H02N11/008 — Thermal-to-Electric

The claim describes an 'electric extension' or charging with 'no need from electricity charging devices,' which directly implies creating electrical energy without an adequate source. This violates the conservation of energy. The vague, obfuscated language prevents identification of a legitimate physical mechanism.

The device is presented as a generator that outputs more energy than the small input needed to keep its disk spinning, which violates the conservation of energy. No external energy source or valid physical mechanism is described to account for the claimed excess power, making it a perpetual motion claim.

The device is presented as a magnetic engine combining permanent magnets and an electromagnet. Since permanent magnets are not an energy source but a static field, the system likely attempts to extract net work from magnetic forces without accounting for the energy needed to reset the magnetic cycle, violating energy conservation. The vague, obfuscated claims are classic hallmarks of a perpetual motion machine.

The device is described as an electromagnetic motor that creates mechanical energy from magnetic fields. Since permanent magnets are not an energy source but store static potential energy, any work extracted from their forces must be replenished by an external input. The patent's reliance on magnetic repulsion/attraction for propulsion, coupled with vague operational description, constitutes a violation of energy conservation.

The claim describes a system that appears to extract and amplify energy from unspecified 'energetic waves,' promising output vastly exceeding any known solar limit without a legitimate thermodynamic driver. The circuit configuration suggests a self-charging battery system, which violates energy conservation if net energy is produced without an external source.

The patent claims explicitly deny the universal law of energy conservation and propose a device that generates electrical energy from a closed superconducting loop with no identifiable energy input, which is a direct violation of the first law of thermodynamics. The arguments misuse concepts from cosmology and superconductivity to create a facade of legitimacy for a perpetual motion machine.

The patent describes a circuit that allegedly amplifies 'return energy' to produce useful work, but provides no identifiable external energy source to account for the claimed amplification and increased efficiency. The language obfuscates the physics, suggesting an attempt to extract net energy from internal system dynamics, which violates energy conservation for a non-driven, isolated system.

The device claims to be a 'latent atomic energy storage' that converts the perpetual motion energy of electrons into usable mechanical rotation without any external fuel or gradient, directly violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). Its description misapplies fundamental physics principles to obfuscate an impossible perpetual motion machine.

The device is described as a self-powered generator, where part of the electrical output is used to power the motor that drives the generator. This creates a closed loop that violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation), as the system's output energy (for the motor + external devices) cannot exceed the input energy, and all losses make net external power output impossible without an ongoing external energy source.

The patent describes a magnetic system claiming to output more energy than is input by extracting energy from ambient magnetic fields. This violates energy conservation because it doesn't identify a true energy source being consumed; extracting net work from Earth's magnetic field alone is thermodynamically impossible without a temperature or potential gradient. The description uses correct magnetic terminology but in a way that obfuscates the fundamental energy accounting problem.

The device claims to generate electrical current by pumping ferrofluid through magnetized rings. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics because the electrical output energy must come from somewhere; the only identified input is the work done to pump the fluid, which would always exceed any recoverable electrical energy due to inherent losses, making it a net energy consumer, not a generator.

This patent describes a magnetic system claiming to generate electricity continuously after a brief start-up. It violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it lacks any identifiable external energy source to sustain the motion against losses. The configuration of permanent magnets cannot produce net work over a complete cycle, making it a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The device claims to convert 'magnetic energy' from a space region to power coils in a self-sustaining loop without identifying any external energy input, violating energy conservation. The description uses obfuscated terminology without clear physical mechanisms for energy extraction from magnetic fields.

The patent claims a device that converts ambient heat directly into useful work (mechanical, electrical, chemical) with a net surplus, acting as a perpetual motion machine of the second kind. It ignores the work required to perform the capacitance-modulating operations that are central to its proposed cycles, violating the Kelvin-Planck statement of the Second Law.

The patent describes a magnetic system claimed to become self-exciting and produce excess energy through magnetic flux concentration and resonance. It fails to identify any external energy source to account for the claimed output, implying energy creation from permanent magnets or magnetic feedback loops, which violates the first law of thermodynamics. The mechanism is described vaguely using correct magnetic terminology but in an impossible configuration.

The patent describes a closed system that claims to produce net electrical energy from internal particle interactions, recycling unused output to sustain itself indefinitely. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy cannot be created) and the Second Law (all processes increase entropy, requiring an energy source). It is a textbook perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to produce continuous rotation with excess power by using gravity and magnetic repulsion/attraction to create a permanent imbalance. This is impossible because both gravity and magnetic forces are conservative; in a closed cycle, they cannot add net energy to the system. The described mechanism violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation).

The described system is a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims to power a vehicle using only a generator driven by the vehicle's own driveshaft, creating a closed energy loop that cannot sustain itself due to conservation of energy. Every real system has losses, so without an external energy source (like a battery or fuel), it would quickly stop.

This device claims to generate electricity using magnetic levitation and repulsion, with part of the output powering its own magnetic drive. This violates energy conservation as magnetic forces are conservative and cannot provide net energy gain. The system lacks a continuous external energy source to overcome inevitable losses from friction and resistance.

This system claims to produce kinetic energy output greater than its electrical control input by harnessing 'energy expansion/contraction' of permanent magnets. This violates energy conservation, as permanent magnets are not energy sources but static fields. The description lacks any identifiable external energy source to account for the claimed net work output.

The patent describes a system where a device's waste heat is fed back to power the same device via a 'quantum heat engine,' creating a closed energy loop. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) and the second law (cannot extract net work from a single temperature reservoir). The proposed spin-flip mechanism cannot generate the claimed induced current from thermal energy alone.

The patent describes a system that claims to generate electricity through rotational motion and magnetic interactions, but fails to identify any external energy source to overcome inevitable losses. Its claims of 'energy saving amplification' and a 'power feedback loop' strongly suggest an attempt to create a perpetual motion or over-unity device, which violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The use of obscure, pseudo-technical language further obscures the fundamental physics flaws.

The system describes a closed water loop powered by electric pumps, claiming to generate electricity from 'force field discharges' within the flow. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as the electrical output cannot exceed the input to the pumps minus inevitable losses. It is a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The device claims to overcome pendulum damping using permanent magnets and mechanical tricks, but this violates energy conservation. Magnetic forces are conservative; they cannot perpetually replace energy lost to friction and air resistance. The described mechanisms merely temporarily redistribute energy within the system, not add net energy from an external source.

The device is a textbook example of a perpetual motion machine. It describes a generator powered by a motor, which is in turn powered by the generator's output. This closed loop violates conservation of energy, as the inevitable losses in each conversion mean the system cannot sustain itself without an external energy input beyond the initial start.

The patent describes a motor-generator system with feedback to its power source, constituting a closed loop. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as it claims autonomous operation without an identifiable net external energy input, implying perpetual motion of the first kind.

This patent describes a magnet-based apparatus claiming to generate electrical energy without any identifiable external energy input, directly violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The complex geometric descriptions cannot circumvent the fundamental impossibility of extracting net work from static permanent magnets.

The device claims to use permanent magnets to compensate for and exceed pendulum damping losses, which violates energy conservation. Magnets provide conservative force fields, not a source of usable energy; any work gained during attraction is paid back when separating them. The description suggests a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The patent describes a system claiming to generate and wirelessly transmit very high power densities using atmospheric electricity and resonance, but it fails to identify a legitimate, bounded energy source or account for all energy inputs and losses. The description is physically incoherent, uses obfuscatory jargon, and implies violations of energy conservation and thermodynamic limits.

This 'power amplifier' patent claim fundamentally violates Newton's Third Law and the Conservation of Energy. It incorrectly treats internal reaction forces as an independent energy source that can be harvested to double the system's output work, which is physically impossible for a closed system. The described mechanism is a form of perpetual motion.

The patent describes a 'magnetic-powered train' that claims to achieve zero net energy consumption during constant-speed operation and generate supplemental energy during braking. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it proposes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, extracting useful work from a static arrangement of permanent magnets without an identifiable external energy source to offset losses.

