Newman's free energy machine

has any one seen the movie on amazon prime called Newman? Holy crap, what a movie! Cant stop thinking about it . Anyone interested in this subject of free energy should watch the movie Just wondering is any one saw it and their thoughts.
Seems so sad that he had a motor that could produce free energy with basically no carbon foot print. Powered by magnets. Supposedly the secret died with him but so many scientist works with him on it . You would think someone would be able to reproduce the machine again.

Newman's Energy Machine was a DC motor which the inventor, Joseph Newman, claimed to produce mechanical power exceeding the electrical power being supplied to it

a reply to: HODOSKE

right in ypour OP you have contradicted the claim :

you cannot have " powered by magnets "

AND

" zero carbon footprint "

to be pedantic - EVERYTHING you use that is not raw , unrefined , uncultivated " found stuff " - has a carbon footprint

and a basic magnet - requires iron - mined , and refined smelted - cast // forged // machined - then energised

the carbon footprint of rare earth magnets = astronomical

so already - its got a carbon debt

originally posted by: HODOSKE
has any one seen the movie on amazon prime called Newman? Holy crap, what a movie! Cant stop thinking about it . Anyone interested in this subject of free energy should watch the movie Just wondering is any one saw it and their thoughts.
Seems so sad that he had a motor that could produce free energy with basically no carbon foot print. Powered by magnets. Supposedly the secret died with him but so many scientist works with him on it . You would think someone would be able to reproduce the machine again.

Newman's Energy Machine was a DC motor which the inventor, Joseph Newman, claimed to produce mechanical power exceeding the electrical power being supplied to it

But..........

The NBS concluded that Newman's machine did not reach or exceed 100% efficiency as Newman claimed, and declared the patent as unrewardable

en.wikipedia.org...

yep, it's real......Teslas electromagnetic capacitance, goin from memory

i wonder a bout the true torque, not like a normal free energy set up....this one uses a spinning generator with a magnet getting 90 degree capacitance instead of 0 degree flux that tries to slow the generator when ya hit the load.....

so, its the dynamic flux.......turned 90 degrees to the usual in a generator

sounds fairy tale, i know

a reply to: HODOSKE

This won't mean anything to anyone but someone close to me who was my science guy for my old radio show was on the same track. I mean vitually nothing by this but he died on the cusp of completing particular project.

Those of us who've been shut down have a word for this. Nefarious.

a reply to: HODOSKE

More free energy resources:

Simple free energy devices: Donald Lee Smith’s Designs

Free energy technologies (890 files)

teleportation free energy time travel compilation application patents

gofile.io...

Free energy using magnets is a misnomer. OK for a start but magnets lose their magnetism over time and your left with an iron bar.

i guess this capatance is what helps ac voltage transmission easier than dc voltage

flux surrounding the line circular like

I know how to get free energy
Hook your supply up to a lamppost

Did the movie mention that the device was tested and did not work as claimed:

www.govinfo.gov...

At all conditions tested, the input power exceeded the output power. That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it used.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Free energy using magnets is a misnomer. OK for a start but magnets lose their magnetism over time and your left with an iron bar.

Everything wears out or breaks down at some point. That is not the reason why you cant get free energy using magnets.

Energy conservation applies to the field of a magnet too. You can not extract any free energy out of it.

originally posted by: moebius
Did the movie mention that the device was tested and did not work as claimed:

www.govinfo.gov...

At all conditions tested, the input power exceeded the output power. That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it used.

When people honestly think the output power is greater than the input power, it's usually the result of the inventor not being familiar with the intricacies of how to measure something. So when you dig into a lot of these free energy claims, this is what you find, the inventor was not an expert in conducting measurements.

Some NASA engineers who were interested in over-unity energy inventions offered to test over-unity devices if their submission guidelines were met which avoided these measurement errors, by requiring that the motor be connected to a shaft with a string wrapped around it that would lift a weight. Then the inventor would report how much weight was lifted by what amount in what time, and as far as I know that requirement eliminated so many of the flawed output measurements that I don't know if they ever got any actual free energy machine to test. Someone not familiar with electrical engineering can fool themselves with electrical measurements, but lifting a weight with the output eliminates a lot of those mistakes.

