The history of perpetual motion machines dates at least back to the Middle Ages. For millennia, it was not clear whether perpetual motion devices were possible or not, but modern theories of thermodynamics have shown that they are impossible. Despite this, many attempts have been made to construct such machines, continuing into modern times. Modern designers and proponents sometimes use other terms, such as "overunity", to describe their inventions.
History There are two types of perpetual motion machines: Perpetual motion machines of the first kind are those devices that violate the first law of thermodynamics, the principle of conservation of energy, creating energy out of nothing. Most attempts fall into this category. Perpetual motion machines of the second kind are devices that violate the second law of thermodynamics. Even though they obey the principle of conservation of energy, they attempt extraction of work from a single heat reservoir, violating the principle of no entropy decrease in an isolated macroscopic thermodynamic system.
Pre-19th century There are some unsourced claimsMark Eberhart (2007):Feeding the fire: the lost history and uncertain future of mankind's energy, p.14 that a perpetual motion machine called the "magic wheel" (a wheel spinning on its axle powered by lodestones) appeared in 8th-century Bavaria. This historical claim appears to be unsubstantiated though often repeated.
Early designs of perpetual motion machines were done by Indian mathematician–astronomer Bhaskara II, who described a wheel (Bhāskara's wheel) that he claimed would run forever.Lynn Townsend White, Jr. (April 1960). "Tibet, India, and Malaya as Sources of Western Medieval Technology", The American Historical Review 65 (3), p. 522-526.
A drawing of a perpetual motion machine appeared in the sketchbook of Villard de Honnecourt, a 13th-century French master mason and architect. The sketchbook was concerned with mechanics and architecture. Following the example of Villard, Peter of Maricourt designed a magnetic globe which, if it were mounted without friction parallel to the celestial axis, would rotate once a day. It was intended to serve as an automatic armillary sphere.
Leonardo da Vinci made a number of drawings of devices he hoped would make free energy. Leonardo da Vinci was generally against such devices, but drew and examined numerous overbalanced wheels.Time-Life Books (1991). Inventive Genius. 143 pages. Page 125. Philip J. Mirowski, (1991). More Heat Than Light: Economics As Social Physics: Physics As Nature's Economics 462 pages. Page 15.
Mark Anthony Zimara, a 16th-century Italian scholar, proposed a self-blowing windmill.
Various scholars in this period investigated the topic. In 1607 Cornelius Drebbel in "Wonder-vondt van de eeuwighe bewegingh" dedicated a perpetual motion machine to James I of England. It was described by Heinrich Hiesserle von Chodaw in 1621. Robert Boyle devised the "perpetual vase" ("perpetual goblet" or "hydrostatic paradox") which was discussed by Denis Papin in the Philosophical Transactions for 1685.MIT, "Inventor of the Week Archive: Pascal : Mechanical Calculator", May 2003. "Pascal worked on many versions of the devices, leading to his attempt to create a perpetual motion machine. He has been credited with introducing the roulette machine, which was a by-product of these experiments." Johann Bernoulli proposed a fluid energy machine. In 1686, Georg Andreas Böckler, designed a "self operating" self-powered water mill and several perpetual motion machines using balls using variants of Archimedes' screws. In 1712, Johann Bessler (Orffyreus), claimed to have experimented with 300 different perpetual motion models before developing what he said were working models.
In the 1760s, James Cox and John Joseph Merlin developed Cox's timepiece.Ord-Hume, Arthur W. J. G. Perpetual Motion: The History of an Obsession. St. Martin's Press. . Cox claimed that the timepiece was a true perpetual motion machine, but as the device is powered by changes in atmospheric pressure via a mercury barometer, this is not the case.
In 1775, the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris made the statement that the Academy "will no longer accept or deal with proposals concerning perpetual motion."
Industrial Revolution
19th century In 1812, Charles Redheffer, in Philadelphia, claimed to have developed a "generator" that could power other machines. The machine was open for viewing in Philadelphia, where Redheffer raised large amount of money from the admission fee. Redheffer moved his machine to New York, after his cover was blown in Philadelphia, while applying for government funding.Hicks, Clifford B. (April 1961). "Why won't they work?". American Heritage Magazine. American Heritage Publishing Company. Retrieved 28 August 2009. It was there that Robert Fulton exposed Redheffer's schemes during an exposition of the device in New York City (1813). Removing some concealing wooden strips, Fulton found a catgut belt drive went through a wall to an attic. In the attic, a man was turning a crank to power the device.Information originally at www.skepticfiles.org/skep2/pmotion2.htm
In 1827, Sir William Congreve, 2nd Baronet devised a machine running on capillary action that would disobey the principle that water seeks its own level, so to produce a continuous ascent and overflow. The device had an inclined plane over pulleys. At the top and bottom, there travelled an endless band of sponge, a bed and, over this, again an endless band of heavy weights jointed together. The whole stood over the surface of still water. Congreve believed his system would operate continuously.
In 1868, an Austrian, Alois Drasch, received a US patent for a machine that possessed a "thrust key-type gearing" of a rotary engine. The vehicle driver could tilt a trough depending upon need. A heavy ball rolled in a cylindrical trough downward, and, with continuous adjustment of the device's levers and power output, Drasch believed that it would be possible to power a vehicle.
In 1870, E.P. Willis of New Haven, Connecticut made money from a "proprietary" perpetual motion machine. A story of the overcomplicated device with a hidden source of energy appears in the Scientific American article "The Greatest Discovery Ever Yet Made". Investigation into the device eventually found a source of power that drove it.
John Ernst Worrell Keely claimed the invention of an induction resonance motion motor. He explained that he used "etheric technology". In 1872, Keely announced that he had discovered a principle for power production based on the vibrations of tuning forks. Scientists investigated his machine which appeared to run on water, though Keely endeavoured to avoid this. Shortly after 1872, venture capitalists accused Keely of fraud (they lost nearly five million dollars). Keely's machine, discovered after his death, was based on hidden air pressure tubes.
1900 to 1950 In 1900, Nikola Tesla claimed to have discovered an abstract principle on which to base a perpetual motion machine of the second kind. No prototype was produced. He wrote:
David Unaipon, Australian inventor, had a lifelong fascination with perpetual motion. One of his studies on Newtonian mechanics led him to create a shearing machine in 1910 that converted curvilineal motion into straight line movement. The device is the basis of modern mechanical shears.Graham Jenkin, Conquest of the Ngarrindjeri (1979), pp. 234-236,
In the 1910s and 1920s, Harry Perrigo of Kansas City, Missouri, a graduate of MIT, claimed development of a free energy device.Harry E. Perrigo , a vertical file at the Kansas City Public Library in Kansas City, Missouri, described as follows: "Photos, illustrations, and information on Harry Perrigo, a local inventor of a "free energy" device in the 1910s-1920s turning out to be a hoax. Energy source of "invention" supposedly "from thin air" or from "ether waves" but in actually from a hidden battery." Perrigo claimed the energy source was "from thin air" or from aether waves. He demonstrated the device before the Congress of the United States on December 15, 1917. Perrigo had a pending applicationfiled December 31, 1925; Serial Number 78,719 for the "Improvement in Method and Apparatus for Accumulating and Transforming Ether Electric Energy". Investigators report that his device contained a hidden motor battery.Citations originally at www.kclibrary.org resources Subject area ID 77176
Popular Science, in the October 1920 issue, published an article on the lure of perpetual motion.Phillip Rowland. "The undying lure of perpetual motion". Popular Science, October 1920.
Modern era
1951 to 1980
In 1966, Josef Papp (sometimes referred to as Joseph Papp or Joseph Papf) supposedly developed an alternative car engine that used inert gases. He gained a few investors but when the engine was publicly demonstrated, an explosion killed one of the observers and injured two others. Papp blamed the accident on interference by physicist Richard Feynman, who later shared his observations in an article in Laser, the journal of the Southern Californian Skeptics. Papp continued to accept money but never demonstrated another engine.
On December 20 of 1977, Emil T. Hartman received titled "Permanent magnet propulsion system". This device is related to the Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy (SMOT).
Paul Baumann, a German engineer, developed a machine referred to as the "Testatika"Jeane Manning, The coming energy revolution. Reviews Avery Pub. Group, April 1, 1996. Page 141. and known as the "Swiss M-L converter"Matthey, PH (1985), "The Swiss ML Converter – A Masterpiece of Craftsmanship and Electronic Engineering" or "Thesta-Distatica".New scientist, Volume 170, Issues 2286-2291. Page 48.
Guido Franch reportedly had a process of transmuting water molecules into high-octane gasoline compounds (named Mota fuel) that would reduce the price of gasoline to 8 cents per gallon. This process involved a green powder (this claim may be related to the similar ones of John Andrews (1917)). He was brought to court for fraud in 1954 and acquitted, but in 1973 was convicted. Justice William Bauer and Justice Philip Romiti both observed a demonstration in the 1954 case.
In 1958, Otis T. Carr from Oklahoma formed a company to manufacture UFO-styled spaceships and hovercraft. Carr sold company shares for this commercial endeavour. He also promoted free energy machines. He claimed inspiration from Nikola Tesla, among others.
In 1962, physicist Richard Feynman discussed a Brownian ratchet that would supposedly extract meaningful work from Brownian motion, although he went on to demonstrate how such a device would fail to work in practice.
In the 1970s, David Hamel produced the Hamel generator, an "antigravity" device, supposedly after an alien abduction. The device was tested on MythBusters where it failed to demonstrate any lift-generating capability.MythBusters Episode 68: Christmas Tree Lights, Antigravity Device, Vodka Myths IV
Howard Robert Johnson developed a permanent magnet motor and, on April 24, 1979, received .[The United States Patent office main classification of his 4151431 patent is as an "electrical generator or motor structure, dynamoelectric, linear" (310/12).] Johnson claimed that his device generates motion, either rotary or linear, from nothing but permanent magnets in rotor as well as stator, acting against each other. (Cover illustration is here.) He estimated that permanent magnets made of proper hard materials should lose less than two percent of their magnetization in powering a device for 18 years.
In 1979, Joseph Westley Newman applied for a patent on a direct current electrical motor which, according to his book The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman did more mechanical work than could be accounted for by the electrical power supplied to it. Newman's patent application was rejected in 1983.