Kmarinas86 (talk | contribs) |
Kmarinas86 (talk | contribs) KEEP THIS. THIS IS BY REQUEST OF PEER REVIEW. |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| title=PUSHING FOR A PATENT, INVENTOR AWAITS TEST OF ENERGY MACHINE, |
| title=PUSHING FOR A PATENT, INVENTOR AWAITS TEST OF ENERGY MACHINE, |
||
| publisher= [[Philadelphia Inquirer]] |
| publisher= [[Philadelphia Inquirer]] |
||
| date= |
| date= 1986-02-15 |
||
| accessdate=2008-01-12 |
| accessdate=2008-01-12 |
||
}}</ref> says all magnetic fields consist of particles with a [[gyroscope|gyroscopic]] spin.<ref name="THEORY">{{cite web |
}}</ref> says all magnetic fields consist of particles with a [[gyroscope|gyroscopic]] spin.<ref name="THEORY">{{cite web |
||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
| date=2000-01-12 |
| date=2000-01-12 |
||
| accessdate= 2007-01-01 |
| accessdate= 2007-01-01 |
||
}}</ref> He claims this inheritance allows the machine's mechanical rotor output to be greater the electrical power it receives.<ref name="A patent pursuit: Joe Newman's 'energy machine'.">{{cite web |
}} [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Newman+claims+the+macnine+is+actually+converting+mass+to+energy+but+much+more&btnG=Search+Archives&num=10&lr=&as_price=p1 ''(highlight)'']</ref> He claims this inheritance allows the machine's mechanical rotor output to be greater the electrical power it receives.<ref name="A patent pursuit: Joe Newman's 'energy machine'.">{{cite web |
||
| author=Peterson, Ivars, |
| author=Peterson, Ivars, |
||
| url=http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-3794102.html |
| url=http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-3794102.html |
||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
| date=1986-06-14 |
| date=1986-06-14 |
||
| accessdate=2007-12-13 |
| accessdate=2007-12-13 |
||
}}</ref> For this to occur, the magnetic axes of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet(s) are set perpendicular to the bar. |
}} [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Power+is+used+to+rotate+two+magnets+wrapped&btnG=Search+Archives&hl=en ''(highlight)'']</ref> For this to occur, the magnetic axes of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet(s) are set perpendicular to the bar. |
||
In a more developed version of the Newman machine, the commutator flips the current direction twice every magnet rotation and it also connects and disconnects the circuit 24 times for each rotation. According to a senior staff scientist from [[Sperry Corporation]], the commutation allows the magnetic field to collapse, producing a surge of current that turns the rotor with the abruptness of a "karate chop".<ref name="NBS report short-circuits energy machine - National Bureau of Standards"/> |
In a more developed version of the Newman machine, the commutator flips the current direction twice every magnet rotation and it also connects and disconnects the circuit 24 times for each rotation. According to a senior staff scientist from [[Sperry Corporation]], the commutation allows the magnetic field to collapse, producing a surge of current that turns the rotor with the abruptness of a "karate chop".<ref name="NBS report short-circuits energy machine - National Bureau of Standards"/> |
||
Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
| date=1986-02-26 |
| date=1986-02-26 |
||
| accessdate=2007-01-24 |
| accessdate=2007-01-24 |
||
}}</ref> The claim about having mass, however, contradicts the [[Special relativity|Special theory of relativity]], which states no particle with mass can travel at the speed of light.<ref>{{cite web |
}} [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Gyroscopic+particles+moving+in+a+spiral+pattern+around+the+wire+expand+outward+&btnG=Search+Archives&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&um=1 ''(highlight)'']</ref> The claim about having mass, however, contradicts the [[Special relativity|Special theory of relativity]], which states no particle with mass can travel at the speed of light.<ref>{{cite web |
||
| author=A. Einstein |
| author=A. Einstein |
||
| url=http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ |
| url=http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ |
Revision as of 20:51, 25 January 2008
Template:Perpetual motion machine The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman is a singly-fed electric motor consisting of a permanent magnet field rotor that spins end-over-end inside an electromagnet that is both an stator and an armature.[1] Joseph "Westley" Newman, the inventor of the machine,[2] says all magnetic fields consist of particles with a gyroscopic spin.[3] The inventor says he cannot get more mechanical energy out of the machine than the mass-energy it inherited.[4] He claims this inheritance allows the machine's mechanical rotor output to be greater the electrical power it receives.[5]
Newman's attempt to patent the device was rejected by the United States Patent Office. The United States district court later requested that Newman's machine be tested by the National Bureau of Standards, or NBS.[1] The NBS test program was conducted and its results were published in June 1986. The report concluded that the machine consumed more energy than it created.[6] A magnet engineer who had built a working replica of the device, questioned the measuring techniques used by NBS, saying that NBS might have ignored the mechanical output of the rotor.[1] Newman later withdrew the patent.[6]
Description and operation
One end the voltage source is connected to one end of an electromagnetic coil and the other is connected to a commutator. At the other end of the coil is a brush that contacts a metal axle. The axle carries one or more aligned permanent magnets. As the axle spins inside the commutator, the commutator controls the opening and closing of the electrical pathway.[1] Whenever the circuit is closed, electric current sent to the coil creates a force against the permanent magnet(s), which causes the rotor to turn.[7] For this to occur, the magnetic axes of the electromagnet and the permanent magnet(s) are set perpendicular to the bar.