Of course not all the mistakes are honest. The folks that paid Rossi millions for E-Cat testing say they were defrauded, and it's thought Rossi's over-unity measurements were an intentional hoax using the neutral wire to carry current (which it's not supposed to do except in a fault condition).

a reply to: HODOSKE

Since I'm probably the only one here (outside of the OP so far) that actually watched your suggested movie from start to finish (no scrolling or fast forwarding). I can say without a doubt that as documentaries go, that was well executed due to the massive footage shot by all the News outlets and even more so by his appearance on the Tonite Show with Johnny Carson.

I'm glad I watched it as it certainly falls in the Conspiracy category and is perfect for the ATS membership to watch (If you have Amazon). If not, if you get the chance to watch it's definitely worth the watch.

When all is said in done, this isn't really a Documentary about whether or not Newman's device did as he claimed (put out more energy than was input-ed in), but why he was denied a patent for the device.

I believe that Newman did indeed invent a device that appeared to work because he wasn't burdened down with taught Physics. After all the engineers that were skeptics and attempted to debunk his device, and then turn around and volunteer to help him with his project said a lot to me. To have the court-appoint "Special Master" (William Schuyler) who not only was an Engineer, but was the former Commissioner of Patents of the United States sign for the court his recommendation for Newman to be granted a patent as the machine works, said a lot more to me.....

I'm not going to tell you the ending, although it was a bit of a eye-opener and an inside look as to what negativity can eventually do to a person.

Johnny

originally posted by: JohnnyAnonymous
When all is said in done, this isn't really a Documentary about whether or not Newman's device did as he claimed (put out more energy than was input-ed in), but why he was denied a patent for the device.

I believe that Newman did indeed invent a device that appeared to work because he wasn't burdened down with taught Physics. After all the engineers that were skeptics and attempted to debunk his device, and then turn around and volunteer to help him with his project said a lot to me. To have the court-appoint "Special Master" (William Schuyler) who not only was an Engineer, but was the former Commissioner of Patents of the United States sign for the court his recommendation for Newman to be granted a patent as the machine works, said a lot more to me.....

If Newman wanted a patent, he probably could have received a patent if he just claimed he had a novel motor design, instead of claiming it was a perpetual motion machine, so I don't think you can say " this isn't really a Documentary about whether or not Newman's device did as he claimed (put out more energy than was input-ed in), but why he was denied a patent for the device", since the two are so closely related.

A patent professor who cites the Newman movie points this out and also points out that the Newman case is now officially an example of an "inoperable device" in the patent rules, not because the motor wouldn't work, but because it didn't perform as claimed:

The Quest to Patent Perpetual Motion

On my way to a conference last week, I watched a great documentary called Newman about one inventor's quest to patent a perpetual motion machine...

The failed claim was primarily due to the insistence on claiming perpetual motion. Had Newman claimed a novel motor, then the claim might have survived (though there was a 102/103 rejection somewhere in the history). One of the central themes of the documentary was that Newman needed this patent to commercialize his invention, so others could not steal the idea. He could not share it until it was protected. But he could have achieved this goal with a much narrower patent that did not claim perpetual motion. That he did not attempt a narrower patent is quite revealing, and foreshadows some of the interesting revelations from the end of the documentary.

I think the professor's comments also support my contention that the inventors of "free energy" devices such as Newman don't really know how to measure output properly, and the fact that Newman refused to answer the question about measuring the output speaks volumes!

..the output was measured in complicated ways (according to his own witnesses). Yet, Newman failed to indicate how measurement should be done when it counted: "Dr. Hebner [of National Bureau of Standards] then asked Newman directly where he intended that the power output be measured. His attorney advised Newman not to answer, and Newman and his coterie departed without further comment."

