted track, and the counterweight on the short end has a ratio of (1X U.S. Quarter, 1X U.S. penny, 1X standard marble, 5 in. of duct tape) to one standard marble on the longer lever end, that upwards and downwards motion from rest takes place, and the rolling ball may be permitted to have a significantly higher midpoint after being raised than the height of the lever at the start of the track (at 10.8 : 6.25 X the distance of the midpoint of the counterweight from the fulcrum), with room to move into. Therefore, the device, if arranged in a horizontal loop with units repeated at the same average altitude, might be perpetual.

Friction is proven to be overcome at every point except perhaps at the beginning between units. But, we know it has sufficient capacity to lift the lever at the beginning of the first unit, and every unit is identical.

Test for Specific Values

It has been estimated from work I will duplicate later that 2X counterweight, 1X marble, and 0.5X effective long-end leverage mass is a workable value.

So, let's test it…

1X marble + 0.5X lever = 1.5X effective mass at every point for the marble.

10.8 leverage X 1.5X effective mass = 16.4 X effective leverage at the beginning of the long end.

2X mass X 6.25X leverage = 12.5X effective leverage (constant) for the short end.

16.4X long-end leverage is significantly greater than 12.5X leverage, so the long end is effectively heavier.

Note, this is before the marble is supported by the track.

Now, the marble on the long end is supported by the track.

Since the track is almost horizontal, the resistance is now close to 1/2 effective mass, since 1/2 effective mass falls between 0 resistance (falling) and 1 ideal resistance (lifting, e.g. 0 plus friction in equilibrium, as this is).

Thus, we take the same initial resistance of 16.4 and divide by 2 to get an approximate resistance (supported) of 8.2 or somewhat over.

This is now significantly less than the 12.5 effective leverage of the counterweight, so now the marble will move upwards very slightly, so long as it is supported by the track, and so long as the ratios are followed.

Now, let's test whether it works at 14 : 6.25 (at the end of each unit).

14 leverage X 1.5 effective marble mass = 21 effective leverage.

21 / 2 = 10.5 effective leverage when supported, still significantly less than the counterweight's 12.5, which also has the advantage of equilibrium.

But now, when the marble is unsupported at 14X leverage with 1.5X effective mass, it has the full 21X effective leverage, versus the same now puny 12.5 X effective leverage of the counterweight, which means when unsupported the marble is clearly able to lift the counterweight, IN SPITE OF ORIGINALLY MOVING UPWARDS!

General Values

10.8 / 6.25 = > 1.73 X (mass) for counterweight to move marble.

(1.73 X is ideal motion from equilibrium with 10.8 : 6.25, particularly when there is reduced resistance from a supporting track and lever mass adding to the leverage of the 1 X marble as indicated below).

14 / 6.25 = 2.24 X leverage applied at the end of motion by marble = maximum mass of counterweight including all compensations for leverage mass.

→ 1.73 to 2.24X window for counterweight mass with upwards motion and applicable leverage, when leverage is in a 10.8 to 14 : 6.25 ratio.

Long end lever weight without counterweight or marble while hinged = 0.001X to 0.51X plus any unaccounted weight in short end of lever (so, it could, in effect, be heavier than 0.51X if not all the counterweight mass has been accounted for).

Now, if the lever is lighter in raw units than the differential, it has been shown to work!

In fact, even if I am wrong about this, the experiment clearly shows motion from rest with natural momentum, and there is indication of recovery of altitude through the height of the midpoint of the marble.

---Nathan Coppedge
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: blueplanet on January 01, 2018, 09:35:25 AM
I have just done some internet search on your machine but I have not seen any evidence of perpetual motion. I might be wrong.

To prove that it is a really perpetual motion machine, your machine must be able to be  continuously self-running without any artificial power input for at least one year.

In my humble opinion, your machine should not break any laws of physics, except for the second law of thermodynamics.

Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: conradelektro on January 01, 2018, 11:28:01 AM

May be this book helps people who have a perpetual motion problem:

https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Plans-Better-Without-Masturbating/dp/1502429659/ (https://www.amazon.com/Omega-Plans-Better-Without-Masturbating/dp/1502429659/)

Omega Plans: How to Do Better Without Masturbating
by   Nathan Coppedge (https://www.amazon.com/Nathan-Coppedge/e/B007SN7UTQ/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1)    (Author)

This is a good book to give someone who might have a masturbation problem. The advice comes from someone who for a long time had no religious motivation. Trouble that developed caused him to turn around and see that he was missing out on a big part of life. And this book gives advice asking everyone to participate and to be more divine. Forget reverse psychology, it won’t persuade people, even when some small part of them admits that they want a better life than what God is offering them. Avoiding masturbation is the answer, and this book provides sensitive advice.

http://www.nathancoppedge.com/ (http://www.nathancoppedge.com/)  more books for the perpetual motion minded

