Permanent Magnet Generator EVs?

[Kubla]

I wonder if the OP was referring to flywheel generator storage, something mentioned in many Sci Fi books and experimented with in the 70's and 80's, main problem being the flywheels coming apart from the high speeds needed and gyroscopic effects if you tried to use them in a moving vehicle

 

[smkettner]

smketner said; Where did you get your training in thermodynamics?

Again, address your questions as to the validity of Charles Flynn's approved patent (#6246561, June 12, 2001) to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or to the inventor. I am neither. Nor, have I spoken to either. Nor, do I have any arrangements of any kind with either for anything.

It just seemed to me that such a generator of electricity could replace a battery pack in an EV. It never dawned on me that that patent, (Flynn's US Patent #6246561, June 12, 2001) was invalid. If you believe that Flynn's patent is invalid, and feel so strongly about that belief, and can prove it, then you should challenge that patent in a court of law. Until you or someone else does succeed in such a legal challenge, I am going to continue to presume (as I have every right to do) that Flynn's patent is valid.

In other words, I do not have to prove that Flynn's patent is thermodynamically sound to cite it. Until you or someone else proves that Flynn's patent is NOT thermodynamically sound, in a court of law, I will continue to cite it.

Dan

No reason to get all excited.

This patent cannot power a vehicle and so Nissan is not working on this.
No one else is either.

Easy to prove that it is not thermodynamically sound because what you expect defies the laws of thermodynamics.
Your local library has what you need.

 

[mbender]

I wonder if the OP was referring to flywheel generator storage, something mentioned in many Sci Fi books and experimented with in the 70's and 80's, main problem being the flywheels coming apart from the high speeds needed and gyroscopic effects if you tried to use them in a moving vehicle

As recently as a year ago, Volvo was still working on them. Seems to me that they could combine two with opposite orientations in order to nullify any gyroscopic effects. But it also seems silly, if not "quaint", now, given the state of battery development.

 

[derkraut]

I heard that some automobile manufacturers were developing permanent magnet generators (PMGs), like Charles Flynn's 2001 patented one, to replace battery packs. PMGs weigh a fraction of battery packs, don't require recharging at all, last the life of the EV, and won't blow up.

Free energy machines are being reserved for the chargers. That way they can still make money out of you while putting the chargers anywhere without a need for electrical infrastructure.

It's a conspiracy. We could have had cars that go for 500,000 miles without any need for external energy in the 70's but the oil companies suppressed it. They have it in aircraft carriers now, and pretend it is nuclear energy.

They got the technology from the Space rabbits when they docked with their space station during the Moon shots, which is permanently located at a Lagrangian point on the far side of the Moon so we can't see it.

Yo Donald.....what have you been smokin'??? :roll:

 

[DATsunONE]

I was driving down the road the the other day, with my 8 year old daughter sitting next to me, when she asked if she could turn on the radio. I said; it won't work for you unless you know exactly how it works. She giggled, while she reached to turn it, on and said; that's just silly. While we sat there driving down the road enjoying listening to the music together, I realized that billions of people listen to music everyday on their radios but have no clue as to how they work.

If Nissan doesn't want to turn Flynn's PMG on to see if it will power their Leaf, without knowing exactly how it works; that's just silly.

Nissan doesn't have to know how Flynn's PMG works to turn it on or to see if it works or even to manufacture it.

Dan

 

[Smidge204]

But most people could at least tell you that the music "comes from" a radio station, or from a tape/CD/MP3 player, as opposed to the radio magically producing it ex nihilo. :roll: You'd have to travel to a pretty remote part of the world to find someone who didn't understand, at least at some level, that the music is external to the radio.

FYI, the underlying principle of Flynn's device is described in the patent that I'm increasingly convinced you didn't actually read. It's about magnetic flux control. primarily through the use of electromagnet fields to selectively restrict permanent magnetic fields. There is no claim or suggestion that such mechanisms can produce a device which produces energy without input.

I'm not asking you to explain how it works, I'm asking you to tell me where you think the energy comes from. You insist that you don't know how it works, yet you simultaneously insist that it does things that even the inventor does not claim. Do you not see the contradiction here?

Going back to your radio analogy, I'm not asking you to explain how the radio itself works, I'm asking you to tell me where you think the music is coming from. You insist that you don't know how a radio works, but in this analogy you apparently are content to believe there are little tiny musicians inside it.
=Smidge=

 

[garsh]

Nissan doesn't have to know how Flynn's PMG works to turn it on or to see if it works or even to manufacture it.

Uh huh.