This is consistent with my assertion about free energy device inventors often not being able to measure output accurately, since he refused to even answer a reasonable question about how to measure output.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
originally posted by: JohnnyAnonymous
If Newman wanted a patent, he probably could have received a patent if he just claimed he had a novel motor design, instead of claiming it was a perpetual motion machine, so I don't think you can say " this isn't really a Documentary about whether or not Newman's device did as he claimed (put out more energy than was input-ed in), but why he was denied a patent for the device", since the two are so closely related.

I'm sorry that I see it differently. This is about what did happen when they tried to patent it... not how he 'should've or perhaps tried to patent the device', it's just a fascinating historical event.

In the Doc (I'm assuming that you did not watch yet), the Judge says; I'm not an engineer and can't make a ruling on this, we'll bring in a Special Master to help the Court decide. Special Master after several months of testing the unit claims the device does as claims and Newman should be awarded an grant. The Attorneys for the Patent Office say, Judge do you believe in Fairy Tales? Judge rules in favor of the Patent Office.

Again... to me... the interesting story is about a conspiracy.

Reminds me of Shaun McCarthy and Steorn. Free Energy device / Orbo.
that also used magnets/rotor/stator and claimed excess energy out above energy input.
but you can't measure the energy input needed to magnetise magnets. Magnets can't 'do' work.
There's a hysteresis loop involved with magnetisation of one of the parts, fast in/slow out, or vice versa.
i went to Dublin, met Shaun, drank several Guinness with him. He seemed to genuinely believe that he had something novel.

thanks for commenting. i agree with you...
i wish the others that comment would at least watch the movie before making judgements
a reply to: JohnnyAnonymous

a reply to: HODOSKE

once again - internal consistency in this tail - collapses

its claimed - no one can replicate it

but then claimed that WS - demonstrated it to work

cannot have it both ways

originally posted by: JohnnyAnonymous
Special Master after several months of testing the unit claims the device does as claims and Newman should be awarded an grant. The Attorneys for the Patent Office say, Judge do you believe in Fairy Tales?

Do you believe in fairy tales? The laws of physics that the Special Master admitted were violated according to the measurements are not just some words written in textbooks, they are supported by many, many observations, many more than those flawed measurements made of Newman's motor, and it's not too hard to figure out what is wrong with those measurements as explained by people directly involved who were not represented in the movie. The movie tells a biased one side of the story; my next post will tell the other side of the story.

originally posted by: HODOSKE
thanks for commenting. i agree with you...
i wish the others that comment would at least watch the movie before making judgements
a reply to: JohnnyAnonymous

The movie didn't help your understanding a bit, since much of what you say is wrong, but then again the movie is biased so I'm not surprised you have such misconceptions. For example, here's something that you're wrong about according to Newman himself:

originally posted by: HODOSKE
Supposedly the secret died with him but so many scientist works with him on it . You would think someone would be able to reproduce the machine again.

The secret didn't die with him, other people worked with him and know the secret and they have shared it and reproduced the machine. But even before that, Newman told Dr. Park you can buy machines using his technology from the people that testified in court on his behalf, then stole his tech and marketed it as Park explained in his book "Voodoo Science":

" the people I trusted most betrayed me and the human race."(said Newman). His patent lawyer, the company that supplied the batteries for his machine, even those who had testified on his behalf in court and in the Senate hearing had all used or sold his ideas. There are motors based on his ideas on the market right now, he assured me, that are more than 100 percent efficient; the manufacturers refuse to admit it so they won't have to pay him royalties.

GEOFFREY S. MILLER - NEWMAN MOTOR DISCLOSURE at 2017 energyscienceconference

Geoffrey was an assistant to the legendary Joseph Newman, who is an undisputed pioneer of the modern day free energy movement. Back in the 1980’s, Geoffrey worked with Newman for 10 years and has an inside perspective of the Newman Motor that very few people can claim...You will see a live demonstration of a REAL Newman Motor and this presentation will empower you with enough information, including schematics, so that you can replicate this historical technology.

