Perpetual Motion, by Percy Verance. 



```
Perpetual Motion
```

Comprising a History of the Efforts to Attain Self-Motive
Mechanism with a Classified, *ILLUSTRATED* Collection and
Explanation of the Devices Whereby it Has Been Sought and Why
They Failed, and Comprising Also a Revision and Re-Arrangement
of the Information Afforded by "Search for Self-Motive Power
During The 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries," London, 1861, and "A
History of the Search for Self-Motive Power from the 13th to The
19th Century," London, 1870, by Henry Dircks, C. E.,
LL. D., Etc.

![](i_002.jpg)

BY  
PERCY VERANCE

Copyright 1916  
By  
20th Century Enlightenment Specialty Co.

---

5

## CONTENTS

For Summarized Table of Contents, see page [358](#Page_358)
*et seq.*

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|  | Page |
| Introduction | [3](#Page_3) |
| Preface | [7](#Page_7)a[10](#Page_10) |
| Introductory Essay | [11](#Page_11)a[21](#Page_21) |
| Chapter I. | |
| Devices by Means of Wheels and Weights | [22](#Page_22)a[67](#Page_67) |
| Chapter II. | |
| Devices by Means of Rolling Weights and Inclined Planes | [68](#Page_68)a[75](#Page_75) |
| Chapter III. | |
| Hydraulic and Hydro-Mechanical Devices | [76](#Page_76)a[117](#Page_117) |
| Chapter IV. | |
| Pneumatic Siphon and Hydro-Pneumatic Devices | [118](#Page_118)a[162](#Page_162) |
| Chapter V. | |
| Magnetic Devices | [163](#Page_163)a[174](#Page_174) |
| Chapter VI. | |
| Devices Utilizing Capillary Attraction and Physical Affinity | [175](#Page_175)a[194](#Page_194) |
| Chapter VII. | |
| Liquid Air as a Means of Perpetual Motion | [195](#Page_195)a[196](#Page_196) |
| Chapter VIII.6 | |
| Radium and Radio-Active Substances Considered as a Conceived Source of Perpetual Motion | [197](#Page_197)a[199](#Page_199) |
| Chapter IX. | |
| Perpetual Motion Devices Attempting Its Attainment by a Misconception of the Relation of Momentum and Energy | [200](#Page_200)a[211](#Page_211) |
| Chapter X. | |
| The Alleged Inventions of Edward Sommerset, Sixth Earl and Second Marquis of Worcester, and of Jean Ernest Eli-Bessler (Councillor) Orffyreus | [212](#Page_212)a[255](#Page_255) |
| Chapter XI. | |
| Conservation of Energy. A Discussion of the Relation of the Doctrine of Conservation of Energy, and the Possibility of Perpetual Motion | [256](#Page_256)a[269](#Page_269) |
| Chapter XII. | |
| Will Perpetual Motion Ever Be Accomplished? A Discussion by the Author, with a Review of the Opinions of Eminent Scientists on the Subject | [270](#Page_270)a[357](#Page_357) |

---

7

## PREFACE.

The author has no apology to offer for the production of this
book. He has spent his life in environments that have brought him
into constant contact with mechanics, artisans and laborers as
well as professional men, engineers, chemists and technical
experts of various types. He knows a great many menayoung men, for
the most partaare constantly working on the old, old problem of
Perpetual Motion; that much money, and much time are being spent
in search of a solution for that problem which all scientific and
technical men tell us is impossible of solution.

It is believed by the author that a classification and
presentation of selected groups of the devices produced in the
past by which it was by the inventor believed, self-motive power
had been attained, will save much work in fields already
thoroughly exploited.

So far as the author knows no book on the subject has appeared
since 1870. The various encyclopedias published contain articles
on the subject, but they are necessarily brief, and not satisfying
to young men who have become interested in the subject.

In 1861, Henry Dircks, a civil engineer, of8 London, published a
work entitled "Perpetuum Mobile; or, Search for Self-Motive Power,
During the Seventeenth, Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries." The
book contains 599 pages, and was followed in 1870, by a second
series by the same author entitled "Perpetuum Mobile, or a History
of the Search for Self-Motive Power from the Thirteenth, to the
Nineteenth Century." In these two books there is amassed a
wonderful amount of material showing on the part of the author
diligence, great patience and wide and thorough search.

The author of these works was not enamoured of his subject, and
his books clearly show that he was not writing them because of any
interest he had in the subject of Perpetual Motion. On the
contrary, they appear to have been written because of a deep
detestation entertained by the author for the subject of Perpetual
Motion, and a contemptuous pity for any one seriously interested
in the subject. Mr. Dircks's works may be said to be the works of
a scold. His sentiments were deep, and his impulses strong, which
accounts for the vast amount of labor he did in the preparation of
his books. Those books are now out of print, and it is believed by
the author of this book that they may well remain so. They contain9 much
material that no one would be justified in wading through. The
most complicated mechanisms devised by enthusiastic dreamers are
shown in the same detail with which the inventors described them
in presenting them to the public, or to the patent offices. Little
is to be gained by this.

So complicated are many of the devices that only technically
trained engineers could read them understandingly, and few
technically trained engineers are now greatly interested in
self-motive power devices. We believe that every useful or
interesting purpose is served if enough devices are collected,
classified and presented to show the various principles relied
upon by the inventors; with an explanation of why they
failedai. e., wherein the principles relied upon are wrong,
and while possibly not out of harmony with any mechanical
principles then known, are entirely out of harmony with principles
since discovered and now well known.

In the preparation of this volume a vast amount of the
information furnished by the two works of Mr. Dircks has been
rearranged, reclassified, and used.

Everyone who has to any extent, by environment, associated with
the mass of people who are not technically educated, knows that10 the
persons who are still interested in the subject of Perpetual
Motion, and who still seek its attainment, are not technically
trained engineers or mathematicians, but for the greater part
untrained people of naturally strong mechanical sense, and of
natural mechanical and mathematical adaptation.

This book is written for the perusal of that large class of
people. It is not designed as an argument either for or against
the possibility of the attainment of Perpetual Motion.

The author is content to classify and presentaclearly, it is
hopedathe leading endeavors that have been known in that field of
effort, and to explain their failure.

It is believed by the author that the perusal of the present
volume by anyone whose mind has been attracted by the subject of
Perpetual Motion will result in an enlightenment, and, it is also
believed, will have a tendency to direct his mind from a struggle
with theories long ago exploded, and may result in directing his
efforts to things practical, and not without hope of attainment.

This work is offered only to minds mechanically or mathematically
inclined. It is not even hoped that it will interest people who
prefer fiction to fact, nor people who read simply for idle
entertainment.

---

11

## INTRODUCTORY ESSAY

Perpetual Motion as used in this book is to be taken in its
conventional, and not in its strict literal sense. The strict
literal analysis of the two words implies unceasing motion. Of
this we have many illustrationsathe tides, the waves of the ocean,
the course of the earth around the sun, and in the movements of
all heavenly and astronomical bodies. In fact, it is difficult to
conceive in a strictly scientific sense of any substance having an
entire absence of motion.

Perpetual Motion as used in this book means what it is usually
understood to meanaSelf-Motive Poweraa machine that furnishes the
power to keep its parts going as a machine. In this sense
Perpetual Motion has always engaged the minds of many, many
peopleaand what is more natural? As soon as a boy begins to take
an interest in moving parts of machinery, vehicles, locomotives,
and what not, he perceives that the application of power results
in the motion of bodies, and again that bodies in motion are
productive of power. A wheel moved by muscular, or other
mechanical power, is made by machinery to elevate water, and
elevated water can be made in descending to run machinery. The
windlass, or other12 wheel, turned by applied force,
lifts buckets from wellsaraises stone, and elevates heavy bodies,
if desired. Heavy bodies descending can be, and are used through
means of machinery to make machinery run.

A great many similar illustrations could be given. What, then, is
more natural than that a boy with an active mind who is at all
mechanically turned, as most boys are, begins to wonder why, if
wheels lift stones, and if stones descending make wheels run,
cannot a machine be made that will lift stones, or other weights,
and in turn be run by the descent of the lifted stones, or other
weights? Why, if the turning of wheels lift water, and if
descending water makes wheels go, should not an adaptation be made
by which the same machine will elevate water, and be run by the
descent of the elevated water?

That it cannot be done is now the consensus of opinion of all
technically trained mechanics, but, that it can not be done, and
why it can not be done, is sure not to occur to the boy, nor to
the man who has only a strong natural mechanical sense to guide
him, and has not the advantage of technical training.

Again, it is well known that many, many men have spent
considerable sums of money and given hours and hours, and days,
and13
months, and years of close and careful thought, and experiment to
the production of a machine that will accomplish Perpetual Motion,
and that many have announced to the world that they had succeeded
in its accomplishment, but that all their devices so far have
turned out failures.

It is to no purpose to tell the Perpetual Motion worker that he
is seeking to attain the impossible; that the attainment of
self-motive power has been demonstrated to be an impossibility. He
will answer, or, at least, he will reason to himself that many
things once pronounced impossibilities and claimed to be so
demonstrated, have since been attained. The Perpetual Motion
worker is usually a person of active intelligence, and being
enamoured of mechanical projects is likely to read extensively
along mechanical lines, and knows as every well-informed person
knows, that there are many instances in the history of the
discovery and development of the most important mechanical
inventions and scientific discoveries where the persistent efforts
of so-called enthusiastic dreamers and cranks finally triumphed
over the settled and conventional "impossibilities" of dignified
scientists.

When, less than a century ago, it was proposed to propel a ship
across the Atlantic14 ocean by steampower, Ignatius
Lardner, a scientific teacher, lecturer and interpreter of real
note and merit wrote a book "demonstrating" the physical
impossibility of a vessel carrying enough fuel to propel itself
through that distance of water. The book was actually printed, but
was scarcely off the press until the first steamship had
successfully crossed the Atlantic with steampower, and steamed
triumphantly into port.

After communication by electric telegraph was well established
and had been in successful commercial use for decades, it was
proposed to converse by long distance over a wire. The idea was
hooted and declared impossible, and it did seem so, and yet today,
there is scarcely a farm house in the nation but what has an
instrument by which the occupants can talk over wires not only to
their near-by neighbors, but to remote cities.

Prof. Samuel P. Langley, less than two decades ago undertook in a
thoroughly scientific manner to accomplish what is called "heavier
than air flight." His scientific ideas on the subject were
entirely correct, but he did not have the advantage of engine
refinement as it is known today, by which high energy development
can be attained with an engine or motor of small weight.
Nevertheless,15
Prof. Langley succeeded in flying a considerable distance, and in
fact, made a number of successful demonstrations of the *physical
possibility* of heavier than air flight. Prof. Simon Newcomb,
who is to be ranked as the greatest astronomer, mathematician and
scientist the United States has ever produced, and with the
possible exception of Benjamin Franklin, the most original thinker
along scientific lines, wrote an article which was published
generally in scientific journals, in which he warned Prof. Langley
of the folly of his attempts, not claiming, however, the
scientific impossibility of heavier than air flight, but claiming
that it could never be of any real practical value; that the
instability of the air, etc., limited flight by man to a daredevil
show performance. A child then born would now be scarcely grown,
and yet, aeroplanes are in use in every civilized country in the
world for observation and military purposes, and even for carrying
mail to places not otherwise easily accessible.

Thousands of flights are undertaken every day with the confident
expectation of a successful trip and return. How many, many boys
and mechanics, prior to the achievement of human flight, have been
attracted by the problem, only to have their ambitions and16
dreams discouraged and suppressed by being told that the
scientific world knows that human flight is impossiblea"God made
man to walk on the ground, and the birds to fly, and if Nature had
intended that we should fly we would have been equipped with
wings," and probably to be dubbed "Darius Green," as a reminder of
the inglorious fate of the pseudo hero of that name in
Trowbridge's clever and immortal poem about Darius Green and his
Flying Machine.

The announcement of the discovery of rays by means of which views
may be made and photographs taken through substances supposedly
opaque to all light rays was scouted as a ridiculously visionary
dream; but the discoverers were not dismayed by scout and
ridicule, but persisted in their dreams and enthusiasm. There is
not a village of any considerable size in the civilized world but
has its X-Ray Machine by which foreign substances in the flesh may
be viewed and photographed and located with exactitude, fractures
examined and all surgical operations aided to the benefit and
health and recovery of the sick and wounded. Mankind is the
recipient of the benefits resulting from the fact that
enthusiastic cranks were not deterred by ridicule and supposed
demonstrations of their folly.

17
The above are only a few of the many like instances recorded in
scientific progress. While not accurately true, and while less
true during the last two decades than formerly, it is,
nevertheless, a general truth that scientific progress has been
made in spite of, and in the face of discouragement and ridicule
from the multitudes who were destined to be benefited by the
discoveries made by the persistent so-called cranks.

These facts are all well known to the Perpetual Motion
enthusiast. It is, therefore, of no avail to tell him that the
scientific world has pronounced his aspirations and attempts but
dreams, and that Perpetual Motion workers are by the scientific
world denominated cranks.

If it be admitted that Perpetual Motion is, as scientific men
tell us, a chimerical dream, it is still to be very greatly
doubted if the world at large is to be benefited by dissuading
minds from working on the problem. There is no doubt that many
persons who have become more intensely interested in mechanics by
thinking and working on the problem of Perpetual Motion, have
thereby been lead to study more and more generally into mechanical
subjects, and became not merely tyros, but useful men in various
mechanical pursuits. Many18 doubtless have followed mechanical
subjects to which they were introduced by labors toward Perpetual
Motion, to the making of useful and valuable inventions and
discoveries.

Notwithstanding the fact that a countless number of devices for
the attainment of Perpetual Motion have been proclaimed and
exhibited, it is to be supposed that those actually proclaimed and
brought to light constitute but an infinitesimally small
proportion of those actually made. It is to be supposed that the
Perpetual Motion worker has some sense, and that the great
majority of them before proclaiming his apparatus would want to
know himself that it was not a failure, and would not, when
ushered before the public, bring upon him humiliation and jeers.
It is to be believed that in nearly every instance the produced
device was tested before being proclaimed and ushered into the
light of day. It goes without saying that all that were so tested
were failures, and were never heard of except by the inventor and
a very few intimate friends or co-laborers. Those that have been
heralded to the world represent only that small proportion where
over-confidence in the operation, or a disregard for the truth, or
some other unexplainable something caused the inventor and19 his
friends to make the announcement and disclosure of the device
before the test.

It is almost impossible to conceive of a person of any
intelligence exposing himself to the ridicule resulting from the
failure of a pompously heralded device, when a simple test would
have saved the exposure, and yet the civilized world has been
filled with Perpetual Motion devices proclaimed and heralded with
trumpet blast, which, when tested, "didn't work."

It is not, however, the purview, or purpose of this book, to
incite people to work on the problem of Perpetual Motion, neither
is it its purview or purpose to dissuade them from it.

In the works of Mr. Dircks, mentioned in the preface of this
work, the devices for Perpetual Motion are classified somewhat
with reference to the time each was produced. In some instances
with reference to whether or not patents were applied for and
obtained, or as to the source of information concerning them.

A careful examination of the devices presented in Mr. Dirck's two
works, and of those, information concerning which has been
obtained elsewhere, leads the author to believe that nothing is to
be gained by an attempted classification along those lines.

20
In countless instances Perpetual Motion seekers of different races
and living in separate countries, and, indeed, on different
continents, centuries apart, have sought the attainment of
Perpetual Motion by practically the same devices, and inventor
after inventor has brought forth alleged inventions depending upon
precisely the same underlying mechanical principle.

The author has attempted to classify the various devices
presented in this book according to the underlying mechanical
principles upon which the inventor chiefly relied for the success
of his invention. Even this classification is extremely difficult
and not well distinguished. Many of them, indeed most of them,
depend for their success upon more than one mechanical principle,
and the classifications thereby inevitably intermingle and overlap
what otherwise would be their distinguishing boundaries. Still it
is believed by the author that it is the best that could be
adopted, and that no better or clearer classification is possible
than the one here presented.

The various devices are classified by the author under the
following heads:

Devices by Means of Wheels and Weights.

Devices by Means of Rolling Weights and Inclined Planes.

21
Hydraulic and Hydro-Mechanical Devices.

Pneumatic Siphon and Hydro-Pneumatic Devices.

Magnetic Devices.

Devices Utilizing Capillary Attraction and Physical Affinity.

Liquid Air as a Means of Perpetual Motion.

Radium and Radio-Active Substances Considered as a Conceived
Source of Perpetual Motion.

Perpetual Motion Devices Attempting Its Attainment by a
Misconception of the Relation of Momentum and Energy.

to which is addeda

"A Discussion of the Alleged Inventions of the
very eminent Edward Sommerset, Sixth Earl and Second Marquis of
Worcester, and Jean Ernest Eli-Bessler Orffyreus.

Alsoa

"A Discussion by the Author of the 'Doctrine of
Conservation of Energy, and Its Relation to the Possibility of
Perpetual Motion.'"

Anda

"A Discussion by the Author of 'Will Perpetual
Motion Ever Be Accomplished?'"

---

22

## CHAPTER I DEVICES BY MEANS OF WHEELS AND WEIGHTS

### Wilars de Honecort

While attempts at Perpetual Motion are as old as the human race,
not many of the more ancient devices have been preserved, either
by engraving or by explanation.

Among the very earliest of these attempts of which we have
detailed information is the device of Wilars de Honecort. He was
an architect, and lived in the thirteenth century. The information
is preserved in "A Sketch Book" by him which was deposited and
remains in the Ecole des Chartes at Paris. About the middle of the
nineteenth century comments were published in France on this
ancient device. Some of these were translated into English. The
following account is an extract from a translation made by
Professor Willis, of Cambridge.

"*Many a time have skilful workmen tried to contrive a wheel
that shall turn of itself: here is a way to make such a one, by
means of an uneven number of mallets, or by quicksilver.*"

Wilars de Honecort presents to us a device23 for a perpetual
motion; it is not clear whether he intends to claim the
contrivance of it, or whether he had met with it in the course of
his travels. It differs very little from a well-known contrivance
for this purpose which has been so often published, and its
fallacy so fully explained in popular books, that it is
unnecessary to dwell at length upon the mechanical principles
which it involves. It is extremely curious in this place, because
it shows the great antiquity of the problem, the solution of which
has wasted the time, the brains, and the means of many an unhappy
artisan or philosopher.

In the drawing we have now before us, the two upright posts,
which are framed together and skilfully braced so as to ensure
their steadiness, support between them a long horizontal axle, to
the center of which is fixed a wheel with four spokes. The absence
of perspective in this drawing makes the wheel appear as if it
were parallel to the frame, instead of being, as it is, at right
angles to it.

![](i_024.jpg)

Seven mallets, or arms, each loaded with a heavy weight at the
end, are jointed at equal distances to the circumference of the
wheel, so that those which happen to have their joints below the
diameter of the wheel will hang freely down, but if the wheel be
turned round by hand or otherwise, the weights of those which24 are
on the ascending side will, in succession, rest on its
circumference, and will, in that position, be carried over the
highest part of the wheel and downwards on the descending side,
until the arms that bear them are brought into a vertical position
and a little beyond it, and then the weight will fall suddenly
over and rest on the opposite position on the circumference of the
wheel, until its further descent enables it to dangle freely as
before. The effect of this mechanism upon the position of the
weights is not truly represented, for the upper mallet has fallen
over too soon. In the modern form of this contrivance a pin, or
stop, is introduced, by which the mallet, when it falls over, is
compelled to rest so that its arm shall point to the center of the
wheel, and thus the descending weight be held at a greater
distance from the center than when ascending. It is extremely
probable that this difference is a mere error of the artist, for
the drawing has the appearance of having been made from a model of
the wheel at rest; a condition in which, of course, it would
always be found, unless moved by some external force. The inventor
seems to have thought that the action above described would always
place four weights on the descending side, and leave but three on
the ascending side, each weight as it rises to the top being
intended25
to leap suddenly over to the descending side, in the manner just
explained; or perhaps, as M. Lassus suggests, the contriver
imagined that the blows given to the wheel in succession by the
falling mallets would help it forward. It is surprising that
although the slightest model would show the failure of devices of
this class to persons incapable of mathematical reasoning, yet
such machines have been seriously proposed in books, and are
continually recontrived by ingenious workmen. The allusion to
quicksilver in the manuscript shows that26 Wilars was
acquainted with the well-known contrivance described in the books
already referred to, in which portions of that metal inclosed in
channels are used instead of the falling weights.