This book will help with perpetual motion:

https://www.amazon.com/Worthwhile-Magical-Things-Do-Spell-Casting/dp/1515164187/ (https://www.amazon.com/Worthwhile-Magical-Things-Do-Spell-Casting/dp/1515164187/)

Worthwhile Magical Things To Do: (Spells & Spell-Casting)
by   Nathan Coppedge (https://www.amazon.com/Nathan-Coppedge/e/B007SN7UTQ/ref=dp_byline_cont_book_1)    (Author)

FROM THE INTRODUCTION This book is inspired by an excellent day in which I decided to change my mind about nearly everything! I would adopt an attitude in which I banished all negativity that surrounded my presence! As you might not expect, my object was to accomplish this through magical means! In the process, I would become a powerful wizard! You may not believe this, but the beginning of the process involved changing the sky into the most beautiful periwinkle blue! It was a very optimistic start. But, what else will surprise you, is that many of the magical effects I had already done myself (“Around the house, on my own time…”). So, I immediately set out to write this book to inspire the world about magical wizardry! The tricks are intuitive as magic goes, so I have full confidence that you will pull off more than one of these tricks before you are even done reading this book! It’s inspired magic, and it’s inspired magic that’s good!
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 03, 2018, 02:49:23 PM
You can make the colors yellow and blue turn into green
Just by using your mind while you mix them.
Magic is in the eye of the beholder. (or maybe their psychi)

The concept that your thoughts control the world around you
is propagated by groups of people who have lived most of their
lives without thinking....

And, for them, these thoughts are manifested through their change
in actions. and so their views work for them.
It’s hard to convince them otherwise.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: NathanCoppedge on January 13, 2018, 04:26:28 PM
I have just done some internet search on your machine but I have not seen any evidence of perpetual motion. I might be wrong.

To prove that it is a really perpetual motion machine, your machine must be able to be  continuously self-running without any artificial power input for at least one year.

In my humble opinion, your machine should not break any laws of physics, except for the second law of thermodynamics.

My feeling is that while others have not built a fully-working device either, I have provided some highly interesting facts to analyze, and maybe it is time to lower the bar and make something run for a cycle however short without any input except altitude and mass.

Assuming my device moves from one modular unit to the next, the device is guaranteed perpetual, because other than the transition there is proven natural momentum at every point, and the transition theoretically involves no change in altitude.

Unusual conditions hold in this case which don't involve inputting energy---that is one of the exceptional things about it.

Not only does it not need to gain additional altitude, but it has room to move into, and there is strong evidence of natural up-and-down motion, just look at the equations.

If there is one thing that might discourage me, it is someone's argument that the horizontal transition is not possible. But the device has 12 freaking categorical advantages at the weakest point, and only one remaining disadvantage---that the lever is taller than the base, but not the midpoint of the marble.

So, I would say, it is time for someone to reproduce the experiment, and take it VERY very seriously.

I have dreamed of the Ouroboros three times, and the third time it appeared like the shape of the Lemniscate. I jumped right out of bed, and remembered the other part of the dream, which was the idea of turning my Repeat Lever 2 into a horizontal, modularly repeating device. In my mind, all things considered, it is the best attempt at perpetual motion by far. This is leagues beyond the Repeat Lever 5, but very similar to Repeat Lever 2 and numerous less likely serious attempts.

The Repeat Lever 2 might work, but this is just over the top.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: NathanCoppedge on January 13, 2018, 04:38:47 PM
I have just done some internet search on your machine but I have not seen any evidence of perpetual motion. I might be wrong.

The following Youtube video may show you how easy it is to transition between one modular unit and the next in the diagram that started this thread.

Just imagine that it has the kind of momentum that's been proven in the Successful Over-Unity Experiment 1 (my primary experiment).

Imagine that its allowed to move, and that the marble is much, much taller. Now do you see? It works!

Because:

1. It has natural momentum at every point.
2. There is no additional necessary change in altitude.
3. It doesn't use energy.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: blueplanet on January 17, 2018, 07:31:31 AM
.....
Imagine that its allowed to move, and that the marble is much, much taller. Now do you see? It works!

Because:

1. It has natural momentum at every point.
2. There is no additional necessary change in altitude.
3. It doesn't use energy.

What allows it to move then?
Momentum means force. If there is any so-called natural momentum at any point, what is this source of this force?
This force must come from somewhere. But you have not mentioned it.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: NathanCoppedge on May 07, 2018, 07:26:29 AM
I have just done some internet search on your machine but I have not seen any evidence of perpetual motion. I might be wrong.

In my humble opinion, your machine should not break any laws of physics, except for the second law of thermodynamics.

Well, the problem with your statement is that usually only fakes run that long. A real machine performing work will break down unless it is built very solidly.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: NathanCoppedge on May 07, 2018, 07:37:45 AM
What allows it to move then? ...
This force must come from somewhere. But you have not mentioned it.

The force comes from the heavier counterweight meeting with little resistance from the marble / mobile weight when the marble / mobile weight is supported like a wheel.