If Nissan is going to use it as a major component in a mass-market vehicle, then they definitely would want to know how it works. If Nissan is going to be liable for the resulting product, then they definitely would want to know how it works.

DATsunONE, your posts are right up there with some of the more insane things I've read on the internet. You appear to be steadfast in your refusal to believe that a perpetual-motion machine cannot be made to work. It is quite a thing to behold. I'm not sure if you are really this naive, or if you are just a mole for the inventor, trying to spread information about this "product" around the internet to help generate buzz and search engine hits.

Either way, it actually makes me smile when I see that this thread has been bumped again. Carry on!

 

[DATsunONE]

I don't know if it is true or not but, one person commented (here) that Nissan did review Flynn's work and did turn on one of his PMGs to see if it did work and, from doing that, was convinced enough to make Flynn an offer. That person further claimed that Flynn would not license his PMG technolgy to Nissan. No reason was given for Flynn's refusal to do so.

If that's true then, Nissan cared much less about how Flynn's PMG worked than they did about if it worked.

Seeing is believing. You might be able to explain to a lay person, in detail, exactly how a radio works but, if you can't demonstrate the principle with a real working radio, you might as well be talking to the wall.

I don't have a Flynn PMG to show you if or how it works. Nor, can I acquire one. So, even if I could explain to you how Flynn's PMG works, you wouldn't believe me anyway.

Nissan, however, either did or can acquire a Flynn PMG to see if it works.

That's why I am asking Nissan if they looked at Flynn's PMG; and, if so, what they thought of it.

Dan

 

[Smidge204]

Seeing is believing. You might be able to explain to a lay person, in detail, exactly how a radio works but, if you can't demonstrate the principle with a real working radio, you might as well be talking to the wall.

To continue with the radio analogy, a satisfactory answer to "where does the music come from" would be "Somewhere there is a radio transmitter that broadcasts the music, and this is a receiver."

I'm not asking for how Flynn's device(s) work - I already know how they work, more or less, because I read the patent.

You are advocating the use of this device for a specific purpose without understanding what the device is or how it works. For all you seem to care it might as well be full of little elves turning cranks. It genuinely bothers me that it doesn't seem to bother you to ask if a company is investigating a technology you don't understand for a purpose you don't even know if it's suitable for.
=Smidge=

 

[adric22]

I would be extremely shocked to find out that Nissan has no intention, whatsoever, of ever checking to see whether Flynn's patent is valid. I suspect some of the other major automakers would not be so close minded.

Well, prepare to be shocked. Nissan has no intentions of checking Flynn's patents. They are about as interested in this as doctors are interested in magnetic healing bracelets. Or as interested as stock brokers are in hiring psychics to tell them when the stock market will go up or down. Anyone with half-a-brain about physics knows to laugh at these perpetual motion machines.

Oh.. and FYI - The last I heard, the patent office will NO LONGER accept any patents for perpetual motion machines unless the inventor can demonstrate a working prototype. Guess how many working prototypes have been demonstrated to the patent office? That's right. Zero.

 

[mbender]

I don't know if it is true or not but, one person commented (here) that Nissan did review Flynn's work and did turn on one of his PMGs to see if it did work and, from doing that, was convinced enough to make Flynn an offer. That person further claimed that Flynn would not license his PMG technology to Nissan. No reason was given for Flynn's refusal to do so.

For the record, that person was me (was I), and even though you couldn't see it, my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. I posted that (reluctantly, and now a bit regrettably) in order to -- how should I say it? -- keep this absurd and purely speculative thread "alive".

I also later said this

Regardless of what "the truth" is to any of this though, it's obvious that no one here (including yourself, apparently) has any idea what you're really talking about, let alone if Nissan or other manufacturer is "working on it". So since it's clearly all just idle speculation, I'm going to take donald's cue and say adios to this thread!

and even though I can't keep myself from peeking, I hope I'm now making it clear that further speculation and argument over this technology/product and its incorporation by a major manufacturer is pointless. Be sure to start a new thread however when a breakthrough is announced in a press release!

 

[donald]

Again, I never communicated with Flynn or any of his staff.

I cannot show or explain Flynn's work, without his permission; and, I do not have Flynn's permission to do so. Nor, do I plan to acquire his permission to make such a presentation.

True; not all patents are valid. The inverse is also true; not all patents are invalid, either.

I have never communicated with the Space rabbits, or any of their staff. I cannot show or explain Space rabbit work without their permission, nor do I plan to acquire their permission.

Not all Space rabbits are real. The inverse is also true, not all Space rabbits are imaginary, either.

There is no evidence to show this isn't Space rabbit technology, therefore that possibility is not excluded.

