• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Perpetual motion machine examination rules, please.

Ok. So the first question would be, "Why is the perpetual motion machine considered quasi-paranormal?"
 
Because it violates the first law of thermodynamics. Remember Lavoisier: "Rien ne se perds, rien ne se crée: tout se transforme" (Nothing is lost, nothing is created, all is transformed)
 
Note also that most descriptions of telepathy and levitation would also constitute a perpetual motion machine (though I'm waiting for the day a clever applicant decides to add that his ability draws a lot of power out of him, and thus doesn't actually violate any laws of thermodynamics ;))
 
Hello I am here., I suggest you check out the application of Mr. Ron Nucci and read carefully what has happened:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29206

Also, if your time allows it, give Mr. Kirk Gustom a try:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27304



Get some coffee and read these application threads front to back, left to right back and forth and back again. Unfortunately, both threads possess quite a volume.

You'll get rewarded though because they both show quite nicely:

1. How both applicants came in with supposably high hopes and

2. How their applications - along with their alleged devices - disintegrated in broad daylight.



As Mr. Konrad Brean put it in "Wag The Dog":

"They didn't think it through."
 
I am here -

Do you have a perpetual motion machine you would like to submit for testing under protocol?

Just trying to ascertain the purpose of the question.
 
hellaeon said:
I would say, understand basic physics and thermodynamics.

My two cents
Click to expand...


Well I would readily accept that if this were in the science forum. It's in the Challenge forum, therefore I am trying to understand why.
 
I am here. said:
Ok. So the first question would be, "Why is the perpetual motion machine considered quasi-paranormal?"
Click to expand...
I'd say PM machines fall more under the category of pseudoscientific rather than paranormal... or quasi-paranormal. Still perfectly challenge-worthy nonetheless.

I'm currently working out the kinks in my own PM machine design:

image.php


My prototype has been running for three straight weeks now. The million bucks is as good as mine.
 
I have read the FAQ, which is the reason that I was asking in the first place. In the unofficial FAQ which is somewhere in this forum I noticed that it said something to the effect of, "perpetual motion machines have been found to be borderline paranormal" or something like that in the section where it describes what's considered paranormal for the purposes of the challenge (listed are things like telepathy, TK, dowsing, etc.). However, I was confused because right before it mentions that PMDs (perpetual motion drives) are considered only quasi-paranormal, it refers to things that violate Newton's laws as completely paranormal. So, what is the difference? One would think that any PMD necessarily breaks Newton's laws.

Also, yup I sure do have something to submit for testing. However, I'm facing a pretty vicious bill to build this thing and the bill rises significantly as the machine has to be adapted to operate in different environments. To this end, I need to get an idea of what kind of hurdles the examiners are going to throw at me. That is the purpose of this thread, the answer to these two questions.
 
I am here. said:
I have read the FAQ, which is the reason that I was asking in the first place. In the unofficial FAQ which is somewhere in this forum I noticed that it said something to the effect of, "perpetual motion machines have been found to be borderline paranormal" or something like that in the section where it describes what's considered paranormal for the purposes of the challenge (listed are things like telepathy, TK, dowsing, etc.). However, I was confused because right before it mentions that PMDs (perpetual motion drives) are considered only quasi-paranormal, it refers to things that violate Newton's laws as completely paranormal. So, what is the difference? One would think that any PMD necessarily breaks Newton's laws.

Also, yup I sure do have something to submit for testing. However, I'm facing a pretty vicious bill to build this thing and the bill rises significantly as the machine has to be adapted to operate in different environments. To this end, I need to get an idea of what kind of hurdles the examiners are going to throw at me. That is the purpose of this thread, the answer to these two questions.
Click to expand...

The FAQ and challenge rules should answer all questions. If you have further questions you may email Kramer.

Color me not surprised a new poster in this forum asking about challenge rules and FAQ has something they want to apply with, and hasn't read through the FAQ fully, or has a nitpick.

Look paranormal or quasi paranormal, it's eligible for the prize.

Also, you should be aware that we on this forum do not represent the JREF in any respect, nor do we evaluate applications. That is for Kramer. Email him and ask him and questions you have.

In short: Here's where you hear what we tell everyone else that posts the way you did...

...Show us. Apply. Skip the small talk and apply.
 
Of course, the easiest way to do this might be to just describe exactly what it is that I've got here. So, essentially what it is is a big (6'X6'X2' standing up) box that has a small hole in its side from which a shaft protrudes to which a fan is attached. I know, a little garbled. But its a box with a fan sticking out of it and the fan turns. And... it requires no fuel... obviously. So, does that count? Are the examiners going to give me a hard time about the argument that perpetual motion machines are going to stop "eventually"... like when the sun burns this planet to a crisp. And yes, mine will stop, like a car engine, when it breaks.
 
Well, I'm no expert in the area of challenge rules and such but it seems to me that you should go ahead and build it, regardless of the rules. Why?

If you're convinced that it works your expenses should be easily covered by the million bucks you're going to win. Even if you don't win, a PM machine, if it works, is going to make you rich beyond anyone's wildest imagination.