### A Repetition of Wilars de Honecort's Plan

This device was brought forth in 1831 in England, and illustrates
what we say in the Introductory Essay to the effect of inventors
working on the same plan in different parts of the earth and
centuries apart.

![](i_025.jpg)

27
We are unable to give the inventor's name. He was a correspondent
to Mechanics' Magazine, and the description furnished by the
inventor as published in Mechanics' Magazine, is as follows:

Description.aA A A is a ring of thin wood;
B B B, several spokes, movable round the fixed points
C C C, and only allowed to move one way by the
construction of the openings D D D; E E E,
heavy weights fixed to the ends of the spokes.

From the position in which the wheel is at present, it is evident
that the weights on the right-hand side (1 and 2) acting at a
greater distance from the center than those (4 and 5) on the other
side, will cause that side to descend until the spoke 1 reaches
the position 3, when it will exert no moving influence, but by
which time the weight 8 will have fallen into the position 1, when
a similar effect will take place, and so on with the rest.

### Leonardo da Vinci

It is with a mingled feeling of sorrow and exaltation that we
note the Perpetual Motion labors of the great Leonardo da Vinci.
Of all of the men who ever gave the subject more than a passing
notice he is the most famous.

Leonardo da Vinci was an Italian, born in 1452, and died in 1519.
He was the illegitimate28 son of Florentine, lawyer. His
mother has been variously described as a peasant, and as of gentle
birth. Little about her is known. The father belonged to a family
of lawyers, and never repudiated the son, but took him, educated
him, and cared for him. It is well for the world that he did, for
Leonardo da Vinci has perhaps contributed more to art and learning
in the world than any other single individual that ever lived. He
was a painter, a sculptor, an architect, a musician, a
mechanician, engineer and natural philosopher. Each subject in art
or science that he touched he not only mastered, but improved and
embellished. He painted the original of the well-known picture of
the Christ and His twelve Apostles, known as the "Last Supper," or
the "Last Supper of Our Lord." This, and Mona Lisa, are perhaps
the paintings by which he is known to the greatest number of
people, and are considered by many connoisseurs the highest
perfection in art ever attained by mortal man.

But, as painter and sculptor, he is to be regarded as among the
greatest, if not the very greatest that ever lived. In art he
ranks beside, if not ahead of Michelangelo and Raffael, and yet
they are known only as artists, while he was preeminent in both
art and science. The work he did in natural science was entirely29
original and emanated from an inherent initiative and originality,
and as a scientist, he is entitled to rank below only Newton,
Gallileo and Copernicus, and very few others. In all the history
of the world he is the only man of whom it can be said that he
attained the apex of eminence in both art and science.

The information concerning Leonardo da Vinci's devices for
obtaining Perpetual Motion is extremely meager. There does not
seem to be extant any detailed explanation of just how he expected
his different designs to work.

All that is known concerning his efforts is sufficiently
illustrated by the following cuts and language from Dircks:

Fig. 1 may be taken as a scheme belonging to the fifteenth
century. It seems to be placed at the head as a simple or
elementary design for future improvement. It is a chambered drum
wheel, containing balls or weights, which, being always farthest
from the center on one side, as compared to the other, are
expected to keep the wheel constantly rotating.

Fig. 2. Failing in this scheme, the inventor next offers one
with weighted levers, which are to fall outwards on one side,
but to fall inwards on the opposite side, the weight at the same
time sliding up the lever when vertical at the bottom, so as to
be nearer the center throughout on the ascending side. But how31
the weight is to be made to ascend *at the bottom* remains
to be shown.

![](i_029.jpg)

Fig. 3. The difficulty of elevating the weight would appear to
have suggested its immersion in a trough of water, as here
shown. The weights seem to be attached to some contrivance to
float them *upwards*; but we are perplexed, and so no
doubt was da Vinci, how to sink them, or being sunk, how to
render them again buoyant by any self-motive process.

Fig. 4. It would appear as though the difficulties observable
in Fig. 3 were attempted to be met here, in a plan which
evidently combines several views of the case, yet without
removing the main difficulty; for although the weight at the end
of the long arm may be quite capable of sinking in the liquid,
we still inquire, How is it ever to be raised again?

Fig. 5 seems to be an incomplete sketch, and a mere variation
on the preceding designs, with the addition either of machinery
below to be worked by it, or to give it motion. Possibly it was
proposed to have a magnet at the bottom of the vessel.

Fig. 6 appears to be two designs in one sketch. On one side we
have long single levers, with a single weight at their ends, and
a weight between each at the periphery; on the other end, double
or forked levers and double weights. Its mixed character renders
it probable that it was merely some preliminary sketch.

The great value of the present exhibition32 of these early
contrivances of misdirected mechanical ingenuity consists in the
convincing evidence which they afford, that all young inventors
who occupy themselves in the search for self-motive machines, do
little more than reproduce the blunders of a past age. After a
lapse of five centuries modern inventors often become patentees
of contrivances which are only more complicated than the
assumed-to-be overweight wheel of Wilars de Honecort, or the six
similar ones of Leonardo da Vinci. But such has hitherto been
the ignorance of mechanics on this subject, that Fig. 1 of the
annexed diagrams has frequently been adduced by writers on the
subject, as the veritable wheel invented by the Marquis of
Worcester, in the seventeenth century!

### A. Capra's Device

In 1678, A Capra, of Italy, revived the ancient, but still
favorite scheme that dates back to the 13th century. (See page 22
ante.) He illustrates his idea with the following figure and the
following comment:

On the wheel A (of the facsimile engraving opposite), which must
be hung well equipoised between two uprights, are appended
counter-weights, eighteen in number, all precisely at the same
distance from each other, and all exactly of the same weight. The
counter-weights33 are provided with a small ring by
which they are hung.

![](i_032.jpg)

Whilst the counter-weights B are farther from the center C of the
wheel, they weigh more than the counter-weights I, because these
are low and nearer to the center C of the wheel, so that the
counter-weights B descend and the34 weight I drops; and
whilst the weight B is alternately descending and the weight I
ascending, the wheel will revolve continually. But it must be
understood that it is necessary to make the wheel perfectly true
in equilibrium, so that it do not weigh more on one side than on
the other on account of the counter-weights.

### The Device of Dixon Vallance. England, 1825

This inventor was certain he had overtaken and captured the
ever-illusive Perpetual Motion. He gives a description of his
happiness and his machine in the following effusively joyous
language:

The annexed drawing shows how I have at length taken this
enticing jilt (perpetual motion), though after a long and weary
chasea

Through pleasant and
delightful fields,  
 Through barren tracts and lonely
wilds;  
 'Mongst quagmires, mosses, muirs
and marshes,  
 Where deil or spunkie never scarce
is!  
 By chance I happened on her den,  
 And took her when she didna ken.

![](i_034.jpg)

W W W W represents a wheel with twelve hollow
spokes, in each of which there is a rolling weight or ball.
C C C C is a chain passing over two pulleys
P P. There is an opening round the wheel from the nave to
the circumference,35 so as to allow the chain to pass
freely and to meet the weights. The weights are met by the chain
as the wheel revolves, and are raised from the circumference
till they are at last brought close to the nave, where they
remain till, by the revolution of the wheel, they are allowed to
roll out to the circumference. By this arrangement the weights
are, on one side of the wheel, always at the circumference, so
that that side is more powerful than the other, which causes the
wheel continually to revolve. F F F F is the
frame of the machine;36 M M M M the
mortices for joining the two sides of the frame by cross rails.
The arrows point out the direction in which the wheel turns.aI
am, yours, &c., Dixon Vallance. Liberton, Lanarkshire, Nov.
10, 1825.

### Furman's Device

Strange as it may seem, the patent office of the U. S.
government as late as 1884 and 1886, received and filed, seriously
considered and granted Letters Patent on Perpetual Motion Devices
as appears from the description of Furman's Device following, and
from Schirrmeister's "Mechanical Movement," and Enbom &
Anderson's "Improvement in Pumps," appearing on pages 38 and 76
respectively, supra.

These were not denominated Perpetual Motion Devices by the
inventors, but the specifications show them to be simply that and
nothing more.

July 15, 1884, George H. Furman, of Rochester, Ohio,
U. S. A., was granted U. S. Patent No. 301979, on

"A New and Improved Motor."

The essentials are sufficiently shown by the following excerpt
from the specifications and the following figure. We have omitted
Figure 2, mentioned in the specifications:

37

UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE.

George H. Furman, of Rochester, Ohio.

MOTOR.

Specification forming part of Letters Patent  
No. 301979, dated July 15, 1884.  
Application filed March 6, 1884. (No model.)

The action of the motor is as follows: A suitable quantity of
the small weights *d* being placed in the outer drum, F,
through the door *f*, the machine being at rest, they will
accumulate at the lower part of the drum F in the pockets *cA'
cA'*. Now, to run the machine a person will apply his hands
to the rim H and revolve the outer drum, F, in the direction of
the arrow shown in Fig. 1. This movement of the outer drum will
cause the weights *d* to be carried in the pockets *cA'
cA'* to the upper side of the drum, at which point they will
roll from the pockets *cA' cA'* into the pockets *b b*
of the inner drum, G, where their weight will cause the drum G
and shaft E to revolve. *As the pockets* b *of the
inner drum pass below the shaft E they empty the weights into
the troughs* cA' *of the outer wheel, F, to be again
carried above the shaft and dropped38 into the pockets*
b, *so that the inner wheel, G, and shaft E will be revolved
continuously.*

![](i_037.jpg)

### Schirrmeister's Mechanical Movement

July 6, 1886, Charles Schirrmeister, of Brooklyn, Kings County,
State of New York, U. S. A., obtained Letters Patent No.
345077, on a new and useful

"Mechanical Movement."

The essentials of the patented device appear from the following
excerpts from the specifications, and the following figures
accompanying the specifications. (Figs. 2, 3 and 4 we do not
show.)

39

![](i_038.jpg)

40

The object of my invention is to furnish a cheap and simple *means
for imparting mechanical power*; and I accomplish this by
means of a series of radial arms placed at right angles to and
projecting from the axis of motion where power is first applied,
and so arranged that each arm is in a different vertical plane,
said arms being weighted at each end with a ball of metal. Some
of these arms are also made hollow and inclose sliding or
rolling weights, which move back and forth as the axis revolves,
and the motion is still further re-enforced by a series of
springs which are attached to the axis by a lever and eccentric.

![](i_039.jpg)

Taking the simplest form of my device, I illustrate the same by
the accompanying drawings, in whicha

Figure 1 is a side elevation of the entire apparatus. Fig. 2 is
a sectional view showing the hollow arm with a rolling weight.
Fig. 3 is an end view showing the operation of a re-enforcing
spiral spring. Fig. 4 is a detailed41 view showing still
further the method of re-enforcing motion by springs. Fig. 5 is
a view of the driving-pulley with its hollow arms.

Similar letters refer to similar parts in the several views.

A is the axis to which the power first imparting motion is
applied.

N are the bearings supporting the same.

B is the driving-pulley attached to said axis, and from which
motion is imparted by means of the driving belt *b* to any
point desired.

C are the hollow arms of the driving-pulley B.

D are the solid arms radiating from the axis A.

E are the hollow arms radiating from the axis A.

F are the solid balls or weights secured to the ends of the
arms D and E.

*a* are the sliding or rolling weights, which are inclosed
within the hollow arms C and E.

*c* are the slots cut into the hollow arms E, to relieve
the air-pressure formed by the backward and forward motion of
the weights *a*.

G are springs so arranged as to expend their force upon the
axis A by means of the connecting rods H, both attached to the
springs and one attached to the axis A by means of the eccentric
I and the other to the wheel J at one end of the axis.

K is a balanced lever, upon which the springs G may rest, said
lever being supported at each end upon the springs L.

42
M is a crank attached to one end of the axis A, and serves to
show the place and manner in which the power may be applied.

The manner of constructing and operating my invention is as
follows: The entire apparatus is made of steel or iron, and the
shaft, bearings, arms, springs and connecting-rods are of
ordinary form. The main or driving pulley is cast with four
hollow arms, in which round weights are inclosed, which move
back and forth within the arms when the wheel is set in motion.
The solid arms, as well as the hollow arms, which are used in
addition to those forming a part of the driving-pulley, are
arranged by means of set-screws a suitable distance apart upon
the axis and in different perpendicular planes, so as to give
steadiness in motion. A thread is cut upon each end of these
arms, and the fixed weights are then screwed on. When the shaft
or axis revolves, the weights which move toward the ends of the
arms above the center accelerate the motion, and the momentum of
the machine aids in overcoming the resistance caused by the
weights, which are below the center. At the same time the
revolution of the eccentric and crank-pin upon the axis
depresses the connecting-rods, which in turn depress the
springs, which, being released as soon as the eccentric and
crank-pin have reached their lowest point, contribute a lifting
power to overcome the resistance above mentioned. As shown in
the drawings, these43 springs joined to the
connecting-rods may be supported and assisted by other springs.

The power is applied by hand, operating upon a crank at the end
of the axis, or may be imparted by steam, hot air, electricity,
or in any other known method, and is conducted to any desired
point by means of the belt *b*.

Having fully described my invention, what I claim as new, and
desire to secure by Letters Patent, is:

1. The combination, in apparatus for increasing mechanical
power, of an axis, as A, supported upon bearings N, with a
driving-pulley, as B, having hollow arms, as C, with movable
weights, as *a*, and radial arms, both solid and hollow,
the latter having movable weights, together with fixed weights
attached to the end of each arm, all substantially as and for
the purpose described.

### Ferguson's Device

James Ferguson was an eminent Scotch mechanician and astronomer.
He was born in 1710, and died in 1776. He was reared in very
humble circumstances, and is known as the Peasant Boy Philosopher.
A most interesting story of his life was written by Henry Mayhew,
and published in England in 1857, entitled "The Story of the
Peasant Boy Philosopher."

He prepared astronomical tables of great value and lectured on
astronomical and mechanical44 subjects. His lectures were edited
by a no less eminent man than Sir David Brewster.

![](i_043.jpg)

While Perpetual Motion seemed to have received considerable time
and attention from him, and while his writings show that he
examined a great many mechanical devices, he seems all the time to
have entertained serious doubt of the possibility of a machine
having self-motive power. However, in 1770, he devised a machine
for the purpose of producing Perpetual Motion. It does not appear
that he ever offered the machine to the public, or sought
publicity for it.45 A description of it is to be found
in his Common Place Book in the University Library, Edinburg. The
description there furnished is as follows:

The axle at A is placed horizontally, and the spokes B, C, D,
etc., turn in a vertical position. They are jointed at *s*,
*t*, *u*, etc., as a common sector is, and to each of
them is fixed a frame as R, S, T, etc., in which the weights 7,
8, 9, 1, 2, etc., have liberty to move. When any spoke as D is
in a horizontal position, the weight I in it falls down and
pulls the part *b* of the then vertical spoke B straight
out, by means of a cord going over the pulleys K and k to the
weight I. The spoke C *c* was pulled straight out before,
when it was vertical, by means of the weight 2, belonging to the
spoke E *e* which is in the horizontal position D *d*;
and so of all the others on the right hand. But when these
spokes come about to the left hand, their weights 4, 5, 6 fall
back, and cease pulling the parts *f*, *g*, *h*,
*i*; so that the spokes then bend at their joints X, *y,
z*, and the balls at their ends come nearer the center A,
all on the left side. Now, as the balls or weights at the right
hand side are farther from the center A than they are on the
left, it might be supposed that this machine would turn round
perpetually. I have shown it to many who have declared it would;
and yet for all that, whoever makes it, will find it to be only
a mere balance. I leave them to find out the reason.

46

### B. Belidor's Device

This device was incubated in the brain of an American. His name
is unknown. We have denominated it "B. Belidor's Device," not
because B. Belidor was the inventor, but because the account of
the invention was furnished by him. This device seems to the
author to have possessed originality, though, of course, it failed
to work for reasons clearly apparent.

![](i_045.jpg)

An account of it was given in the Journal of Franklin's
Institute, Philadelphia, in 1828.47 The article
contributed by B. Belidor is as follows:

Even the pursuit after perpetual motion, hopeless as it is, may
not be considered entirely vain, in occasionally leading to
useful modifications of machinery. As an instance of this, I
here submit to you a plan suggested by an ingenious friend of
mine, several years ago, as in the diagrams annexed, Fig. 1, a
perpendicular, and Fig. 2 a horizontal view.

A A, two vertical wheels, placed diagonally, and revolving
on the axes X X. The levers B B and C C are
hinged at the peripheries of the wheels. By rotation the arms
B B are projected from the center of motion, while the arms
C C are drawn in.

It is plain that a series of arms as shown in Fig. 2, will
produce an eccentric motion, causing the weights at their ends
apparently to preponderate on the side B.aBelidor.

### Desagulier's Proposition on the Balance

This so-called problem is of doubtful classification. The author
of the problem did not claim that the discovery of the problem
discloses any means for attaining Perpetual Motion, and, yet, it
is apparent that if the author of the problem was correct in his
solution of it, Perpetual Motion was thereby already within his
grasp. The difficulty about it all is that while the problem is
quite interesting, the48 author's solution shows that he was
not familiar with even fundamental mechanics. The name of the
author was J. T. Desagulier, LL.D., F. R. S. He was
a minister of the gospel, but evidently gave considerable
attention to mechanical questions. He is mentioned in chapter X of
this work.

Rev. Desagulier presented two problems of the balance. One he
calls "A Proposition on the Balance, not taken notice of by
Mechanical Writers, explained and confirmed by an Experiment." The
article under this heading is as follows:

![](i_048.jpg)

In the last papers I published in "Philosophical Transaction"
against this perpetual motion, described in No. 177, I intreated
the author to permit me to say nothing as to what alterations he
might make in his engine, resolving to leave it to others to
show him that upon that principle all he can do signifies
nothing. But I find since, in the "Nouvelles de la Republique"
for December last, that he still persists to urge some new
contrivances, which being added, he conceives his engine must
succeed. To this I answer, that I undertook only to shew that
his first device would faile, which yet I should scarce have
done if I had thought a dispute of this nature could have lasted
so long. To come, therefore, to the point where he saith that
this engine may well succeed without alteration, because he hath
tryed with liquors put into50 bellows immersed
in water; I again say that I grant him the truth of the
experiments, but deny the consequences he would draw from them.
I have already given the reasons of my dissent, which this
gentleman is not pleased to understand. But to end all
controversies, he may please to consult Mr. Perrault, De la
Hire, or any other at Paris well known to be skilled in
hydraulicks, and I doubt not but he will find them of the same
opinion with Mr. Boyle, Mr. Hook, and other knowing persons
here, who all agree that our author is in this matter under a
mistake.

#### A Proposition on the Balance, not taken notice of by Mechanical Writers, explained and confirmed by an Experiment.

A B is a balance, on which is supposed to hang at one end,
B, the scale E, with a man in it, who is counterpoised by the
weight W hanging at A, the other end of the balance. I say, that
if such a man, with a cane or any rigid straight body, pushes
upwards against the beam anywhere between the points C and B
(provided he does not push directly against B), he will thereby
make himself heavier, or overpoise the weight W, though the stop
G G hinders the scale E from being thrust outwards from C
towards G G. I say likewise, that if the scale and man
should hang from D, the man, by pushing upwards against B, or
anywhere between B and D (provided he does not push directly
against D), will make himself51 lighter, or be
overpoised by the weight W, which before did only counterpoise
the weight of his body and the scale.

