Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Self Contained Power Source? 397

McOSEN writes "Your Server Cabinet could have a 100% self sustained power source. It's called Parallel Path Technology and it's being coined as a revolution in the magnetic motor industry. From Segways to Vacuum cleaners to Server Cabinets. The article talks about the technology but doesn't exactly lay out specifics."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Self Contained Power Source?

Comments Filter:
  • by __aaahtg7394 ( 307602 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:44PM (#14764735)
    From TFA:

    1. It's a motor, not a generator. It sounds like it could be a neat motor, but it's still not a generator.

    2. "The technology claims to be able to increase magnet motor efficiency substantially, even over the 100% barrier."

    That's right folks! It's perpetual motion machine!

    So, this is about a motor that makes claims that are pretty universally accepted to be impossible. The poster, of course, is affiliated with the site hosting the page, so he really should have read the article the same way I did. Even if he didn't, maybe ScuttleMonkey should have.

    I would be more annoyed, but this fits ScuttleMonkey's past science articles. Could someone send him a few pop-sci introduction texts, so we can stop having the Electric Universe, perpetual motion, and other fringe theories on the frontpage as science?
    • Even if it didn't fit past articles, this one alone should be grounds for an indefinite suspension of story submission rights (for both submitter and editor).

      The slogan here is "news for nerds", not "news for people who have no knowledge whatsoever of the basic principles of physical science"...
      • oooh but just think, if you had a subscription you could've seen it even before the rest of us! ha. ScuttleMonkey has along with that other new editor, managed to flush any last vestiges of science story reputability this place ever had down the toilet long, long ago. This has got to be like the 50th bogus pseudoscience artice from "opensourcenergy" alone he's posted. I would be shocked to learn that /. even has a dozen subscribers left at this point. Who in thier right mind would actually pay to be insulte
        • Actualy (Score:3, Insightful)

          by autopr0n ( 534291 )
          Actually Slashdot's traffic trippled [alexa.com] just a couple months ago. At least among IE uses with the alexa toolbar installed.

          Kind of weird, and annoying given how crappy this place has become. No one with any authority cares about the site at all. It's pretty lame.
      • by strider44 ( 650833 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:43PM (#14764939)
        sheesh - you're taking this way too seriously. Don't you know that it says "It's funny, laugh!" if you put your mouse over the foot up here . . . wait a sec...

        Well I thought it was very funny anyway. Especially the bit that says "The article talks about the technology but doesn't exactly lay out specifics".
    • Re:"LISA!!" (Score:5, Funny)

      by DesireCampbell ( 923687 ) <desire.c@gmail.com> on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:59PM (#14764810) Homepage
      "... in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
    • Mod parent up (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:03PM (#14764826) Homepage
      Yeah, it's bogus.

      If you like exotic motor designs, check out these "thin gap" motors [thingap.com]. These brushless permanent magnet motors can reach 90% efficiency, which is very impressive. The windings are made from thin copper plates rather than round wires. These are real. You can order them.

      There's some interesting work going on in motor electromagnetics, but the "greater than 100%" motor probably isn't it.

      • 90% isn't that good for a motor, most run between 92 and 98% efficient.

        But definitely aren't going to go over 100%

        I really wish perpetual motion, free energy .... nut jobs would go back into the woodwork. They make the life of engineers frustrating.
      • Interesting ... but just wondering, whatever happened to the idea of backup power being stored in giant underground flywheels; the energy would be stored by bringing these up to speed, and released by slowing them down.
        • by DarkHand ( 608301 ) on Tuesday February 21, 2006 @02:32AM (#14765810)
          Interesting ... but just wondering, whatever happened to the idea of backup power being stored in giant underground flywheels; the energy would be stored by bringing these up to speed, and released by slowing them down.

          This idea is already in use: Even as we speak, dead physicists the world over are spinning in their graves from the posting of this Slashdot article. We simply need to harness this energy to solve the worlds energy problems!
        • Re:Mod parent up (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Dun Malg ( 230075 ) on Tuesday February 21, 2006 @02:38AM (#14765818) Homepage
          whatever happened to the idea of backup power being stored in giant underground flywheels

          Nothing happened to the idea. It's been used for decades. My father worked for a defense contractor in the late 60's who had their computer rooms powered via a motor-driven generators with a 6-foot diameter reinforced concrete disks affixed to the shafts between the motors and generators. The inertia of the spinning disks easily kept the big iron powered up during brownouts, and during blackouts they provided enough interim power for the generators to come online.