So, are you convinced your device will work?

If yes: Build it regardless of expense.

If no: Why do you want to attempt the challenge, just to try it out?
 
I am here. said:
Of course, the easiest way to do this might be to just describe exactly what it is that I've got here. So, essentially what it is is a big (6'X6'X2' standing up) box that has a small hole in its side from which a shaft protrudes to which a fan is attached. I know, a little garbled. But its a box with a fan sticking out of it and the fan turns. And... it requires no fuel... obviously. So, does that count? Are the examiners going to give me a hard time about the argument that perpetual motion machines are going to stop "eventually"... like when the sun burns this planet to a crisp. And yes, mine will stop, like a car engine, when it breaks.
Click to expand...


I'm calling troll.

Okay, I'll resist the curmudgeon in me and ask:

What drives the perpetual motion machine? Chi? Karma? Vibes? "Quantum vibrations"?
 
I'm not getting any reactions that I didn't expect here. I'm certainly not trying to be rude, just trying to say that I have already been challenged. I don't need to be challenged by you also. However, if that's your preference then I'll gladly endure it to get the information that I need. These are important questions to me.
 
Anywho. I'm not going to say any more about what makes it work than that the energy comes from natural sources.
 
I am here. said:
I'm not getting any reactions that I didn't expect here. I'm certainly not trying to be rude, just trying to say that I have already been challenged. I don't need to be challenged by you also. However, if that's your preference then I'll gladly endure it to get the information that I need. These are important questions to me.
Click to expand...


And if you expected this, why then post it? If indeed you have a claim, then apply. It's as simple as that.

My prediction: in about 4 more pages of this the thread will have degenerated into a flame war and nastiness will ensue.

I urge you to reconsider the tact you are taking not because I want to start any fight with yuo, or that I think any less of you, merely that if you have a claim and have questions, applying to Kramer is the fastest and easiest way for you to resolve this.
 
I am here. said:
I'm not getting any reactions that I didn't expect here. I'm certainly not trying to be rude, just trying to say that I have already been challenged. I don't need to be challenged by you also. However, if that's your preference then I'll gladly endure it to get the information that I need. These are important questions to me.
Click to expand...

OK, so you've got this big box with a fan sticking out of it. So far so good.

Are you going to allow the test observers to examine the inside of this box?

If you're answer is no, then I don't think your challenge will be accepted. You should, as has been suggested, direct your questions to the correct person however when you send in your application.
 
It is a secret after all. I intend to capitalize on it. If everyone knows how to build one then I sacrifice my monopoly. I have little faith in the strength of patents. While they have been useful in the past, this piece of technology is a long way from a special drill bit or napkin folder.
 
No one can look inside the box. This makes it more difficult to test, I understand. But I also understand that Mr. Randi is interested only in the fact that it does work, not how it works.
 
I am here. said:
It is a secret after all. I intend to capitalize on it. If everyone knows how to build one then I sacrifice my monopoly. I have little faith in the strength of patents. While they have been useful in the past, this piece of technology is a long way from a special drill bit or napkin folder.
Click to expand...


Of course it is. IT's a box with a fan...

Have you looked into patenting this?

Or were you tripped up there by needing a working model for the US PAtent office to consider it?
 
I am here. said:
No one can look inside the box. This makes it more difficult to test, I understand. But I also understand that Mr. Randi is interested only in the fact that it does work, not how it works.
Click to expand...

I think you might find he is interested in knowing if it's a scam too. Like maybe you have a big battery inside that box ........
 
So are we abusing me or answering questions?
I know patent law. As I said, I don't have any confidence that a patent can protect this tech.
 
I am here. said:
So are we abusing me or answering questions?
I know patent law. As I said, I don't have any confidence that a patent can protect this tech.
Click to expand...


Of course it could. Anyone copying your tech would be subject to serious legal action by you as the patent holder.

I'm not abusing you, I am asking direct questions.

Why exactly have you not applied for a patent? How is it you think it would not protect your invention?

I am rather well versed in patent law myself, and perpetual motion machines are a rather tricky subject with the patent office. Perhaps you should retain a patent attorney to help.
 
A battery, spring or whatever. That's where this whole thread is going. Since they can't look in the box what do I have to do to prove that it is not using any fuel or stored energy?

How do I make your text show up in my replies?
 
I am here. said:
A battery, spring or whatever. That's where this whole thread is going. Since they can't look in the box what do I have to do to prove that it is not using any fuel or stored energy?

How do I make your text show up in my replies?
Click to expand...


The button at teh bottom of each post that says "Quote" will do this.


I'm sorry, but no one is going to just take your word for it. You would need to divulge the contents of the box. Which is why getting a patent now would be in your best interest.

But again, you should be asking Kramer, not us.
 
A patent does not actually do anything. It only gives one prosecution rights. It will still be copied. So, I suppose the real kicker is that if you can believe I've come up with perpetual motion then you can just trust me when I say that one of these machines can produce an unlimited amount of energy. So, if its copied even once...
 
