So ALL the energy sources that we currently tap can be traced back to the sun and then back to the Big Bang.

Most heavier elements were created at the time of the big bang but not really by our sun.

As for the ability of a magnet to cause domain alignment in a nearby ferrite and thus to overcome the hysteresis losses involved is very clear. That is how it works.

Ok.

As we know the source of the magnets H field (magnetising field) we know that the energy source that caused the electrons to move will supply that energy just as would happen if we used a solenoid and power supply to supply the H field.

IronShell3d

Ok.  So we agree there is no way for a self running magnet motor to work.

@newbie123
Quote:
"Most heavier elements were created at the time of the big bang but not really by our sun."
LOL, you sound like one of those personality types that likes to state everything they have read in a textbook as absolute fact. I have found modern science to be more like a form of religion than what it was in the early 1900's when the likes of Faraday,Maxwell and Tesla were still around. Maybe you should ask yourself why in this modern age of science our cars are only 15% effeicient, why nuclear power is less than 10% efficient, why over 50% of most all generated electricity never performs actual "worK" for the consumer, LOL, modern science would seem to be a contradiction in terms. As for the Big Bang and an expanding universe, it is only a "theory" based on less than a couple hundred years of observation, considering the universe is stated as being Billions of Billions of years old I hardly think this qualifies as fact.

@All
I think to understand where the energy could come from in a magnet motor first you should understand "what" magnetism is. It's funny that many educated people know some of the "effects" related to magnetism as science is the study and observation of effects, but in all my years I have only met a few people who can actually tell me what magnetism is fundamentally---not what it does, what it "IS".
Here are some clues---
--Faraday stated that to induce a current in a conductor, a magnetic field  or conductor must move relative to one another. There is however a homopolar generator in which the magnet moves with the conductor thus there is "NO" relative motion between them and yet a strong current is generated in the conductor. This should tell you that the magnetic field is not a property of the magnet, it is a property of the "space" surrounding a magnet because the field remains stationary in space. Is the energy "IN" the magnet or is it "IN" the field?
--Magnetic fields are expansive, that is they will form closed loops external to the source which produced them. If the magnetic poles attacted one another then why is the field external and not inside the magnet? As well the magnetic field produced is a function of surface area exactly like an electric field, both following the inverse square law. If a magnet is built with a very large south pole and a very small north pole then the smaller north pole would seem to be stronger but both are equal, only the surface area thus density of field have changed.

The reason most people cannot understand how to build a permanent magnet motor is because they do not understand "what" magnetism is,or electricity or gravity. How could you possibly build something that you do not make an effort to understand fully. Worse are the fools who say it cannot be done because they honestly believe that if they cannot do it then nobody can, the human ego at work.
Regards
AC

@newbie123
Quote:
"Most heavier elements were created at the time of the big bang but not really by our sun."
LOL, you sound like one of those personality types that likes to state everything they have read in a textbook as absolute fact. I have found modern science to be more like a form of religion than what it was in the early 1900's when the likes of Faraday,Maxwell and Tesla were still around.

This is always a funny/ironic  argument coming from the true FE believers.

It is true some real scientists can be very closed minded with regard to new ideas and concepts (LENR/CF  is a good example of this), and they will sometimes follow each other like sheep and even refuse to consider experimental evidence...   But the majority aren't this closed minded, but they're all skeptical of extraordinary claims (which is a good thing).



Here is an example of a very open minded physicist  (and nobel laureate).     In his intro he talks about CF, but he also researches the "mind over matter" type aspects of quantum physics.
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5994673126675909042



Saying "science is like a religion"  is pretty much ridiculous, because everything you believe WRT "Free energy"  is faith based, imo...  Everything scientists believe WRT "Free energy"  is science based...  By "science based" i mean experimentally proven again and again...   Do you have any experimental evidence for "Free energy"?  Has it been widely replicated and verified?


Btw,  even one instance of a "Free energy" device (if it exists) isn't proof, because  people do make mistakes...    lots of verifications/replications = acceptance.

Theories such as the "Big bang"   are just that...  Theories.   But so far the big bang theory  (which is evolving as we speak) is the best theory with the most supportive scientific EVIDENCE, and DATA.