          If you specifically mean those super high-speed flywheels we hear about from time to time, well, those require such exacting construction that they're still too expensive to replace batteries or generators. Someday maybe, but not yet.

    • Electic motors that generate electricity and are perpetual motion machines have been appearing off and on since the electric motors have been invented. I remember reading about another such "electromagnetic generators" in a Romanian science journal back in the early 90s. There is also a web site some place (sorry no time to find the link) that documents all these perpetual motion ideas. It is quite a funny collection of ideas...

      I always thought that Slashdot editors are somewhat literate as basic science g

    • "The technology claims to be able to increase magnet motor efficiency substantially, even over the 100% barrier."

      How to make a small fortune in the stock market? Start with a big one.

      Want to increase efficiency over 100%? Start with a motor that has 40%, make one that is 80% efficient - you got 100% increase!

      • by MindStalker ( 22827 ) <mindstalker@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:52PM (#14764973) Journal
        Read it again. The adverb is substantially. So the question is "How much are they increasing efficiency?" The answer is "Substatially." The then elaborate that total effiency is over 100%. Technically I'd agree with you though, if the word Barrier wasn't there, it implies and increase over a specific known barrier, thus is the 100% efficiency barrier.

        Let say I was to say

        "This will increase your runnning speed substatially, over 4 minutes in a mile"

        You could assume to you would be cutting 4 minutes from your mile.

        If I were to say

        "This will increase your runnning speed substatially, over the 4 minute mile barrier"

        The assumption would be vastly different.
      • Good point, there is an ambiguity there. However, I stand by my reading of it.

        100% isn't a barrier if it's a relative increase, as you correctly point out. It is a barrier if you're talking about absolute efficiency. By talking about it as a barrier, the author almost certainly intends for us to read it as "100+% absolute efficiency."

        I'd be happy to be corrected by anyone affiliated with the posted site, but until then, I strongly believe that they're talking about a motor that's more than 100% efficient
      • Anyone that talks about increasing efficiency to over 100% doesn't know the meaning of the word "efficiency" and can safely be ignored. It's a sure sign of the incompetent.
    • I don't know if this is exactly the same concept I read about some time ago, but I heard about a patent using similar terminology. And while the claim is over unity power output (the patent I read involved no moving parts) the fundamental idea was to harness the degradation of flux in permanent magnets.

      In other words, they are using a permanent magnet as a type of high-density chemical-free battery, releasing the energy that was required to magnetize the material in the first place. The magnets would eventu
      • I was actually rolling that very process over in my mind as I wrote my original comment. Since my post was mostly pointing at the slashdot editorship, I decided not to run with it. I'm glad someone brought it up, though, since it could be a good discussion. I'm ignorant here, so I'd love to see some decent old-fashioned slashdot discussion*.

        It's a neat idea, but I too have doubts about how much energy you can shove into a magnet and get back out. It does raise a pretty fun question: how efficient is the
      • by rubycodez ( 864176 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @11:27PM (#14765135)
        The energy stored in a permanent magnet (from rotated domains held from returning to their equilibrium condition) is called magnetic energy density, and is given in SI units of KJ/m^3. A more common unit used to be the Mega Gauss-Oersted (MGOe). T [1 MGOe = 8 kJ/m^3]. For most nifty permanent magnets, the KJ/m^3 value will be in the 20's to 30's. Now consider the volume of magnets that would fit in a motor you could hold in your hand, and thence calculate the energy density. Then calculate the effect of releasing ALL this energy in one minute, say of a 100mm x 10mm x 10mm magnet, releasing its 0.3 J in 60 seconds, for a whopping 0.005 Watts of power, leaving an unmagnetized lump of metal. Impressed?
    • by pete-classic ( 75983 ) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:52PM (#14764975) Homepage Journal
      It's a motor, not a generator. It sounds like it could be a neat motor, but it's still not a generator.

      That's the beauty of it! You connect the axes of two of these things together. Power one, and use the power exceeding 100% efficiency to power the other as a generator!

      Can anyone tell me why there's no big foot on this story?

