| INDEX PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINES!!! 12 JULY 2016 --- [ABOVE] Significant update 2017-10-11 more accurately reflecting successful experiment by Nathan Coppedge: Ratios in partial experiment are workable, but are somewhat different than originally thought. Ball gains diabolical advantage by using a higher midpoint of the ball at the end of each module than height of the track at the start of the track for the ball. All motion occurs by weight and counterweight application, in a simple, repeatable process. Construction requires something close to 10.8 : 6.25 leverage at the beginning of each track, and 14: 6.25 leverage at the end of each, with counterweight being a ratio of "a quarter, a standard penny, a standard marble, and 5 inches of duct tape"- this being the ratio of heaviness compared to a standard marble, and the lever itself must be extremely lightweight relative to both weights. Motion occurs through a mixture of equilibrization, weight application on both ends, and differences in leverage power. Many other principles are also operating. The first fully defensible perpetual motion machine, dating from ~6pm, July 12, 2016. By Nathan Larkin Coppedge: philosopher, artist, inventor, poet. Note: A small weight may need to be added to the end of the lever for balance, much like a rapier sword, as shown in the Successful Over-Unity Experiment 1 video. 18 MARCH 2016 -- [ABOVE] A design by Nathan Coppedge. Known more officially as the "Not-If-But-When" Machine #4, this design is virtually proven to return the ball at the same altitude, as per (an)... experiment building on the Successful Over-Unity Experiment 1. He called this second successfuly experiment Successful Perpetual Motion Experiment 2, because it is the second experiment he conducted that points towards highly-qualified design of the machines. The Successful Perpetual Motion Experiment 1 --- a third experiment --- simply showed a likelihood for maintaining equal altitude in a specific design. The experiment for this design was more general in its implications. 10 JANUARY 2016 -- [ABOVE] This device concept is a second design making use of the differential angle concept, and is dubbed the Not-If-But-When Machine #3 (It is the third design of this series. The second design was of a different type), by Nathan Coppedge from 2016. In Nathan Coppedge's differential angle concepts, there are two segments: in the first segment, significant support is offered from a fixed member (a straight half-track sloped to accomodate the moving ball), and a second segment involves less fixed support, permitting the ball to activate the lever. Meanwhile, the mobile element, usually a counterweighted lever, is designed to permit constant motion between the two or more segments. In other designs multiple levers are required, but here the hurdle is the question of how to prevent the spiraling effect which would require net loss of altitude. Perhaps short sloped connecting ramps are not required between the two members because of momentum provided by the counterweighted lever (?). 3 JULY 2014 -- Experiment purportedly proved that an object could roll upwards using a 'master angle,' raising the possibility of a real working 'M.C. Escher machine' in which a spherical object rolls perpetually. Nathan Coppedge tested his small model with a level, and found it was possible for all four connected slopes --- running in four different directions in a parallelogram shape --- to be independently prone to linear motion in the same cyclical direction. This was in spite of the fact that half of the slopes were directed slightly upwards, using a sideways or horizontal angle and momentum from the angled backboard. He considered this to be a seminal achievement, if it was not already proved in some other example. The complete working model remains unproven as of October 2014, although his experimentation with the master angel concept shows at least by conjecture that upward motion may be possible with minimal input. 9 - 10 NOV 2013 -- The Modular Trough Leverage Device, a simple theoretical over-unity device consisting of horizontally repeated units, each of which according to a recorded video is proven to work. The small difference between the initial height of the lever is accommodated using an upwards motion. Further, the mostly horizontal distance traveled in each unit is permitted because the marble or spherical weight is coasting along a nearly horizontal surface, with support coming from a fixed two-sided track support, for each modular unit or lever arrangement. The rising motion which occurs through the use of a counterweight is designed to permit the downwards motion to operate the levers at the beginning of each cycle, like a permanent spring. CIRCA 2007 - 2010 [ABOVE]. Repeat Leverage Variation 1. This is the design that later led to the Nov 2013 Trough Lever experiments, as a result of frustrations with the construction of this design. If you observe the direction of the leverage through its motion in this case, you observe that it is barely possible --- perhaps possible --- to see it working! The operation is designed to occur as usual through a 1:1 compensated ratio between weights, and a difference between supported and unsupported weight on the mobile side, e.g. through ramps connected somehow. 29 MARCH 2007 -- [ABOVE] Motive Mass Machine. Designed to work provided an unbalanced principle between each of the three units. The principle is, in principle, a result of using unsupported mass to create supported, partially-horizontal motion. The unsupported mass has more potential energy than the uspported mass. This version is Type / Iteration 2. In other variations each of the three units is a double-seesaw with the top of each being much smaller. This is meant ot limit the major constraint, which is the ratio between the small heavy unsupported mass and the following equal mass in relation to the vertical distance moved by each seesaw unit. The pulley arrangement is designed to permit automatic chain reactions if only the unbalanced principle works. The theory has been partially proven by experiment as early as 2007. 30 OCT 2006 -- [ABOVE] Perhaps the first concept for a horizontal as opposed to horizontally-rolling wheel applied to perpetual motion, the concept was conceived by Nathan Coppedge... shortly after the founding of his website at nathancopedge.com. It is inspired by a coffee cup rolling on its side. Previous perpetual motion machine designs such as the Bhaskara Wheel required much more vertical motion. "Say... you talk about pulling something up an inclined plane with an equal weight. You're right. This is possible. And not at all a violation of conservation of energy." ---Ian Switzer, CEO of a Cornell engineering company THE BEST PMM AT NATHANCOPPEDGE.COM NATHAN COPPEDGES PMMS ON QUORA ADDITIONAL MATERIALS AT OLD PMM SITE INDEX |