I am here. said:
A patent does not actually do anything. It only gives one prosecution rights. It will still be copied. So, I suppose the real kicker is that if you can believe I've come up with perpetual motion then you can just trust me when I say that one of these machines can produce an unlimited amount of energy. So, if its copied even once...
Click to expand...


And you would basically own whoever copied you. You would be compensated, and you would be recognized as the patent holder. Again, how is it you would not be protected?


Why would you ask a forum of skeptics to take your word on anything? We obviously would want to rule out any scam. I'm not saying you are scamming. I will quote Carl Sagan:

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."
 
I can see that you've never personally dealt with patent right infringement.
There's more to it than you would think. Either way, you're probably right. I should just talk to kramer. I had just hoped that I could have the thing built already when I did the application to streamline the process from start to finish and not have to deal with everyone waiting on my to build it. Furthermore, I figured I'd have a lot easier time dealing with people like you (slightly offensive but ultimately direct, as you say) if I had the thing sitting right in front of me. Easier for me to just say, "blah blah blah it's working right in front of me."
 
I am here. said:
I can see that you've never personally dealt with patent right infringement.
There's more to it than you would think. Either way, you're probably right. I should just talk to kramer. I had just hoped that I could have the thing built already when I did the application to streamline the process from start to finish and not have to deal with everyone waiting on my to build it. Furthermore, I figured I'd have a lot easier time dealing with people like you (slightly offensive but ultimately direct, as you say) if I had the thing sitting right in front of me. Easier for me to just say, "blah blah blah it's working right in front of me."
Click to expand...

OK, so you have your fan box. You whell it up in front of a skeptic or two, like me for instance, and you say:

Lookee here, I have this box and you see this fan here? Well it will spin around forever and not consume any power, isn't that great?

I say:

Yeah, that's nice, but can I see inside the box just to make sure you don't have a battery in there?

You say:

Oh no, you're just abusing me, I'm going to take my box to somebody who will believe anything I tell them.



Hmmm...
 
I am here. said:
I can see that you've never personally dealt with patent right infringement.
There's more to it than you would think. Either way, you're probably right. I should just talk to kramer. I had just hoped that I could have the thing built already when I did the application to streamline the process from start to finish and not have to deal with everyone waiting on my to build it. Furthermore, I figured I'd have a lot easier time dealing with people like you (slightly offensive but ultimately direct, as you say) if I had the thing sitting right in front of me. Easier for me to just say, "blah blah blah it's working right in front of me."
Click to expand...

OK, so you have your fan box. You whell it up in front of a skeptic or two, like me for instance, and you say:

Lookee here, I have this box and you see this fan here? Well it will spin around forever and not consume any power, isn't that great?

I say:

Yeah, that's nice, but can I see inside the box just to make sure you don't have a battery in there?

You say:

Oh no, you're just abusing me, I'm going to take my box to somebody who will believe anything I tell them.



Hmmm...
 
Ok so the facts as we have them are this:

1) You have an idea for a perpetual motion machine that you have not built or tested yet.

2) you want to apply for the million dollar prize

3) you have not applied for a patent, and seem unwilling because of a fear of your technology being stolen.

4) You refuse to divulge the contents of the box with a fan, and expect us to take your word for it that it works, though no working model of this has been built.


You have a severe misunderstanding of the nature of scientific research and patent process. Not only would you win the Nobel Prize for this invention, but you would indeed be guaranteed to have protection from copying of your technology through patent law. If someone DID copy you, you would clean house in court, and most patent attorneys would beat down your door to represent you. You have not built a working model, nor have you stated that your paper on the theory behind this has been published in a peer reviewed science journal.

You are a fraud. I say this because you have not only done everything exactly the opposite of someone who would have legitimately researched and tested this, but you also are posting in a manner that is in line with every other fraud troll we've had on this challenge forum.

In short: Yes you would have to show me the device and allow peer review of the mechanisms and plans and specs before you convinced me of anything. That you don't seem to understand why I would require this further shows you either have something to hide, or you are a simpleton in the ways of science.

Last time I state this:

Apply and skip the rhetoric. Put your device where your mouth is and win the million.



ETA:


Let the record show I called this on post 7.
 
Last edited:
Yeah well, that was why I figured they would make me run it in a vaccuum for a prescribed period of time to prove that stored energy wasn't being used.
Time because of battery type cheating and vaccuum because of the incompatability of combustible fuels.

You shouldn't insult people. It closes doorways through which your mind has to pass.
 
I am here. said:
Yeah well, that was why I figured they would make me run it in a vaccuum for a prescribed period of time to prove that stored energy wasn't being used.
Time because of battery type cheating and vaccuum because of the incompatability of combustible fuels.

You shouldn't insult people. It closes doorways through which your mind has to pass.
Click to expand...



You shouldn't insult our intelligence any further with this thread. Go apply now.
 
I am more than happy to do whatever is necessary to prove that it works as long as I don't have to show someone how it is working. I can however show how it is not working. That is, show that it isn't using gasoline, batteries, springs, or whatever else anyone could come up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom