cause them to doubt the possibility of perpetual
motion. But today we have a body of well-tested
and accepted laws of mechanics that clearly tell
us that certain things are impossible in nature, and
no experimental evidence suggests otherwise. So
how can anyone still expect to invent a perpetually
moving mechanism? Well, many do, undeterred
by a long history of total failure, contemptuous of
the laws of physics, and oblivious to scientists who
declare, “It’ll never work.”
Hans-Peter Gramatke has identified 1,800 perpetual-motion patents in the United States, England,
France, and Germany between 1860 and 2000, and
a dozen patents from other countries. From 2000
on, an average of about 50 patents per year were
issued worldwide. Most were in the four countries
named above, although Japan, China, and Korea
show recent increases. These are patents that were
“obviously” intended to be perpetual motion. There
may be many more unworkable device patents in
other categories.
Patent examiners do look for serious flaws in
patent applications, but their primary criterion
for patentability is that a device be a new idea; it
doesn’t need to be workable or practical. That’s why
unworkable devices get patented. Today, inventors
avoid using words that would signal to an examiner
that their device is supposed to get something for
nothing, or that it is violating any well-established
laws of nature.
Has all of this effort been a waste of time?
Not entirely. Failed experiments give us a better
understanding of the inherent limitations in nature’s
operations. Science learns from its mistakes. Perpetual motionists’ mistakes get perpetually repeated.
PIXIE DUST
Perpetual motionists are especially attracted to
those parts of physics they don’t understand.
William Gilbert (1544-1603) summarized his experiments on magnetism in his book De Magnete
(1600). The book was a sensation, widely read and
widely misunderstood. It stimulated all sorts of
incorrect, pseudoscientific notions about magnets,
some of which still persist today. One fellow, heavily
invested in a scam perpetual-motion device, wrote to
me that every physicist should know that magnets
contain infinite stored energy. As an example, he
cited the lowly refrigerator magnet, which, he said,
“can hold itself in place forever, working against the
Gilbert’s perpetual motion
Woodward’s wheel
pull of gravity, so it obviously has unlimited stored
energy.” Obvious to him, perhaps, but physicists
know that work is the product of force and the
distance that force moves something. A magnet
does not move as it clings to the refrigerator, so it
does no work and expends no energy.
Since simple mechanisms have been so well
studied for so long, perpetual motionists today
concentrate on elaborate and complex schemes,
and then challenge skeptics to find the flaw. Science
writer Bob Schadewald once observed, “A perpetual
motionist typically concocts a scheme so complicated that he can’t see why it won’t work. He then
assumes that it will work.” Some perpetual motionists pin their hopes on cutting-edge speculations
of theoretical physics. Zero-point energy and dark
energy are popular now. Perpetual motionists use
these as the stage magician uses “magic pixie dust”
— to justify apparent miracles. Some postulate
as-yet undiscovered laws or hidden energy sources
in nature, give them names, and then assume they
have just those properties required for the success
Make: 73
