Energy conservation - Edward Leedskalnin

I refer to Leedskalnin's Perpetual Motion Holder:
This guy had a strange theory about magnetism, a kind of mistic, not really part of scientific world.
Interesting is the simple device which can be replicated, named Perpetual Motion Holder. Here is a video about it:

How the energy conservation does apply here?
LVL 21
Who is Participating?
BigRatConnect With a Mentor Commented:
The U-shape, the horse-shoe shape is not magnet.

OK, but

All pieces are stainless steel or ferrous, ferromagnetic.

which means that it is magnetizable.

It becomes electromagnet only due to the coils in the moment when we apply the voltage from battery.

Yes, that is correct.

Then the whole core become very strong magnetized.

Dependent on the applied current and the magnetic permeability it *could* be strongly magnetized.

How is it possible to maintain that magnetization for long time after the battery is removed?

The material is made up of domains in which the iron atoms are aligned. But the domains are not aligned. The magnetic field due to the current aligns these domains and after the field has been removed most but not all of the domains revert to their original "non"-alignment. Some remain and the material becomes magnetic.

There is no rocket science in this - it is the principle of core and disk storage in computers.

What however is missing is MEASUREMENT. The total amount of energy expended to make the "magnet" is not preserved in the magnet since the alignment of the domains causes friction and this is lost in heat. There is no perpetual motion and the only way to recover energy is to wait as the domains slowly revert to their original alignment. This causes a little heat and I doubt that anybody could ever make use of it.
Answer to question: It doesn't.

When I read about zinc and acid with bubbles all have to do with magnetism, I just turn off. This guy just doesn't understand basic chemistry and what is worse is that if one wants to query the foundations of electro-chemistry one has to address the experiments which lead to the conclusions that lead to the modern theory and not just invent something which is not founded on any experiment.

This sort of crap really ought to be taxed : a transformer; it demonstrates how permanent magnets are made, and is a holder of perpetual motion.  The latter will be demonstrated now because it is important for you to see it defy some of the most basic laws of physics and a few, more sophisticated laws of modern EM theory.

He wouldn't know what "modern EM theory" was if it jumped up and bit him on the leg.
viki2000Author Commented:
Agree that is a lot of crap that has nothing to do with known laws of physics, but how do we explain the functionality of the "Perpetual Motion Holder"?
Evaluating UTMs? Here's what you need to know!

Evaluating a UTM appliance and vendor can prove to be an overwhelming exercise.  How can you make sure that you're getting the security that your organization needs without breaking the bank? Check out our UTM Buyer's Guide for more information on what you should be looking for!

I find it simply AMAZING the number of so-called "scientists" who just DON'T understand relativity.
In there is an explaination on how E=mc² in which he claims (page 8) correclty that light can produce a force on a physical target, says the force as a rate of change of momentum (claiming that it is a Maxwellian equation), substitutes the momentum as mc and then by simple integration (ignoring the possibility of an additive constant) comes up with the famous equation. The equation is simply INCORRECT since, for light, m=0 and the real equation, being E²=m²c^4 + p²v², gives E=pc. The important point about Einstein's theory is that it gives the energy for massive AND massless particles AT THE SAME TIME.

Needless to say that this bady written, cherry picked referenced paper goes on to rubbish almost all of modern science. No wonder the author has disappeared off to an obscure Indonesian island.
What "functionality"?
Looks like:

Battery puts current through coils.
Coils induce magnetic field in bar steel prong with keeper bar.
When keeper bar is pulled from end of prong magnetic field collapses through coils.
Coils induce electric field through lamps.

Putting a keeper bar on the ends of magnets to keep their magnetism was something done in my schooldays.  So the only interest is that his original experiment didn't lose its magnetism over a long period of time.  If that experimental device is a Perpetual Motion Holder (I just skimmed the video and didn't watch the end of it) then ...
viki2000Author Commented:
Why do you say the conservation energy does not apply here?

A simple device like that with 2 coils and U-shape core cannot maintain its magnetism so strong long time.
What is happening?
Are you saying that all the experiments done in the videos are fake?
viki2000Author Commented:
No, no. That is the problem. The U-shape, the horse-shoe shape is not magnet. All pieces are stainless steel or ferrous, ferromagnetic. It becomes electromagnet only due to the coils in the moment when we apply the voltage from battery. Then the whole core become very strong magnetized.
How is it possible to maintain that magnetization for long time after the battery is removed?
There are no magnets here.
Why do you say the conservation energy does not apply here?

