I don't remember much of what I read, to be honest, but I do remember that in one issue David Jones issued a challenge to readers to work out how a "perpetual motion" machine he had built worked, with the answer and the names of those to guess correctly to be published in the magazine in the next issue. Of course, this being a serious scientific magazine, there was no suggestion that it was a real perpetual motion machine.
I thought about it for a while, and had an idea as to how the wheel was supplied with energy to keep turning. I wrote to David Jones and he wrote back to say my suggestion was correct. Unfortunately my letter just missed the deadline. The names of two other people who had guessed correctly were published in the magazine. I seem to remember that he wrote that he had decided not to reveal how the machine worked for a while longer, to keep people guessing...
I didn't think about it again until a few days ago when a YouTube suggestion for a video about the very machine appeared while I was watching something else. I never thought that over 40 years later it would still be a source of mystery and debate.
I wish I had kept my letter from David Jones, but as far as I knew he was going to reveal how the machine worked in a week or so, so I chucked it in the bin. Apparently all David Jones' letters about the machine are archived, so my letter could be in there!So what is the secret? Well, I would hate to spoil a 40 year old mystery. It's not really that difficult to guess. A number of people in the YouTube comments have suggested the answer I came up with. As Virginia Mills intimates in the video, look for a mundane explanation, rather than an exotic one. She also gives a huge clue in talking about Orffyreus' weighted wheel perpetual motion machine. The idea of falling weights adding impetus to a wheel is initially attractive until you remember that there is actually no net input of energy because the momentum of the wheel has to drag the weight upwards from a lower level on the way up. Without a source of energy it won't work.
But with a source of energy?
Interesting. There was a video, where magnetic fields were tested. Only found them in two places: dreadco box and heatsink box. Which sorta points to motor and power source
ReplyDeleteOh cool click bait from someone who doesn't know the secret awesome job pajeet
ReplyDeleteThe boxes are heat-sinks, the dreadco box contains a salt-heat battery, and a magnet is connected between each heat-sink and heat source with copper wire; the thing is a self cooling peltier circuit… It’s clever because salt-heat batteries can last years, but have little real world application.
ReplyDeleteYou haven't taken Virginia Mills comment into account: look for a mundane explanation, not an exotic one. Also salt-heat batteries were not developed until 30 years after this machine was made, as far as I can see.
DeleteThis one is a somewhat interesting because people are interested in this thing, If however an inventor has the knowledge of making a device that could really run on permanent magnetic power only ( no input energy - only the built in energy of the device ) strange thing that being the case: people are not interesting in the real deal, only fakes. So: FreewheelinFrank - in place of a fake would you be interested in seeing how a technology can convert Permanent magnetic potential energy into a motion device ( I never use the term Perpetual because it makes people crazy ) I don't really care how a fake works myself I am more interested in non-fake devices that produce energy output from a non-energy source of power - Gravity being 1 and magnet being 2 - no batteries needed - ( if and outside source is used in any way, simply speaking - it is a trick - ) to confuse people - all Fun stuff - Of course many people know me already the name is
ReplyDeleteDr. Wlazlak - din ma Tom - but in the long run-
Who cares? people are so confused about what they really want. ( they would like to see how this thing works, but once they see how it works, they could care less how it works.
You are right in that if David Jones had revealed 40 years ago how the machine works, people would have just said "Oh, is it really that simple?", and wouldn't be talking about it today.
DeleteThere is no external energy source, by the way. It not really difficult to guess what the energy source is, as many people in the YouTube comments did. What type of common energy source lasts for a couple of years?
Yes, it's a trick, but what is the trick? The science of gravity and magnetism is simple (at least in the how if not the why), and fits the requirement that the explanation must be mundane.
Hello again, The Mr. Jones device is nice as an Art project, But what is being said: is misleading as something it is not. ( being perpetual ) You say the science of gravity and magnetism is simple: However the Science of using these non-energy power sources as the main and sole power sources by science is said to be impossible: What I am saying I have proof all the science groups are wrong on that subject: ( Simple thinking is the key to understand this to be true ) The concepts I am talking about also can produce great amounts of energy output : billions of time more than just moving a bicycle wheel for a few decades : talking hundreds of years without using any energy to do so.