The device attempts to use permanent magnet repulsion as a source of additional motive energy, which is impossible as magnetic fields are conservative. The claimed 'assistance' from magnetic repulsion to do more work and generate excess electricity violates the conservation of energy, as no net energy can be extracted from a static magnetic field configuration.

The device claims to generate electrical power autonomously in space using superconducting coils and a moving grid, but it identifies no legitimate external energy source to initiate or sustain motion against losses, implying creation of energy from permanent magnets/superconductors. The description uses obfuscating technical terms to mask a violation of energy conservation.

The patent describes a configuration of rotating magnets driven by an electric motor, claiming improved efficiency through phasing. However, permanent magnets alone are not an energy source; the system is a motor-driven magnetic transmission. Any electrical output from the alternators must be less than the mechanical work input from the motor, violating no thermodynamic principles if fully accounted for, but the claims imply generation from 'magnetic repulsion' itself, which is a violation of energy conservation.

This patent describes a 'magnetic circuit tumbler' that claims to create excess energy without any external input, which is a direct violation of energy conservation. The detailed mechanical assembly cannot circumvent the fundamental requirement that useful work output requires an energy input from somewhere.

This device claims to produce both electromagnetic torque AND additional torque from induced currents, effectively suggesting energy multiplication. The description of recharging batteries while driving without external energy input violates conservation of energy by implying perpetual motion through incomplete energy accounting.

This magnetic device claims to produce continuous motion using only magnetic interactions, with occasional recharging after magnetic energy is 'consumed'. This violates energy conservation because restoring magnetic fields requires at least as much energy as was extracted, and the system cannot sustain motion without net energy input against inevitable losses.

The device claims to produce energy by deforming Earth's magnetic field lines, but this violates the first law of thermodynamics as it proposes extracting significant work from a static ambient field without an equal or greater energy input. The description is a physically incoherent assemblage of electromagnetic concepts that does not identify a real energy source or respect thermodynamic limits.

The patent describes a 'magnetic energy generator' that claims to produce amplified energy output (300x to 6000x) through magnetic interactions without identifying any external energy input to sustain it. This constitutes a clear violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation), as it claims to create energy from nothing within a closed system of magnetic components.

The patent describes a magnetic energy conversion system with feedback loops between components, implying energy amplification without an external source. This violates energy conservation, as magnetic fields store energy but cannot provide net work without an external input or consumption of the field itself. The design fits the pattern of a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The device is described as a magnetic energy generator that uses permanent magnets and magnetic components to produce electrical power. It violates fundamental physics because it claims to generate net power output without identifying an external energy source to replenish the system, effectively attempting to create a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The patent describes a magnetic energy conversion device that claims to generate cascading or multiplied magnetic fields and motion from an initial magnetic source without a clear, sustained external energy input. This constitutes a perpetual motion claim, as it implies the extraction of net work from a system in equilibrium (permanent magnets), directly violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation).

The patent claim describes a device where a created gradient is used to produce energy, and part of that output energy is fed back to maintain the gradient. This constitutes a circular energy flow with no net external input, which violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The vague, obfuscated language prevents identification of a legitimate external energy source.

This magnetic energy transformer claims to produce output force through magnetic attraction/repulsion and mechanical leverage without identifying any external energy input. Permanent magnets alone cannot provide net work in a cyclic process, making this a violation of energy conservation laws. The complex mechanical design obscures the fundamental thermodynamic impossibility of extracting continuous work from static magnetic fields.

The claim explicitly states the device consumes little energy but produces much more ('viel Strom erzeugt und wenig Verbraucht'), which is a direct violation of the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The description suggests an over-unity or perpetual motion machine without a legitimate external energy source.

This patent describes a magnetic motor/generator system that claims to achieve continuous rotation and electrical output using only the attraction and repulsion forces between permanent magnets. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it violates energy conservation by purporting to generate useful work (electricity) from a system with no external energy input to replenish the magnetic potential energy used to overcome losses.

The device claims to produce a large energy output from a small input by cyclically lifting and dropping masses. This is impossible because the energy required to lift the masses must be at least as great as the energy recovered from their fall, making it a net loss system. The description is a classic violation of the conservation of energy.

The device claims to output more power than it draws from the electrical mains, which is a direct violation of energy conservation. The described circuitry, including capacitor banks and IGBTs, can only control, condition, or temporarily store energy from the mains; it cannot create new energy. The use of technical terms like 'electron acceleration' obfuscates the fundamental over-unity claim.

The patent describes a mechanical system with an electric motor, conveyor belt, and generator in a loop. The wording implies the motor only 'supports' the operation, suggesting the system could sustain itself or produce excess energy from the generator. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as there is no identified external energy source to compensate for inevitable losses from friction and electrical conversion.

The system describes a complex process but omits the crucial energy balance. The electrical energy required to create the plasma from electrolyzed gas will always exceed any electrical energy recovered from separating its charged particles, as the plasma generation and particle separation are lossy processes. This constitutes a violation of the first law of thermodynamics.

The patent describes a process to extract electrical energy from ordinary ground or water by using applied electric fields to pull out electrons. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) because the energy required to ionize the source material and move the electrons must come from somewhere, and the patent provides no legitimate external source or gradient. It effectively claims to create useful energy from an equilibrium system.

The device claims to generate useful DC power by rectifying both ambient electromagnetic waves and the random thermal motion of electrons. While harvesting ambient EM radiation (e.g., RF) is physically possible but extremely low power, directly converting uniform ambient heat into electricity without a thermal gradient violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, making the core energy claim impossible.

This magnetic motor claims to produce continuous mechanical output from small electrical inputs using permanent magnet arrangements, violating energy conservation. The description uses complex magnetic terminology but describes no actual external energy source, making it a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

This device is a classic perpetual motion machine claim. It describes a complex mechanical system with springs, flywheels, magnets, and impacting steel balls, asserting it can produce continuous, amplified kinetic energy without any external fuel or power input. This directly and unequivocally violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics.

The device is a classic over-unity claim. It describes a generator powered by motors, whose electrical output is then used to power the same motors. This closed loop violates energy conservation, as the system's inevitable losses (friction, heat, resistance) would drain any initial energy, requiring continuous external input to sustain motion.

The patent describes a mechanical apparatus but claims its energy comes from vague, non-thermodynamic sources like 'natural electron spin' and 'Zero Point Energy.' This constitutes a violation because it implicitly claims to extract net useful work without a clear, lawful energy input gradient, bypassing the need for fuel or an external energy source, which contradicts energy conservation and the laws of thermodynamics.

The patent describes a system claiming to generate and transmit extremely high electrical energy over unlimited distances with high efficiency, but it fails to identify a sufficient external energy source or account for the work required in its described processes. The language is obfuscated and implies energy multiplication, directly violating energy conservation.

The device claims to produce continuous mechanical energy by converting the potential energy of springs while simultaneously re-tensioning them using magnetic repulsion forces. This describes a closed-loop system with no net external energy input, which is impossible under the laws of thermodynamics. The magnets and springs form a conservative system that cannot perpetually output net work.

This patent claims a device that outputs more electrical energy than it inputs by using a capacitor's charging and discharging energy simultaneously, which violates the first law of thermodynamics. No external energy source is identified to account for the claimed excess output, making this a classic perpetual motion claim.

The patent text uses dense, obscure technical jargon to describe a process that claims to generate high-power electricity from a fluid medium. It fails to identify a legitimate external energy source, and the described mechanisms suggest an attempt to create energy from within a closed system, violating the first law of thermodynamics.

The patent claim describes a complex system of high-frequency oscillators and resonators claiming to produce continuous high-power output, but it completely fails to account for the required energy input. The use of obscure, technically-sounding language obscures a fundamental violation of energy conservation, as it implies sustained output without sustained input.

The device claims to be a 'perpetual motion machine' that harvests ambient infrared energy to produce excess work for pressure increase and refrigeration, but its described circuit is just a complex arrangement of capacitors and switches with no defined ambient energy input mechanism. This violates both the first and second laws of thermodynamics by implying energy creation and useful work extraction from a single-temperature reservoir.

This device claims to be a 'second kind perpetual motion machine' that extracts net work from ambient air heat using electrical input, then recovers more electricity than input via thermoelectric conversion and feedback loops. This violates both energy conservation and the laws of thermodynamics, as it attempts to extract useful work from a single thermal reservoir without a proper temperature gradient.

The device is a passive arrangement of metal plates and an insulator, requiring significant external electrical input to 'excite' it. It claims to output more useful DC electrical energy than is supplied, violating the first law of thermodynamics. The description suggests a closed-loop system that could power itself and a load, which is a definitive perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to generate electrical energy by using an electrically-powered electromagnetic device connected to a ground. This describes a closed loop where the input energy powers the generator, and the output is supposedly additional electricity from the ground, violating conservation of energy. The Earth's grounding system is not an infinite source of free energy.

The patent describes a system using unbalanced rotors and 'electron spin resonance' to allegedly generate propulsion, braking, steering, and electricity. It violates core physics principles by implying the creation of net mechanical work and electrical energy from internal cyclic motions without an external energy input, constituting a perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to generate a sustained electrical current in a closed conductor using only an initial powered electromagnet and a ground connection, violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The ground is not an infinite electron energy source, and without a maintained thermodynamic gradient or continuous input, the claimed perpetual current is impossible.

The device violates energy conservation. The microwave generator is the only clear energy input, and the described phenomena (arcs, heat) are energy dissipation pathways, not sources. The claims use jargon to imply a novel power generation method, but it is thermodynamically impossible to get more electrical energy out than is put in to create the resonance.

The system violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The motor-generator pair cannot output more electrical energy than it takes in, and each conversion step (battery->motor->generator->battery) loses energy to heat. Without an external charger, the batteries will deplete.

The patent describes a device that allegedly uses a small electrical input to 'absorb' magnetic energy and produce a larger electrical output, which can then feedback to sustain the process. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it claims to generate net energy from a permanent magnet's static field without an external energy source or gradient to exploit.

This patent describes a complex magnetic rotor system but fails to identify any external energy source. The device appears to be configured as a magnetic perpetual motion machine, attempting to generate kinetic energy solely from internal magnetic forces, which violates energy conservation. Any initial rotation would decay due to inevitable losses.

The device appears to be a magnetically levitated rotor driven by a turbine, which is in turn driven by the rotor's shaft. This describes a self-driving, closed energy loop with no external energy source specified to compensate for inevitable losses, constituting a perpetual motion machine of the first kind that violates energy conservation.

The patent describes a static magnetic configuration claimed to improve motor output and efficiency. Since permanent magnets are conservative field sources, reconfiguring them cannot provide net energy to a motor system without an external energy input, violating energy conservation. The claim represents a classic permanent-magnet-based over-unity violation.

The patent describes attaching generators to rotating parts of machines and vehicles to produce 'additional' electricity. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics; the generated electricity is not additional but is converted from the machine's own mechanical work, increasing its energy consumption. There is no novel external energy source, only parasitic extraction.

This patent describes a 'magnetic motor' that explicitly claims to operate without any energy source, which directly violates the first law of thermodynamics. Permanent magnet configurations cannot produce continuous net work output as they eventually reach equilibrium, and all real systems have losses from friction, resistance, and magnetic hysteresis that require continuous energy input to overcome.

The patent describes a magnetic system that claims to generate electrical energy by using its own output to create a magnetic potential difference, which then drives further generation. This constitutes a classic over-unity or perpetual motion claim, violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it lacks a defined external energy source and describes a closed, self-powering cycle.

The device is described as a 'magnetic wheel' using permanent magnets and compression springs to produce continuous rotation without any external energy input. This is a classic perpetual motion machine claim, violating both the first law (energy conservation) and second law (no net work from an equilibrium cycle) of thermodynamics.

The device claims to generate more electrical energy than it consumes by 'amplifying' the flux from permanent magnets. This violates energy conservation, as permanent magnets are not energy sources; manipulating their fields requires work. The description uses correct magnetic terminology (reluctance, flux) to obscure the core violation: output energy cannot exceed the total electrical and mechanical work input.

The device claims to use a battery to start a generator which drives magnets, producing more power than the input to run other machines. This is a classic over-unity claim that violates the first law of thermodynamics. Magnets facilitate forces but do not create energy; the system's output cannot exceed the energy drawn from the initial battery plus any other environmental inputs, which are not described.

The patent describes a system of cascading magnetic converters that claim to produce output energy greater than input, effectively suggesting energy multiplication from permanent magnets or magnetic circuits without a clear, sustainable external energy source. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it implies a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, extracting net work from a static magnetic field without degrading it.

The patent describes a closed-loop system where a standard UPS circuit powers an 'electron captor,' which then supposedly powers the UPS and external loads, violating energy conservation. It fails to identify any external energy source to compensate for system losses and the claimed useful output, constituting a perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to generate continuous mechanical drive torque from ambient electromagnetic vibrations using electron spin resonance in a rotating gyroscope. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) by implying creation of energy from an undefined, diffuse source, and the second law by attempting to extract useful work from an equilibrium environment without a sufficient gradient.

The device claims to generate electrical power by using an electrical input to accelerate charge carriers, then collecting them to produce a larger electrical output. This describes a closed electrical loop with lossy components, violating the conservation of energy. The vague terminology obscures the fact that no net energy source is identified.

The device claims to generate useful energy (torque, rotation, electricity) primarily through the strategic angular arrangement of permanent and electromagnets. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it claims a net energy output from a closed system of magnets, violating energy conservation. No legitimate external energy source capable of supplying the claimed output is identified.

The described system is a thermodynamic violation. It proposes using a hydrogen fuel cell's output to run an electrolyzer that produces hydrogen for that same fuel cell. This creates a closed energy loop with inevitable losses at every conversion step, making net power generation impossible without an external energy source.

The patent describes a system using Peltier devices in a cascading arrangement that appears to use its own electrical output to create temperature gradients and generate more electricity, forming a closed energy loop. This violates energy conservation, as it lacks a clear external energy source and implies perpetual motion.

The patent describes a light-emitting device that uses its own emitted light to generate more electrical power, forming a closed loop. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, violating energy conservation, as it claims to produce net energy output without an adequate external energy input.

The apparatus claims to generate immense electric energy by extracting power from both strokes of a hydraulic press using piezoelectrics, while suggesting the potential energy is restored for reuse. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation), as the electrical energy output must come from the initial external work input, with inevitable losses. The system cannot output more energy than is put into it.

The device claims to provide inexhaustible energy from an undefined 'astral' source to charge batteries in a loop, with no connection to any real energy gradient. This is a classic violation of the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it proposes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, creating energy from nothing.

The device claims to produce significant thrust using laser photons reflecting internally, misapplying the Lorentz force to neutral photons and implying energy multiplication through internal reflections. This violates conservation of momentum and energy, as no external energy source or reaction mass is identified to account for the net thrust output.

The patent claims a wireless power transmission device generates 'excess' electricity (18W output from 10W input) by harvesting environmental electromagnetic field energy, which violates the First Law of Thermodynamics. No mechanism is provided for how the Earth's ambient field constitutes a usable thermodynamic gradient from which net work can be extracted, making this a classic over-unity claim.

The device claims to power a load while simultaneously recharging its own batteries using only energy derived from those same batteries through a conversion loop. This violates energy conservation, as the described cycle cannot overcome the inherent efficiency losses in each conversion step (inverter, charger, motor, generator), leading to net energy depletion.

The device is described as a 'perpetual electric motor' that generates current in a load circuit using isolated electrodes and contacting elements, vaguely referencing heat at the contact point. This constitutes a classic perpetual motion machine claim, violating both the first and second laws of thermodynamics by proposing continuous useful work output without a corresponding energy input or a necessary thermal gradient.

This device is a classic magnetic perpetual motion machine. It claims to produce motive power by alternately shielding and un-shielding repelling magnets or charges. The critical flaw is that the energy needed to insert the diverter (shield) against the repulsive force is at least as great as the energy recovered during the repulsive stroke, resulting in zero or negative net work output. No external energy source is identified to make up the difference.

The patent describes a system with circulating fluid and magnetic fields but fails to identify any legitimate energy source. The mechanism implies creation of sustained fluid motion through magnetic field interactions alone, which would violate energy conservation as work done on the fluid must come from somewhere. The use of 'quantum' terminology appears to be obfuscation for what is essentially a perpetual motion claim.

The device is a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims to convert the kinetic energy of falling magnets into rotation, but ignores the energy required to lift the magnets back to the top of the guides to repeat the cycle. The magnetic repulsion is an internal, conservative force that cannot provide net energy output over a complete cycle.

The device claims to generate electricity by resonating a gas in a sealed chamber. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as the only identified energy input powers the frequency generator; any electrical output from the core would imply energy creation. Resonating a gas is not a source of energy.

This patent describes a device claiming to cyclically extract useful work from a material's internal energy without raising its temperature above ambient or requiring external energy input. This violates both energy conservation (material's energy would deplete) and the second law (cannot extract net work from a single thermal reservoir at uniform temperature).

The patent describes a device that purports to generate electricity using magnetic bodies, vibration, and rotation without identifying a legitimate external energy source. The mechanism suggests energy amplification without an input, which violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The use of technical terms like 'magnetic body,' 'induction body,' and 'vibration unit' in a vague, non-quantitative way obfuscates the fundamental lack of an energy source.

The claim violates energy conservation by proposing a system where energy extracted from blade motion via induction (a loss) is stored and then used to re-start the blades to generate more electricity, implying a net energy gain. This describes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it lacks a sufficient external energy input to sustain the cycle against losses.

The device is a mechanical system with no described external energy source. Its claim to generate energy to power a motor or battery from its own internal motion constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, directly violating the law of conservation of energy. Reducing friction does not create energy.

The device claims to produce usable artificial gravity fields, which violates General Relativity as such fields require planetary-scale masses/energies. The energy description is circular and obscures the massive external input needed to overcome thermodynamic losses, especially at 4K. It uses correct terms like 'gravitomagnetic' but applies them to an impossible, scale-breaking effect.

The device claims to become self-powering and generate useful external power after an initial start, violating the first law of thermodynamics. The description obfuscates the true energy source with vague terms like 'independent energy from the air', which, if meant as ambient harvesting, is insufficient to explain the claimed performance.

The device describes a classic 'self-charging' perpetual motion scheme. The initial battery energy is converted to light with significant loss, then the light is converted back to electricity by a solar cell with further loss. The system cannot recharge itself to its original state, let alone provide net useful work, due to these irreversible losses. It violates both the conservation of energy and the laws of thermodynamics.

The patent describes a device that claims to generate electricity by cascading energy conversions using ambient heat as the sole source, without a colder reservoir to create a usable thermodynamic gradient. This directly violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, constituting a perpetual motion machine.

The patent claims a method for net energy extraction by cyclically manipulating Casimir force parameters. This violates energy conservation because the Casimir force is conservative in standard quantum electrodynamics; any work extracted during one part of the cycle must be less than or equal to the work input to reset the system, unless energy is drawn from an external source not accounted for in the claims.

The patent describes a passive circuit initially charged by a DC source. It incorrectly claims the resulting decaying oscillations in the LC network constitute a sustained AC power output sourced from the vacuum, which violates energy conservation. No mechanism for net energy extraction from the vacuum or continuous work output is physically justified.

The device is claimed to be self-powering, using its own output to recharge its starting battery. This creates a closed energy loop where every conversion (electrical to laser, laser to electrical) incurs significant losses, making net gain impossible. It is a textbook violation of energy conservation.

The claim describes a system where, after an initial input from wind/tidal energy, redirecting energy between batteries and a dynamo produces unlimited accumulating energy. This is a classic perpetual motion claim, as it violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation) by asserting net energy output can exceed and grow from a finite initial input in a closed system.

The device claims to generate electrical energy by exploiting the internal heat of its own coil through a special switching process, effectively proposing to extract net work from a component at a single temperature. This violates both the first law (energy conservation) and the second law (no work from an equilibrium thermal reservoir) of thermodynamics.

The claim fundamentally violates energy conservation. In a series circuit at constant voltage, adding identical lamps increases total resistance, reducing the current and total power consumed from the source. The observed constant readings are likely an artifact of measurement precision or the power supply regulation, not evidence of infinite energy. The conclusion is thermodynamically impossible.

The patent describes a thermoelectric conversion device that claims to directly and continuously convert heat to electricity while maintaining a temperature difference. This constitutes a heat engine, but it fails to account for the energy required to create/maintain the thermal gradient, violating the Second Law. The system, as described, would deplete the gradient unless externally driven.

The patent describes a system where a magnetic field rotation device is powered by a magnetic field generator to produce an output, creating a circular energy flow with no clear external input. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it implies the creation of energy from within the system or output exceeding the identifiable input.

The patent claims an electrical energy source with an efficiency greater than one, which is a direct violation of the first law of thermodynamics. The described apparatus is a capacitor-plasma switching circuit; all output energy must originate from the input charging and excitation energy, minus inevitable losses. No novel external energy source is identified to justify a net gain.

The claim explicitly states input energy is increased 4-20 fold, which directly violates the conservation of energy. The described system of synchronous rotors, generators, and control elements suggests a closed mechanical/electrical system with no external energy source to justify the claimed amplification, making it a textbook perpetual motion claim.

The patent describes an electrical drive that, after a startup from the grid, operates in a closed loop where a motor drives a generator that recharges an inductive accumulator to power the motor. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it claims to produce net electrical power greater than its consumption with no ongoing external energy source, directly violating the law of energy conservation.

The device is essentially a lossy battery: it uses grid electricity to power lights to generate less electricity from solar cells. The claim of getting 'double the power' or charging batteries 'without cost' directly violates the first law of thermodynamics, as it creates energy from nothing within the system.

The patent describes a device using arranged magnets to generate directional motion, but fails to identify any external energy input. Since permanent magnet fields are conservative, no net work can be extracted from them in a cycle without an external energy source, directly violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation).

The device claims to generate energy using permanent magnets and magnetic forces without identifying any external energy source. Since permanent magnets are in equilibrium and their fields are conservative, any work extracted from magnetic attraction/repulsion in a cycle must be paid back, making net energy generation impossible without an external input.

The device claims to be an electric generator with a non-moving rotor. It uses electrical energy to sequentially power electromagnets, creating a changing magnetic field that induces current in stator coils. Claim 7 proposes feeding some output back to power the system. This describes an electrically-driven transformer or inductor with feedback, not a net power generator. For continuous net power output, it requires an external energy source, which is not identified, thus violating energy conservation.

This patent describes an electrical system that claims to produce more energy than it consumes by manipulating voltages and currents internally. This is impossible as it violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation). All components like transformers and voltage multipliers have losses, and the described process of creating 'static charges' to add voltage does not create usable electrical power.

The device is a classic perpetual motion machine of the first kind. The generator cannot produce more electrical energy than the mechanical work it extracts from the motor's shaft. This extraction increases the motor's load, causing it to drain the battery faster than the generator can recharge it, resulting in a net energy loss with each cycle.

The apparatus claims to generate electrical power in excess of its load and use part of that excess to power itself, creating a self-sustaining loop with net power output. This is impossible as it violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation); every conversion step loses energy to heat, so the feedback power is always less than the generator output, leading to shutdown without an external source.