In a more developed version of the Newman machine, the commutator flips the current direction twice every magnet rotation and it also connects and disconnects the circuit 24 times for each rotation. According to a senior staff scientist from Sperry Corporation, the commutation allows the magnetic field to collapse, producing a surge of current that turns the rotor with the abruptness of a "karate chop".[1]
History
During the early development stage, Joseph Newman imagined that the carriers for the magnetic field force were clouds of particles moving and spinning at the speed of light. He also believed these particles should behave as gyroscopes and have the property of inertia, as well as mass.[8] The claim about having mass, however, contradicts the Special theory of relativity, which states no particle with mass can travel at the speed of light.[9] His 'gyroscopic particles' are not listed within the Standard Model of particle physics.[10]
Skeptics believed Newman claimed to have developed a perpetual motion machine, although Newman insisted his machine's energy was limited by matter.[4] Throughout his investigations, he came to the conclusion that mass-energy can be utilized without relying on chemistry or nuclear physics. In the 1980's, Newman attempted to patent an "energy generation system having higher energy output than input".[11] Because of resistance by the United States Patent Office against the patenting of devices which are claimed to have a release of energy greater than the observable energy input, his attempt to patent his machine in the United States had been a failure.[11]
U.S. patent battle
A United States Patent and Trademark Office patent application[11] for Newman's electric motor was rejected, which set off a lengthy court battle involving conflicting expert opinions. For example, in the spring of 1986, a magnet design engineer from the Magnetic Engineering Co., in Atlanta, Georgia had built his own version of the Newman machine and observed what he though was evidence for a high-efficiency mechanical output.[1] On the other side, the National Bureau of Standards (NBS), now known as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), by request of the patent office, tested the device and got negative results. By using various methods to gauge the electrical wattage coming into and from Newman's machine, they were able to conclude that "In all conditions tested, the input power exceeded the output power. That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it used." The NBS report was later submitted to the U.S. District Court.[6]
In response to the NBS report, the engineer from Magnetic Engineering Co. stated that the motor is more suited for its mechanical output than for its electrical output, and that consequently, the NBS test report may have overlooked the rotational energy of the rotor. Newman's lawyer, John P. Flannery II of Leesburg, Va., stated that Newman and his representative could not afford continuous presence for much of the testing period.[1] Nevertheless, the court gave the following statement in its final decision:
"We conclude that Mr. Newman had a duty to raise objection, before or during testing, to any defects in the test protocol that he knew or believed would impair the results. He had a clear chance to obtain a definitive test, and to the extent that he did not take it, he can not now impeach the results that were conducted by procedures of which he had advance knowledge. If there were flaws in the NBS protocol, we do not now give controlling weight to objections that could have been raised at a time when any errors could have readily been corrected. We conclude that Mr. Newman waived or acquiesced in any purported defect in the test procedure by remaining silent throughout the test period."[12]
Dr. Roger Hastings concluded that the NBS failed to measure the energy in Joseph Newman's energy machine although it had the energy machine for 150 days. Dr. Hastings said that the NBS simply didn't know what they were doing. In his evaluation, Dr. Hastings wrote that the NBS "results reflect a total lack of communication between the NBS and Newman or any other expert on Newman's technology." Dr. Hastings said in his evaluation that the NBS allowed energy to escape from Newman Energy Machine and then, instead of measuring the output energy from the machine, they measured the power consumed by resistors "placed in parallel with the Newman motor, and called this power the output." Dr. Hastings concluded, "The primary r.f. (radio frequency) power was shunted to ground." As for measuring output, Hastings said the NBS's test was "equivalent to stating that the output of an electric motor plugged into a wall socket is given by the power used by a light bulb in the next room which is on a parallel circuit." Additionally, the NBS failed to follow its own test protocol prepared in which the test schematic showed that the device was not to be grounded; yet, the NBS grounded the device for every test conducted.