Those who know wheels work know the force necessary to move them is equal to 1/2 m * distance = 1/2 the mass * whatever distance it travels, in other words, 1/2 the mass if purely horizontal.

Therefore, an equal or slightly heavier counterweight can actually perform work based on this difference in resistance.

That is the theory, and I have proven it can create upward and downward motion. I would love to hear of people replicating my experiments, but apparently few have tried, or few have tried adequately.

However, it should be rather easy, for a change, to prove that my experiments are accurate. One must simply follow the ratios in the diagram: 1X standard marble's worth of mass as compared to a counterweight of 1 standard marble, 1 U.S. quarter, 1 U.S. penny, and 5 inches of duct tape, effective unweighted long-end leverage mass (while hinged) of about 0.5X a standard marble mass, leverage ratio of 10.8X - 14X on the long end to 6.25X at midpoint of mass on the short end. Ultra-smooth, ultra straight (as straight and smooth as possible) slotted track, with upward angle of less than 1 degree, with lever angle modified to suit whatever works.

Someone let me know if you do this experiment. I would be overjoyed to see your video on YouTube replicating the experiment.

It is simple... And, over-unity I might add, for a change. In my view at least it is over-unity. Someone else is free to have a different theory, but electricity, batteries, elastic, etc is not one of them.
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: Belfior on May 07, 2018, 01:40:32 PM
second law is broken already. Only debunkers pull that one out every now and then. I could make up a law like that. Here we go. "In a universe that has nothing, there is no gravity between particles".

Other laws are used also on false pretenses like energy conservation. They say "you cannot create energy from nothing, because energy can't be created or destroyed". What the law actually means is that all energy has been created already. You can only transform it from one form to another. So if I put x amount of energy to a system that creates imbalance, nature can use 2x of energy to try to balance shit out. Then if I design my device properly then 2x of my input energy is trapped into my system.

Then people ask "well where does the energy come from?". It does not really matter, because I just know that Nature will do this. It can come from Gaia's arse if it works. That is not my problem but Nature's problem and if the device works, then all is good.

My opinion is that it is the event of transformation where this is actually possible, if your device is designed properly. When energy changes from form to another there is a window to get more on the output. Just like in a transformer. No electrons go from primary to secondary and still there is power in the secondary. It is because primary creates changes in flux in the core and the secondary sees the flux changing and transform that to electricity. So the problem that is left is that how can you make the secondary see more flux, faster change in flux or what ever you can think of to fake it to the secondary.

Just take a neodymium magnet and make it face an iron core with a coil around it. The flux from thew magnet goes all the way through the core. This is btw a magnetic field takes a shitload of electricity to produce. Then use like a 3V DC motor to turn a round plate with holes in it between the magnet and the core. The plate should be copper&steel&aluminium plate glued together if you can't afford galfenol. This will stop the field and let it pass to the core when ever there is a hole in the plate. You will get plenty more than to run the small motor.

At some point you will start getting a counter acting field from the core&coil that hits the magnet, but does it really matter? Make one pickup coil CW and other CCW or figure it out some other way, if it even matters
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: norman6538 on May 14, 2018, 04:25:58 PM
Nathan in msg # 9 you said this....

"Just take a neodymium magnet and make it face an iron core with a coil around it. The flux from thew magnet goes all the way through the core. This is btw a magnetic field takes a shitload of electricity to produce. Then use like a 3V DC motor to turn a round plate with holes in it between the magnet and the core. The plate should be copper&steel&aluminium plate glued together if you can't afford galfenol. This will stop the field and let it pass to the core when ever there is a hole in the plate. You will get plenty more than to run the small motor.

At some point you will start getting a counter acting field from the core&coil that hits the magnet, but does it really matter? Make one pickup coil CW and other CCW or figure it out some other way, if it even matters"

And I made such a sandwich and did not see any reduction in flux passing through the
sandwich. Have you tried this yourself and what was your result?

So far I have not seen a true flux blocker - yes diverters but not blockers.
Even a flux reducer might give some advantage. To me the laws of nature are
pretty tight....barely a crack anywhere.

Norman
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: Belfior on May 15, 2018, 12:54:26 PM
I think it was me and not Nathan...

Just pick any type of magnetic shielding and use that

You don't need to totally block the flux. Altering flux will produce current

You could even use a perm magnet with South facing an iron core with a pickup coil. Then between the perm magnet and the core you have an air gap with a coil that has South facing the perm magnet. This brings us back to Kunel patent:

https://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Patents/DE3024814.pdf
Title: Re: Nathan Coppedge perpetual motion, real evidence
Post by: norman6538 on May 15, 2018, 10:34:17 PM
Belfior do  you know of anyone that has the Kunnel device working? Kunnel said that "it works but not as drawn. see if you can figure out (the correct drawing Norman )

I thought toroid might be a help....By now somebody surely would have figured this
out.

Norman