Motive Mass Machine: A Perpetual Motion Machine Concept
Using See-Saws and a “Difference Weight” Applied to Alternating
Sides by Various Methods



ONE: As described above, a 4 or 5 foot board with ten pound weights on either end.
Applying a pound of force near one of the balanced ends forced the weight downward,
producing more than a pound of pressure on a small kitchen scale.

TWO: I constructed a smaller see-saw, taping glass jars to either end of a pivoting wooden
framework consisting of one 22 inch crossbeam and a single support beam attached by a
threaded bolt and wingnut. The segment with the jars weighed under two pounds. When the
framework was well attached to a base structure I used a makeshift pulley to transfer any net
force from one end of the balance to a 4 oz. cart running along a level surface at the same
height. I then applied pressure equal to the weight of the cart at various distances along the
appropriate arm of the see-saw, to determine how far I could make the cart move, and if there
was an equivalency in distance, if it was adequate.


Distance at which weight applied      |      Distance cart moved

 1 in.                                          No movement
 2 in.                                          0.5 in.
 3 in.                                          3.25 in.
 4 in.                                          4.5 in.
 5 in.                                          6 in.     

I then added 4 oz. to the weight of the cart, and doubled the mass of the applied weight, and
ran the same experiment:

Distance at which weight applied        |      Distance cart moved

  1 in.                                        No movement  
  2 in.                                        1 in.
  3 in.                                        4 in.
  4 in.                                        6.5 in.
  5 in.                                        N/A (max. degrees exceeded)

I then applied the 8 oz. cart and weight experiment using an inclined ramp, simulating the arced
track used to assist in disambiguation in some models of my design:

Distance at which weight applied         |      Distance cart moved

  1 in.                                          No movement
  2 in.                                          No movement
  3 in.                                          5/8ths of an inch
  4 in.                                          3 inches
  5 in.                                          6.5 inches


According to my experimentation there is some potential for a weighted see-saw to pull a     
difference weight, perpetuating a process of weights moving up and down with little initial

If 4 oz. of weight applied against a 4 oz. cart at 3 inches pulls 3.25 inches, on a gently curving
structure this might be adequate to pull the next difference weight past the midpoint, at which
point it may roll on its own to the extremity.

More adequately 8 oz. of weight at 4 inches against an 8 oz. cart pulls 6.5 inches, meaning
that if the difference weights run on a central track only 8 inches from end to end, that moving
one difference weight to its end is more than adequate to move the next in the series. 6.5 – 4 =
2.5 inches towards pull, which on a gently sloping track may be enough to carry it over to the
opposite end.

The application of the device to a sloped track ramp proves that it might be effective even    
with the use of a close to semicircular tube for the difference weight. 5 inches producing 6.5
inches means that beyond a certain proportional length of “difference tube” sufficient force
seems to be generated to move the next difference weight in the series. In this case a centered
tube ten inches long would permit 6.5 – 5 = 1.5 inches pull past the midpoint. Provided that
that movement is sufficient for disambiguation, this is the most promising result so far.

Note that pulleys can be used at a height to reduce lift necessary in the difference weight. Also
an arcing difference tube requires less distance to pull it the first third of the distance, since the
see-saw is at that point tilted away from the pulley. It seems possible that the use of a
triangular difference tube might solve the trouble of disambiguation more adequately than the
semicircle, provided that the distances are judged accurately in the construction of the
machine. It may be more applicable to less than 45 degree tilts, since a strong tilt may require
a sharp isoceles for disambiguation.

I predict that larger fixed weights on the scale produce proportionally more force and permit
proportionally smaller difference weight masses. The result would be that a much larger
proportion of the force could be siphoned to generate energy, through the use of pistons or
ratcheted wheels, as pictured in Diagram 1.

PHOTOS of these Experiments   Repeating Leverage Device
NATHAN COPPEDGE--Perpetual Motion Concepts

PM Theory



Fluid Lever

Curving Rail


Repeat Lever

Tilt Motor





Escher Mach

Early Failures


PM Types

white elephant