If the common center of gravity of the scale E, and the man
supposed to stand in it, be at *k*, and the man, by
thrusting against any part of the beam, cause the scale to move
outwards so as to carry the said common center of gravity to *k*
*x*, then, instead of B E, L *l* will become the
line of direction of the compound weight, whose action will be
increased in the ratio of L C to B C. This is what has
been explained by several writers of mechanics; but no one, that
I know of, has considered the case when the scale is kept from
flying out, as here by the post G G, which keeps it in its
place, as if the strings of the scale were become inflexible.
Now, to explain this case, let us suppose the length B D of
half of the brachium B C to be equal to 3 feet, the line
B E to 4 feet, the line E D of 5 feet to be the
direction in which the man pushes, D F and F E to be
respectively equal and parallel to B E and B D, and
the whole or absolute force with which the man pushes equal to
(or able to rise) 10 stone. Let the oblique force E D (= 10
stone) be resolved into the two E F and E B (or its
equal F D) whose directions are at right angles to each
other, and whose respective quantities (or intensities) are as 6
and 8, because E F and B E are in that proportion to
each other and to E D. Now, since E F is parallel to
B D C A, the beam, it does no way affect the beam
to52
move it upwards; and therefore there is only the force
represented by F D, or 8 stone, to push the beam upwards at
D. For the same reason, and because action and reaction are
equal, the scale will be pushed down at E with the force of 8
stone also. Now, since the force at E pulls the beam
perpendicularly downwards from the point B, distant from C the
whole length of the brachium B C, its action downwards will
not be diminished, but may be expressed by 8 A B C; whereas
the action upwards against D will be half lost, by reason of the
diminished distance from the center, and is only to be expressed
by 8 A B C/2; and when the action upwards to raise the beam
is subtracted from the action downwards to depress it, there
will still remain 4 stone to push down the scale; because 8 A
B C - 8 A B C/2 = 4 B C. Consequently, a
weight of 4 stone must be added at the end A to restore the
A|quilibrium. Therefore a man, &c., pushing upwards under the
beam between B and D, becomes heavier. Q. E. D.

On the contrary, if the scale should hang at F, from the point
D, only 3 feet from the center of motion C, and a post G G
hinders the scale from being pushed inwards towards C, then, if
a man in this scale F pushes obliquely against B with the
oblique force above mentioned,53 the whole force,
for the reasons before given (in resolving the oblique force
into two others acting in lines perpendicular to each other)
will be reduced to 8 stone, which pushes the beam directly
upwards at B, while the same force of 8 stone draws it directly
down at D towards F. But as C D is only equal to half of
C B, the force at D, compared with that at B, loses half
its action, and therefore can only take off the force of 4 stone
from the push upwards at B; and consequently the weight W at A
will preponderate, unless an additional weight of 4 stone be
hanged at B. Therefore, a man, &c., pushing upwards under
the beam between B and D, becomes lighter.

The other problem presented by Rev. Desagulier is denominated by
him "An Experiment explaining a Mechanical Paradox, that two
bodies of equal weight suspended on a certain sort of balance do
not lose their equilibrium by being removed, one farther from, the
other nearer to, the center."

The article concerning this problem is as follows:

If the two weights P W hangs at the ends of the balance
A B, whose center of motion is C, those weights will act
against each other (because their directions are contrary) with
forces made up of the quantity of matter in each multiplied by
its velocity; that is, by the velocity which the motion of the
balance turning about C will give to the body suspended.55
Now, the velocity of a heavy body is its perpendicular ascent or
descent, as will appear by moving the balance into the position
*a b*, which shews the velocity of P to be the
perpendicular line *e a*, and the velocity of B will
be the perpendicular line *b g*; for if the weights P
and W are equal, and also the lines *e a* and *b g*,
their momenta, made up of *e a* multiplied into W,
and *b g* multiplied into P, will be equal, as will
appear by their destroying one another in making an equilibrium.
But if the body W was removed to M, and suspended at the point
D, then, its velocity being only *f d*, it would be
overbalanced by the body P, because *f d* multiplied
into M would produce a less momentum than P multiplied into *b g*.

![](i_053.jpg)

As the arcs A *a*, B *b*, and D *d*,
described by the ends of the balance or points of suspension,
are proportionable to their sines *e a*, *g b*,
and *d f*, as also the radii or distances C A,
C B, and C D; in the case of this common sort of
balance, the arcs described by the weights, or their points of
suspension, or the distances from the center, may be taken for
velocities of the weights hanging at A, B, or D, and, therefore,
the acting force of the weights will be reciprocally as their
distances from the center.

Scholium.aThe distances from the center are taken here for the
velocities of the bodies, only because they are proportionable
to the lines *e a*, *b g*, and *f d*,
which are the true velocities; for there are a great many cases
wherein the velocities are neither proportionable to the
distances56
from the center of motion of a machine, nor to the arcs
described by the weights or their points of suspension.
Therefore, it is not a general rule that weights act in
proportion to their distances from the center of motion; but a
corollary of the general rule that weights act in proportion to
their velocities, which is only true in some cases. Therefore,
we must not take this case as a principle, which most workmen
do, and all those people who make attempts to find the perpetual
motion, as I have more amply shewn in the Phil. Trans., No. 369.

But to make this evident even in the balance, we need only take
notice of the following
experiment:aA C B E K D is a balance in
the form of a parallelogram passing through a slit in the
upright piece N O standing on the pedestal M, so as to be
moveable upon the center pins C and K. To the upright pieces
A D and B E of this balance are fixed at right angles
the horizontal pieces F G and H I. That the equal
weights P W must keep each other in A|quilibrio, is evident;
but it does not at first appear so plainly, that if W be removed
to V, being suspended at 6, yet it shall still keep P in
A|quilibrio, though the experiment shews it. Nay, if W be
successively moved to any of the points 1, 2, 3, E, 4, 5, or 6,
the A|quilibrium will be continued; or if, W hanging at any of
those points, P be successively moved to D, or any of the points
of suspension on the cross-piece F G, P will at any of
those places make an A|quilibrium with W. Now, when the weights57
are at P and V, if the least weight that is capable to overcome
the friction at the points of suspension C and K be added to V,
as u, the weight V will overpower, and that as much at V as if
it was at W.

From what we have said above, the reason of this experiment
will be very plain.

As the lines A C and K D, C B and K E,
always continue of the same length in any position of the
machine, the pieces A D and B E will always continue
parallel to one another, and perpendicular to the horizon.
However, the whole machine turns upon the points C and K, as
appears by bringing the balance to any other position, as *a b e d*;
and therefore, as the weights applied to any part of the pieces
F G and H I can only bring down the pieces A D and B E
perpendicularly, in the same manner as if they were applied to
the hooks D and E, or to X and Y, the centers of gravity of A D
and B E, the force of the weights (if their quantity of
matter is equal) will be equal, because their velocities will be
their perpendicular ascent or descent, which will always be as
the equal lines 4 *l* and 4 L, whatever part of the pieces
F G and H I the weights are applied to. But if to the
weight at V be added the little weight *u*, those two
weights will overpower, because in this case the momentum is
made up of the sum of V and *u* multiplied by the common
velocity 4 L.

Hence follows, that it is not the distance C 6 multiplied into
the weight V which makes its58 momentum, but its
perpendicular velocity L 4 multiplied into its mass.
Q. E. D.

This is still further evident by taking out the pin at K; for
then the weight P will overbalance the other weight at V,
because then their perpendicular ascent and descent will not be
equal.

The Rev. Dr. Desagulier was evidently a man of scientific turn
and capacity. It is unusual to find ministers deeply interested in
scientific matters, and yet, he seems to have been. The net result
of his experiments can be succinctly stated as follows:

In the first problem there is *no change in the distance of
the center of gravity from the support*, and, therefore,
there could be no disturbance of the equilibrium.

In the second problem there *is a change in the distance in
the center of gravity from the support*, and there must have
been a disturbance of the equilibrium.

### John Haywood's Device

In 1790, John Haywood, of Long Acre, Middlesex, draftsman and
mechanic, obtained British patent on:

"A machine for working mills and engines without the aid of
fire, water, or wind, or in aid of all or any of those or any
other powers."

The specification describes the device as follows:

59

![](i_058.jpg)

"The machine acts on a rotative principle, or, in other words,
has a revolving circular or circulating motion round an axis,
center, or centers. It may be made or constructed of any
materials or matter whatsoever, so it be of sufficient strength
to sustain the power of action when applied to any mill, engine,
or machine to60 which action or motion can or may
be communicated by a wheel. The size or dimensions of this
machine are by no means confined, but may be varied or altered
as circumstances may require.

"References to the drawings of the machine hereunto
annexed:aFig. 1 is the section of the machine. A, A, B, a
cranked or double center, fixed to the stand or frame D by the
bolts E. C, C, the wheel which turns or revolves round that part
of the cranked center mark A. F, levers which turn or revolve
round the cranked center B. G, G, rollers or weights which
revolve in the circular guides or grooves by means of the
leavers F. H, H, circular grooves or guides which are affixed to
the inner sides of the wheel. N. B.athe distance from A to
B is the radius in all cases to determine the space between the
center of the guide or groove H and the center of the roller or
weight G. The distance of the two concentric circles which form
the guides or grooves H must be equal to the diameter of the
roller or weight G. I, I, springs which stop the rollers or
weights G from returning when at the horizontal diameter of the
wheel. K, weights, which may be increased or diminished at
pleasure. L, ledges which connect the sides of the wheel
together. N. B.aBy fixing cogs or teeth on the rim of the
wheel, so as to connect it with any mill, machine, or engine to
which motion can be given by a wheel, the power of this machine
may be communicated."

61

### Explanation of the Failure of the Preceding Wheels and Weights Devices

It must not be presumed that the preceding devices shown in this
chapter constitute any considerable part of the Wheels and Weights
Devices that have been constructed through the hope of attaining
Perpetual Motion. Of all the means whereby Perpetual Motion has
been sought wheels and weights have been by far the most prolific.
There is scarcely a village or a rural community in the civilized
world that cannot point out its Perpetual Motion worker, and he
generally starts with wheels and weights, though often, after long
labor and final failure with wheels and weights, he still exploits
other attractive fields of hopeless endeavor. Of the devices of
that kind, accounts of which have appeared in scientific journals,
or application for patents upon which have been made, and, indeed,
patents often granted, it would be possible to write a book of
thousands of pages, but to do so would be to no purpose.

It is believed by the author that the preceding devices are
sufficient to illustrate, and show the controlling features of all
the various mechanical contrivances for the utilization of wheels
and weights as a means of Self-Motive Power. Countless others
could be shown of more or less complicated mechanism, but an
examination62
would disclose the fact that each gets back to some combination of
parts well illustrated in the preceding. Also, in endeavoring to
express why all wheels and weights devices have failed to work,
each essential point of weakness is disclosed in the preceding.
Now, why have they failed to work, and wherein are they inherently
wrong and unscientific?

A cursory examination of the preceding devices shows that each
depends ultimately on the supposition:

1. That a descending weight elevates an equal weight through a
distance equal to the descent, and at the same time overcomes the
frictional resistance of mechanism, both ascent and descent being
measured on perpendicular lines, or

2. That weights affixed to an axis and caused to have a longer
leverage on the descending side than on the ascending side, and
consequently the downward pull on the long lever side is supposed
to be greater than the downward pull or resistance on the short
lever side of the axis.

If the fallacy of these supposed principles is explained and
fully understood, it disposes, and disposes effectually, of the
possibility of obtaining Perpetual Motion by means of wheels,
weights and the force of gravity.

It should be remembered that a wheel is a63 lever, or rather it
is a continuous series of leversanothing moreanothing less.

![](i_062.jpg)

We first refer to the figure shown in A. Capra's device, page 33
ante. The left side of this wheel is, of course, supposed to be
the descending side on which the weights are farthest from the
center of the wheel. It is apparent that only five weights are
having any leverage advantage whatever, while a much greater
number are being made to ascend. The advantage which a few of the
weights have by virtue of the leverage pulling downward is always
exactly counterbalanced by an *increased number* of weights
being drawn upward. It should be borne in mind that the direction
of the force of gravity is toward64 the center of the
earth, and not in the direction of the motion of the wheel, except
at the extreme left side of the wheel.

Again, consider the figure appearing on page 63. It is manifest
that the weights on the right hand are further out, and have a
leverage advantage of the weights on the left hand side, but it is
also manifest that there is, and always must be, a greater *number*
of weights on the left hand side. The *greater leverage* of
the weights on one side is exactly balanced by the greater number
of weights on the other side.

For a further illustration, take the figure shown on sheet 65,
ante. The weight "1" has a distinct advantage over weight "5."
Weight "2" has a distinct advantage over weight "6." But here we
have only three weights: 1, 2 and 8, tending to pull the wheel
from left to right, whereas there are five weights, 3, 4, 5, 6 and
7, tending to prevent its going to the right.

In other words, if weights 1, 2 and 8 were removed, it is clear
that the wheel would turn back to the left by reason of the action
of the weights 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Here again the *leverage
advantage* which weights have descending is counterbalanced
by the *increased number of weights* on the opposite side
acted on by the force of gravity, tending to prevent the descent
of those having the greater leverage.

65

![](i_064.jpg)

All the simpler devices failed, of course, to work. The more
complicated devices are simply efforts to overcome the elementary
principles that prevented the simpler devices from working. Among
these that of Dixon Vallance (see page 34, ante), is best adapted
to illustrate the folly and the fallacy of these various devices
to overcome elementary principles.

We here refer to the figure appearing on page 35, ante, shown in
connection with Dixon Vallance's Device. The obvious purpose was
to66
keep all the weights close to the hub, except those depended upon
to produce continuous motion by their greater leverage.

To the untrained and untechnical person it would perhaps not be
manifest at first just why the Vallance machine failed to work.
Here is its failure: Weight "c" must be raised toward the hub of
the wheel. To raise that weight requires the application of force.
That force must be supplied. The belt "cc" would work more freely
if it were not elevating a weight, and the force required from "w"
to turn the wheel so as to elevate the weight at "c" is
counterbalanced by the resistance the weight "c" offers to being
raised, and consequently to the motion of the belt and in turn to
the progress of the wheel.

It should always be remembered that, omitting friction, the
energy exerted by a descending body is the *perpendicular
distance* of its descent multiplied by its weight. For,
notwithstanding what its course may be from an elevated point to a
lower point the energy accumulated in the descent is still the
product of the perpendicular distance and the mass, or weight.

In all of these devices it is apparent that every weight is
brought back by some force from the lowest point it reaches to the
same elevation from which it started to descend. It is axiomatic,
therefore, that the perpendicular ascent is67 equal to the
perpendicular descent. The ascending weight and the descending
weight are, of course, the same. Therefore, the product of the
weight and the perpendicular distance of *ascent* is exactly
equal to the product of the weight and the perpendicular distance
of *descent*. Hence, there is an exact balancing of
energies, and no motion results. Any motion imparted by wind,
water or steam will, if the moving force be withdrawn, soon be
overcome by unavoidable friction, and a state of rest follows.
There can be no doubt that any attempt to attain Self-Motive Power
by means of wheels, weights, levers, and the force of gravity must
result in failure. The thing itself is physically impossible.

In addition to what is above stated, read carefully Chapter XI,
on Conservation of Energy; also read Chapter XIV, entitled "The
Seeming Probability of Effecting a Continual Motion by Solid
Weights in a Hollow Wheel or Sphere" at page 290 of this book.

---

68

## CHAPTER II DEVICES BY MEANS OF ROLLING WEIGHTS AND INCLINED PLANES

### Device by Mercury in Inclined Glass Tube and Heavy Ball on Inclined Plane

Neither the inventor's name nor his nativity can we give. An
account of the invention was furnished by a correspondent to
Mechanics' Magazine in 1829. The account is as follows:

To the curious who delight in mechanical intricacies, to whom
ingenuity of contrivance is the goal for which they run, nothing
seems to afford and require such endless resources as that most
puzzling thingaperpetual motion. The unfortunate name "perpetual
motion," if changed for "mechanical experiment," would
eventually, perhaps, remove the real cause of censuring it, by
the different idea of the object aimed at.

I now beg leave to offer some account of a combination of
movements, which, from its originality, and seeming to possess
every requisite for retaining it in action, may possibly be
acceptable.

![](i_068.jpg)

This diagram shows a side view. On the stand A are raised two
supports B, each having a center hole at *a*, to receive
the axle of the balanced apparatus, consisting of C, a glass
tube69
containing a portion of mercury G; and D, a grooved scaleboard,
in which a ball, E, can roll backwards and forwards. F F
are two jointed levers, which are to serve, when struck by the
ball, to reverse the position of the compound balance: the whole
centred at *a*, the tube at *b*, and the grooved
board at *c*. In its present position, the mercury (it is
supposed), having flowed to the end C, will depress D, and cause
the ball E to roll to D, and depress the end G F D;
and so on continually.

### Series of Inclined Planes

This scheme is of English origin, and was promulgated in 1864.
The name of the inventor is unknown, but he described his
invention in a communication to a scientific publication in the
following language:

70

The accompanying diagram represents a series of inclined
semi-tubes connected together in the form of a rectangle.

![](i_069.jpg)

The ball A, is placed at the top of an incline in such a
position that it shall descend to B, at which point it will have
sufficient velocity or gravity to carry it up the ascent to C;
and so supposing the inclines and ascents to be endless, the
repetition of the movement must be also endless. I think it is
not unreasonable to suppose that a perpetual movement of the
ball will take place, from the fact that the velocity imparted
to it by its *first* descent is sufficient to carry it
from A to C, *those two points being at the same level*. I
think the only thing to guard against is the ball rushing over
the point C, and thus accelerating the velocity at each descent.
The incline on road upon which the ball runs can be made either
circular, square, octagonal, or, in fact, almost of any form.

71

### Device by Oscillating Trough and Cannon Balls

(Name of inventor unknown)

An adaptation from a "Perpetual Pump" substituting cannon-balls
for water.

An account of this invention was published in London in 1825, in
the language of the inventor, who says:

The description of the perpetual pump has suggested to me
whether the long-sought "perpetual motion" may not be found by a
simple mechanical alteration of that machine, and substituting a
cannon-ball as a *primum mobile*, in lieu of the water,
not always obtainable. I would recommend that in the bottom of
the trough be inserted at each end two dropping-boards, of a
triangular form, moving on an axis at one corner, one of which
falling below the level of the trough at the elevated end, the
other shall be raised by the stop affixed to the standard-post,
which, throwing the ball again back to the former end, shall
depress that, until the same process is repeated in perpetual
activity.

Description.aFig. 1. A, the trough,
swinging on an axis at B. C, the cannon-ball, raised by one of
the dropping-boards, D, whilst the other falls through the
opening at E, into the trough. F, the support or stop, raising
the dropping-board72 D. The center of the trough ought
to be pierced, leaving the sides as a support to the ball, which
ought not to be wider than the ball may travel freely through.

![](i_071.jpg)

Fig. 2. D D, the dropping-boards, which pass through the
center so as to leave a sufficiency of the trough as a resting
place for the ball to give a momentum, and depress the trough,
previously to its being again raised by the dropping-board.

We meekly venture to call the attention of this inventor, if he
is still living, and to any others who may be working along the
same line, that to our certain knowledge water is more generally
obtainable than cannon-balls. We, therefore, suggest the use of
water instead of cannon-balls.