Until you've disproved Flynn is actually a remotely controlled Space rabbit robot I cannot see how you would deny it, and as robots are excluded from being assignees of patents then the patent is not valid.

 

[mbender]

I'm pretty sure he is connected to a PMG-fueled fresh air supply.

 

[Smidge204]

I was thinking:

(A really great game, actually...)
=Smidge=

 

[mkjayakumar]

This same poster (OP) I believe is going on and on with this BS in the Tesla forum and is rightly getting slapped there.

 

[DATsunONE]

I missed that law school lesson that said that patents are speculation.

The real fact is that, in US law, patents are presumed valid.

35 U.S. Code § 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses
(a) In General.— A patent shall be presumed valid. Each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) shall be presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent or multiple dependent claims shall be presumed valid even though dependent upon an invalid claim.

The burden to prove otherwise, to claim that a patent is invalid, is on the challenger.

35 U.S. Code § 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses
(a) . . . The burden of establishing invalidity of a patent or any claim thereof shall rest on the party asserting such invalidity.

Challenges to a patent, for invalidity, have to be plead, presented in a court of law, to rebut the presumption of their validity.

35 U.S. Code § 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses
(b) Defenses.— The following shall be defenses in any action involving the validity or infringement of a patent and shall be pleaded:

To date, Charles Flynn’s US Patent #6246561, June 12, 2001, is still posted on the USPTO’s site as being approved and valid. At the top of page 19 of that patent, Flynn claims four separate permanent magnet motors.

To date, no one has challenged Charles Flynn’s US Patent #6246561 for being invalid. Thus, it is valid.

There is no US law that requires one to be a physicist to rely upon a patent.

There is no US law that requires one to be a physicist to cite a patent.

There is no US law that requires one to explain a patent before that person can rely upon it’s validity.

I proclaim Charles Flynn’s US Patent #6246561 valid, and I rely upon the validity thereof, because the law does.

Dan

PS: Open your ears the next time your law school professor talks about US patents.

 

[Smidge204]

To date, Charles Flynn’s US Patent #6246561, June 12, 2001, is still posted on the USPTO’s site as being approved and valid. At the top of page 19 of that patent, Flynn claims four separate permanent magnet motors.

Exactly. You know what he DOESN'T claim? A device that can do this:

I heard that some automobile manufacturers were developing permanent magnet generators (PMGs), like Charles Flynn's 2001 patented one, to replace battery packs. PMGs weigh a fraction of battery packs, don't require recharging at all, last the life of the EV, and won't blow up.

At no point in that patent does he claim a device that can produce more power than it takes to operate it - which is exactly what you'd need to to do what you are proposing. How many times do I have to rub your nose in it before you address the issue at hand?

As for "validity" - that refers to the validity of the patent with respect to the invention described being eligible for patent, not valid as in it actually works. For example, a patent is invalidated if prior art is found and successfully argued on court. Another example is if a patented idea is already in public use; in other words you can't patent something that someone else has already making and/or selling for one year or more.

The "Presumption if validity" clause means the USPTO is not going to go through the effort of searching for prior art. They are going to assume in good faith that the person filing for a patent has already done their due diligence. The USPTO does not evaluate claims based on their operability, feasibility, economy, effectiveness or suitability for any purpose. The only requirements are that the invention be either novel (no prior art) or "non-obvious."
=Smidge=

 

[donald]

To date, no one has challenged Charles Flynn’s US Patent #6246561 for being invalid. Thus, it is valid.

No-one has yet challenged my claim to own the whole of North America. Thus, my claim is valid.

Please move out and y'all let me know when you've vacated my property so I can tell the Space rabbits I've found them a new home.

 

[smkettner]

Patent can be valid all day long and still the fact remains the device will never power a vehicle as you propose.
Nissan is not working on this and neither is anyone else except DATsunONE.

I recommend you try one of the crowd funding websites to gather some capital for your project.
You should find lots of like minded people to get this going :|

 

[hill]

My first Datsun (now Nissan) was the 510 manual, I bought it back in '75' for just under $3000. It cost me about $5 to fill up the tank and I'd drive around all week on that.

Nissan seems to be the only auto manufacturer out there that comprehends the need for a low end (economy) EV (electric vehicle).

EVs are still so limited, though. They use a, plus or minus, 1000 pound battery pack that only goes between 100 to 300 miles, at best, on a recharge that just seems to take forever to do. .........snip............

Dan

100 ?? um - there are folks that can easily suck the life out of a new pack in less than 50 miles. Better reset your low end.