Additionally, the NBS failed to follow its on test protocol schematic in which the device was not grounded. Yet for every single test conducted, the NBS grounded the device.
During the 30-day test period authorized by the U.S. Court of Appeals, the N.B.S. failed to test his invention. It is Joseph Newman's position that all actions taken by the Patent Office and N.B.S. after February 24, 1986 (the end of the 30-day test period as authorized by the U.S. Court of Appeals) -- when his property was confiscated by lower Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson -- were performed illegally in violation of the U.S. Court of Appeals Order.
Subsequent events
Following the failure of his attempt to patent the machine in the USA, Newman went on to successfully patent a variation of the device in Mexico (Patent number MX158113, "MEJORAS A UN SISTEMA Y METODO PARA GENERAR ENERGIA" granted in January 1989).[13] Newman has since claimed that God had chosen him make the discovery and to be "the good steward for the gift".[14] He also claimed that machines using his techniques are already being sold by other manufacturers and that they are getting more than 100% efficiency - a fact which he believes they are covering up in order to avoid paying royalties.[14] Newman now claims that the device will produce ten times the amount of electricity required to power it and explains that you can "Put one in your home and never pay another electricity bill."[14]
In a spectacular feat of showmanship, Newman rented the Louisiana Superdome for a week and charged more than 8,500 people one dollar each (the minimum required by Superdome officials) to view repeated demonstrations of the technology. Newman also rented the convention center in Atlanta, Georgia. That demonstration entailed continuously driving a car equipped with his motor at about four miles per hour for a total of 20 hours and 10 minutes, after which time the rental of the convention center expired. He claimed to have achieved this feat using 1.5 transistor batteries connected in series that were provided by Rayovac corporation. Newman stated that those same transistor batteries had previously logged in 10 hours of continuous operation. Pat Spellman, Chemist for Rayovac corporation stated during a televised interview on WWL-TV in New Orleans, "It would appear that the machine is producing more power than the batteries are capable of delivering." See the televised interview at: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1610087835473512086&hl=en
See also
Bibliography
- Newman, J. (8th ed.).(1998). The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman. Scottsdale, AZ: Joseph Newman Publishing Company. 0-9613835-8-5
References
- ^ a b c d e f g Peterson, Ivars, (5 July 1986). "NBS report short-circuits energy machine - National Bureau of Standards". Science News. Retrieved 2007-12-24.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Gemperlein, Joyce, (1986-02-15). "PUSHING FOR A PATENT, INVENTOR AWAITS TEST OF ENERGY MACHINE,". Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved 2008-01-12.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Joseph Newman's Theory". [[1]]. Retrieved 2007-10-23.
{{cite web}}
: External link in
(help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
|publisher=
(help) - ^ a b "Perpetual Motion: Still Going Around". The Washington Post. 2000-01-12. Retrieved 2007-01-01.
{{cite web}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help) (highlight) - ^ Peterson, Ivars, (1985-06-01). "A patent pursuit: Joe Newman's 'energy machine'". Science News. Retrieved 2008-01-12.
{{cite web}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b c US National Bureau of Standards (June 1986). "Report of Tests on Joseph Newman's Device". The National Capital Area Skeptics. Retrieved 2008-01-12.
- ^ "Will Joseph Newman's energy machine revolutionize the world?". Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 1986-06-14. Retrieved 2007-12-13.
{{cite web}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help) (highlight) - ^ "Inventor speaks to LSU audience on controversial "energy machine"". The Advocate (Baton Rouge). 1986-02-26. Retrieved 2007-01-24.
{{cite web}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=
(help) (highlight) - ^ A. Einstein (1905-06-30). "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies". Annalen der Physik. Retrieved 2008-01-16.
- ^ Donoghue, J. F.; Golowich, E.; Holstein, B. R. Dynamics of the Standard Model. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-47625-6.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ a b c Newman, Joseph (1983-03-17). "Patent Application: "ENERGY GENERATION SYSTEM HAVING HIGHER ENERGY OUTPUT THAN INPUT" (failed)". Retrieved 2008-01-12.
- ^ US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, Case #88-1312, Newman v Quigg.
- ^ ""Mexican Patent Search at infopat.com". Retrieved 2008-01-13.
- ^ a b c Park, Robert, L (2001-08-31). Voodoo Science: The Road from Foolishness to Fraud. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 978-0195147100.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
External links
Optimistic sources
- Joseph Newman's personal website
- The Newman's Energy Machine V1.0 from JL Naudin Independent testing. Includes full video, blueprints, pictures, patent references, and measurement results.
Skeptical sources
- Joe Newman's Free Energy Claims - are they valid?
- James Randi's comment after a visit to Newman
- Straight Dope article on Newman