Let me explain one thing that is very important:

Let me quote the first law of Newton's three laws of motion:


That's your frictionless object in motion, as long as we don't apply an external force to it, it will keep it's motion. If we do however apply an external force to in, like say, use it to rotate magnets, then the motion of that object will change, to be more precise: it will be slowed down.

To complete this lesson: With a frictionless design we only minimize the loss of energy in a generator on the part of, well you must have already guessed it, friction!


On to the next lesson, I'm rollin' : The magnetic force a magnet can apply in it's lifetime is utmost equal the energy you put in to become a magnet. Practically however, it cost more energy to make the magnet then it will deliver back in it's whole lifetime.


As for free energy, the best changes now are in using renewable energy like solar power, tidal power, wind power, etc. Especially solar panels get better and cheaper very fast these days.


I hope this post doesn't come as a big lecture of how it's done etc. e.g. I do know that Newtons law are not completely correct (at speeds approaching the speed of light the effects of special relativity must be taken into account). It's just to point you in the right direction.


Kind regards,

The Traveler

I'm actually the most excited about tidal power. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun isn't always out. But it is really hard to build something to hold up in an ocean environment. It's very corrosive down there and there is alot of sea life to muck things up. Tidal power is the most challenging energy technology, but I also think in the end it is the most rewarding.

Actually, i remeber hearing something about a new approach to solar tech, as to catch photons even at night, thoses solar pannels will be the shit as more work is done to upgrade them. I just don't see how they get away with charging so much for solar pannels. I could understand them not being cheap, but $30,000 for 1 home? Some one is being greedy i would think, we have plenty of silicone, there is no reason for the price to be that high. They put peices of metal on top of silicone and paint it and bake it with protective layers, i'm sure the process isn't that expensive.


Yes, i see because of conservation of energy it wouldn't work. You could sustain motion without fuel by defeating the friction with magnetics, but your still using energy(Magnetics) to get that 0 friction. Theres on'y one thing that makes me think maybe, well, two things. One is with 0 friction you don't have to continue to push with energy, and the fact that it is the motion that is mainly converted to electrical. Magnets do die, but the most of the energy you get when generating dosen't come from the magnet, it comes from the motion. Thats obvious in the sence as to add current to an electromagnet to generate power from it, if you could only get out what you put in on the magnets side, then you would only generate as much power as you put into the electromagnet, but thats not the case, motion is being converted, the motion may be the cause of the drain of the magnet as it pulls and does work, but your not extracting enrgy from the magnet, your using the field to convert motion to energy. Thats what throws me off, Because you get more energy out of the magnetic feild than you put into the magnet alone. Energy from magnet & motion is greater than the energy used to make the magnet.


I'm not real sure what you where saying. But i know this, kenetic energy is what pushes something to give it motion, its not motion its self. When you spin an object in space, you put in only enough energy to get it spinning, then because there is nothing to slow it down it remains spinning without more enegy input, thus it is motion not energy. I want to build one of these to answer my question, the only thing is how could i find out how much energy it took to make the magnets i use. I know i can keep a record of how long it runs and how much energy it produces, also i thought of putting a thin but strong magnet infront of the coil instead of behind, that way the electromagnetic coil has to over power the magnet in front of it to cause friction. So you can prduce more than your using to cause zero friction. I see how many other free energy systems are bullshit, but this one i think might be a little different, i think i must build one to see what the actual answer is.

This is a better description of how i make sence of it.


Take the electromagnetic generator for a great example. Ofcourse there is no permanent magnet used, and once generating it can feed the eletromagnet + gain energy as in more than your putting into the electromagnet. And i am aware kinteic energy is being used to create motion as well, but just look at the electromagnet and motion, forget about the kinetic energy. The thing i'm getting at is motion is not a form of energy, kinetic energy can push something and give it motion, but it is not a form of energy. Example is in space you where you have zero friction you can push something and it will move forever as long as nothing else effects it.

So if Energy from motion + electromagnetic feild >Alot greater than Energy for eletromagnetic feild then that tells you that the electromagnet alone generates more energy than it uses, because motion is not energy, and motion can be sustained without kinteic energy.

Now there is the coil becoming an electromagnet and causeing friction by attraction. But if you use a magnet which generates a feild which contains more energy and use that feild in front of the coil to kill out the friction by repelling the central electromagnet then you will get free motion while generating energy from the eletromagnetic feild.

Now, it is true that magnets drain over time, but it is a very long time, they possible generate more energy than used in my thinking, breaking conservation of energy. Why, how? Because every eletric feild generates a magnetic feild, which in return generates an electric field, and on and on. Because you can get that energy by moving a coil or the feild shows you that conservation of energy is not true for an eltric generator which converts motion(Not energy) into eletrical energy.


Now, it makes sence to me, but i've been wrong alot in the past, so what, if anything do you see wrong with this?