73

### Unpublished Incline Plane and Weights Devices Noted by the Author

Except the preceding three devices the author does not remember
ever to have seen reported in any book, patent, application for
patent, or report, the account of a device for obtaining
self-motive power by means of weights and inclined planes, and
yet, it is believed by the author from the use that has been made
of inclined planes and rolling weights in demonstrating mechanical
principles by many natural philosophers, and also from devices
that have from time to time been brought to the attention of the
author during thirty years last past, that the inclined plane with
rolling weights has been a fertile field of folly among Perpetual
Motion seekers.

On a number of occasions the author has been asked to view and
inspect mechanical devices of that kind, which it was claimed by
the confident inventor and his friends "would surely work when
just one little thing could be overcome." The phraseology was
sometimes varied a little from the preceding quotation, but the
substance was always there.

In one instance the device attracted the enthusiastic attention
and elicited breathless interest from a doctor and surgeon of much
more than ordinary skill and intelligence in his profession, and
was hopefully regarded by a number of other74 persons who had had
schooling advantages and were supposed to be versed in the
rudiments of mechanics, and, it would seem to the author, ought at
first sight to have perceived the fallacy and hopelessness of the
inventor's dreams.

All of these claimed inventions relying on the inclined plane
with rolling weights were so nearly alike in the principle
involved that all may be illustrated by the following explanation:

![](i_073.jpg)

The above figure shows a vertical section of a device that
illustrates the controlling principle in all of these devices. It
is manifest that the balls between A and C are hanging equally
between A D and C D, the points of suspension A and C
being in a horizontal line. It is also manifest that there will be
a greater number of balls on the sloping incline A B than on
the sloping incline B C. The Perpetual Motion seeker has
always argued to himself that the *four* balls between A and
B should pull stronger to the left at B than the *two* balls
between B and75
C can pull. Sometimes this device has been varied whereby the
balls would roll freely down the incline from B to A and then roll
back toward C down another incline where they would be supposed to
strike a lever and impel a ball from C to B, which ball would then
roll down the incline B A, and so on indefinitely.

The error of all this lies in the fact that the four balls
between B and A will not elevate the two balls between B and C for
the reason that they are on a less inclined slope. As we would
ordinarily state it, B C is a "steeper" incline. One ball
between B and C by force of gravity pulls stronger toward C than
one ball on B A will pull toward A. It is manifest, therefore,
that an equilibrium requires a greater number of balls on B A
than B C.

B A is longer and accommodates a greater number of balls
than can be accommodated on B C. The number of balls that can
be accommodated on the respective sides is always found to be such
that the small number of balls between B C pull in the
aggregate toward C the same as the greater number of balls between
B and A pull toward A, and thus equilibrium is established.

It is manifest, therefore, that with the pull from B toward C
equal to the pull from B toward A, the mechanism finds its balance
and motion ceases. This is true of all similar devices.

---

76

## CHAPTER III HYDRAULIC AND HYDRO-MECHANICAL DEVICES

### Enbom & Anderson's Pump

"June 13, 1882 U. S. Patent, No. 259514 was granted to Andro
Enbom and John A. Anderson, of Augusta, Kansas,
U. S. A., on

"Improvements in Pumps."

It seems probable that the inventors did not suspect, and that
the patent office examiners did not discover that the device had
in the claimed "Improvement" the essentials of self-motive power.
An examination of the specifications clearly shows, however, that
the claim of the inventors that "the water lifted by the pump is
caused in its passage over the wheel AA2 to give power to the same
and thus lessen the labor required," presupposes the principle of
self-motive power. The following figure taken from the
specifications and the following excerpt from the specifications
illustrate the intended operation:

The operation is substantially as follows: By the application of
power to the crank a revolution is given to the main shaft A, and
by means of this the pump-handle is properly actuated through the
intermediate mechanism described. The water lifted by the pump is
discharged77
through the spout *eA'* to the buckets of the wheel *a*A2,
and by these is delivered to the trough F. By means of the
construction described the water lifted by the pump is caused, in
its passage over the wheel *a*A2, to give power to the same,
and thus lessen the labor required to produce a given result.

![](i_076.jpg)

We suggest to the inventors that if instead of elevating the
water to the place of discharge EA' they discharge it at the level
of the trough "F" they will lessen the distance of elevation and
will save many times the energy that can be realized by the
descent of the water from the level of EA' to the level of "F."

78

### Device of "Ed. Vocis Rationis"

In 1831 Mechanics' Magazine printed an article contributed by a
correspondent who signed himself "Ed. Vocis Rationis." He claimed
to have invented a very powerful Perpetual Motion Machine.

His enthusiasm is as interesting as his device is absurd. We give
the article as published in full:

![](i_077.jpg)

I propose to endeavor to show how my plan of perpetual motion
could be applied to practical and useful purposes. With a view
to this, I give the prefixed sketch, with the following
description of its construction and use: Let A represent the
side-wall or gable-end of a house, from 40 to 50 feet in
elevation; B, a cistern, filled with water, having an orifice
near its bottom, and another79 open at the top,
for the ready escape of waste water, as before; C, a reservoir,
so far filled with water as not to come in contact with the
bottom of the water-wheel D, which, being an undershot wheel,
may, of course, be of such radius as is suitable for the power
required to raise the water. Let E be another cistern, filled
with water, equal to and provided with orifices as in cistern B,
both orifices together discharging water faster than it escapes
from the lower orifice of the cistern B; F, two (or more, as the
case may require) pumps, or expressing-fountains, supported
against the walls by ties *d d*, and having their
cylinders inserted in the reservoir C, and their lower suckers
fixed at a little less than 32 feet above the surface of the
fluid in the reservoir C. These expressing-fountains discharging
their water into the cistern E a trifle faster than it escapes
from its lower orifice, at an elevation of at least 33 or 34
feet above the surface of the water in the reservoir C, will
afford space for water-wheels, supported against the wall by the
upright K, say three water-wheels, G H I, of at least
eight feet in diameter each, or two only of greater diameter.
The upper wheel G being an undershot one, if not of greater
radius than four feet, which it might be, may have its axle
fixed at an altitude of at least 30 feet, and allowing the space
of a foot between each water-wheel for the troughs a and b,
which collect and convey the water from wheel to wheel, will
give a space of 22 feet, occupied by the three water-wheels,
leaving 10 feet for the descent of the water by the trough *c*
to the cistern80 B (which may be four or five feet
in depth), and thence to the reservoir C, which may be three or
four feet in depth; also the cistern E may be four or five feet
in depth, and all of other corresponding dimensions *ad
libitum*. To produce the motion, remove the plugs or
stoppers from the lower orifices of the cisterns E and B; the
water rushing from the latter turns the great water-wheel D,
which works the expressing-fountains into the upper cistern E;
from the orifices of which, the water escaping turns the
undershot wheel G (which may be of larger diameter, if
required); whence being collected by the spout *a*, it
shoots over and turns the wheel H; being collected by the spout
*b*, it turns the overshot wheel I; whence being collected
by the spout *c*, it is conveyed into the cistern B, from
thence to the water wheel D, and, finally, into the reservoir C,
from which it is raised again by the fountains into the upper
cistern E; and so on as long as you please, or as long as the
whole keeps in repair and in good order. The apparatus may, with
facility, be stopped for convenience at any time without fear of
derangement, because the fountains carrying water faster than it
escapes from the lower orifices, the cisterns will be always
full; and it may be again set in motion with equal facility.
With the above proviso, it cannot stop till the prevailing
natural causes which gave it motionaviz., the pressure of the
atmosphere and the descent of water, which in their nature and
tendency are of themselves perpetualashall be diverted. Thus you
may have the power, free and disposable, of81 three water-wheels
in perpetual motion, to be applied to such useful purposes of
machinery within the building as its inmates may require. A
supply of water-mills might be thus provided in any situationain
the center of the metropolis or other large townsain places
subject to a deficiency of rivulets suitable for mills on the
common system. Neither would there be any necessity for
resorting to rivers, or raising immense buildings upon their
banks; wherever there was a convenient house, it might be
readily appropriated with little further expense than machinery.

Yours, etc.,  
Ed. "Vocis Rationis."

Jan. 10, 1831.

### BAPckler's Plates

In 1662 George Andrew BAPckler published a work on mechanics. The
work is replete with fine drawings. Not a great deal of space is
devoted to Perpetual Motion devices, but the following three
plates which are numbered 150, 151 and 152 in his work are shown
as Perpetual Motion devices.

These devices do not appear to have been the inventions of
BAPckler himself, but are devices noticed by him. They are not
explained with any considerable detail.

![](i_081.jpg)

Figure 150 is "A Water Screw," and it is stated that the inventor
intends it for a Perpetual Motion device, and it is further stated
that he has83
scarcely worked out his purpose. The author states that the
excellence consists in the proportion and distribution of the
wheel, balls and weights, and says further that he does not
describe it in detail, and that it is his intention to publish at
a future time a separate treatise on Perpetual Motion in which
this and other similar machines will be considered.

He gives the first as Fig. 150, "A Water Screw," the purpose of
which is not quite so obvious as to be understood at the first
view of the figure; for the inventor intimates that he intends it
for a perpetuum mobile. He has, however, scarcely worked out his
purpose, as we may, nevertheless, say without any prejudice to the
inventor. Nor will we here describe how the excellence of this
work consists in the proportion and distribution of the wheel, and
the balls or weights, because it is our intention to publish, at a
future time, a separate treatise on the perpetuum mobile, in which
we shall consider this and several similar machines.

Figure 151 is "A Water Screw," having a grindstone for cutlery.
The author remarks concerning this machine as follows:

![](i_083.jpg)

This machine also is intended for a perpetuum mobile. The
inventor discharges water from the reservoir A, by the canal B,
on the water-wheel C, which turns the open screw-cylinder D, by
means of the toothed wheel E, the cog-wheel F, the spoked wheel
G, together with the85 cylinder H, and the spoked wheel
I, whilst this spoked wheel I, catching the small cog-wheel L,
together with the cylinder M, and the handle R, turns the small
spoked wheel of the screw-cylinder H, and the screw-cylinder
itself, and thus draws up again the water discharged from the
reservoir A through the spiral screw Q. In order to render this
machine useful, a couple of grindstones are placed on the
cylinder D. Concerning this machine, it is particularly to be
considered, whether a sufficient amount of water can be raised
again, as has been frequently remarked before about similar
works.

Figure 152 is said to represent "A Double Water Screw, with
Double Pump," and the author observes:

This machine is, on the whole, similar to the preceding ones.
The water is discharged from the round or square reservoir A, by
B, on the water-wheel C. A continual supply of water for the
water-wheel is provided as follows: The crown wheel H is fixed
on the upright cylinder M, and is turned by the revolutions of
the cylinder, whilst it turns at the same time the upper wheel
L, which, acting on the spokes of the double screw K, K, draws
up sufficient water by I, I, and then, as stated, discharges it
by B, on the wheel C.

The machine may be rendered useful by furnishing the cylinder D
with the double crank E, to drive the two pistons of the tubes
F, F, which lift the water through the pipes G, G, into the
reservoir N, whence it may be carried off for service.

86

![](i_085.jpg)

87

### John Linley's Hydraulic Device. 1831

An account of this was published in 1831 in Mechanics' Magazine,
and is as follows:

32. Perpetual Water-wheels and Pumps (vol. 14, 1831).aA
correspondent gives a description of a plan which he says he
believes to be entirely original, and not without considerable
claims to plausibility, thus:

![](i_086.jpg)

Let *a b c d* represent a wooden cistern,
or trough, half filled with water; E F G, three
overshot water-wheels, supported by the upright piece; K is
another cistern, or trough, filled with water up to the dotted
lines; P is a syphon to convey water from the lower to the upper
cistern K; R is a beam supported from88 the cistern;
S T U are moveable cranks attached to the horizontal
shafts through the center of the water-wheelsaeach crank has a
connecting-rod to the beam R; V W are two curved spouts to
convey water from one wheel to another. It may be well here to
premise that each water-wheel has a pump and beam, as only one
is seen in the section.

Now, in order to put the machine in motion, it is only
necessary to draw a portion of water from the syphon over the
wheel E, which immediately revolves, consequently the pump
L M draws water from the lower to the upper cistern K. Now,
the water passing over the wheel E is collected by means of the
curved spout V, and is conveyed upon the middle wheel F, which
also gives motion to another pump, and draws in like manner.
Again, the water passing over the middle wheel, is collected as
before by another curved spout W; consequently, the lower wheel
is put in action, accompanied with another pump. Hence it is
obvious that three water-wheels and three pumps are worked by
one stream of water from the syphon. What more is required to
perpetuate its motion?

John Linley.

Wicker Sheffield, May 28, 1830.

### Device of Author of the "Voice of Reason"

In 1831 a contributor who signed himself Author of the "Voice of
Reason," furnished to the scientific journals of England an
account of what he claimed was a Perpetual Motion Device89
invented by him. It should be said to his credit that he claimed
no surplus power for his deviceaonly that it would run itself. He,
in fact, stated that his machine could not perform more than the
simple operation of pumping its own water.

The principle upon which he relied is sufficiently shown by the
following figure, and the following excerpt from the contributed
article:

Observing that persons no less distinguished than Bishop
Wilkins, the Marquis of Worcester, etc., have amused themselves
with such things as perpetual motion, it may be some apology for
a humble individual residing as I do in a very retired part of
the countryascarcely within reach of much societyato confess
that by way of a little rational amusement and relief to the
mind, I have at times, amid a variety of other investigations
and inventions, amused myself amongst the rest, with this of
perpetual motion. The result I will, with your permission, lay
before your readers. That I trespass upon your pages, you are
indebted to your correspondent, Mr. Linley, whose invention I
thought might partially lead to an anticipation of one of my
own, a model of which I constructed a short time ago. The system
which first came to my mind, as likely to lead to the
accomplishment of perpetual motion, was that of the syphon;
experimenting with which, opened discoveries that might prove
useful in hydrostatics. Amongst these was a mode of equalizing
the horizontal surface of the water in two separate vessels of
different altitudes. The90 following sketch will afford an
idea of my invention.

![](i_089.jpg)

Let A be a vessel, having two orifices, one at the bottom of
it, *a*, and the other open at the top for waste water *b*,
filled to the brim. B, a reservoir, so far filled with water as
not to come in contact with the bottom of the great wheel C,
whose axle turns in the wood *c*, attached to the side of
the reservoir; *d*, a crank fixed to the axle of the great
water-wheel, which turning moves up and down the rod *e*,
attached to the beam E, which works the pump D, having its
cylinder inserted in the reservoir B; *f*, an upright
attached to the upper vessel A, to form a support for the beam
E; the whole, together with the cylinder of91 the pump, being
supported and tied together by the woodwork *g g g*.

To produce the motion, draw the plug from the orifice *a*,
from which the water gushing out with considerable force will
immediately turn the water-wheel, which communicating motion, by
the crank *d* and rod *e*, to the beam E, will cause
the pump D to be worked, the water from the spout passing into
the upper vessel A. Now, the cylinder of the pump, if one only
be used, must be of suitable dimensions, or the velocity of its
movement so increased by means of a multiplying-wheel as to
enable it to discharge water into the upper vessel A faster than
the same escapes through the lower orifice *a*;
consequently, the vessel A will soon overflow from the capacious
opening at *b*, to which a trough is attached, which
collecting the waste water, causes it to descend also upon the
circumference of the water-wheel; thus contributing to its
movement, and at the same time tending to preserve an uniform
supply of water in the reservoir for the continued action of the
pump. Hence you have a perpetual motion, so long as the whole
keeps in repair and in good order, which is all that can be
expected of any perpetual motion, constructed as it must be of
perishable materials.

But of what use are all the perpetual motion machines, if they
can perform no other work than that of keeping themselves in
motion? For it is evident, in the case of my machine, that if I
wish to increase the power of the wheel, fixed as it is in size,
radius, etc., I must increase the jet of92 water, and
consequently the pumps must be made of corresponding dimensions,
or exert a corresponding increase of force or velocity to
replace the water; so that it is evident, neither Mr. Linley's
machine nor mine, in their present fixed state, can perform more
than the simple operation of pumping their own water.

And this is the case with all the perpetual motion machines I
have ever observedathey can exert no useful or disposable power
beyond that of keeping up an equilibrium, or getting beyond the
point of equilibrium.

Yours, etc.,  
Author of the "Voice of Reason."

### An Italian Device

In 1825 there was published in London in Mechanics' Magazine the
account of a very ancient invention by an Italian. He had written
an account of his invention in Latin. It had been translated and
furnished to Mechanics' Magazine by a correspondent of that
Magazine. The communication so furnished as published is as
follows:

The underwritten is translated from an ancient Latin book \* \* \*
(entitled "De Simia NaturA|," Autore Roberto Fludd), which treats
of every science known at the time it was published, and largely
of the science of mechanics. What followed I have extracted
merely to show that the discovery of the perpetual motion was as93
nearly attained then, perhaps, as it is now.aI am, &c., P.

*Of another useful invention for raising water
easily, by the which a certain Italian ventured to boast
that he had discovered the Perpetual Motion.*

Description of the Instrument.aA is
an exhauster, or pump.

![](i_092.jpg)

B, a little wheel placed at the bottom of the exhauster, about
which pestils, or circular flaps94 of prepared
leather, revolve lightly, so that they rise easily: they are
connected by crooked iron.

C C C, pestils, or circular leathers, by means of
which the water is raised in the pump.

D, a wheel, by which the said circular leathers are raised up.

E, a pinion, moving the wheels D and B.

F is a wheel, continued from the wheel G, whose teeth the
pinion E propels circularly.

H, a pinion moving the wheel G.

Use of the Instrument.aThis
instrument is classed with those of the first sort, on which
account it is absolutely necessary for a multitude of purposes,
because it bears upward a large quantity of water with the least
labor; for the number of wheels is not variable; but the length
of the receiver A is about the proportion of 35 feet, and its
breadth one foot and one-third. The concavities of it should be
made exactly round, that they may not lose any water by
contracting in their ascension; the concavity of the pump,
therefore, should be perfectly round. The great water-wheel
should be 24 feet diameter, and the wheel G 20 feet.

The Italian, deceived by his own thoughts, conceived that as
much water would be raised by this pump as would keep the wheel
perpetually in motion; because he said that more force was
required at the extremity of this machine than at the centre;
but because he calculated the proportions of power wrong, he was
deceived in practice.

95

### P. Valentine Stansel's Device. Prior to 1657

(Exact date not known):

![](i_094.jpg)

A, B, C is a large cistern of water, above which is another
cistern D, E, which is supplied from the lower cistern by the
pump X, operated by the water-wheel M, N, the crank L of which
is attached by a rod K to the horizontal beam H, I, K, which
swings at H, from the side of the upper cistern, as shown at F,
G, H. The force-pump X, on the depression of the plunger O,
causes the water to rise up the vertical pipe P, Q, R, S, and
thence discharge itself into the cistern D, from which a small
portion is allowed to escape through the short pipe T, V, whence
it falls on the water-wheel, and so on continuously.

96

### Vogel's Device

In 1847, A. F. Vogel, of Leipzig, invented what he called

"Hydrostatic General Mobile."

It was described at the time in a pamphlet,97 and its operation is
sufficiently illustrated by the following annexed figure and
explanation:

![](i_095.jpg)

A water-wheel, A, B, C, D, raising the water by means of which
it is to be operated. This is effected, he supposes, by the
wheel acting at A, by the pressure of one of six pins D, on a
vertical rod, attached to a horizontal beam, working on a
centre, and its opposite end being secured to the pump-rod of
the barrel M, N. The projector has an idea that by means of
flaps, which close the cells of the wheel as they pass under
rollers at B, while at C there is a similar contrivance to open
the flaps and let out the water, and therefore by its retention
on the descending side it will become more effective in turning
the wheel.