    • It is so bogus that Boeing went to the hassle to patent a perpetual motion machine? And got it.
      I seriously doubt the 100% barrier, but approaching it is a different matter. Keep in mind that they are using permanent mags. Those had to be created.
    • We should be able to rate stories by bogosity, and it should not be limited to 5. This one should be in the thousands.
  • by gentimjs ( 930934 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:47PM (#14764747) Journal
    I hear this was developed specifically for the new Phantom gameconsole and online service. I cant wait to get duke nukem whenever going on that baby!
  • Wow.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by fred911 ( 83970 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:47PM (#14764751)
    I thought they were called squirrel cages. And they're not perpetual, someones gotta feed the squirrels!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:47PM (#14764754)
    "Lisa, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
  • Bah... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:49PM (#14764760)
    Yet another 'Coming Soon' thing that will always be 'Coming Soon'
    Did someone forget entropy?
  • Electric motors are already 80-90% efficient, while this might make it closer to 100% it won't go over, unless someone discovered some new laws of physics. Given that they attempt to make the claim of greater than 100% I suspect the entire thing is full of crap.
  • Ahh Physics (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheUnknownOne ( 810624 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:50PM (#14764767)
    So the first lines of the article basicly claim it's a perpetual motion machine, and than later in the article it says this is impossible. Wonderful when even the articles contridict themselves. I really enjoy the part where they state that they recieved a patent, like it actually means something.
  • by isomeme ( 177414 ) <cdberry@gmail.com> on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:51PM (#14764773) Homepage Journal
    Why is it that every new PMM for the last two decades has involved permanent magnets? Is there some kind of mad-scientist cabal that decrees these things? Will the fashion turn to something else soon, like, I don't know, materials so bouncy that they rebound with more energy than they hit the surface with? (Name that classic SF story.)

    Seriously: Editors, please shitcan perpetual motion machines before we have to waste precious seconds on them. When a real PMM is possible, you'll know it's happened because suddenly the universe will have stopped working properly, and you'll be instantaneously and very thoroughly dead.
    • The Nutty Professor!

    • It is, of course, Flubber! [imdb.com]

    • Why is it that every new PMM for the last two decades has involved permanent magnets? Is there some kind of mad-scientist cabal that decrees these things?

      Wikipedia's entry on Perpetual Motion Machines has a good explanation of the obsession with permanent magnets:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion [wikipedia.org]

      Take a look at the "techniques" section. The core mistake in these theories is that work done by permanent magnets doesn't weaken the magnet.
    • by drgonzo59 ( 747139 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:25PM (#14764875)
      People who do not have a particularly good relationship with math and real science are fascinated with the "crazy" and "wonderful" action at a distance. Much like my cat is fascinated at the strange red dot that is there moving but then disappears all of the sudden, when I turn the laser point off. These kind of people will say stuff like "OMG! Wow! Look Ma! Two pieces of metal attract each other and they are not even touching!" Then of course they make the obvious step from there and say "Aha! I know, I bet I could build a perpetual motion machine, I'll be famous and solve the world's energy problems..." As they get older they don't necessarily get smarter, they just make their designs more complicated and use a lot of buzzwords, then they apply for patents, and people just like them from the patent office grant them those patents, then they create websites, attract investors and become famous.

      What is most sad about the story is that it appeared on the front page of Slashdot. "News for nerds" turned into "News for idiots". This leads me to believe that if even the supposedly scientifically minded Slashdot editors and submitters are willing to believe such crap, the general public will probably be even easier convinces.

      Sad, sad, sad... I blame the primary education in this country.

    • The reason for all the commotion about permanent magnets is their seemingly unending supply of energy. From a simplistic point of view, this could mean an easy path to a PMM. Example: you can envision putting a magnet on your fridge. It sticks until you take it off. Put a piece of paper on your fridge, it just slides to the ground. The magnet has to exert force all the time to keep itself from falling, right? What if we could harness this incessant force somehow? Great Scott, we'd have a perpetual motion ma
      • Actually a permanent magnet does have chemical energy, and is releasing its energy through magnetic fields but at a very slow rate (ie wasted energy from the electrical resistance of air). Extracting this energy would require something vastly different that just altering the flux flow. Probably would require chemical extraction.
      • Listen to your own description. These people do NOT believe they are creating a PPM. They believe that they are harnessing energy that is being released by the magnets. Calling a magnet powered generator a PPM would be the same as calling a fission reactor a PPM. Just because you add your fuel to your generator once, and the fuel last for 10, 100, or 1000 years, does not in any way make a generator a PPM. Whether a magnet can be used as a fuel source is a completely different debate, but arguing that i
      • Example: you can envision putting a magnet on your fridge. It sticks until you take it off. Put a piece of paper on your fridge, it just slides to the ground. The magnet has to exert force all the time to keep itself from falling, right? What if we could harness this incessant force somehow?