Deleteimpossible: NO -- just not well known:
but unlike David Jones: I offer to show anyone interested : the answer to how this technology works: no guesswork needed - All anyone needs to do is ask
Of course this is no trick - it is a real type of perpetual motion source of power - So as said in the first comment - real is less and fake is more to what the world is wanting to see more of.
But on the other hand - Was it in David Jones's best interest to tell the truth if someone guess how the his device worked in the first place: To say yes you guessed right is the best way of keeping the secret - Secret - the guesser is happy they guess correct - but was the correct answer a con - artist method of keeping the true working for being known by the guesser in the first place.
( freewheelin - what I tell people unless you view a device in person and see the working for yourself in person - it is just Hear / Say - of what is being said about how a device unseen works - by whoever said it. ( in the first place )
everybody is happy they guess right - and no one is the wiser
Thanks for the interesting story on this subject.
Dr. Wlazlak - retired engineer - but not retired on the subject above. The world could use the real deal - maybe?
but fakes are much more abundant and seem to have much more value ( for story writer and the easily Confused in guessing how they don't work perpetually ) of course:
David Jones was a scientist, and this was very much a science project: a challenge to explain the motion of the wheel. He was explicit that it was not a perpetual motion machine, and indeed it does have a very mundane explanation based on simple science.
DeleteHe said "perpetual motion is utterly impossible, and my machine is an ingenious hoax". (Letter on Torch Research Centre Oxford University web page.) Perhaps the reason he kept the secret is so few people seem to see the simple explanation. If he'd had a dozen letters to New Scientist saying, "This is how it works...", I'm sure he would have published the answer as promised. For whatever reason, he left the mystery as a challenge to explain, using some boring science. I haven't revealed my explanation to keep the mystery alive, but I'm reasonably confident that it is correct because David Jones told me it was, it fits the description of the workings by the people who maintain it, and the idea that he had really invented a real perpetual motion machine and passed it off as a hoax seems a bit far-fetched.
David Jones also wrote (in response to somebody pursuing free energy in the letter quoted above) "It saddens me to learn of [somebody] seriously addressing [themselves] to this possibility; I can only advise you to redirect your talents into fields where success may potentially be achieved. But thank you for your interest."
Words I can only echo.
This is a nice story: I would wonder as a Scientist if David Jones would have researched the possible event of something being said to be different than the viewpoints set in stone by scientist conflicting with the lack of understanding of their knowledge.
Deletebeing the possibility ( now is the tricky part ) There is no possibility of producing -- a free energy device also a perpetual motion machine, and the rest of the devices that are derived to confuse the outcome of a real type of technology that uses forces to energy -in place of energy itself as the main source of power-
It is very easy to see how the David Jones device produces movement - but
again is that device really useful ?
it conforms to a simple format of thermodynamics producing movement as it depletes energy used by the device Then recharged as needed
( from an outside source ) - obviously
And electric motor is just an electric motor - nothing science has not already done in the past. ( how it works - It is an electric motor ))(( - electromagnets pulling on ferrous metals on the rotating system to produce motion ( all other components of the On / Off system are for the electromagnets controls are irrelevant ) They exist -
In reverse I fell sorry for the people that wish to seriously address themselves as experts on a subject - without knowing the subject they addressing
unless you see it to know it how do you know it to be what you know it is to be - Faith maybe, over true knowledge, maybe?
All I can say is ( What the EGO is more than true knowledge explains a lot to the baseline of this story )
Trying to convince other of ones beliefs
in order to promote followers in ones beliefs means the underlying goal in to convince ones self the event must be real because other believe the same as the one telling the story ( in the first place ) not knowing unless told different - of course -
A simple viewpoint from a design and mfg. of real such things -
But on the other hand - please do not believe me - I am not looking for people to change their viewpoint on their own confusion - That would be misleading
Thanks - Echo - echo - ec-ho - and gone