The described system violates energy conservation. Generating electricity via motional EMF requires mechanical work to move the conductor against the magnetic resistance. The patent treats the celestial motion as a free energy source, but fails to account for the energy needed to both create the magnetic field and to sustain the relative motion against the induced braking force.

The claim violates energy conservation. In any generator, the mechanical resistance (torque) on the shaft is directly and fundamentally linked to the electrical power extracted. Attempting to eliminate this resistance via magnetic geometry while still generating electricity is thermodynamically impossible, as it implies creating electrical energy without an equal input of mechanical work.

The described system is a classic over-unity/perpetual motion claim. After the battery starts the motor, the alternator's output is insufficient to both power the motor and supply useful external work due to inevitable losses. The claim of unlimited energy violates the first law of thermodynamics.

The device claims to output more electrical energy than is input by using pulses to cool a conductor and absorb ambient heat, which directly violates energy conservation and the laws of thermodynamics. The description misuses physics terminology ('etalon', 'resonance') to obscure a classic over-unity claim lacking a legitimate, quantified external energy source.

The device claims to cool an object (extract heat) while simultaneously producing more electrical energy than is supplied, effectively creating a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. This directly violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation) and the Second Law (cannot convert ambient heat into useful work without a colder reservoir).

The patent describes a system that claims to generate and absorb energy from a vague environment using interacting magnetic fields and ions, but it fails to specify a legitimate external energy source. The description uses invented and misapplied terminology to obscure the fact that it proposes extracting net work without a thermodynamic gradient, constituting a violation of energy conservation.

The device is a classic perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims that after an initial start from a battery, the generator can produce enough electricity to power the motor driving it, sustaining the cycle indefinitely. This is impossible because every conversion step loses energy as waste heat, causing the system to rapidly stop without continuous external energy input.

The patent describes an impossible energy conversion process. It uses correct-sounding terms (antimatter, tokamak, particle accelerator) to obfuscate the core violation: it implicitly claims net energy output while ignoring the massive energy required to create and contain the antimatter, which is the true energy source. The described rotation mechanism is physically nonsensical.

The system describes a loop where electrical energy is used to run a high-voltage generator and a Van de Graaff generator, which then supposedly powers an electrostatic motor. It claims 'amplification' of electrostatic energy without introducing a new external energy source, implying creation of energy from within the closed system, which violates the first law of thermodynamics. The use of correct electrostatic terms obscures the fundamental violation of energy conservation.

The device is described as a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims to use part of its own output to sustain itself indefinitely while producing excess power for the grid, violating the conservation of energy. The references to Earth's magnetic field and 'near frictionless' operation are insufficient to circumvent thermodynamic limits.

The device is a standard thermoelectric generator setup requiring an external heat source and sink. The claim of 'free electricity' violates energy conservation, as the electrical output cannot exceed the total energy input into the system, which includes the laser power and any ambient heat harvested. The description obfuscates this by focusing only on the low laser power.

The device claims to generate more electrical output than input by using its own internally circulated light, which is a violation of the first law of thermodynamics. The described 'photon-electron interactions' in a sealed, passive crystal do not constitute a valid energy source, making this a perpetual motion claim of the first kind.

The device claims to produce more electrical energy than it consumes by cyclically harnessing the static Casimir force with a piezoelectric element. This violates the conservation of energy, as the energy needed to reset the system (modulate the Casimir force) must equal or exceed any electrical energy harvested from it during the cycle, making net power generation impossible.

The device claims to produce continuous electrical power from a permanent magnet after an initial pulse, violating the conservation of energy. The description invokes nonsensical physics concepts like a magnetic 'whirl-pool' and an 'atmospheric depression' to obfuscate the lack of a real, sustainable energy source.

This device is a classic over-unity claim. It proposes a loop where a battery runs a motor that turns an alternator to recharge the same battery, while also powering a large external load. This is impossible because every energy conversion step loses energy to heat, friction, and electrical resistance. The system cannot sustain itself or output net power without an external energy source.

The described system is a classic over-unity claim. It attempts to create a closed loop where a generator recharges the battery that powers the motor driving the generator, while also outputting significant useful power. This violates the conservation of energy, as the total output power (charging + load) cannot exceed the input power minus all inevitable losses.

The described device is a static arrangement of magnets and conductors with no moving parts, changing fields, or external energy input. It violates energy conservation by claiming to generate usable electrical power from a permanent magnet's static field alone, which is thermodynamically impossible as it would constitute a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The device claims to perform useful work and fully recharge its own battery in a closed, reversible cycle, which directly violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) and the second law (entropy must increase in a real process). The description obfuscates the lack of a legitimate external energy source.

The device is described as a permanent magnet machine that exports electricity continually after a startup from a self-charging battery. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, violating energy conservation. The magnetic forces used to induce current and repel rotor cores will inherently dissipate the rotor's kinetic energy, requiring external work to maintain motion.

The claim violates fundamental physics. The Casimir force is not an external energy source but a conservative force arising from boundary conditions on the quantum vacuum; you cannot extract net work from it in a cycle. The device describes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, claiming to create energy from nothing.

The device is described as a 'generator' but provides no external mechanical or thermal energy input. The only identified energy source is its own power supply, making it an electrically-driven oscillator, not a net energy generator. Any electrical output would be less than the controller and magnet input power, violating energy conservation if net output is claimed.

The patent claims describe a material that allegedly generates electrical power from mechanical loads or waves without creating a voltage, which violates the fundamental requirement of an electromotive force to drive a current. The proposed mechanism of 'reshaping charge carrier wave characteristics' is physically nonsensical and obscures a likely violation of energy conservation, especially when claiming simultaneous energy harvesting and structural enhancement from the same finite energy input.

The patent directly and explicitly claims to violate the conservation of energy, which is a fundamental law of physics. The described mechanisms—phase shifts and signal distortions in electrical circuits—manage the flow of real and reactive power but cannot create net energy without an external source.

The claim violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation) by proposing a device that generates both electrical and mechanical power while implying increased efficiency, without identifying a sufficient external energy source. It attempts to circumvent thermodynamic limits using unsubstantiated theoretical constructs.

The claim describes a classic over-unity/perpetual motion device. The system ignores all energy losses and proposes that a fan, powered by its own generated electricity (after an initial wind input), can sustain its own motion indefinitely while also powering external loads. This directly violates energy conservation laws.

The device claims an energy conversion coefficient far greater than unity (400%-2000%), which violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation). It incorrectly treats the ambient Earth electromagnetic field as an energy source that can be tapped for net work output without a compensating dissipation, analogous to a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. The comparison to heat pump coefficient of performance (COP) is a misleading obfuscation, as COP relates to energy movement, not creation.

The claim describes a device that supposedly generates and stores energy from magnetic attraction/repulsion and quartz compression, but provides no source of energy to initiate or sustain these cycles, violating energy conservation. The technical language is used incoherently, mixing unrelated semiconductor concepts with energy generation claims.

The described device is a collection of energy storage and conversion parts with no identified source of energy to recharge the battery. Running a load from the battery will deplete it. Calling it 'self-charging' without an external energy source is a direct violation of energy conservation.

The device claims to produce limitless or greatly increased electrical power by isolating like charges, which fundamentally violates the conservation of energy. No legitimate external energy source is described, and the proposed mechanism misapplies basic electrostatic principles.

The patent claim explicitly states its purpose is to disprove conservation of energy and produce more output electrical energy than input, which is a direct violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics. The described innovations do not identify any external energy source, making the claimed over-unity operation impossible.

The device attempts to recycle energy lost to tire deformation to propel the car. This violates energy conservation because the harvesting process itself increases the energy needed to deform the tire, and the recovered electricity is always less than that extra cost. It cannot create net energy to assist propulsion; it can only recapture a portion of a loss it exacerbates.

The patent describes a system that appears to violate energy conservation. It claims to capture and store energy from both the charging and collapsing magnetic field of a coil, and to generate additional output from 'sweeping' permanent magnet flux, without identifying a sufficient external energy source to account for the total claimed outputs beyond the initial electrical input.