        You know, I think you may be on to something... a suction cup sticks to a window in much the same way! We all know that suction cups work on the principle of "vacuum" (and we're not talking sweepers, here). Outer space

      • The basic idea behind harnessing the power of a permanent magnet is related to the similar phenemona associated with the electrostatic force in electrons/protons, the nuclear force, gravity and other such seemingly permanent forces. All of them give the full appearance of being able to perform useful work in perpetua.

        For example, two electrons, through electrostatic repulsion, will accelerate away from one another. It is impossible to dismiss that energy was required to cause this acceleration. Yet, t
    • Perpetual motion machines are impossible. The reaction is almost automatic. It's proven. It's scientific law. It's been proven unquestioningly impossible to do.

      Really!? When?

      Even if it were possible to prove something impossible, we haven't done it here. Now.. I'm not defending the article, it's certainly BS.. but the idea that the universe is not a closed loop system, the idea that once energy enters one of it's forms it cannot possibly take any other form ever under any circumstance, I would think,
  • by rindeee ( 530084 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:53PM (#14764783)
    Bra-vo /. Not only is the story utter crap (greater than 100% return on input energy), but the headline has absolutely NOTHING to do with what's in TFA.
  • Mod article down (Score:3, Insightful)

    by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:53PM (#14764785)
    Why are we bombarded by these nonsense articles? This sort of thing should be recognized as B.S. by even a reasonable competent High School student.

  • by OriginalArlen ( 726444 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:55PM (#14764791)
    Wow, intriguing! I haven't bothered to read the article because even the write-up says it's light on details. Unhampered by preconceptions, the possibilities are endless!

    • infrared solar cells lining cabinets absorb all heat passively - saving money on fans and the power to drive them - one rack per row contains a small steam (or hot water) powered generator.
    • Arrays of pigeons
    • batteries! They're self contained, after all
    • 256-port power-over-ethernet switch bonds multiple ports into one 240v supply
    • convection-powered 'wind' turbines. Ajax-heavy Web2.0 content will obviously be more eco-friendly due to the warm gusts of hype
    • Helldesk phone receivers connected to flywheel. List the phone, add some revs to the flywheel
    • ...my imagination fails. Well, it is nearly 2am... note to self: must stop posting to slashdot in bed.
    • Heh, didn't bother to read it either.

      What gets me is that the submitter said the article is light on details, but the submitter probably wrote the article himself! At least, they're both from OSEN.
  • lab? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by widget1985 ( 956045 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @09:56PM (#14764798)
    I love how the "Lab" in the picture looks a whole lot like a kitchen.
  • Correct!!! (Score:2, Insightful)

    "The article talks about the technology but doesn't exactly lay out specifics"

    The one true statement in the post!

    What's it got to do with "Server Cabinets"? Absolooly... nuthin'.

  • by mentaldrano ( 674767 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:04PM (#14764834)

    Bullshit detector overload!

    This is Slashdot, for crying out loud. We're nerds, we don't fall for this idiotic screed even a high school freshman could debunk.

    Ooooh, big words are scary! Stator, rotor, magnetic flux. Dammit, both the editor and article submitter should hand in their geek cards.

    This guy does have a real patent, though. I don't know which is worse, the ignoramus patent examiner who allowed this one through or the baboon who posted it to Slashdot. Check the USPTO link here [uspto.gov].
  • Infinite Energy magazine runs out. Sure, I'm all for the occassional "Crystal Chakras Power Generates Excess Neutrons" story, but after awhile, it gets ridiculous.
  • by retro128 ( 318602 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:07PM (#14764843)
    Like many here, I read the article and got the idea that they were talking about a perpetual motion machine (could be the "The technology claims to be able to increase magnet motor efficiency substantially, even over the 100% barrier." at the beginning of the article that gave everyone that impression...), but the only place that I can find such a claim is from the author of the article...From the way it's written, it just doesn't appear that he knows what he is talking about.

