New Energy Technologies Magazine nr 3 2005.pdf - Index of

Despite ineptitude of such an "exposure", the
scientific community could more easily believe
in the complete incompetence of Professor
Gravesande, prince Karl and other respectable
participants of numerous tests of Orffyreus'
wheel than assume the possibility of existence
of a phenomenon, which was beyond the
established ideology. In 1775, Paris Academy
of Sciences refused to consider perpetual
motion machines at all because they did not
exist. And the same Academy refused to
consider the existence of meteorites because
the possibility of stones falling from the sky was
thought absurd. After the law of energy
conservation had been formulated in the XIX
century, the question of the possibility of
perpetual motion machines' existence was
finally buried as contradicting mathematical
and physical laws. A paradoxical situation often
happened when a working device posed as a
Perpetuum mobile was demonstrated but no
scientifically grounded refutation followed.
Usually such a situation ended up with a
magazine lampoon, as it happened in the case of
Orffyreus' wheel.
A perpetuum mobile model shown at Paris
exhibition in the middle of XIX century can be
an example of such a pseudo-exposure. The
engine had a form of a continuously rotating
wheel with weights moving inside it. People
interested could stop it by making a strong
effort; after that the wheel continued rotating.
A journalistic "exposure" of the perpetuum
mobile was a presence of a spring in the wheel.
Ostensibly, the spring became twisted during
the device's stop and was a source of rotation
energy. It is interesting that no scientists
disputed such an "exposure".
How can the law of energy conservation work if
the engine's wheel continues rotating while
energy is always spent for its stop Possibly, there
was a flywheel inside a wheel with the spring
attached to it, which became twisted during the
wheel's stop by the flywheel's inertia while a
locking device connected to the frame prevented
the flywheel from untwisting. Thus, the spring
created the effort necessary for starting the
wheel's motion after a stop. Further motion could
happen only due to the weights' motion inside the
wheel. By the way, Orffyreus' wheel needed an
effort imparting initial velocity of rotation, too.
Undoubtedly, due to the shirking position of the
scientists, many perpetuum mobile projects
originated from wrong suppositions but this does
not mean that all demonstrated models were the
results of a counterfeit or incompetence. An
objective of real science is the search for truth
instead of conservation of the previous paradigm
at any price. That is why, if there are facts
contradicting it, they should be objectively
studied and, if necessary, the science paradigm
should be changed instead of rejecting the facts
without grounds.
The regular crisis of physics happening in the end
of the XX and the beginning of XXI centuries
makes scientists revise many physical theses. For
example, the question of existence of aether or
"physical vacuum", which is a medium having
inexhaustible reserves of potential energy where
electromagnetic waves spread, is the order of the
day again.
The existing idea of the nature of matter and force
fields, particularly the gravity one, must be revised.
Finally, it is time to understand what the
fundamental concepts, force and mass are because
physics is still satisfied with the ideas of the XVIII
century, when force was determined by mass and
mass was determined by inertia. And it is still not
understood what inertia is. Probably, the scientific
paradigm, particularly the physics' one, can
greatly change soon. The changes can also concern
the existing interpretation of the law of energy
conservation and, therefore, the scientific
approach to the possibility of designing of the
perpetuum mobile, i.e. a device able to produce
yield using energy from a force field or directly
from physical vacuum.
In order to hasten this process, besides a
description of another perpetual motion
machine's design given in this article, it is
suggested to consider its validity from the
physics' point of view not overstepping the limits
of the existing paradigm except the ban against
the possibility of such a machine's existence.
A basic model of the suggested gravity engine
consists of hollow cylinders with pistons fixed at
a flexible base of the type of a closed belt. The
base is stretched on two freely rotating wheels
with axles, placed one under another, fixed on the
frame. Moving around the wheels, the belt with
22 New Energy Technologies #3(22) 2005