The device is a textbook perpetual motion machine. It claims to generate rotational kinetic energy from a magnetically constrained sphere, convert it to electricity, and use that electricity to power its own magnets. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it provides no net external energy source to compensate for inevitable losses.

The system's core claim of recycling battery energy to run itself and produce excess power is a textbook violation of energy conservation. After the initial solar input is depleted, the proposed closed loop cannot sustain itself, let alone provide net output, due to inevitable losses in every conversion step.

The device claims to double electrical current by using grid power to run lamps that illuminate solar panels. This is a classic violation of energy conservation, as the solar panels can only output a fraction of the light energy they receive, which itself is only a fraction of the original grid power. The system's total output cannot exceed its total input.

The device claims to generate usable overvoltage and reduce energy consumption by over 50% by capturing vague 'suspended energies,' which is a classic sign of incomplete energy accounting. The described mechanism lacks a legitimate, quantifiable energy source, and the performance claims violate the conservation of energy for a passive device attached to an electrical system.

The device is a form of permanent magnet motor, which cannot produce net work. The electrical energy needed to reorient the stator magnets against the strong magnetic forces of the rotor will always equal or exceed any mechanical work extracted, violating conservation of energy. The claim of transforming 'magnetic energy into mechanical energy' misrepresents magnets as an energy source rather than a means of temporary force transmission.

The claim violates the conservation of energy. The magnetic force used to drive the piston is powered solely by the electrical input. No additional, unaccounted energy source is identified, making the promised amplification impossible. The system is a lossy electromechanical converter, not an amplifier.

The device claims electricity generation using magnetic arrays without identifying any energy source, violating conservation of energy. Magnetic systems alone cannot produce net work without an external energy input or thermodynamic gradient to exploit.

The device claims to produce kinetic and electrical energy from undefined 'anti-weight' and repulsive forces, with no need for fuel. This constitutes a perpetual motion claim, violating energy conservation by asserting a continuous energy output without an identifiable, quantifiable energy input.

The claim describes a system for high energy production with minimal cost but fails to specify any legitimate external energy source, violating energy conservation. The use of vague, grandiose language and references to unspecified 'bio-physical theories' is characteristic of pseudoscientific perpetual motion claims.

The claim describes a photovoltaic system with LEDs but implies 24-hour operation without a clear, quantified energy storage system. This violates energy conservation by omitting critical accounting for how daytime solar energy is stored to power LEDs continuously. The vague language and lack of technical specifications obscure the fundamental energy balance.

The described system is a classic over-unity/perpetual motion claim. It posits a closed electromechanical loop where a generator powers the motor that drives it, with surplus energy output. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation), as it lacks an external energy source and claims net energy production from nothing.

The patent describes an autonomous generator where a motor drives magnets to generate electricity, part of which is fed back to power the same motor. This constitutes a closed-loop energy system with no external input, which violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it claims continuous operation without an external energy source.

The patent describes multiplying magnetic forces through magnet arrangement to create rotary motion, which violates energy conservation. Permanent magnets are conservative fields; no net energy can be extracted from their static configuration without an external input to change the system, making this a perpetual motion claim.

The claim describes a mechanism to generate propulsive force using a superconducting coil in a magnetic field, heavily relying on the Meissner effect. It fails to account for the substantial energy required to achieve and maintain superconductivity (cryogenics) and to establish the magnetic field. The system cannot produce net useful work exceeding these inputs, constituting a violation of energy conservation.

The device claims to generate energy and store unlimited data by manipulating a single electron's trajectory with programmed pulses in an oxygen environment, but provides no identifiable external energy source. This violates the First Law of Thermodynamics (energy conservation), as the claimed outputs require energy that is not accounted for in the described inputs.

The claim explicitly states the output energy exceeds the electrical input energy, which violates the first law of thermodynamics. The described mechanism of a conductor absorbing vague 'external energy' from pulses lacks a credible, quantified source to justify the claimed gain, making it a perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to generate power using a spinning disk with nano-features, but identifies no external energy source to convert. Any force or induced current measured would simply extract energy from the disk's rotation, requiring continuous motor input to maintain spin. This constitutes a violation of energy conservation, presenting as a perpetual motion scheme.

The claim describes a superconducting wire in a specific winding pattern but provides no physical mechanism for a net energy gain. It attempts to use correct terminology (Cooper pairs, superconductivity) to obfuscate the core violation: it proposes a system that would generate electricity without an identifiable external energy source, directly contradicting the law of conservation of energy.

The device claims to generate electricity with zero energy input, which directly violates the conservation of energy. The description of a 98% efficient, continuous cycle with 'recyclable' energy ignores the inevitable losses to heat and friction required by thermodynamics, making it a perpetual motion machine.

The patent describes a circuit that claims to generate electrical energy from parametric excitations of the quantum vacuum ground state via Josephson junctions, converting resulting photons to current. This is a classic zero-point energy claim that violates energy conservation, as extracting usable work from the quantum vacuum ground state is thermodynamically impossible without a temperature gradient or external pump energy.

The described device is a classic perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims to produce continuous rotation using only fixed permanent magnets, which is impossible because magnetic forces are conservative and cannot provide net work over a cycle without an external energy source to overcome losses and reset the system.

The patent describes a machine using electromagnetic components to produce electricity but fails to identify any external energy source. A closed system cannot produce net electrical output without consuming stored energy or harnessing an environmental gradient, directly violating energy conservation laws. The use of technical terms without clear energy accounting suggests a perpetual motion claim.

The device claims to generate a net propulsive force solely from internal magnetic forces in a curved core. This is a clear violation of Newton's third law and conservation of momentum, as internal forces cannot accelerate the center of mass of a closed system. It is a form of reactionless drive, which is physically impossible.

The patent claims a device that performs useful work (driving chemical reactions) solely by creating an asymmetry in quantum vacuum energy density. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as the quantum vacuum's zero-point energy is not a source of extractable work; attempting to use it in this way constitutes a perpetual motion scheme.

The patent claims a device that extracts useful energy by locally reducing quantum vacuum energy density, typically via a Casimir cavity. This violates thermodynamics because the quantum vacuum is in a ground state at equilibrium; extracting net work from it without a colder reservoir or an external drive is impossible, constituting a perpetual motion machine of the third kind.

The device is a perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It attempts to generate vertical lift using only internal electromagnetic forces and mechanical linkages, violating Newton's laws of motion. No net external force can be produced on a vehicle by forces entirely contained within it.

The claim describes an internal electromagnetic arrangement intended to produce a net force on an assembly like a spacecraft. This is a textbook violation of momentum conservation, as it attempts to create propulsion without expelling reaction mass or interacting with an external field, making it a form of reactionless drive, which is physically impossible.

The patent claims a device that generates electricity solely from ambient heat at any temperature above absolute zero, without requiring a temperature difference or any other external stimulus. This is a textbook violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics (a perpetual motion machine of the second kind), as it claims to convert thermal energy from a single reservoir completely into work with no other effect.

The device claims to generate and capture 'gravito-magnetic energy' from spinning surface features, a term with no basis in established physics. While the system could legitimately detect features using GMR or piezoelectric sensors (consuming electrical energy to do so), the claim of 'producing power' from this setup suggests energy extraction from a conservative rotational system, violating energy conservation.

The patent describes a device that claims to generate energy from weight differences created by opposite electric charges on bodies. This is a violation of energy conservation, as the electrostatic forces are internal and any motion generated would require at least as much energy to reset the system (e.g., to re-separate the charges), resulting in zero net energy output.

The device claims to use 'magnet motors' to drive hydrofoils for propulsion, but provides no valid external energy source, implying work can be extracted from permanent magnets alone. This violates energy conservation, as permanent magnets are static fields in equilibrium and cannot perform net work without an energy gradient being depleted.