### A Water Wheel-Driven Pump

This device is claimed by the writer to be an adaptation of
Rangely's Patent Roller Pump. A description by the writer, whose
name is not given, was published in Mechanics' Magazine, 1823, in
the following language:

I think it possible to produce a self-moving power by such a
machine as that, a drawing of which is now prefixed. From its
very simple construction, a very brief description is necessary.
A represents a pump immersed in a reservoir B; the pump is
worked by the rotary motion of the water-wheel C, which is four
feet in diameter. On the shaft of the water-wheel is the
drum-wheel D, working by a small cord the wheel E, on the axis
of the pump discharging the water by99 the pipe F into a
reservoir G over the water-wheel. In this reservoir is a cock to
regulate the quantity of water to be discharged on the wheel.
The wheel on the shaft of the water-wheel being nine inches
diameter, and the wheel on the axis of the pump three in
diameter, the latter will consequently make three revolutions
for one of the water-wheel. As the pump is not required to turn
with great velocity, the speed might be regulated by the
quantity of water thrown on the water-wheel, the latter being
four feet in diameter, and the wheel on its shaft nine inches;
consequently the radius or arm of the wheel has near 4A1/2 powers
to counteract the friction of the axis of the pump and
water-wheel, and of a fine cord passed over the wheels D and E.
If necessary, the friction of the machine might be still farther
reduced by the axes of the pump and water-wheel being made to
run in gudgeons with friction rollers.

![](i_097.jpg)

The pipe H is intended to convey the surplus water from the
reservoir over the wheel to the reservoir below.

The pump might easily be turned by a cog-wheel; but this is
unnecessary, as the cord passing over the drum-wheels will do
equally well, and is, besides, a more simple method.

### "A Journeyman Mechanic's" Device

The gentleman, whose real name is unknown, but who styled himself
"A Journeyman Mechanic," made an invention, an account of which
appeared in "Mechanics' Magazine," in 1831. It100
was an attempted adaptation of the wellknown principles of
Barker's Mill.

The inventor undoubtedly thought he had successfully solved the
long sought problem of Self-Motive Power, and he benevolently and
graciously offered to contribute his valuable invention to the
world, having "no wish to profit by monopoly."

We cannot but contrast the plenary benevolence of his heart with
the mechanical paucity of his head. He describes his invention
with the following language and figure:

The inventor offers the accompanying sketch, with description of
an Hydraulic Mover, for communicating power to machinery, and
recently invented by him:a

A is a hollow cylinder or pipe, forming the upright shaft of a
mill on Barker's well-known and effective centrifugal principle.

B B, the lateral pipes from ditto; *a a*, the
jets of water, whose centrifugal force gives the motion.

C, beam to support the machinery, built at each end into the
wall D D.

E E, two cog-wheels to communicate the motion to

P, the rod of a pump (on Shalder's principle), which derives
its supply from the well into which the water from the pipes is
conducted, which it raises to

101

![](i_100.jpg)

H, a cistern into which one end of a syphon, I I, is
introduced, the other end of which is soldered with an air-tight
joint into the top of pipe A, to which it thus supplies the
water which is continually running from the pipes B B,
producing a constant motion which may be given by carrying the
horizontal rod F through the wall D, to machinery for any
purpose. And, if the statement in the pamphlet on Hydrostatics,
by102
the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, as to the
effect of Barker's Centrifugal Mill, be correct, the power
gained must be very great.

The advantages of the invention are obvious. The whole of the
machinery for a large factory may be contained underground,
which, indeed, will be the most desirable situation for it, and
valuable room will thus be saved; the expense of erection will
not be great; and the saving in coals, &c., necessary for a
steam-engine of the like powers, will be immense. I might,
perhaps, have secured much benefit to myself by taking out a
patent for the discovery, but I have no wish to profit by
monopoly. All I desire is, that it may be recollected that the
machine was invented by one who is

A Journeyman Mechanic.

### James Black's Device

In 1858, James Black, Machine Maker, of Edinburgh, Scotland,
applied for a British patent on

"An improved mode or means of obtaining, applying, and
transmitting motive power."

The expected operation is sufficiently illustrated by the
following figure and excerpt from the specifications:

A face plate or disc is fixed on an axis, and has formed in it
a number of wipers, eccentrics,103 or curved
paths, which receive (in the space taken out) a pulley or
roller, free to revolve on its own axis, and attached to an
adjustable lever in equal balance with the desired lift or
pressure. On rotary motion being communicated to the plate (by a
band or otherwise), the pulley or roller moves round the
eccentrics or paths, imparting a rocking motion to the lever
(similar to the action of a beam), wherefrom motion may be
transmitted or applied, as desired, or converted by suitable
appliances into any description of motion.

![](i_102.jpg)

In connection herewith, a pump may be set in a tank of water,
and a tank added above; on the same shaft with the face plate is
a water-wheel driven by the water from above; when it passes the
centre, the water falls into the lower tank and is pumped up
again; whatever weight of water is in each stroke is equalized
by a balance weight on the lever; the number of eccentrics and
size of water-wheel may be increased to correspond with the
quantity of water required to secure a desired power.

One means of imparting rotary motion from my arrangement is by
attaching at the end of the lever a crank and connecting rod of
same radius as the lift of the lever, carried over the centre by
a fly wheel.

104
The invention is applicable to the actuating of pumps, mincing
machines, and other machinery, instruments, and apparatus, and
to parts thereof; to propelling on land and water, and to
various motive purposes.

Fig. 1 is an elevation, showing an arrangement for obtaining
power according to my invention. X is the general framework of
the apparatus; A, a disc or plate, mounted on a shaft E, and
formed with curved paths B; the same shaft E also carries a
water-wheel W, provided with vanes or blades *w w*,
as is usual; C is a roller, working in the paths B, and
connected to a lever D, attached to rods *d d* of
pumps G G. GA1 is a balance weight at the further end of the
lever, which is supported in the bearing *f*; H H are
tanks fixed below the water-wheel, and I is a tank set above it;
*i i* are supply pipes, for conveying the water from
tanks H H to the tank I; *j j*, escape water
pipes. The water falling from the tank I on the wheel W, drives
that wheel in the usual manner; and when it passes the centre,
the water falls into the lower tanks H, from which it is pumped
up again into the upper tank I by the pumps G, actuated by the
levers E, driven by the rollers C, in the pathways B of the face
plate A, as the latter is caused to revolve by the revolution of
the water-wheel W on the same shaft with it, thus producing a
continuous motive power.

### Archimedean Screw and Liquid

This device was made public by a communication from a
correspondent to "Mechanics'105 Magazine" in
England, in 1823. The device is described as follows:

![](i_104.jpg)

A is the screw turning on its two pivots G G; B is a
cistern to be filled above the level of the lower aperture of
the screw with mercury (which I conceive to be preferable to
water on many accounts, and principally because it does not
adhere or evaporate like water); C is a reservoir, which, when
the screw is turned round, receives the mercury which falls from
the top; D is a pipe, which by the force of gravity conveys the
mercury from the reservoir C on to (what, for want of a better
term, may be called) the float-board E, fixed at right angles to
the centre of the screw, and furnished at its circumference with
ridges106
or floats to intercept the mercury, the moment and weight of
which will cause the float-board and screw to revolve, until, by
the proper inclination of the floats, the mercury falls into the
receiver F, from whence it again falls by its spout into the
cistern G, where the constant revolution of the screw takes it
up again as before.

To overcome this (the power of the fluid in the screw to turn
it backwards), I thought of placing a metallic ball, or some
mercury, on the ledge above the floats (as at H in the drawing),
of just so much weight, and no more, as would exactly neutralize
this backward endeavor; whether or no this would increase the
difficulty of raising the mercury in the screw I cannot say,
having never tried the experiment.

### John Sims's Problem. 1830

John Sims, a Welshman, furnished the following suggested device
to "Mechanics' Magazine" in 1830:

Let us suppose an apparatus to be constructed of the
description represented in the annexed engraving: *a* is a
water cistern, whence water is to be raised by the pump *b*,
to supply the cistern; *c d* is a small pipe with a
stop-cock at *e*, which lets the water from cistern *c*
into a strong water-tight bellows *f*. The bellows have no
valve, but a cock *g* to let out the water into cistern *a*;
*h* is a weight, and *i* a rack on the top of the
bellows which works in the cogs on the axle of the large107
cog-wheel *j*; *j* turns the little cog-wheel *k*,
that gives motion to the arm *l*, and works the
pump-handle *m*; *n* is an upright rod on the end of
the lever *o*, which rod has a turn at *p* and *q*
for the top of the bellows to press against in ascending and
descending. The water being let into the bellows from the pipe *d*,
will cause the top of the bellows, with the weight and rack, to
ascend till the former reaches and presses *p*, which will
move the lever *o* and the arm or rod *r*; by which
means the stop-cock *e* of the pipe will be shut, and the
cock *g* opened, and the water let in from the bellows108
into the cistern *a*. The top of the bellows will now
descend till it comes down and presses the turn *q*, which
will again shut the cock *g* and open *e*, on which
the water will again flow from the pipe into the bellows, and
cause the top with the rack to ascend.

![](i_106.jpg)

Now it is generally known that the power of an hydrostatic
bellows is thus calculated:a

As the area of the orifice or section of the pipe,

To the area of the bellows:

The weight of water in the pipe is,

To the weight the bellows will sustain on the top-board.

We will suppose, therefore, the pipe *d* to be 10 feet
high, with a bore equal to 1 square inch, which would give 120
cubic inches, and about 4A1/4 lbs. of water. Let us suppose, also,
the boards of the bellows to be 20 inches square, which gives
400 square inches. When the water is let from the pipe into the
bellows, there will be a pressure of 4A1/4 lbs. on every square
inch, which on the whole will amount to 1,700 lbs. Now take half
of this force and place it on the top of the bellows; there will
then be a working power of 850 lbs. up and down, and allowing
the bellows to raise one foot, it will contain about 20 gallons
of water. Now the question is, will not the machinery, with a
moving power of 2 feet and 850 lbs., raise 20 gallons of water
10 feet, which would, of course, cause the motion to be
perpetual?aJohn Sims.

Pwllheli, North Wales, Dec. 11, 1829.

109
The foregoing device brought from another correspondent the
following:

Had Mr. Sims gained the power exerted by the descending weight
on his bellows, he would have been fortunate indeed; but it
unfortunately happens that its returning power (or an
equivalent) was expended in raising it.

With respect to his question, whether a circulation of water
would be kept up by the arrangement, I answer, no; as the
velocities will be in the inverse ratios to the forces, and the
descending column of 120 inches must expend itself forty times
to raise the ascending one to the height of twelve inches, as proposed:a

10 ft. or 120 in. A 40 = 4,800, lifting force or power.

400 in. A 12 = 4,800, opposing force, resistance, or weight.

Here is an equilibrium, and nothing gained to overcome friction
or the weight of the atmosphere on the piston of the pump. Were
it possible to annihilate both friction and atmospheric weight,
even then, unless the power exceed the weight, the power would
not be a moving one.

### A Perpetual Pump, by an Unknown Inventor

In Volume I of "Mechanics' Magazine," 1823, appears an account by
a correspondent of a Perpetual Motion device which is illustrated
by the figure, and the quotations following:

*a b c d* is the section of the reservoir,
&c., showing the wheel, the pump, &c. A B is an110
overshot water-wheel; C D the working beam; E the pump; F a
pipe from the top of the pump, through which the water was to
fall upon the wheel; C G an arm, communicating, by means of
a crank attached to an horizontal shaft through the centre of
the wheel, motion to the lever or working beam, and so raising
water from the reservoir by means of the pump; H I the
water. It was supposed that the water which had fallen upon the
wheel into the reservoir would be raised by means of the pump,
fall through the horizontal pipe, and so produce a continued
rotary motion.

![](i_109.jpg)

The persistence of Perpetual Motion workers is amusingly
illustrated by the inventions of William Willcocks Sleigh and
Burrowes Willcocks Arthur Sleigh. Their devices were so extremely
complicated and not susceptible of being understood, and hence are
mentioned rather than shown in this work.

In 1845, William Willcocks Sleigh, a doctor111 of medicine and
surgery, of Chiswick, Middlesex, England, applied for and obtained
British Patent on what he called

"A Hydro-mechanic apparatus for producing motive power."

He took out other patents on hydro-mechanical devices in 1853,
1856, and 1860. Then in 1864, his son, Burrowes Willcocks Arthur
Sleigh took out two patents on similar devices, and then in 1866,
still another patent.

The specifications for each of the above mentioned patents are
lengthy and detailed. The inventors evidently had the greatest
confidence in their efforts, though surely they never put them to
actual test. They seemed to have been mechanically stupid, and
incapable of correct mechanical thinking, but their efforts were
so tireless and so earnest that we submit that the Sleigh family
had done its full, fair share in the efforts to accomplish
Self-Motive power.

Equally amusing are the efforts of James Smith of Seaforth,
Liverpool, and Sidney Arthur Chease, Liverpool, gentlemen: These
two co-laborers applied for British patents on four different
Hydro-mechanical devicesaone in 1858, two in 1863, and one in
1865. On three they obtained patents, and on the other one
provincial protection. One of them seems to have been a
capitalist, and the other one a machinist. Their112
models were complicated beyond understanding, and apparently they
were laboring in the dark without intelligent plan. They seemed to
have thought that when a complicated mess of machinery parts and
fluid were assembled Perpetual Motion must somehow result.

Nothing could be gained by setting forth their inventions fully,
but their labors were so great, and their efforts so intense that
we feel like preserving their names from oblivion, and hence we
give them mention here.

### Why Hydraulic and Hydro-Mechanical Devices for Obtaining Perpetual Motion Failed to Work

Next to wheels and weights, the use of liquids in a hydraulic,
hydrostatic, or hydro-mechanical manner have been sought to be
utilized by Perpetual Motion seekers as a means of obtaining
energy from the machine not supplied to the machine. The foregoing
are only a few of the many devices of that kind, but they are the
most simple of those that have been brought to light, and
consequently better illustrate the manner in which it has been
sought to utilize the interesting properties of liquid pressure
and mobility in the solution of the problem.

An examination of the preceding devices discloses that in each
case the inventor sought by113 the energy of the
descent of a liquid to elevate through the same distance of ascent
the same or a greater quantity of the same liquid, or in some
cases to obtain from the pressure of a liquid a greater force than
is required to expand a bag, bellows or vessel, submerged the same
distance below the level.

The impossibility of all of these schemes is apparent from the
same reasoning that is applied to illustrate and show the
impossibility of obtaining Perpetual Motion by the use of wheels,
weights, levers and the force of gravity.

In each case the basic idea and error was in supposing that by
some possibility the descent of a liquid through a given distance
could be made to deliver more energy than would be required to
elevate the same quantity of liquid the same distance. As a matter
of fact, the descent of a liquid, the same as any other weight,
through a given distance represents exactly the amount of energy
necessary to elevate the same weight of liquid through the same
distance measured vertically. Some loss by friction of the liquid
in the containing tubes is inevitable as well as from friction in
the working parts of the mechanism. Therefore, as this loss
continues, some outside energy must be supplied. If all friction
could be eliminated (which is an impossibility) and if the liquid
were started in motion, the motion would114 be constant, but
no energy could be taken from it for running other machinery
without reducing the motion.

There have been many arguments on this subject. We select one
which was elicited by the publication in "Mechanics' Magazine" of
an account of the device of the author of the "Voice of Reason."
This argument was published in "Mechanics' Magazine" in 1831, and
is as follows:

I am induced to make an attempt to demonstrate the utter
impossibility, under any circumstances, of making a water-wheel
that will supply itself instead of having any surplus power.

The accompanying drawing represents part of an overshot wheel
in section, the buckets only part filled, by which the whole of
the water expended continues to act through a greater portion of
the circumference than it otherwise would do. The area of the
vertical section of the complement of water to each bucket is
made 40 inches; and taking the breadth of the wheel at, say 28
2/3 inches, gives 40 lbs. as the weight of water in each bucket;
therefore, as there are 12 buckets containing 40 lbs. each, No.
13 30 lbs., and No. 14 only 20 lbs., altogether making a total
of 530 lbs. acting on the wheel at the same time;ato show
clearly all the effect that can be expected from this, I have
divided the horizontal radius into a scale of 40 equals parts
(there being 40 lbs. in each bucket); and from the gravitating
centre of the fluid contained in each is drawn a perpendicular115
to the scale, where the effective force, or weight in each
bucket, may be read off as on the arm of a common steelyard. The
weights will be found as follows, viz:a

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| No. | Lbs. |
| 1 | 21A1/2 |
| 2 | 26A1/4 |
| 3 | 30A1/2 |
| 4 | 33A3/4 |
| 5 | 36A3/4 |
| 6 | 38A3/4 |
| 7 | 39A3/4 |
| 8 | 40 |
| 9 | 39A1/2 |
| 10 | 38 |
| 11 | 35A3/4 |
| 12 | 32A1/2 |
| 13 | 21 |
| 14 | 12 |

It is therefore quite evident that, although we have 530 lbs.
acting on one side of the wheel, a column of water weighing 446
lbs. reacting at the same distance from the centre, on the
opposite side, will exactly balance the whole 530 lbs. contained
in the buckets; so that about a sixth of the expenditure rests
on the axis without producing any useful effect, and the wheel
so loaded must remain in a state of rest. Now, in spite of
friction and the *vis inertia* of matter, if we suppose
the wheel at work, it can raise only 446 lbs. at the expense of
530 lbs.; but even if it could raise the whole 530 lbs., we
should then be but little nearer the mark, for we must remember
that the gravitating centre of our power falls through a space
of only 8 ft. 11 in., while the water must be raised at least 11
ft. before it could be laid on and delivered clear of the wheel.

![](i_115.jpg)

As a further means of coming at the end I had in view at the
commencement of this letter,117 I will conclude
with a simple rule for calculating the quantity of water a wheel
of this kind will raise:aMultiply the number of pounds expended
in a minute by the height or diameter of the wheel in feet,
divide the product by the height (also in feet) of the reservoir
to be filled, and two-thirds of the quotient will be the answer
required. Example, for the wheel above described, making six
revolutions per minute:a

```
        42 buckets on wheel.
         6 revolutions per minute.
       ---
       252 buckets filled per minute.
        40 the weight of water in each bucket.
     -----
     10080 lbs. expended per minute.
        10 feet height of wheel.
    ------
11) 100800 momentum, dividing by 11 feet as
             the height of reservoir.
    ------
   3) 9163.636 divided by 3.
      --------
      3054.545 multiplying by 2.
             2
      --------
      6109.09  answer in lbs.
```

So that for every 1008 gallons expended on the
wheel, we only gain sufficient power to supply 611 nearly.

See also Chap. XV, Bishop Wilkin's Work,
appearing at page 297 et seq. supra.

---

118

## CHAPTER IV PNEUMATIC, SIPHON AND HYDRO-PNEUMATIC DEVICES

### The Hydrostatical Paradox

Next to the wheel with levers and weights, we believe this simple
Hydrostatical Paradox has more frequently occurred to mechanical
and scientific tyros as a means whereby it was hoped to attain
Perpetual Motion. There is no record that we know of of the name
of anyone who has ever attempted it, and, yet, the instances are
doubtless myriads.

The author believes he has heard dozens of young persons mention
it as a means of obtaining a continuous flow of water.

In 1828, Niel Arnott, M. D., published the third edition of
his "Elements of Physics, or Natural Philosophy." At page 141
under the subject of "Mechanics" he comments generally on the
subject of Perpetual Motion, and says:

What an infinity of vain schemesasome of them displaying great
ingenuityafor perpetual motions, and new mechanical engines of
power, etc., would have been checked at once, had the great
truth been generally understood, that no form or combination of
machinery ever did or ever can increase, in the slightest
degree, the quantity of power applied. Ignorance of this is119
the hinge on which most of the dreams of mechanical projectors
have turned. No year passes, even now, in which many patents are
not taken out for such supposed discoveries; and the deluded
individuals, after selling perhaps even their household goods to
obtain the means of securing the supposed advantages, often sink
in despair, when their attempts, instead of bringing riches and
happiness to their families, end in disappointment and utter
ruin. The frequency and eagerness and obstinacy with which even
talented individuals, owing to their imperfect knowledge of this
part of natural philosophy, have engaged in such undertakings,
is a remarkable phenomenon in human nature.