So the secret didn't die with Newman, according to Geoffrey Miller who says he shared it.

originally posted by: HODOSKE
Newman's Energy Machine was a DC motor which the inventor, Joseph Newman, claimed to produce mechanical power exceeding the electrical power being supplied to it

He not only claimed it did, but many people confirmed it did with measurements, which is why the Special Master and others said there was overwhelming evidence that the output power was greater than the input power. But, the Special Master also admitted such a claim violates some very fundamental laws of physics, which didn't do much to support the claim, and what was worse, he also said he didn't believe in Newman's (crackpot) theories about how the excess energy was produced.

But we know how those measurements are made. I can build a machine that will measure more output power than input power, and so can you, it's not a mystery at all how to do it. In fact the very first section of the FAQ on electrical free energy machines explains how you can do it:

sci.skeptic FAQ

8.1: Why don't electrical perpetual motion machines work?
---------------------------------------------------------

Electrical perpetual motion machinists usually present a machine that causes a small battery to generate a huge amount of power. The most common problem here is that the "huge amount of power" was incorrectly measured. AC power measurements are tricky; you can't just multiply the voltage and current, because they may be out of phase. Thus, measuring 10 Volts and 10 Amps could indicate anything from 0 to 100 Watts, depending on the power factor. In addition, most AC meters expect a sinusoidal wave; if they are given some other wave they may be totally wrong. A simple argument against these machines is; "If they can provide so much energy, why do they need the battery to keep going?"

Here are some posts from people who worked with the Newman machine explaining that similar measurement errors are more or less what was going on with Newman's machine. They also explain how it could fool so many experts, because it really did measure more output than input, which as I said and as the FAQ explains, it's not that hard to do:

www.newphysics.se...

[email protected]> [email protected] (Paul Houle) writes:
> Well, Joe Newman came to NM Tech yesterday along with a group of
>investors from Albuquerque. Yesterday, he got into an argument with my
>thermodyanmics professor and finally got around to demonstrating his
>machine. He powered it with a neon sign transformer through a stack of
>rectifiers -- ran the wire through a current transformer, a florescent
>light bulb and finally the motor. A neon sign that said "Gyro" was mounted
>on the top to "bleed excess charge away". He then connected an osciloscope
>to the secondary of the current transformer and used that to demonstrate that
>his motor produces very large inductive spikes. I tried to tell him that
>a current transformer doesn't measure current, but that it does measure the
>derivative of current, so it will magnify small changes...

So again as the faq explains, non-sinusoidal waveforms can result in very large output measurements, and Paul Houle was trying to explain this to Newman. He also explained that such spikey waveforms are very difficult to measure accurately (and indeed it was a huge challenge for NBS to find a way to make accurate measurements, this is also documented):

>...The results with the wattmeter were very interesting, but
>certainly not conclusive. Joe Newman has succeeded in building a motor
>that challenges the state of the art in measurement technology -- I wouldn't
>blame him and many other people for being confused and making bad measurements.

And this is how the Special Master and other "experts" can get misled, since the measurements can and sometimes do show output greater than input, and sometimes people don't understand why, unless they have a great deal of expertise to devise particular measurement techniques instead of the flawed techniques which are not designed to measure such irregular output.

Here's another person (Stefan H.) who said he wasted 3-4 years of his life on the Newman motor before concluding it was a measurement problem:

Here's A Reply from Stefan H.

Well, I did a university study of the Newman machines a while back in
1987 and 1988 when the thing was still hot...

I also visited Mr. Newman in 1987 in his workshop in the woods of
Lucedale Mississippi and talked with him for a few hours in 1987...

My rebuild Newman-Machine had about a efficiency of around 70 % up to
130 %, where the later efficiencies where to unstable to be true...

So we concluded it to be measurement errors...

You can contact me on every single phaenomen of the Newman-Machine...

I wasted 3-4 years of my live to study them...