The device claims to achieve perpetual motion and generate electricity using only the repulsive forces between arranged permanent magnets. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) because it proposes to create useful work from an internal, non-depleting configuration with no external energy input. The magnetic forces are conservative and cannot provide net energy over a cycle.

The device claims to generate continuous rotation using only permanent magnets and charged particles, which constitutes a perpetual motion machine. Static magnetic fields cannot provide net energy output without an external energy source, violating the first law of thermodynamics. The description uses technical terms but lacks a coherent, physically possible energy conversion process.

The device attempts to generate useful force or motion solely from the arrangement of permanent magnets. Since magnetic fields from permanent magnets are conservative and store finite energy, no net work can be extracted over a cycle without an external energy input, violating energy conservation. This is a classic magnetic perpetual motion claim.

The patent claims a device that generates electrical power using only ambient heat, with both electrodes at the same temperature. This is a textbook violation of the Kelvin-Planck statement of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which forbids a heat engine from receiving energy from a single thermal reservoir and producing net work. The described contact potential cannot deliver sustained power without an external driving force or gradient.

The device is described as a permanent magnet motor using a Geneva drive mechanism to sequence magnetic attractions/repulsions. It violates the first law of thermodynamics as it claims to produce continuous mechanical work (turning a crankshaft) without an external energy input, attempting to extract net work from the static fields of permanent magnets, which is impossible in a closed cycle.

The described 'centrifugal drive' attempts to create net thrust by moving masses radially within a rotating system. This is physically impossible for a closed system, as internal forces (centrifugal and magnetic) cannot produce a net external force on the system's center of mass, violating conservation of momentum. It constitutes a form of reactionless drive.

The claim describes a system where magnetic material achieves permanent rotation driven by the environment and a ferrofluid, which then drives a generator. This constitutes a perpetual motion claim of the first kind, as it proposes continuous energy extraction without an identifiable, sustainable external energy input to compensate for losses, violating the first law of thermodynamics.

The device is an attempted reactionless drive or electrostatic perpetuum mobile. It describes a configuration of moving charged capacitor plates whose motions are claimed to be coordinated to produce net directional motion without expelling reaction mass or interacting with an external field, violating conservation of momentum and energy.

This device claims to produce continuous mechanical output using only permanent magnet fields, which violates energy conservation since static magnetic fields in equilibrium cannot perform net work over a cycle. The design attempts to create perpetual motion by converting magnetic potential energy to mechanical work without any external energy input.

The device is a static arrangement of a magnet and conductors with no described source of energy input or changing conditions. It claims to generate usable power, which would violate energy conservation by creating energy from a permanent magnet's fixed field.

The patent describes a magnetic repulsion device that claims to rotate and generate electricity indefinitely without any external energy input. This is a classic perpetual motion claim, directly violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it purports to create useful work from a system with no energy source to replenish losses.

The device is described as a 'permanent electric battery' using static magnets and a coil. It violates fundamental physics because a constant magnetic field cannot induce a continuous voltage in a stationary coil; no energy input is identified to account for the claimed electrical output, making it a perpetual motion claim.

This device claims to generate energy solely from the arrangement of permanent magnets, which violates energy conservation. Magnetic forces are conservative and cannot provide a net energy output without an external energy source to change the magnetic configuration or overcome hysteresis losses.

The device claims to generate rotation solely from the magnetic interaction with ambient charged particles in a vacuum, with no described external energy input or maintained gradient. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the second kind, violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics by attempting to convert ambient thermal energy entirely into work.

The device is a classic perpetual motion machine claim. It attempts to use gravity and a fixed magnet to create continuous rotation, but both are conservative forces that cannot add net energy to the system over a complete cycle. The energy gained on one part of the path is exactly lost on the return, violating the first law of thermodynamics.

This describes a 'permanent magnet motor' that attempts to use complex magnetic interactions to produce continuous rotation and output work without an external energy source. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as permanent magnets are conservative force fields; no net work can be extracted from them in a cyclic process without an external input to reset the system.

The device is an internal electromagnetic system powered solely by the spacecraft's own electrical supply. It cannot produce net thrust to accelerate the spacecraft because it lacks any external reaction mass or asymmetric interaction with an external field (like a photon rocket or an ion thruster), violating conservation of momentum.

The patent describes a closed system that attempts to power a load by cyclically transferring a fixed initial energy charge between two battery configurations and a transformer. This violates energy conservation and the second law of thermodynamics, as the continuous operation claimed is impossible without an external energy source to overcome inevitable losses from each transfer cycle.

The device is an electrical circuit that moves energy between two battery configurations and a transformer. While the switching process itself is not impossible, the described reversible, cyclical operation as a vehicle drive system violates energy conservation. All losses incurred during charging, discharging, and transformation must be supplied from the initial stored energy, depleting it. The patent implies indefinite operation without a net external energy input, which is thermodynamically impossible.

The device is a type of permanent magnet motor. It attempts to create perpetual motion by using a shield to manipulate magnetic forces, but the energy required to operate the shield is not provided by an external source and would dissipate the kinetic energy of the system. It violates energy conservation by claiming to produce net work from a static, conservative potential field.

The device is a permanent magnet motor, a classic type of perpetual motion machine. It claims to produce continuous rotation using only fixed magnets and a mechanical timing system, violating the first law of thermodynamics by creating energy from nothing and the second law by lacking a method to restore the magnetic potential gradient.

The device is an electromagnetic pendulum generator. Without an explicit, sustained external energy source to counteract damping, the oscillation will decay as energy is converted to electricity, violating energy conservation. The claim of functioning in a vacuum only reduces one loss mechanism but does not provide the needed energy input.

This device is a classic perpetual motion machine. It claims to use gravity to repeatedly bring like magnetic poles together, harnessing the repulsion for continuous rotation. However, in a complete cycle, the energy required to separate the magnets again (or to lift the gravity-driven mass) would equal or exceed any work gained from the repulsion, violating energy conservation.

The device is a magnetic perpetual motion machine. It attempts to generate continuous rotation using only fixed permanent magnets and a gear train, violating energy conservation. The magnetic forces are conservative and cannot provide net work over a closed cycle without an external, non-conservative energy input.

The device claims one magnet can cause another to rotate spontaneously using only a fixed magnetic arrangement. This is impossible because magnetic forces are conservative and cannot do net work in a closed cycle without an external energy source, violating energy conservation and constituting a perpetual motion machine.

The device is described as a magnetic perpetual motion machine. The controlled stator magnets can only redirect magnetic forces; the work required to turn them against magnetic repulsion/attraction must equal or exceed any rotational energy gained by the rotor. No external energy source is identified to make up the difference, violating conservation of energy.

The device describes a static, charged capacitor-like structure. While it can produce a brief pulse of current, it cannot generate continuous electrical power without an external energy source to replenish the separated charges, violating energy conservation.

The device is a permanent magnet motor, which claims to generate continuous motion from magnetic repulsion alone. This violates energy conservation because the magnetic force is conservative; any work extracted from the magnetic field during one part of the cycle must be paid back to reset the system, leading to zero net work output when accounting for losses.

The described device is a passive arrangement of magnets and conductors with no mechanism for energy input. Extracting continuous electrical power from static permanent magnets violates energy conservation, as it would constitute a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

This 'permanent magnet assisted engine' claims to produce continuous rotation and output power solely from the magnetic attraction between fixed and rotating permanent magnets. This violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it attempts to extract net work from a conservative force field without an external energy source, and the second law as it lacks a thermodynamic gradient to drive motion. The system is a classic magnetic perpetual motion machine.

The described 'magnetic motor' is a classical perpetual motion machine. It uses only the fixed magnetic fields of permanent magnets to produce motion, with no external energy input to reset the 'mobile magnet' mechanism. The work extracted from magnetic repulsion would be exactly canceled by the work required to overcome magnetic attraction during the reset phase of the cycle, resulting in zero net work output.