At page 270 in treating on "Hydrostatics," he says:

![](i_118.jpg)

A projector thought that the vessel of his contrivance,
represented here, was to solve the renowned problem of the
perpetual motion. It was goblet-shaped, lessening gradually
towards the bottom until it became a tube, bent upwards at *c*,
and pointing with an open extremity into the goblet again. He
reasoned thus: A pint of water in the goblet *a* must more
than counterbalance an ounce which the tube *b* will
contain, and must therefore be constantly pushing the ounce
forward into the vessel again at *a*, and keeping up a
stream or circulation, which will cease only when the water120
dries up. He was confounded when a trial showed him the same
level in *a* and in *b*.

### Pickering's Device

In 1858, Peter Pickering, Landed Proprietor of Danzig, Prussia,
applied for a British patent on

"An Atmospheric Engine."

It may be described as follows:

![](i_119.jpg)

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, are cylinders 18 feet long or high and 3 feet
diameter, so that the surface of each piston has 1,296 square
inches acting with an atmospheric pressure of 15 lbs. to the
square inch, causes a pressure of 19,440 lbs. to each cylinder
(saying nothing of friction, which will be accounted for later);
6, 7, 8, 9, 10, pistons of each cylinder, as they must be placed
when the engine begins to work; 6, 7, 8, 9, causing a vacuum
under each piston (as they have for the first time been brought
into their present situation by main force), afterwards, when
the engine is permitted to start, they will regulate themselves;
No. 10 lies flat on the bottom of the cylinder; 11, 12, 13, 14,
15, piston rods acting on shaft No. 16; 17, wheel to communicate
the engine's power to the machinery of the engine itself; 18,
wheel to communicate the engine's power to the wheel or
propelling121
screw of a ship, manufactory, locomotive, etc.

### Stuckey's Device

In 1842, William Henry Stuckey, Esquire, of St. Petersburgh,
applied for a British patent on

"A Pneumatic Engine for Producing Motive Power."

His specifications describe his alleged invention as follows:

![](i_121.jpg)

Fig. 1 is a front view of my said pneumatic engine, partly in
section. AA1 and BA1 two horizontal cylinders, united at their
inner extremities a, a, which rotate on gudgeons that have their
bearings C, C, in the upright standards D, D; AA2 and BA2 two
pistons which work to and fro in these cylinders; EA1 and EA3 two
hollow arms or tubes which radiate from the cylinder AA1, and EA2,
Ea', two similar arms or tubes which radiate in opposite
directions from the cylinder BA1, each cylinder having an open
communication with the arms or tubes attached to it. FA1, FA2, FA3,
and Fa', four other cylinders, affixed to a circular ring R, R,
open at top to the atmosphere, and open at bottom to the radial
tubes EA1, EA2, EA3, Ea', connected with them at their outer
extremities. GA1, GA2, GA3, Ga', pistons working in the cylinders
FA1, FA2, FA3, and Fa', and HA1, HA2, HA3, and Ha', caps screwed on to
the flanges of the cylinders. The different parts described form
a wheel, which, on being set in motion, rotates on the gudgeons
in the bearing C, C. The motion is produced as follows:aI adjust
the wheel so that122 the tubes EA1 and EA3 shall be in
a vertical position; and pour into the tube EA1, through the
cylinder FA1, withdrawing the piston GA1, as much mercury or other
suitable fluid body (previously determined by calculation) as
will fill the tube from the point of its connection with the
inner cylinder AA1 up to the bottom (*a*, *a*,) of the
outer cylinder FA1. The mercury thus introduced flows into the
cylinder AA1 at the back of the piston AA2, and presses that
piston forward to the extremity of its range, the piston GA1
being then restored to its place in the cylinder FA1, and pressed
close down on the mercury in the tube EA1. I next turn the wheel
till the tubes EA2 and Ea' are in a vertical position, by which
turning the mercury therein is forced into the tube EA3, flowing
down which it drives the piston GA3 of the cylinder FA3 forward to
the extremity of its range, leaving a vacuum in the cylinder AA1
at O, equal to the difference between the heights from which the
mercury descends in the tubes EA1 and EA3. I then fill the tube EA2
and cylinder BA2 with mercury, to the same extent and in the same
way as I previously filled the tube EA1 and cylinder AA1, after
which I turn the wheel till the tubes EA1 and EA3 are once more in
a vertical position, whereby I produce a vacuum in each pair of
tubes, and their intermediate cylinder,123 to the degree
of the difference before explained. To the four tubes there are
attached four cocks KA1, KA2, KA3, Ka', which, after the vacua have
been obtained, are closed; and to the four rods of the pistons
of the outer cylinders FA1, FA2, FA3, Fa', there are attached four
hanging or balance weights LA1, LA2, LA3, La', in such manner that
they shall co-operate with the atmospheric pressure on the said
vacua in giving rotation to the wheel. MA1, MA2, MA3, Ma', are
jointed levers, by which these weights are connected at one end
with the pistons GA1, GA2, GA3, Ga'; and NA1, NA2, are cords or bands,
by which they are suspended at the other end from standards P,
P, projecting from the ring R, and bearing pulleys, over which
the cords or bands pass, each cord or band serving to suspend
the two weights which are opposite to each other, for which
purpose it is passed internally across the wheel and over the
exterior of one of the cylinders AA1 or BA1. The cords or bands
are attached to the weights at the lower ends thereof, and pass
over small pulleys close to the points of connection, so that
the cords or bands, when pulled, may act the more effectually on
the weights. It will be readily understood that when any two of
the tubes are in a vertical position, and the mercury or other
suitable fluid has descended to the bottom of the lower tube,
its pressure on the piston of the outer cylinder GA1, or GA2, or
GA3, or Ga', will cause the weight connected with that piston to
turn inwards towards the centre of the wheel, by which movement
a strain is exerted on the connecting cord or band NA1 or NA2,
which throws up124 the opposite weight at top, and
causes it to force down the piston of the top cylinder, or the
surface of the mercury in the upper tube, whereby any excess of
pressure at the bottom of the lower tube is transferred to the
top piston, where it acts in aid of the atmospheric pressure on
the vacua obtained in manner aforesaid. The four cocks K, have
regulating rods connected to them in the way common in steam and
other engines, so that as each tube comes into a vertical
position the cock attached to it is opened, and as it passes
from that position towards the horizontal, is shut, so that the
mercury always retains its proper position in the tubes or
cylinders, and is acted on by the pressure of the atmosphere at
those points only where such pressure can be of service. The
power of this wheel will be, of course, in proportion to the
vacua produced in manner aforesaid, and to the altitude of the
columns of mercury employed. The inner cylinders might be
dispensed with, and the tubes be made to communicate directly
with each other, but I prefer, for most purposes, the
arrangement which I have before described, with the two
intermediate cylinders AA1, BA1; where the inner cylinders are
dispensed with, I make use of eccentrics instead of the joined
levers before described, to enable the weights to turn to the
extent of about half a circle. The number of tubes also need not
be limited to four, but increased to any convenient extent.

### Prof. George Sinclair's Device

This device was invented by George Sinclair,125 who was a
professor of philosophy at Glasgow University. He died in 1696. In
1669 he published a work on Pneumatics, and in that work claimed
to have discovered Perpetual Motion. Explanations of his device
consumed eighteen pages of a Latin work on Pneumatics. It very
absurdly depended for its operation upon the delivery of water
from the short leg of a siphon, instead of the long leg. The
figure illustrates the contemplated operation.

![](i_124.jpg)

### Jacob Brazill's Device

In 1839 Jacob Brazill, of Deptford, Kent, Governor of Trinity
Ground, applied for a British patent on

"Improvements in Obtaining Motive Power."

In his application he describes his alleged invention as follows:

126

My invention consists in a certain arrangement or combination
of mechanism wherein the atmospheric air is employed as the
impelling agent, being brought to bear in such a manner as by
exerting a constant urging pressure, to produce a continuous
rotary motion, and applies to all the purposes where a prime
mover is required.

![](i_125.jpg)

Fig. 1 is an end view of the apparatus *a*, *a*,
are the bearings, top and bottom, for the vertical shaft *b*,
which bearings are to be so constructed as to produce the least
possible amount of friction. *c* is a large drum furnished
with radial plates or fans, some of the plates being so arranged
as to slope down towards the bottom plate, thus forming, as it
were, a series of boxes decreasing in their transverse
dimensions as they approach the boss. This drum is to be put in
motion by means of a current of air directed through the pipes *d*
and *e*, from the two pairs of double bellows *f*
and *g*. *h* is a worm fixed on the vertical shaft
by means of a tightening screw, or in any other convenient way,
taking into the worm wheel *i* on the horizontal
crankshaft *j*, supported in bearings *k*, *k*.
The cranks *l*, *l*, work the bellows by connecting
rods *m*, *m*; *n* is a spur wheel taking into
a pinion *o*, on the axle of which is a winch handle *p*,
for starting the apparatus.

What I claim as my peculiar right is, the impulsion of a
current of air against the fans of127 a drum (as that
at *c*) through pipes, as at *d* and *e*, for
the purposes of a motive power, together with a certain
arrangement of mechanism, by means of which the action first
induced shall be kept up.

### LAcurrencyserson's Device

In 1860 Marc Antoine F. Mennons, of Paris, applied on behalf of
Louis Diodor LAcurrencyserson of Moscow, Russia, for, and obtained, a
British patent on

"Certain Improvements in the Production of Motive Power, and in
the Apparatus Connected Therewith."

He described the essentials of his device as follows:

![](i_127.jpg)

The invention consists in the application of the ascensional
force of air or gases developed under water to the generation of
motive power, and in the combination of apparatus, by means of
which the power thus produced is accumulated, transmitted and
applied. The principal element of this combination is a wheel or
disc (shown in plan and section, Figs. 1, 2), the dimensions of
which are proportioned to the power required. On the
circumference of this wheel are fixed at equal distances a given
number (say sixteen) of flexible air reservoirs *a*,
communicating with an equal number of tubular passages *b*,
which open in the nave *c*. In the length of the fixed
shaft *d*, on which this wheel is mounted, are formed two
cylindrical cells E by which the air is admitted128
to and discharged from the flexible reservoirs *a* by the
tubular passages *b*, with which they correspond. The
hydro-atmospheric wheel thus mounted and immersed to the
required depth in a suitable reservoir as in *f*, is
placed in communication by its hollow shaft with an
air-compressing apparatus of any convenient form, which in its
turn is connected with the shaft of an ordinary hydraulic wheel.
The latter being set in motion acts on the forcing apparatus, by
which a jet of compressed air is thrown into the hollow shaft of
the hydro-atmospheric wheel by the entry cell corresponding with
the orifices of the fourth quadrant or lowest immersed section
of the latter. The air injected following the tubular passages
within its range enters and inflates the corresponding flexible
reservoirs, which thus acquiring an ascensional force
proportioned to their displacing capacity and degree of
immersion, carry forward the wheel in their movement towards129
the surface. On reaching the water line the tubular passage come
into communication by the nave orifices with the discharge cell
of the fixed shaft, and give egress to the air compressed in the
flexible reservoirs, which collapse simultaneously with the
inflation of the succeeding series by which they have in the
meantime been replaced in the fourth quadrant. The latter
following the ascensional movement of their predecessors give
place to a third series, and collapse in the same way on passing
the surface, so that each air reservoir on re-entering the water
in the continued revolution of the wheel presents comparatively
little resistance until it arrives at the turning point, when
the communication with the entry cell of the axle being again
established the movements above described are reproduced. The
force thus developed by the hydro-atmospheric wheel, which
represents about three times that of the prime motor, may be at
this stage applied to the required transmissions of movement.
When natural watercourses are not to be had within a reasonable
distance of the locality in which the force is to be applied, it
becomes necessary to replace them by an artificial fall.

### Von Rathen and Ellis's Device

In 1866 Anthony Bernhard Baron Von Rathen and George Henry Ellis,
both of London, applied for and obtained British patent on

"A New or Improved Mode of Constructing a Motive-power Wheel
Whereby to Obtain130 Permanent Motion by the
Application of Compressed Air or any other Elastic Fluid."

In the specifications for patent the essentials of their
invention are described as follows:

This invention may be considered supplementary to an invention
of the Baron Von Rathen of an elementary motive-power engine,
for which a patent has been granted to him, No. 818, and dated
March 23, 1865, and consisting in a newly-discovered plan for
the construction of a motive-power wheel or engine, on the
principle that the motor, consisting of compressed air or other
elastic fluid, is maintained in permanent activity and without
removal or renewal, and the useful resistance of the air in the
chambers is on the surface of a fixed cylinder, the motion is
regular and direct, the wheel rotating on its fixed central
axis.

The nature of our present invention consists principally in our
providing, instead of that a motive-power wheel having its axis
upon fixed bearings in an eccentric position and turning in an
oscillating cylinder. The motor being brought through a hollow
shaft, or any convenient channel, is introduced into one or more
closed chambers formed upon the longest arm of the power wheel
for the purpose of driving it round; by this means, according to
the uniform pressure of the elastic fluid upon all surfaces, we
obtain not only a continuous but an additional degree of driving
power from the leverage given by the position of the wheel.
There is, as shown in Fig. 1 of the131 accompanying
drawing, a fixed arm or driving rod fixed upon the cylinder by
which to impart motion to a crank, piston, or other apparatus.
We propose to obtain the motor by pumps worked by or in
connection with the power wheel, and having other suitable and
necessary appliances for regulating, storing, transmitting, and
manipulating the force supplied to or communicated by the power
wheel, as have been described, to be applied with the plan for
working the elementary motive-power engine hereinbefore referred
to.

Fig. 1 is a vertical section of the power wheel revolving
inside and moving the oscillating cylinder.

AA1 and AA2 are air-tight chambers, the former being the driving
chamber and the latter intended to check or counterbalance its
wedging or binding effect upon the cylinder, owing to the extra
leverage obtained and the pressure upon the surface of the rod
B, the wheel will revolve in that direction by the action of the
elastic force which finds its useful resistance on the internal
surface of the cylinder C. DA1, DA2, DA3, Da', are packings to
render the two chambers air-tight and to afford bearings for the
four arms of the wheel upon the cylinder; E, E, are two tubes
for conducting the motor into the chambers, and F is the axle,
upon which the wheel is firmly fixed and driven round with it.

![](i_131.jpg)

Fig. 2 is a side elevation of the power wheel. F is the hollow
shaft or axle through which the motor passes from the pumps or
reservoir in connection therewith, and upon which the wheel132
rotates; G is the rod or arm fixed at one end to the cylinder C,
and attached at the other end by a joint or coupling H to the
rod I, acting within a cylinder to give motion to the piston K;
L is one of the side covers of the power wheel, and N the
support or framework for the wheel.

### Richard Varley's Device

In 1797 Richard Varley, of Damside, Lancashire, England, a
merchant, applied for and obtained a British patent on

"A New Perpetual Moving Power."

His device is explained by the following excerpt from his
application:

"My invention consists of a method of applying the weight of
the atmosphere upon a wheel in any other fluid, and by that
means destroying its spring or reaction, the manner of doing
which I133
describe as follows, agreeable to the drawing (Fig. 6) annexed:

![](i_132.jpg)

"A is a circular vessel, made of copper or any other substance,
capable of containing water, and covered with a top part so as
to be perfectly air-tight. B is a wheel placed in the inside of
the vessel, with its axle perpendicular, the uppermost part of
which comes through the top of the vessel,134 and is made to
work air-tight; the lower end runs in a step within the vessel,
and no part of the wheel is to touch the vessel but its axis. C
is a cylinder placed firmly upon the wheel. D is the piston,
suspended by a chain to a strong spring fixed on the wheel. This
spring is to be made of such strength as that when the whole
weight of the atmosphere is upon the piston the air will only
move it about one inch down. E is the tube leading from the
axle, which is hollow from the top to the level of the wheel, so
as to admit the external air by this tube to the piston D, which
piston is a circular vessel, made air-tight, and exactly fits
the cylinder. There is a joint in the tube E at F, which is made
air-tight by leathers, so that when the piston descends the tube
may give way to it. G is a small tube leading from the bottom of
the cylinder to the center of the axle, and from thence brought
out at the end of it, and by which the air is extracted from the
cylinder by means of an air pump and a vacuum formed in it. On
the top part or any other convenient place of the vessel, are
fixed two cylinders or tubes of a proportional size to the
cylinders on the wheel, one of which is a condensing cylinder,
by means of a screw and piston, and by which the water in the
vessel may be compressed; the other has its piston suspended at
the bottom, and the top part of the cylinder being filled with
air as the other piston is screwed down this rises, and
condenses the air in the cylinder, the spring of which keeps the
water in the vessel pressed to all parts alike; and when the air
is extracted from the cylinder C and the piston D135
is forced down by the external atmosphere into the cylinder,
this pressure is continued, and the condensed air expands in
proportion and prevents any tendency to a vacuum being formed,
which would cause a cohesion of all the parts. By this means the
external air is suspended upon the wheel by the chain, the same
as a weight, and the spring of the atmosphere being taken from
the cylinder there is nothing to oppose this weight, there being
no spring in water; and this power may be increased in
proportion to the size and number of cylinders on the wheel and
its diameter."

### Siphon and Funnel Device

This was the work of an Englishman whose name is unknown. An
account of it appeared in "Mechanics' Magazine," 1828, in the
following language:

*a* is a circular glass vessel 1 foot 6 inches diameter; *b b*
a tube fixed thereunto; *c c* are funnels containing
valves; *d*, a float of hollow copper, or any light
substance; *e*, an open mouth; *f*, an open vessel
filled with mercury as high as the dotted line.

It is well known that several experiments were made by M.
Venturi, Sir Isaac Newton, etc., demonstrating that a vessel
shaped thusa

![](i_134.jpg)

136

will emit water with a much greater rapidity than a
vessel shaped thusa

![](i_135a.jpg)

say, with more than a third as much speed. I
propose, then, to have the mouth of the vessel *a*137
of the former shape, being the natural form of flowing water.
The vessel *a*, and tube *b*, must be completely
filled with mercury, by means of the funnels *c c*,
which will also contain mercury. In order to set the fluid in
motion, the valve in the large vessel *c* is to be raised;
the mercury (which was hitherto held up by a greater weight of
atmosphere) will instantly run out of the mouth *e*, and
must be suffered to do so till the mercury in *c* is level
with the dotted line; by this time the mercury in *a* will
have obtained a momentum which will be more than equivalent to
the pressure of the atmosphere: consequently, the mercury will
run out of the large vessel *a*, till it falls as low as
the dotted line; the float *d*, resting on the mercury, of
course, falls with it, opens the valve, and admits a
proportionable quantity of mercury through the tube *b*,
driven by the pressure of the atmosphere (the height from the
mercury in *f*, to the top of the tube *b*, being
only 26 inches, which is 2 inches less than what the atmosphere
will at all times raise mercury in a vacuum).

![](i_135b.jpg)

By this means will there not be a continual circulation of
mercury?

### Orchard's Vacuum Engine

In 1826 there was published in "Mechanics' Magazine," London, a
communication from a Mr. Orchard, concerning an invention he
considered himself as having made. The account is published in his
own words, and is as follows:

138

A is an iron reservoir nearly filled with mercury; B, a tube
twenty-four inches long, having its lower end inserted in that
reservoir; and C and D, two cocks for the convenience of filling
the tube B. From this another tube M proceeds at right angles,
to the vessel G. In this latter tube is the cock F, to admit of,
or shut off, a communication between the tube and the vessel G.
This communication being closed, the tube B is carefully139
filled with mercury; after which the cock D is closed and the
cap E screwed on.