I didn't. But I would claim that there is no perpetual motion in the universe. The picture so often presented by these loonies of an atom, is that the electrons wizz around the core like planets in the solar system. This is completely and absolutely the WRONG pattern. It is only convenient as a model for beginners.
d-glitchConnect With a Mentor Commented:
I have looked at all three links in the post, and watched the video, and read the "proof of concept" from the first post, and the Magnetic Current and Mineral, Vegetable, and Animal pamphlets.

And there is truly nothing there:  no equations, no numbers or units, no measurements, nothing even vaguely resembling science.

If you want to deny the existence of the electron, you have to come up with an alternate explanations for the classic electron experiments by Thompson, Milikan, and Rutherford.

Note that the Perpertual Motion Holder is a static device.  There is nothing moving, and there is no stored kinetic energy.  It does demonstrate magnetic energy storage in a material with very low coercivity.

dbrunton's link to the Magnetic Keeper is on the mark.
My favorite quote from Leedskalnin's Magnetic Current:
Here is a good tip to the rocket people. Make the rocket's head strong North Pole magnet, and the tail end strong South Pole magnet, and then shut to on the moon's North end, then you will have better success.
I have just taken time out to watch this video,, the first in the list.

I beats me that this chap in the video is soooo enamoured with such simple science which he doesn't really understand that he spends so much time posting stuff like this. Again no measurements are made and this is crucial, since the energy involved in removing the magnet keeper bar is mostly transmitted via the changing magnetic field through the transformer effect into the LEDs. HE is the person lighting the LEDs.

What he doesn't realize is that he is denying the science that he is using to make such videos.
dhsindy SparrowRetired considering supplemental income.Commented:
All I see is promotional material.  Where are the patent applications?  Where are the his laboratory journals?  You cannot debunk centuries of science by supposition.  Even I know inductors and capacitors can store charge and magnetic fields.  Where are the measurement that show more energy is created than input in the device.  Even in university courses I had to turn my lab journals.  He is just a crackpot trying to attract ignorant investors.
Perpetual motion has been debunked so thoroughly, so many times, that you can safely assume it does not exist. If people claim they have just discovered it, then it's up to them to prove their point; it's not up to the others to try and prove them wrong.

In other words, until this guy produces real evidence, you'll save yourself a lot of heartbreak by ignoring this.

Note that a patent application is not evidence either. To get a patent for an invention, you do not need to prove that your invention actually works.
d-glitchConnect With a Mentor Commented:
Re: The Perpetual Motion Holder video.

There are lots of ways to keep stored energy on the shelf for a few months or years.
  • You can set a mouse trap.
  • You can charge a capacitor.
  • If the U-shaped square bar were hollow rather than solid, you could pump it down and seal it with a flat keeper.

Some of these may leak more than others.
viki2000Author Commented:
@BigRat ID: 41840254
-      „Why do you say the conservation energy does not apply here?“
-      I didn't.
Yes you did, right from beginning on ID: 41839821 when you said „Answer to question: It doesn't.“ and my question was „How the energy conservation does apply here?“
Anyway, you explained it well later how the energy is conserved in ID: 41840238 at the end.

@ d-glitch
I found nice your explanations from ID: 41840371 at the end and the last one ID: 41841190

It never crossed to my mind a perpetual machine idea. I just wanted to understand how that device named „Perpetual Motion Holder“ works and how the conservation energy applies. I do not speak about over unity or similar things.

Agree that if no measurements are done, then we cannot go in the scientific approach direction.
I conclude that through the given experiment we transfer the electrical energy from battery to magnetic energy in a closed loop, which can be stored for many years due to magnetization of the Ferro magnetic materials. When the loop is open, then a variation of magnetic field induces the electrical current in the coils. All these processes take place with loses of energy, mostly due to the heat, either due to electrical current in the coil or magnetic alignment in the ferrous core material. So we end up only with long time energy storage, of course less energy recovered compared with what we needed initially. And this long time we compare it with magnetization of the hard disks or other mechanisms as d-glitch proposed in the end: mechanical energy in a spring from a mouse trap, pressure in bottles or other sealed tanks (the capacitors is not so good example for many months or years) – good examples.
I think the things are clear now, no mysteries behind. Nevertheless, I find the experiment and the electrical energy storage as magnetic field in a closed loop for long time very interesting.
I guess a nice step would be a setup with measurements to see how much energy we lose when we revert from magnetic loop storage into electrical energy in the coils.
Why do you say the conservation energy does not apply here?

Yes, you are quite right and I apologize. I interpreted the question as to whether this "Perpetual Motion" thingmy was valid.
viki2000Author Commented:
Thank you for explanations.
All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.