The device is a classic perpetual motion machine of the first kind. It claims to produce continuous mechanical output power using only fixed permanent magnets, which is impossible because magnetic forces are conservative and cannot do net work over a cycle without an external energy source to reset the system.

The patent describes a device that claims to produce a continuous electric current by rectifying the thermal motion of electrons in a solid using nanostructures and gravity, explicitly without requiring a thermal gradient. This is a textbook violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, as it proposes to do useful work from a single heat reservoir at uniform temperature.

The device is described as a 'perpetual motion machine' that requires no energy input to produce continuous power, which is a direct violation of the law of energy conservation. The mechanical arrangement of magnets, levers, and a pure iron plate cannot create energy; it can only temporarily convert stored potential energy (e.g., magnetic, gravitational) into motion until equilibrium is reached.

The device claims to generate power from a static magnetic field using the Hall effect in superconductors. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, as a static magnetic field alone cannot perform net work on a stationary system; energy must be expended to change the magnetic flux. The proposed series summation of static potentials cannot deliver sustained power.

The device claims to produce continuous rotation and even generate electricity using only fixed permanent magnets and magnetic blades. This is impossible because magnetic forces are conservative; any work done to attract a blade is exactly recovered (as opposing work) when it leaves, resulting in zero net energy per cycle and no sustained motion without an external energy source.

The device describes a mechanism where a permanent magnet triggers springs to move it back and forth, with the springs being reset by the magnet's attraction. This constitutes a closed cycle attempting to extract net work from a conservative magnetic field, violating energy conservation as it would damp to equilibrium without an external energy input.

The device is a permanent magnet wheel claimed to rotate and output energy. As it lacks any described external energy input, it constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, directly violating the law of conservation of energy. No arrangement of static permanent magnets can produce sustained rotation and net energy output.

The device claims to generate net electrical power from the interaction between rotating and fixed wedge-shaped magnets, asserting the forward motive force exceeds the reverse resistance. This describes a magnet-only motor/generator, which violates energy conservation as the magnetic force is conservative and cannot perform net work over a cycle without an external energy source to reset the system.

This patent describes a static assembly of permanent magnets in a helical structure claiming to output electrical energy. Since permanent magnets in fixed configurations cannot do net work (their fields are conservative), and no external energy source is identified, the device violates energy conservation by claiming to produce energy from nothing.

The patent describes a magnetic configuration that claims to maintain relative motion between magnets without any external energy input. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, directly violating the law of conservation of energy. The system has no identifiable energy source to overcome magnetic potential barriers or sustain motion against losses.

The patent describes a structure of asymmetric permanent magnets in relative motion that claims to generate electricity naturally. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it purports to produce energy from a closed system with no identifiable external energy input to sustain the motion or overcome inevitable resistive losses.

The patent describes a magnetic configuration claimed to maintain relative motion between magnets without identifying any external energy source. This constitutes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, violating energy conservation. Magnetic systems can only provide temporary motion from stored potential energy, not sustained motion without energy input.

The claim describes a 'magnetic levitation perpetual motion machine' using only permanent magnets aligned in the same direction. This is physically impossible as static magnetic fields are conservative; no net work can be extracted from a system in equilibrium, and such an arrangement cannot produce sustained motion without an external energy source.

The device is described as a 'magnetic perpetual motion machine' using an arc-shaped magnet with two side magnets, all with aligned magnetization. It claims to maintain relative motion indefinitely. This directly violates the first law (energy conservation) and second law (entropy increase) of thermodynamics, as it proposes a closed system that performs motion without an external energy source to overcome inevitable dissipative losses.

The device describes a configuration of magnets intended to produce continuous electrical output. However, it identifies no external energy source to compensate for the energy extracted, implying it could generate power solely from its own magnetic fields—a clear violation of the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation).

This device claims to be a perpetual motion machine powered solely by magnets of a single polarity, which violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as it has no energy input. It also relies on non-existent magnetic monopoles, violating fundamental electromagnetic theory.

The device claims to be a motor driven solely by the arrangement of permanent magnets, maintaining relative motion between them. This describes a perpetual motion machine of the first kind, as it proposes to generate continuous kinetic energy from a static, closed magnetic system with no external energy input, directly violating energy conservation.

This patent claims a perpetual electromagnetic energy output from a fixed arrangement of permanent magnets. This is a direct violation of the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation), as it claims to produce useful energy from a system with no identifiable energy input or depletion of an internal store. Magnets alone cannot provide perpetual work output.

The patent describes a static configuration of permanent magnets in relative motion, claiming it outputs magnetic energy. This is a classic perpetual motion scheme, as it provides no external energy source to account for the claimed output, violating both energy conservation and the laws of thermodynamics.

This describes a magnetic perpetual motion machine that claims to produce kinetic energy output from static magnetic arrangements alone. Since magnets are conservative force systems (no energy dissipation in static configurations), any motion would eventually dampen without continuous energy input, violating energy conservation.

This patent describes a static arrangement of permanent magnets and claims it is a 'magnetic perpetual motion machine.' This is a direct violation of the first law of thermodynamics, as a system of fixed magnets contains a finite amount of magnetic potential energy and cannot perform net work indefinitely without an external energy source.

This patent describes a magnetic configuration claimed to be a perpetual motion machine. Since it identifies no external energy input and claims indefinite motion, it directly violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) and the second law (systems tend toward equilibrium). Magnetic potential energy is finite and will be dissipated as heat through friction and electromagnetic losses.

The device claims to output kinetic energy from a configuration of permanent magnets. Since permanent magnets represent stored magnetic energy, not an energy source that can be tapped for continuous work without an external input to change the configuration, this violates energy conservation. The system lacks an identified external energy source to sustain motion against losses.

This patent describes a static arrangement of magnets with aligned magnetization directions, claiming it produces perpetual motion energy output. This directly violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation) as no energy source is identified, and magnets alone cannot produce net work without an external energy input or changing configuration.

The described device is a static arrangement of permanent magnets with aligned poles. It contains no mechanism for energy input and is in a state of magnetic equilibrium. Claiming it outputs kinetic energy violates the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation), as it attempts to extract work from a system with no external energy source or exploitable gradient.

The patent describes a configuration of three magnets claimed to produce energy output through relative motion. This is a classic violation of energy conservation, as magnets alone cannot create a perpetual source of useful work. The vague description and use of magnetic terminology obscure the fundamental impossibility of extracting net energy from a conservative magnetic field without an external input to sustain motion against losses.

The patent describes a static arrangement of permanent magnets and claims it can maintain a state of relative motion. This is a classical perpetual motion claim, as no external energy source is identified to overcome losses, violating the first law of thermodynamics (energy conservation). The energy for any motion must come from the initial placement of the magnets, which is a finite stored potential energy that will quickly be dissipated.

The patent describes a static arrangement of magnets and iron plates with identical magnetization, claiming it can maintain relative motion and output kinetic energy. This violates energy conservation because no external energy source is identified to overcome losses or to perform net work, constituting a perpetual motion machine of the first kind.

The patent's core violation is the 'magnetic generator' (GM), which is described in a way that implies it can generate electrical power from a static magnetic setup without an external energy source, violating energy conservation. The overall system for cabin temperature regulation might be valid if powered conventionally, but the inclusion of the GM as an auxiliary power source renders the claim a physics violation.

The engine attempts to use permanent magnet repulsion to drive a piston. However, the magnetic force is conservative; the work done to push the piston out during a 'power stroke' is exactly recovered as negative work when the piston is forced back against the magnetic field, resulting in zero net work per cycle unless external energy is supplied to reset the system. The patent obscures this by not specifying the energy source for the 'rotating means' that moves the magnet.

This device claims to convert magnetic energy into both kinetic energy (rotation) and thermal energy (heating) without any electrical input, which violates the first law of thermodynamics. Permanent magnets alone cannot provide continuous energy output as their fields are conservative, and any initial motion would quickly dampen due to eddy currents and friction losses.