    I glanced through the patent [uspto.gov] at USPTO and it appears to me that what this is is a more efficient electric motor, not something that outputs more energy than is put into it.
  • by goodie3shoes ( 573521 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:27PM (#14764878)
    It's clear that the writer of TFA didn't understand much about what (s)he heard/read about this. I'm sure that the developers of the technology make no silly claims about greater than 100% efficiency. More likely, this is just an improvement on existing technology that gives, perhaps, somewhat better efficiency, or higher power in a smaller size, less weight for a given power, etc. Any of these would be good, but violate no physical laws.
  • Just when the new Slashcode revison seems to have reduced dup' posts, publishing stories submitted by their author sends a perpetual motion advertisement to the front page. Just because the ad is published in "Open Source" Energy
  • It's real... (Score:5, Informative)

    by chuckw ( 15728 ) * on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:29PM (#14764887) Homepage Journal
    I really wish these kooks could separate the perpetual motion crap from reality here. They are not "over-unity", perpetual motion, or what have you. The do in fact obey all laws of thermodynamics. These motors are real and can deliver as much as 98% efficiency. We've seen them, they work. I was at the presentation recently by Boeing Phanton Works that featured these things. ..Chuck..
    • Please read the cited web page, in particular the "over the 100% barrier" remark.
      • Re:It's real... (Score:5, Informative)

        by chuckw ( 15728 ) * on Monday February 20, 2006 @11:04PM (#14765048) Homepage Journal
        The cited web page is wrong, and if I were Flynn, I would be emailing them to explain that their title description is blatantly incorrect and is making him look bad. If anyone bothered to go to his website [flynnresearch.net], they'd quickly be able to see that PPMT is grounded in basic magnetic physics. PPMT is not free energy or crap like that. It is workable technology that produces a very efficient motor.
        • Re:It's real... (Score:3, Informative)

          by Phil Karn ( 14620 )
          How is Flynn's stuff "real"? I looked at his pages and it was immediately obvious that he has made the same mistake that so many permanent magnet fetishists have made: he has confused force and energy.

          Any motor that's not 100% efficient will dissipate the remainder of its input power in losses such as friction, windage, Joule heating, and the like. If you are going to improve the efficiency of a motor, you must reduce one or more of these losses; there is no other way. How, exactly, does Flynn reduce th

  • The technology claims to be able to increase magnet motor efficiency substantially, even over the 100% barrier.

    I don't need to read any more. Oh:

    They have received a US Patent.

    BS-o-meter just went up in smoke :(

  • by Belseth ( 835595 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:36PM (#14764909)
    Hey at least they didn't claim it ran on Zero Point energy. My favorite current flavor of snake oil.
  • Obligatory UserFriendly strip:

    http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030922 [userfriendly.org]
  • Bogus (Score:4, Informative)

    by viking2000 ( 954894 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:52PM (#14764972)
    Current electrical motors/generators are up to 99% efficient, and the loss is mostly in resistive loss in wire.

    There is no room for any meaningful improvement unless you claim to have more than 100% efficiency, and they do. Lunatic bin right here!

    Current electrical motors/generators are up to 99% efficient, and the loss is mostly in resistive loss in wire.

    There is no room for any meaningful improvement unless you claim to have more than 100% efficiency, and they do. Lunatic bin right here.!

    I was curious as to what they based their claim on?

    First, go to http://www.flynnresearch.net/ [flynnresearch.net] to se some details on this.

    The answer is:
    Just doctor up formulaes: Force is proportional to magnetic flux. Se http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/ [wolfram.com] Look up 'amperes law', 'magnetic force' and 'Lorentz force'. As you can see they are all _linear_. I.e. F=B*k. (Force = Field times some constant. Flynn makes the relationship quadratic: F=B^2*A/2u.

    To translate for /. readers: You have one C++ programmer, and you need more work done. Just hire one more programmer, and to your surprise, you get 4 times as much done.