Hi All
i once read a book by carl seagan and it really opened my eyes to some of the debate that goes on over this subject and about the big bang theory and the fact that at a certain point in a millionth of a second all the matter of this universe came into existance but at some point less than that there was nothing no wave theory no gravity no charge no anything yet something started all this from some form of steady state to an imbalance through which all came into existance.
within us is this bazarre truth as doctors have never removed any part of the human brain that removes the personnel intent of the individual so as to say that our bodies are merely clothes we ware and not we our selves which is the aspect of quantum physics you can look at the matter with an electron microscope or you can watch the energy but you can't watch both.
one would then think that all this is just an illusuion we play in and delude ourselves too and since these points are not yet discovered by science they are not allowed to be fact only religion yet the evidence seems to remain that this is what we are attempting to prove correct.
Newton developed the fundamentals of gravity using electrostatics which governed the attraction of bodies in relation to speed and distance this has had further additions in that changing the charge on a body alters its attractive force making gravity stronger these things were discovered by volta and expanded on by faraday as charges were put in motion it is interesting that a charge wants to collapse to nothing while voltage tension wants to expand and a magnet cannot exist with out current motion charge allone is not enough as related to in maxwell's theories iluding to an alter energy state which we often term as reactive power it is interesting that an expanding universe can only exist when charge states are equal in all other states energy attracts to density this is caused by any imbalance bonding to form matter as reactive states causing its influence to spread if we only work from the state of mind of matter without reactance then we will always be at odds with energy we try to manipulate and low efficiencies will be the best we can hope for.
I could go on for hours citing examples that contridict main stream science and that is only because people do not grasp the basic begining principles on which it was built and it is worked by control of what we need to know which isn't much according to some people but i do not believe this to be so as we can learn as much as we want but imparting what we have learned to others is about how much they are willing to accept.
all matter seems to exist along the bloch wall plain it is formed by spins relative and disparent such as those of copper and iron when uniform and aligned they attract and condence when contrary they repell and can be brought to generate heat which moves as conductive and reactive by infrared wave all heat seems to be relative to 642 ohms per circular mill being a ratio of charge to tension area yet this fact is little understood.
Martin

I don't need faith to believe in free energy(Wind,Wave,Hydro,Solar,EM ect...), energy is force producing motion

AC,  I think you know what I meant by "Free energy"   .. gravity wheels,  Mylow-type magnet motors,  "special"  circuits, pyramids, etc  ..  Not known renewable source.

we are surrounded by forces and motion on both the subatomic and astronomical scales. To say we can never harness other forms of energy in a new way seems counter-productive.

This is where the delusions reside (not you personally but some folks  around here)

What OTHER forms of energy can we possibly harness?   We have nuclear...  Which is the most promising,  but we're far from mastering...  zero-point energy (at 0 kelvin),   We have vacuum energy,  cosmic microwave background radiation, cosmic  rays sometimes (but their energy rarely reaches us)...
Most of these sources have been shown to be insignificant...       They can make a neat experiment sometimes, but they're just not practical as a useful energy source.

@newbie123
LOL, I know what you meant, I just wanted to clarify the terminology a bit for the members here. I agree with you on almost all points, I hold no grudge against any one or group of persons for what they may believe or not. What I have found personally however doesn't always coincide with what most people consider normal or sometimes even possible. I remember  three or four years ago I had built a device to light a 20w bulb 20ft away with only one wire and no ground leads, another was wireless power transfer lighting 10 Led's from four feet away. I remember that I was always much more interested in people's reaction to these devices than the actual devices themselves as it all seemed fairly straightforward from a technical standpoint. What was odd was that the people I demonstrated the machines for were technical people themselves and friends, but after they told me that they honestly had no idea that this was even possible let alone how I did it. Once I explained it was nothing more than a very high frequency/high potential resonant electric field then they understood what was happening and really had no issue with it. During the demonstration however they were dumb struck, their jaws dropped  and they said things like "how in the hell are you doing that", LOL. My lesson here was that psychology often plays a greater role in technology than the technology itself, for instance how can you build something you honestly believe will never work --- why would you even try. As well, do people believe that their opinion or others could somehow sway the actual reality of an event or fact?, ie.. could my friends not believing my experiments validity change the outcome?. In any case I have found there are people that know and understand many things not regarded as common knowledge, to such an extent that what they "know" is probably regarded by most of the world as impossible. I can also say these people have a determination or will to learn and understand like nothing most people can imagine, make no mistake it is an obsession which is why they succeed.
Regards
AC

ie.. could my friends not believing my experiments validity change the outcome?

Nope...    The placebo effect doesn't apply here.

In any case I have found there are people that know and understand many things not regarded as common knowledge, to such an extent that what they "know" is probably regarded by most of the world as impossible.

Like what?