Regarding the description, this is neither new nor renewable. I expect this will be removed from the science channel.

Well I don't have one in my house, so its new, and its renewable, because its basically the closest thing to perpetual motion that we have, and it generates electricity, so what basis does your argument lay with?

Perpetual motion is an idea dating back hundreds of years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#Techniques
Don't blame me for pointing out that 'free' energy is impossible, blame the laws of thermodynamics.

LOL, Though I don't Blame you for anything, I never did call it perpetual, I did say NEAR perpetual. They clearly point out that it produces 5 times more energy than it consumes. No energy production method is 100 percent efficient. Hell, look at the power it takes to run a nuclear power plant. Its all about the ratios...

If you'd like to probe the subject in more depth here's another useful link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exergy#Quality_of_energy_types

This is a textbook case of a bogus free energy claim.

It has the inventor without a scientific background, the engineer with no credentials, zero technical information and a clueless reporter talking about magnets.

I glanced at this guy's patent application, and all he describes is a crude, specific way of controlling a motor in order to alternately operate it as a motor and a generator.

The Australian Skeptics is a group dedicated to investigating claims such as this, and they've investigated Lutec (this inventor's company) in 2001. Here's the executive summary: the people at Lutec don't even know what the physical definition of work is, they didn't properly calculate this device's efficiency and are most likely trying to con small investors into wiring money to an account in Singapore: http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/2001/3_lutec1.pdf

Ok. If anyone here actually know something about the power of magnetics, then you'll understand that there is a solid foundation for the claims for Magnetic Repulsion energy. I have sifted this one, so that you can see how it is not just a bogus claim.

I'm an electrical engineer and a Ph.D. student of electrical engineering, so I do have a strong background in electromagnetism and power generation and conversion.

My issue with this clip isn't regarding the impossibility to make a motor based on permanent magnets. Your second clip demonstrates this (and I think it's neat). My problem with this clip is that it's advocating a false claim (i.e., a free energy, perpetual motion machine).

(BTW, any device capable of producing more energy than it consumes falls in the perpetual motion category, because you could hook up its output to its input and make it run indefinitely. By definition, efficiency is (output power)/(input power) averaged over a long enough period, so this machine would have over 100% efficiency.)

I am thoroughly excited to have someone with such a background here to comment. I am not saying that this rig generates as much energy as the inventor claims, however I am not willing to outright deny the possibilities. It falls into the same category as thermal-power generation. Nuclear power of course relies on this possibility. The energy from the radioactive material heats the water into steam, and the steam spins a turbine, creating electrical energy. Pretty simple concept. Anyway, The magnetic force can push the coil of an alternator to produce energy. Who's to say that with the exact alignment that the generation of energy isn't possible, with minimal loss so as to make it worth it?

Oh and as far as the perpetual motion thing goes.. well the biggest problem with perpetual motion is that most devices for producing energy take fuel. whether it be gas, coal, uranium or what ever it might be, it eventually runs out. A Nuke plant doesn't take nearly as much energy to run as it produces, but eventually the uranium eventually sheds its excess particles. So for a substance such as natural PERMANENT Magnets, fuel consumption shouldn't be an issue.

You're right in saying that these motors can be efficient if well designed. Tesla realised this more than a century ago, when he invented the AC polyphase design that we use to this day (which uses electromagnets to create the magnetic field). The challenge with the permanent magnet motor doesn't concern the proper alignment of the magnetic fields, but the magnets themselves.

Permanent magnets aren't forever permanent. They weaken as you use them to provide work. For example, the motor from your other clip would eventually slow down and stop altogether, and it wouldn't take long if you put a load on its axle.

Unfortunately, natural permanent magnets (lodestones) aren't nearly as magnetic as the commercially produced ones. They're not abundant either.

This post has been removed from the Science channel by channel owner rembar. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

I do hope I don't have to explain why I removed this from the Science channel.

To be honest I am kinda confused...

I'm not sure why people hate this so much so i guess ill just *kill it before someone punches a baby

Permanently discarding this video - kill requested by submitter arsenault185.