  • Combine:
    • Parallel Path Flux Core
    • Capacitor
    • 1.21 gigawatts
    • Time travel
    • Profit!
  • http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click _ id=143&art_id=vn20060211110132138C184427 [iol.co.za]

    SA solar research eclipses rest of the world

    n a scientific breakthrough that has stunned the world, a team of South African scientists has developed a revolutionary new, highly efficient solar power technology that will enable homes to obtain all their electricity from the sun.

    This means high electricity bills and frequent power failures could soon be a thing of the past.

    The unique South African-developed sola
  • by toybuilder ( 161045 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @10:57PM (#14765010)
    Perhaps what was originally claimed is that the power efficiency of the motor is improved by more than 100% over conventional motor designs. TFA doesn't claim that the output motor power exceeds the input electrical power - instead, it states that there is better containment of flux leading to more motive force:
    Testing and Finite Element Analysis show that the Parallel Path system indeed manages to not only increase the magnetic flux in the core by a factor of four over conventional electric motors, but manipulate the flux to act in the direction of motion, generating considerably more motive power than conventional motors.

    Is it reasonable to assume you can get more output power with better efficiency? Try this article titled
    Increase Efficiency 10 Percent and Double Output:

    Improvements in motor efficiency also mean improvements (increases) in continuous torque ratings and reduction in dissipated power. Continuous torque ratings of any electric motor are limited by the internal losses (dissipated power) in a motor which produces heat. Any electric motor's performance is limited to its ability or inability to store and dissipate heat. Face mounting precision motors on recognized aluminum heat sinks have become an important procedure for specifying performance as described in NEMA's ICS16 (step and servo motor) standard. The table below illustrates this condition.

    Efficiency In Out Dissipated
    80% 100 80 20
    90% 100 90 10
    90% 200 180 20

    By increasing power efficiency 10%, output power is more than doubled (180/80), while maintaining constant heat loss. This is a 125% improvement in output power and motor shaft speed at rated load. The power consumption does not increase because it is tied to the line-to-line input current squared and multiplied by the hot line-to-line resistance (I2R).

    I think the original poster/editor misunderstood the original claim...

  • by TheHawke ( 237817 ) <rchapin@@@stx...rr...com> on Monday February 20, 2006 @11:01PM (#14765032)
    Had to get out my hip waders just to get past the first paragragh. Another article with lots of Bull$hit Bingo words in it. The fraudsters love to play mind games containing magnetic fields and it's quick flux fixxer-upper. Small wonder that the geomagnetic poles are trying to swap ends, the North Pole has just about had enough of hearing about it, conned the South Pole into thinking that it's place is better.

    Even the title reeks of faddish words. Remember last year's warm fusion fraudster? This year is mirroring Cell processors and the tech that it uses.

    It makes me wonder who is really submitting these articles to Slashdot.
  • I wonder if the USPTO will make him create a working model.
  • Slashdotters should stick to commenting on computer stuff and not venture into the realm of hardware, especially the stuff that involves physics, electric current and the like. In their ignorance, Slashdotters are forgetting (if they ever knew) that an exponentially increasing magnetix flux in a perpendicular field arrangement - as the article describes - will be able to couple with the zero-point energy of the normal space.

    This is the energy associated with a prediction of quantum thoery which proposes th
  • while gaining greater than 100% efficiency is probably impossible there are sometimes things which can gather free energy such as heat exchangers gathering heat energy from outside concentrating it and releasing it inside.

    solar sails, picking up energy by flying past planets.

    Does the big bang theory of the universe make any sense the universe just appeared and there was a sudden out rush of mass and energy... if the universe has a start point then the idea that energy cannot be created or destroyed needs an
  • Sure - when the government lets us start using atomic batteries.

    For the record, I'm not holding my breath on this one . . .

  • they just add a couple of magnets for extra power source. Magnet =~ extra battery.

    Of course, the magnets will eventually run out...

    it makes sense.
  • by AyeRoxor! ( 471669 ) on Tuesday February 21, 2006 @10:29AM (#14767271) Journal
    Parallel Path is a quantum leap in electromagnetic motor technology

    At least they're being honest. As a scientist would know, (and they purport to be scientists), a quantum leap is the absolute least amount something can move without standing still. And they didn't say whether it was a leap forwards or backwards.

    So basically they probably mean that this is a tiny tiny step backwards for them. I'll can believe that.

Asynchronous inputs are at the root of our race problems. -- D. Winker and F. Prosser