![](i_137.jpg)

The vessel G is to be filled with mercury through the cock H,
the pipe I being open to allow of the escape of air. When this
vessel has been filled, the cock H should be closed and its cap
screwed on; and the pipe I be also closed by a valve, which is
to be pressed tight by the cap on the head of the pipe. I is a
vent-pipe, open at the top. The space represented by the double
lines is a panel of thick plate glass having two horizontal
lines described on its surface, whereby the attendant may
observe the quantity of mercury within the vessel.

The cock F being closed, a quantity of mercury must be allowed
to run out of the vessel G, equal to the space 1, 2, 3, 4, which
space will become a vacuum. If, therefore, the cock L be then
opened, to allow of the discharge of a certain quantity of
mercury on the wheel, and the cocks C and L also opened, the
mercury will continually rise from the reservoir A into the
vessel G, and thence be discharged on the wheel, whence it will
again fall into the vessel A, to keep up the supply. The cock F
must be so adjusted as to admit into the vessel G a quantity of
mercury equal to that which is discharged by the cock L. This
can be ascertained and regulated by means of the panel of glass
above described.

The specific gravity of mercury being 7A1/2 ounces, it is evident
that but a small quantity of it is required to turn the wheel,
which has no friction but that of the axis on which it turns.

140

### Robert Copland's Device

In 1819 Robert Copland applied for a British patent on

"A New or Improved Method or Methods of Gaining Power by New or
Improved Combinations of Apparatus, Applicable to Various
Purposes."

His specifications describe in great detail his invention in the
following language:

![](i_139.jpg)

Figure 1 is a view of a machine by which I purpose to derive a
disposable force or power from the action, weight or pressure of
the atmosphere, through the medium of the column of water or
other heavy liquid descending on one side of the enclosed
vertical wheel, and from thence through the centrifugal wheel,
being returned into the same reservoir from which the pressure
of the atmosphere raises it to be again delivered on the top of
the vertical wheel to supply the discharge on the descending
side, arising from the centrifugal force communicated to it by
the rotary velocity of the centrifugal wheel, and the pressure
of the descending column overbalancing the reaction or
resistance of the atmosphere at the discharging apertures of the
centrifugal wheel. Thus a small141 quantity of
water or other liquid (according to the size of the machine
required) being continually returned onto the top of the
vertical wheel by the pressure or action of the atmosphere, and
acting by its unbalanced gravity or impetus in its descent, will
produce a disposable force or power of any required magnitude,
by increasing the size or number of the machines, provided the
height the fluid is required to be raised is not quite so high
as the column which the atmosphere, when lightest, will raise of
that fluid, and allowing for the requisite velocity on the
vertical wheel. In Fig. 1, A is the feeding pipe through which
the fluid is raised by the pressure or action of the atmosphere
on the fluid in the lowest reservoir in which the lower end of
the pipe is immersed, closed by a cock, sliding plate, valve or
shutter, to allow the machine to be filled at the commencement,
and which may be under the surface of the fluid, also to keep it
air-tight. The other end is inserted air-tight into the top
reservoir, or by a curve, as shown by the dotted line *a*,
joined to pipe C, and delivering upon the vertical wheel,
without any top reservoir. In this case, if water is used, the
highest part of the bend or curve inside should not exceed
thirty feet above the level of the water in lowest reservoir. B
is the top reservoir, the lowest internal part of which should
never exceed twenty-nine or thirty feet above the water in
lowest reservoir, but it will admit the top of the reservoir, if
wished, to be rather higher than when the curved tube *a*
only is used. It must be142 quite air-tight, and supported
as convenient. C is a pipe, joined air-tight to top reservoir,
or forming part of A, *a*, C. C is a movable flap of
strong leather, or other substance, which may be joined to the
lowest part of C, where the water is delivered so high on the
wheel and where floats with hinges are used on the wheel to
prevent its going down on the ascending side; but not necessary
when water is delivered lower on the wheel. D, D, D, D, is the
fixed and immovable waterway, and the fixed case or cover (of
the vertical wheel), of which it is a part, joining also the
stuffing boxes, through which the axle of the vertical wheel
moves air-tight, thus entirely enclosing and surrounding every
part of the wheel but the projections of the axle, and allowing
the float boards and wheel just to turn freely in it without
touching in any part except the axle in turning in the packing
of the stuffing boxes; the float boards are fastened on to the
iron rim or sole of the vertical wheel by very strong hinges or
movable joints just within the fixed waterway D. E is a pipe or
pipes joined air-tight to the fixed cover or case enclosing the
vertical wheel where the water is to be taken off it, having
their lower ends inserted air-tight also into the bottom of the
fixed and immovable top of the centrifugal wheel in such a
direction that they may deliver the water into the moveable
waterway of the centrifugal wheel as near as possible in the
same direction as the water circulates in the wheel. F, F, is
the centrifugal wheel, of any diameter convenient, according to
the size of the machine, placed horizontally143
above the fluid in the lowest reservoir, so as to move on its
axis as near as possible to the surface of the fluid without
touching it, having an immovable cover or top, leaving a hollow
waterway round the rim, into which the fluid is discharged from
E in the direction of the wheels' motion. G, G, are the
discharging apertures of the centrifugal wheel. H, H, is the
surface of the fluid in I, I, the lowest reservoir, containing a
sufficient quantity of water when the machine is put to work, to
allow the bottom of feeding pipe A to be immersed in it at least
two feet below the surface, or a greater depth may be given to
that part of the reservoir under the mouth of pipe A, forming a
sort of well in which A may be inserted any required depth,
better to exclude any particles of air or bubbles mixed with the
water nearer its surface from ascending in pipe A. This
reservoir should be large enough to contain the whole of the
water used before the machine is filled. K, K, are the ends of
the axle of vertical wheel outside of the stuffing boxes of the
fixed case, and are the only parts of the vertical wheel seen,
and turning air-tight through the packing or stuffing boxes, or
in any other manner the external air is entirely excluded from
the vertical wheel when at work; *e* is an air-tight cock
to discharge the air out of the machine when filling. L is an
aperture into top reservoir, or into highest part of pipe A, *a*
when no top reservoir, closed air-tight by a screw cap; by this
the whole machine is filled in every part with the fluid used
before it can be set to work, the bottom of pipe A144
and apertures G (as well as cock to bottom of pipe E when
required) being previously closed. P is part of the axle on
which the centrifugal wheel revolves. Before the machine can be
put to work everything being previously arranged as directed,
the apertures at G and bottom of A (and at E if required also),
must be closed by sliding plates, valves, cocks, or other
methods, as most convenient, and every part of the machine must
be filled with the water or fluid used by the aperture L, or any
other convenient method by which the highest parts may be
filled, the air allowed to discharge by opening E and O, the
latter to be shut as soon as the centrifugal wheel is filled,
and the cock at E closed where required, when the water is above
it a little, *e* continuing open so as to allow the air to
be entirely discharged from every part, which being done, and
the machine entirely filled with water, this cock and aperture L
must be carefully closed; having then fixed upon the most
convenient method for giving the required assistance to set the
machine to work, by giving the centrifugal wheel motion, and
assisting it till arrived at the velocity fixed, it must be put
in motion and the apertures G opened; after it has got a little
into motion, and as soon as the velocity of the wheel has given
a centrifugal force to the water sufficient to overbalance the
slight difference in the height of the feeding and descending
columns, the pipe A must be opened; a discharge from the
apertures G will now take place, which is supplied from top
reservoir B over the loaded side of vertical wheel, where, by
its gravity and145 impetus acting on the float
boards, it causes the wheel to turn till it descends, so as to
be discharged through E, on the rim or waterway W, of the
centrifugal wheel, which it strikes with the velocity of its
descent in nearly the direction of the wheel's motion, and is
discharged through apertures G into the water contained at
commencement in lower reservoir I, from whence this discharge is
again supplied by the pressure of the atmosphere, returning it
through pipe A into top reservoir, or through *a*, C, and
the part intended of the vertical wheel. As the velocity of the
centrifugal wheel is accelerated, the velocity of the descending
column over the vertical wheel will also be accelerated, and,
consequently, the vertical wheels, when having arrived at their
respective fixed velocities, the assisting force being no longer
necessary, may be withdrawn, and the centrifugal wheel may now
receive what assistance is required to support its velocity from
the vertical wheel through the connecting shafts and wheelwork,
or in any other manner.

### Eaton's Perpetual Siphon. London. 1850

The account of this is taken from Dircks's great work, mentioned
in the preface, and is as follows:

![](i_145.jpg)

This is a plan proposed by Mr. Eaton in 1850, and consists in
providing two water cisterns A, B; the short leg of a siphon C
enters the upper cistern, and terminates in three escape pipes,
capable of being rotated by the pulley *a*, connected146
by a band with the pulley *b*, affixed to the vertical
shaft *c*, rotated by the inverted Barker's mill D,
constructed on the short leg of the inverted siphon E, supplied
from the bottom of the upper water cistern. By this means it was
expected to keep up a continual flow down the pipes C and up E,
as shown by the arrows.

### Legge's Hydro-Pneumatic Power Device. 1850

This is an English production, and the inventor claims that it is
the result of fourteen years' study. We take the description from
Dircks. It is as follows:

147

![](i_146.jpg)

It is a dome-shaped vessel; its upper part A filled with air,
and the lower half with water, as at B. This vessel contains two
apparatus for returning the water which is worked through
C D, apparently like pump barrels. The air is to be at from
250 to 500 pounds pressure on the square inch. When once started
it will (it is stated) go on as long as it is oiled. The
inventor estimates a one thirty-second share at one thousand
pounds value.

### Waterblowing Machine

In 1827 "Mechanics' Magazine," London, published an account of an
invention which was furnished to it by some correspondent. The
invention, it seems from the communication, had previously been
described in an appendix by Dr. Brewster to a volume of Ferguson's
lectures, and it also seems that the description furnished
"Mechanics' Magazine" was copied from such appendix. The following
is the article as it appeared in "Mechanics' Magazine":

148

I am encouraged to send you the following attempt at perpetual
motion, because I think it is upon a principle that has not yet
been examined in your pages.

In Dr. Brewster's appendix to Ferguson's lectures, the
following description is given of what is called a "Water
Blowing Machine": "Let A B (see Fig.) be a cistern of
water, with the bottom of which is connected the bended leaden
pipe B C H. The lower extremity H, of the pipe is
inserted into the top of a cask or vessel, D E, called the
condensing vessel, having the pedestal P fitted to its bottom,
which is perforated with two openings, M N. When the water
which comes from the cistern A is falling through the part,
C H of the pipe, it is supplied by the openings or tubes, *m*
*n* *o* *p*, with a quantity of air which it
carries along with it. This mixture of air and water, issuing
from the aperture H, and impinging upon the surface of the stone
pedestal P, is driven back and dispersed in various directions.
The air being thus separated from the water, ascends into the
upper part of the vessel, and rushes through the opening F,
whence it is conveyed to the fire, while the water falls to the
lower part of the vessel, and runs out by the openings
M N." The author then goes on to describe the construction
of the pipe B C H, in the curve of which some nicety
is required, and to explain some atmospherical phenomena upon
the principle of this machine, adding that "Franciscus Tertius
de Lanis observes that he has seen a greater wind generated by a
blowing machine149 of this kind than could be
produced by bellows ten or twelve feet long."

![](i_148.jpg)

Now, if, instead of the pedestal P, a wheel were placed in the
condensing vessel, as in the figure, would not the water, in
falling upon the wheel, be sufficiently dispersed to disengage
the air at the same time that it drove the wheel, and would not
the motion of the wheel be retarded by the density of the
internal air?

I do not apprehend that any considerable resistance would be
offered by the internal air, and the motion of the wheel can be
regulated by its load, so as to offer a sufficient resistance to
the descending stream of water; and I, therefore, assume that
the water, in its descent, would produce by means of the wheel,
a power capable of150 raising a part of the water
expended back again to the cistern; and this is the extent of
the power of most of those machines which have been mistaken for
perpetual motions by their projectors. But I have a blast of
wind which is described as being of great force. Can this blast
be in any way applied to raise the surplus water? I think I see
the smile which the proposal will produce in those who deny the
possibility of a perpetual motion. "A mere puff of wind!" is
doubtless ejaculated from all sides. But let me tell these
gentlemen that, though I may not know any method by which such
blast can produce that effect, it does not, by any means, follow
that the impossibility of the thing is thence to be presumed.
Far from it; for such a conclusion rests upon the supposition
that the powers and application of a blast of wind are fully
known, and that no research or experience can add to our
knowledge on that subjectaassumptions which appear to me
somewhat ridiculous. Allow me, for the sake of argument, to
suppose that this blast instead of wind, had been a blast of
steam. Time was when wise men would have smiled and said, "A
puff of steamaa mere puff of steam!"aand had some one, more
sanguine than the rest, attempted by its application to produce
a motion, he would have applied it to the floatboards of a
wheel, as in Branca's engine, and have been disappointed. It is
not given to man to know when the powers of any great agent have
been fully developed; and those who act upon such presumptions
throw the greatest obstacles in the way of inquiry. But, to151
show the anti-perpetualists that within their own time since the
commencement of the "Mechanics' Magazine," an addition has been
made to our knowledge of the powers of a blast of wind, I have
added a tube, G, to my figure, the proposed use of which I shall
now describe.

In a part of the "Mechanics' Magazine," published some time
ago, there was described a novel mode of raising water in a tube
by directing a stream of air over its mouth, thereby destroying
the pressure of the atmosphere.

I do not suppose it will rise to the height of the cistern as I
have figured it; but it may still be a question whether it may
not be accomplished by a series of short tubes, the bottom of
the one being placed in the cistern into which the next below
discharges its water, each being constructed with a blast and
two valves, in the same manner as the single tubeanamely, the
valves *x* (under water) and *y*, worked in such a
manner by the arms K L, that the one may shut when the
other opens. Presuming that the water will rise to the top of
the tube when the blast is in action (*x* open and *y*
shut), the water in the part of the tube between the blast and *y*
will be discharged into the cistern at the next motion of the
valvesanamely, when *x* is shut and *y* opened, the
blast, at the same time, being discontinued.

### Device by Means of Buoyancy Through Media of Different Densities

An account of this appeared in "Mechanics' Magazine," 1825. The
author apparently had152 no great faith in the
accomplishment of Perpetual Motion, and yet it is manifest that he
had not abandoned hope of accomplishing it, and is still thinking
along some line of attaining it. It goes without saying that the
device failed. The account furnished, however, is as follows:

The unsuccessful (but far from fruitless) search made to
discover the "philosopher's stone," and the "elixir vitA|," were
productive of most important and beneficial results in the
kingdom of chemistry; so, by a parity of consequence, I am
disposed to believe that from inquiry after the "perpetual
motion" (though equally unsuccessful), a similar good will
result to the mechanical world. \* \* I beg leave to offer the
prefixed device. The point at which, like all the rest, it
fails, I confess I did not (as I do now) plainly perceive at
once, although it is certainly very obvious. The original idea
was thisato enable a body which would float in a heavy medium
and sink in a lighter one, to pass successively through the one
to the other, the continuation of which would be the end in
view. To say that valves cannot be made to act as proposed will
not be to show the *rationale* (if I may so say) upon
which the idea is fallacious.

The figure is supposed to be tubular, and made of glass, for
the purpose of seeing the action of the balls inside, which
float or fall as they travel from air through water and from
water through air. The foot is supposed to be placed in153
water, but it would answer the same purpose if the bottom were
closed.

![](i_152.jpg)

Description of the Engraving.aNo. 1,
the left leg, filled with water from B to A. 2 and 3, valves,
having in their centers very small projecting valves; they all
open upwards. 4, the right leg, containing air from A to F. 5
and 6, valves, having very small ones in their centers; they all
open downwards. The whole apparatus supposed to be air- and
water-tight. The round figures represent hollow balls, which
will sink one-fourth of their bulk in water (of course will154
fall in air); the weight, therefore, of three balls resting upon
one ball in water, as at E, will just bring this top even with
the water's edge; the weight of four balls will sink it under
the surface until the ball immediately over it is one-fourth its
bulk in water, when the under ball will escape round the corner
at C, and begin to ascend.

The machine is supposed (in the figure) to be in action, and
No. 8 (one of the balls) to have just escaped round the corner
at C, and to be, by its buoyancy, rising up to valve No. 3,
striking first the small projecting valve in the center, which,
when opened, the large one will be raised by the buoyancy of the
ball; because the moment the small valve in the center is opened
(although only the size of a pin's head), No. 2 valve will have
taken upon itself to sustain the whole column of water from A to
B. The said ball (No. 8) having passed through the valve No. 3,
will, by appropriate weights or springs, close; the ball will
proceed upwards to the next valve (No. 2), and perform the same
operation there. Having arrived at A, it will float upon the
surface three-fourths of its bulk out of water. Upon another
ball in due course arriving under it, it will be lifted quite
out of the water and fall over the point D, pass into the right
leg (containing air), and fall to valve No. 5, strike and open
the small valve in its center, then open the large one and pass
through; this valve will then, by appropriate weights or
springs, close, the ball will roll on through the bent tube
(which is made in that form to gain time as well as to exhibit
motion)155
to the next valve (No. 6), where it will perform the same
operation, and then, falling upon the four balls at E, force the
bottom one round the corner at C. This ball will proceed as did
No. 8, and the rest in the same manner successively.

### Device by Compressible and Distensible Bags in Liquid

In the year 1823, an account of a Perpetual Motion device was
sent to "Mechanics' Magazine" by some correspondent. This appears
to have considerable claim to ingenuity, though the correspondent
states that "it failed from friction." The figure and account
furnished are as follows:

![](i_155.jpg)

A A A A is a cistern of water, filled as high as
B B. C C C C C C are six bladders,
communicating by the tubes D D D D D D
with the hollow axle E, which axle is connected with the bellows
F by the pipe G. H is a crank connected with the crank I by the
rod K. L is a saucer-wheel, M a pinion, N its shaft. O is a
crank attached to the bellows F by the rod P.
Q Q Q Q Q Q are valves with a
projecting lever. R and S are two projecting knobs. T is a hole
in the axle E, forming a communication with it and the lowermost
bladder. The axle B being put in motion carried round the
bladders and tables, and by the cranks H and I, and the
connecting-rod K, caused the wheel L to revolve, which
communicating a similar but accelerated motion to the pinion M,
shaft N, and crank O, worked or blew the bellows F156
by the rod P; the air entered the axle E by the tube G, and
passing through the hole in it at T, entered the lower bladder C
by the tube D; this bladder being thus rendered lighter than the
space it occupied, ascended, bringing the bladder behind it over
the hole in the axle T in like manner, and which thereby gained
an ascending power, producing a similar effect on the one behind
it. When one of the bladders arrived at the knob S, the lever of
the valve Q struck against it and opened the valve; when the
bladder arrived at U and began to descend, its pressure on the
water drove out the air and gave it a descending power; the knob
R then closed the valve Q and prevented the157 entrance of any
water into the bladder; by this contrivance three of the
bladders were full and empty, according as they passed over the
hole T or the knob S.

### George Cunningham's Mercurial Pneumatic Device. Ireland. 1729

![](i_156.jpg)

Among the papers in the British Museum is one which purports to
relate to the Royal Society, and in that Royal Society volume it
is number 32. It is quite amusing. The author explains that he is
withholding many precise details and measurements "such as workmen
should follow in making158 the engine. Intending no more
here than the endeavor to satisfy some others as well as myself,
that there is really such a thing to be found as that long-sought
for Perpetual Motion, which is looked upon by every one to be the
true parent of the Longitude.aDescription of the Perpetual
Motion":

A, a cup nearly full of mercury.

B, the height the mercury will rise by its own weight ina

K, the main pipe, whena

C, the lower cock is open.

E, a hollow globe which must be capable of a greater quantity
than the whole pipe K.

F, the upper cock by which the mercury is filled into the
engine and about 27 inches higher than the line B.

