Name me one good reason why this wouldn't work, sci

name me one good reason why this wouldn't work, sci

The mass of the oil may be greater, but that's because the part of the tube holding it is wider.
The water is denser AND the water-column is taller. The interface between liquids will move until the PRESSURE on both sides is equal and the process stops there.

If unconvinced, feel free to build one and Revolutionize the World.

The top line is where the oil would level out. It would not be higher on either side because liquid always seeks level. Thats how bubble levels work. The middle line represents where the water would level out. Being heavier than oil there is no reason the water would ever remain higher than any amount of oil for any period of time. So its all oil above the line in the middle, all water below. Forgive my shitty scribbles.

Learn how to disprove perpetual motion machines on your own. Hint: show that the machine is in static equilibrium

That's not really correct. The water would push the oil up until it is higher than the water, until the pressures are equal and then it would remain like that.

image title

No oil is going through the water, because the pressure of the oil is smaller than that of the water. If it was otherwise, you could actually create a perpetual motion machine if you just design it well enough. what would happen here is water pushing up on the left side until the pressures are in equlibrium.

what would happen if you use small wooden balls insted of the oil, or a gas? Do the same rules apply to non-liquids?

Doesn't matter what variation you propose.
All are perpetual motion and all are impossible.
"Solid" versions are usually a take on "over-balanced wheels".

You can keep at this all day with different cofigurations, forever but you cannot defeat entropy in any system you concoct my friend.

I'd say OP's post is a subtle overbalanced wheel as well.

I always thought the Calloway V-gate showed potential. The way I see it, magnets take energy to produce and they will bleed off their energy gradually over time, and more quickly if you store them closely together and oriented to repel each other.

>Calloway V-gate

I don't know what the fuck that is and donl't care enough to Google it. But, if it takes stored energy from somewhere, then it is not a perpetual option machine or over unity device.

It may be impractical for any number of other reasons.

>perpetual option
Fucking spell check.

Heterogenous fluids dont settle at an angle, they settle perpendicular to the acceleration of gravity.

Here's another one. The fluids will reach equilibrium and stop moving because theres no work being supplied into the system. The work out of the system has to be equal to the work into the system since this system is apparently designed to be adiabatic.

Create a wheel with magnets

Place it next to a stationary magnet with the same charge

Wheel spins forever (or until the magnet loses it's charge)
Here's one from davinci. Still stops eventually though.

The V-gate is new to me.
The first few links went to PESwiki, which I followed for years, for amusement. Hundreds of schemes which would be commercialized "within months" and "invest now!" Time would pass and device X would never be mentioned again because the site-owner would be touting device Y. Largely moribund now since the owner is serving a long jail sentence. (Nothing to do with Free Energy or Fraud.)

Anyway, I found a video of a "working" V-gate motor. I mean, someone built and tested it. It doesn't work. It rotates, at most, half a turn, reaches a potential minimum and stops.

Permanent magnets do not expend energy. They do not run down. No magnetic motor can EVER work. Generators produce electricity because you're doing work, moving the magnets against resistance. Without something turning the shaft, nothing happens.

*Here's a different idea

Again, magnets don't "lose charge".
Are you sure those ARE magnets?
If it's from daVinci, it's probably on over-balance wheel. A "gravity motor". Not even as "clever" as .

A lot of 19th century machinery had curved spokes on their flywheels. Not entirely ornamental. They thought such wheels would work better.

>I am very sorry if I misrepresented this thing as I've numerous complaints that this thing is not perpetual motion, some being quite hostile. This thing is an illusion and was meant for entertainment purposes only and as such is not perpetual motion. My sincerest apologies to those who believed I was indicating that this thing truly was perpetual motion. It's just an illusion that, unfortunately, has upset a few people here and on YouTube. Again, my sincerest apologies to those offended by the post of this thing.

Biggest kek I've had all day.

as is usually the case, FRICTION MOTHERFUCKER

Pretty much all perpetual motion designs are just flywheels. Just energy storage devices that are very efficient at releasing the energy stored.

With magnet motors there's a cog effect when the fields pass each other. Teh energy required to get past the first "cog" is all the energy that is inputted into the system. From then on, any motion you see is just a draining of that initial stored energy.

Not a problem.
You said right up front that it runs down.
So there's no mis-representation.

Now, cats! Cats are an exception to the rule that "everything runs down".
Cats never run down. Permanently hyper.

>perpetual motion
>increase efficiency
As soon as you need to increase efficiency, it's not perpetual motion.
A perpetual motion machine would have infinite efficiency, i.e. never losing energy. You can't have more or less of it. It's infinite efficiency.

The system will enter a state of stasis wherein the oil and the water will be balanced. It will be precarious, but stable

Efficiency is defined as useful output / input power.
A machine which was 101 percent efficient (slightly more output than input) would be a perpetual motion machine. "Excess" energy could be drawn off and it would keep running. An "improved" model might be 102 percent efficient.
Neither is possible. Just correcting your definition.

A superconducting ring carrying a current or a flywheel spinning in a perfect vacuum between galaxies are both 100% efficient. No losses. But no gains either, so they'll run down if you try to tap them for energy.

It can be argued that an electric space heater is 100% efficient. The electrical energy you put in becomes heat and light -- ultimately it's all heat! In this case "useful output" is the same as "waste". A device which wastes everything is, therefore, 100% efficient. ^_^
But that's not what we usually want.

>magnets don't lose charge
Yes they do

this

Citation please!

Magnetic domains can be disordered by hammering or heating but I am not aware of any case where a permanent magnet, left alone, perhaps suspending an iron nail, loses magnetism. It's not doing any work.

There's no such thing as magnetic "charge" which can leak away as electrons can. You'd have to add a term to Maxwell's equations to incorporate the possibility of a magnetic monopole. None have ever been found.

>Cats never run down. Permanently hyper.
What is a "cat nap?"

Cats, like most predators, ted to be dedicated nappers.

Cats have only two settings.
0% and 200%

What if we make an array of desynchronized cats so at least half of them are always running at 200%?

This issue is this post, your cats body has friction inside of it. It builds up entropy in the system and eventually breaks down over time until the cat dies. You have to keep adding inputs into the system, cats and resources.

If you aren't adding inputs continuously then the cats eventually all stop.