D, the middle cock which, when open, lets the mercury fall
upon the buckets of the wheela

G, and then passing downa

I, a funnel which contracts itself at

L, into a pipe which directs the mercury into the cup A.

H, a case which entirely covers the wheel (being of the same
metal, and of a piece with the pipe), through which the axis
of the wheel passes to set another wheel agoing; so becom
[ing] the principal mover in the clock or engine to be
contrived.

159

#### *The Manner of Setting It to Work*

Stop the cock at C and fill mercury into the cup A, higher than
the line B; then stop the cock at D and turn in mercury at the
cock F, till K and E are full; stop the cock at F, very close,
open C, first, and then D, out of which the mercury will fall
upon the buckets of the wheel G, down the funnel I, L, into the
cup A, and be pressed up K, by the weight of the air, as in the
barometer.

### Why the Devices Described in this Chapter Failed to Work

The devices explained in the preceding chapter are of such
complicated and ridiculous structure that it is impossible to
explain anything from them. It is better to abandon them all and
to discuss in a general way why Perpetual Motion has not been, and
cannot be, attained by devices constructed on similar plans. An
examination of the preceding devices in this chapter shows that
they depended ultimately upon the fact:

1. That air or some other gas is to be compressed by work done
upon it and that upon expanding it will do a greater amount of
work than was required for the compression, or

2. That a bag empty, or partially filled with air, or other gas,
can be easily immersed, and that if blown full of gas while
immersed it will, in its tendency to float, do more work than was
required to immerse it, or

3. That the weight of the atmosphere and its consequent pressure
upon vacua can be utilized160 to drive a piston, or compress a
bag and by some sort of means at the same time produce another
vacua ready for a similar operation, the loss of the driven
piston, or the compressed bag being utilized to drive machinery,
if desired.

It is now believed by all scientific men that none of these
things are possible. In the first place, it is well known that
compressed air will do exactly the same work in regaining its
former volume that was expended upon it to compress it, and this
with absolute exactness. In compressing the gas with a piston the
force exerted upon the rod to drive the piston must be sufficient
not only to compress the gas but also to overcome the friction of
the tight fitting piston, and further, if the pressure on the rod
be removed, the expanding gas will deliver against the face of the
piston exactly the force and energy required to drive the piston
for the compression, but not all of this can be returned to any
machinery driven by the piston-rod, for a part will be lost in the
friction of the tight-fitting parts. Thus here, as elsewhere,
there is an exact equivalent of energy a part of which is consumed
in friction, and only a part available for returned motion. The
same thing is true in compressing a bag, except that possibly the
bending of the fabric is less resistance than the friction of the
tight-fitting piston. Still, the bending of the fabric is some
resistance, and consequently161 the bag so
expanding cannot return all the energy required for its
compression, the difference being the loss, however slight, in the
bending of the fabric of which the bag is made.

Again, let us admit that a dilated bag is easily immersed in
water, and that if inflated with air there will be considerable
tendency to rise, but how much energy is required for the
inflation? It is manifest that if it is immersed the weight of the
water and its consequent pressure will resist the attempted
inflation, and must be overcome before the inflation is complete.
The deeper the immersion the more the compression, and
consequently the more work required for the inflation. If a bag
having a contents of one cubic foot were immersed a mile in fresh
water, and if it should be attempted to inflate it, the reader
will perhaps be surprised to know that the inflation would have to
be done against a pressure of substantially 2,400 pounds to the
square inch. It is simple that the deeper the bag is immersed the
more work it will do in rising to the surface, but it is equally
plain that the deeper it is immersed the more energy is required
for its inflation. In each case the work of inflating is exactly
equal to the work returned in rising to the surface, and there is
not one whit to spare for running machinery of any kind.

The third classes of devices above mentioned162 assume
atmospheric pressure, and a piston driven by atmospheric pressure.
This is easily attained, but in order for atmospheric pressure to
drive a piston it must only be on one side of the piston, and when
the piston has been driven what force and energy will be required
to put it in a position again such that there will be atmosphere
on only one side, and a vacuum into which it can retire, on the
other side? It is easily answered. The same work must be done, and
the same work exactly, to put the piston again in the position
with the vacuum with equal dimensions into which it can be driven
by atmospheric pressure, that first drove it to occupy the
vacuumaexactly the same work, and no less and no more, except that
the amount lost by friction must be supplied in addition.

---

163

## CHAPTER V MAGNETIC DEVICES

### A Magnetic Pendulum

Here we present a device for Perpetual Motion by magnetism, but
we are unable to give the inventor's name or his nativity. It
seems to have been brought forth in the early part of the
nineteenth century, prior to 1828. The description is as follows:

![](i_163.jpg)

Let A A, in the prefixed engraving, represent two magnets
revolving on axes. Let B represent a larger magnet, hanging on
an axis, pendulum fashion, between the two former. As the poles
of the two smaller magnets lie in the same direction, the effect
will be to draw the larger magnet towards that on the left hand,
while it is at the same time repelled by that on the right; but
while this is going on, the upper end of the large magnet raises
by means of a guide wire, the tumbler D, which, just before the
magnets come in contact, passes the perpendicular and falls
over, carrying with it the lever connected with the two wheels
C C, and causing them to perform a quarter revolution;
these wheels are connected by lines with two small wheels fixed
on the axles of the two magnets A A. While the former make
a quarter revolution, the latter turn half round; consequently,
the position of the magnets is reversed, and the same motions
are then performed by the164 pendulum magnet
being attracted and repelled in the opposite direction; and just
before the magnets touch each other the arrangement is again
instantly reversed.

### Magnetic-Driven Wheel

Another plan for Perpetual Motion by magnetism appeared in the
public journals of England in 1828. The inventor states in effect
that he desires to get before the readers an

"Attempt at Perpetual Motion by Means of Magnetism, Applied in a
New Way."

165
His attempt as published is as follows:

The object of the present communication is to lay before your
readers an attempt at perpetual motion by means of magnetism
applied somewhat differently to any that has yet been published
in your Magazine.

![](i_164.jpg)

The above is a wheel of light construction, moving on friction
wheels *in vacuo*; the rim is furnished with slips of
steelapieces of watch-spring will do. N N are two magnets,
which, attracting the rim of the wheel, will render one side
lighter and the other heavier, causing it to revolve *ad
infinitum*: or to render it more powerful, let the steel
rims be magnetized and fixed on the wheel with their north poles
towards its center. Let two more magnets be added, as shown by
the dotted lines: let these two, S S, be placed with their
south poles nearest the rim of the wheel; and the other two,
N N, with their north poles in that position. Now, as
similar poles repel and opposite poles attract, the wheel will
be166
driven round by attraction and repulsion acting conjointly on
four points of its circumference. B B are blocks of wood to
keep off the attraction of the magnets from that part of the
wheel which has passed them.

### Mackintosh's Experiment

F. S. Mackintosh, of England, in 1823, sought to accomplish
Perpetual Motion, and made the attempt here described. It was not
made public until 1836, when it was published in "Mechanics'
Magazine." In the meantime, the inventor had become convinced of
the impossibility of perpetual motion, as his comments on his own
alleged invention discloses.

(The classification in this book of Mackintosh's invention is
somewhat doubtful. The article as contributed in 1836 would as
aptly be classified under arguments against Perpetual Motion,
Chapter XII. But, in view of the fact that at the time of the
invention the inventor was seriously working at a scheme for the
accomplishment of Perpetual Motion, it has been decided to
classify it under Magnetic Perpetual Motion Devices.)

The published article was in the nature of a contribution from
the inventor, and is as follows:

I herewith forward you a description of a machine which was
constructed by me in the year 1823, with a view to produce a
perpetual motion. With this machine and the studies necessarily167
connected with it, first originated the suspicion that the
planets could not continue in motion unless they gradually
approached the center of the attraction.

In the first place, let us describe the machine. Fig. 1: A is a
sectional view of the interior of the wheel, which is formed in
two halves upon one shaft; each half or section is furnished
with a projecting ledge and an opening is left between the two
ledges sufficiently wide to admit of a magnet being introduced
between them, by which arrangement the magnet may be brought as
near to the ball as may be necessary (see Fig. 2). B is a magnet
whose line of attraction acts at right angles with the line of
gravity. C is an iron ball under the action of two forces. The
magnet continually drawing the ball up the inclined plane within
the wheel, and gravity continually drawing it to the bottom, by
their united action it was supposed the wheel would revolve
forever, or till it was worn out; upon the same principle that a
wheel revolves by the animal force or muscular action of a mouse
or squirrel, which carries it up the inclined plane, whilst it
is continually drawn to the bottom by the action of gravity,
thereby causing the wheel to revolve by the weight of its body.
The model was taken from the earth's motion round the sun; and
the following process of reasoning seemed to justify the
assumption that the wheel would move on till it was worn out:

"The earth is carried round the sun by the action of two
forces, one of which is momentum, which is not, in reality, a
force or cause of motion,168 but an effect
derived from an original impulse; and that impulse or the
momentum derived from it is not destroyed, because there is no
resistance to the moving bodyathat is, there is no friction.
Well, I cannot make this machine without having resistance to
the motionathat is, friction; but to compensate for this I have
two real forces, two causes of motion, each of them capable of
imparting momentum to a body: they are both constant forces; and
from one of them, the magnet, I can obtain any power that may be
required within certain limits."

![](i_167.jpg)

169
This reasoning appeared conclusive, and the wheel was made; but
when the magnet was applied instead of the ball rolling up the
inclined plane, the wheel moved backwards upon its center. It
occurred to me that by placing a small ratchet upon the wheel,
as shown at D, this backward motion of the wheel on its center
might be prevented, in which case the ball must roll up the
inclined plane, and that a perpetual motion might then ensue;
but this ratchet I never tried, having about that time begun to
perceive that the idea of a perpetual mechanical motion, either
on the earth or in the heavens, involves an absurdity; and that,
therefore, the motions of the planets must necessarily carry
them continually nearer and nearer to the center of attraction.

The above described device by Mr. Mackintosh brought forth the
following comment from R. Munro, which was published in 1836:

The result of Mr. Mackintosh's essay at perpetual motion might
be attributed to the avoidable friction caused by the manner in
which the iron ball is placed in the wheel. Curious to try the
experiment, I proceeded, and, with the view of diminishing the
friction, I placed two wheels on the axis of the ball, but the
result was precisely that described by Mr. Mackintosh. I next
applied the ratchet, as suggested, but with no better effect;
the ball rolled towards the magnet, but did not give the
required motion to the wheel. It is not unlikely, then, that the
present ingenious attempt will not be realized.

170

### Spence's Device

John Spence, of Linlithgow, Scotland, was a shoemaker, but
possessed great mechanical ingenuity. He could not keep his mind
from the subject of mechanics. He devoted a great deal of time to
designing mechanical schemes for Perpetual Motion. An account of
his efforts is taken from "Percy Anecdotes."

The device was exhibited in Edinburgh and amazing to state it
attracted the attention of one of the greatest and most original
scientists that ever lived, Sir David Brewster.

It is from a letter written by Brewster, in 1818, to the "Annales
de Chimie," that we get a description of the Spence invention. The
editor of "Annales de Chimie," was evidently reluctant to publish
any article concerning Perpetual Motion, and only the great fame
of Sir David induced him to give space to the contribution. The
article was first published in France, but it has, with an
introductory statement by the editor, been translated into
English, as follows:

The reader will readily conclude that in publishing this
article we are influenced solely by the great reputation of the
learned contributor. Sir David writes from Edinburgh:

![](i_170a.jpg)

I am almost afraid to inform you that at this moment in
Edinburgh may be seen a machine, made by a shoemaker at
Linlithgow, which realizes171 the perpetual
motion. This effect is produced by two magnets A and B, acting
alternately upon a needle *m n*, of which the point
of attachment *n* corresponds exactly with the axis around
which turns the movable lever C D. When the needle *m n*
has been attracted into the position *mA' n* by the action
of the magnet B, and C D is in consequence found in CA' DA',
a *substance* connected with m n is interposed by
mechanism between *mA' n* and B. This substance has the
property of intercepting, or rather of modifying the action of
the magnet B, and this permits the other magnet A to draw the
needle into the position *mA'A' n*; but no sooner has it
reached this point than a second plate or layer of the same
substance places itself before magnet, and immediately B
attracts anew the needle.

![](i_170b.jpg)

The annexed figure exhibits a second form of the machine. A and
B are two horse-shoe172 magnets, *a* and *b*
the *mysterious substance*, and *m n* the
needle, which turns constantly with great rapidity. Mr. Playfair
and Capt. Kater have inspected both of these machines, and are
satisfied that they resolve the problem of *perpetual motion*.

### Joannis Theisneri's Semi-Circle

An account of this invention has been preserved by Gaspar Schott
in a work entitled "Thaumaturgus Physicus, sive Magiae Universalis
Naturae et Artis," published in 1859. It is illustrated by the
following figure:

![](i_171.jpg)

The inventor expected the operation of his device to be as
follows: "A" is a large magnet, elevated on a short pillar at the
foot of which is a straight inclined tube, "C" "F" the ends of
which are connected with a curved or semicircular tube "C", "D",
"E", "F", as shown in the figure.

The weight at the lower extremity is supposed173
to ascend through the curved tube by the attraction of the magnet
"A" and upon reaching the point "C" the supposition was that upon
passing the point "C" the attraction of the magnet "A" would be
sufficient to hold it there \* \* \* back to the point "F" through
the straight tube, and then be drawn by the magnet through the
curved tube to the point "C" and so on perpetually.

The impracticability of the above device is manifest. At a point
between "D" and "E" it is plain the ball would have to ascend
perpendicularly and if the magnet exerts sufficient attraction to
elevate the weight at that point it would surely hold the weight
at the point "C", for at "C" the weight would be much nearer the
magnet and consequently much more strongly attracted.

### Device of Dr. Jacobus

In the same work by Gaspar Schott from which an account of the
preceding device is obtained he gives an account of the device of
Dr. Jacobus.

Dr. Jacobus's scheme is illustrated by the following figure:

![](i_173.jpg)

It will be observed that the above figure shows a string of iron
balls "A" suspended on a grooved wheel "E" on an axle "C" between
two uprights "FF". At "H" lies a large lodestone,174
which is to attract the balls at "D" and was expected by the
inventor to cause the wheel to rotate.

---

175

## CHAPTER VI DEVICES UTILIZING CAPILLARY ATTRACTION AND PHYSICAL AFFINITY

### Ludeke and Wilckens's Device

In 1864, Johann Ernst Friedrich Ludeke, of London, and Daniel
Wilckens, of Surrey, applied for British patent on "Improvements
in Motive Power by Capillary Attraction." They describe their
invention as follows:

Our invention consists of improvements in motive power by
capillary attraction constructed as follows:

![](i_174.jpg)

Figure 1 of the accompanying drawings represents in horizontal
section a square case or cistern; this cistern is filled with
water nearly to the top, and two wheels marked *a*, *a*,
and *b*, *b*, are placed in the water in the
cistern. By capillary attraction the water rises between the two
wheels marked *x*, *x*, to a height above the level
of the176
water in proportion to the distance of the wheels from each
other at *x*, *x*. As the water rises between the
wheels marked *x*, *x*, above its level, the weight
of water between the wheels at *x*, *x*, will cause
the wheels to continually revolve.

Figure 2 represents the same as Figure 1, but in a vertical
section. The said power may be obtained by wheels moved on axis,
or by other apparatus by rise and fall in the water by vertical
motion.

### The Jurin Device

The device which we have designated "The Jurin Device," was not,
in fact, invented by Jurin. James Jurin furnished an account of
the invention to The Royal Society of London, and it appears in
the reports of that society published in 1720. The invention was
by a friend of Jurin's whose name he does not give in the account.

Jurin's account of his friend's invention is as follows:

Some days ago a method was proposed to me by an ingenious
friend for making a perpetual motion, which seemed so plausible,
and indeed so easily demonstrable from an observation of the
late Mr. Hawksbee, said to be grounded upon experiment, that
though I am far from having any opinion of attempts of this
nature, yet, I confess, I could not see why it should not
succeed. Upon trial indeed I found myself disappointed. But as
searches after things impossible in themselves are frequently
observed to produce other discoveries,177 unexpected by
the Inventor; so this Proposal has given occasion not only to
rectify some mistakes into which we had been led, by that
ingenious and useful member of the Royal Society above named,
but likewise to detect the real principle, by which water is
raised and suspended in capillary tubes, above the level.

My friend's proposal was as follows:

Fig. 1. Let A B C be a capillary siphon, composed of
two legs A B, B C, unequal both in length and
diameter; whose longer and narrower leg A B having its
orifice A immersed in water, the water will rise above the
level, till it fills the whole tube A B, and will then
continue suspended. If the wider and shorter leg B C, be in
like manner immersed, the water will only rise to same height as
F C, less than the entire height of the tube B C.

This siphon being filled with water and the orifice A sunk
below the surface of the water D E, my friend reasons thus:

Since the two columns of water A B and F C, by the
supposition, will be suspended by some power acting within the
tubes they are contained in, they cannot determine the water to
move one way, or the other. But the column B F, having
nothing to support it, must descend, and cause the water to run
out at C. Then the pressure of the atmosphere driving the water
upward through the orifice A, to supply the vacuity, which would
otherwise be left in the upper part of the tube B C, this
must necessarily produce a perpetual motion,179
since the water runs into the same vessel, out of which it
rises. But the fallacy of this reasoning appears upon making the
experiment.

![](i_177.jpg)

Exp. 1. For the water, instead of running out at the orifice C
rises upwards towards F, and running all out of the leg
B C, remains suspended in the other leg to the height
A B.

Exp. 2. The same thing succeeds upon taking the siphon out of
the water, into which its lower orifice A had been immersed, the
water then falling in drops out of the orifice A, and standing
at last at the height A B. But in making these two
experiments it is necessary that A G the difference of the
legs exceed F C, otherwise the water will not run either
way.

Exp. 3. Upon inverting the siphon full of water, it continues
without motion either way.

The reason of all which will plainly appear, when we come to
discover the principle, by which the water is suspended in
capillary tubes.

Mr. Hawksbee's observation is as follows:

Fig. 2. Let A B F C be a capillary siphon, into
which the water will rise above the level to the height
C F, and let B A be the depth of the orifice of its
longer leg below the surface of the water D E. Then the
siphon being filled with water, if B A be not greater than
C F, the water will not run out at A, but will remain
suspended.

This seems indeed very plausible at first sight. For since the
column of water F C will be suspended by some power within
the tube, why should not the column B A, being equal to, or
less180
than the former, continue suspended by the same power.

Exp. 4. In fact, if the orifice C be lifted up out of the water
D E, the water in the tube will continue suspended, unless
B A exceed F C.

Exp. 5. But when C is never so little immersed in the water
immediately the water in the tube runs out in drops at the
orifice A, though the length A B be considerably less than
the height C F.

Mr. Hawksbee, in his book of Experiments, has advanced another
observation, namely, that the shorter leg of a capillary siphon,
as A B F C, must be immersed in the water to the
depth F C, which is equal to the height of the column, that
would be suspended in it, before the water will run out of the
longer leg.

Exp. 6. From what mistake this has proceeded, I cannot imagine;
for the water runs out at the longer leg, as soon as the orifice
of the shorter leg comes to touch the surface of the stagnant
water, without being at all immersed therein.

Jurin's attitude concerning his friend's discovery is pleasing.
He appears to have had better judgment than to rush into print, or
herald forth that Perpetual Motion had been accomplished. Indeed,
the account as given to the Royal Society was that of an
experiment and a failure. Nevertheless, it presents an interesting
point. Capillary Attraction, however, creates no new181
energy. Adhesion is a force, and is often quite a strong force in
nature.

If a rod or tube be held by the hand at one end, and the other
end inserted in a liquid, it will be observed that in some
instances, depending upon the nature of the material of the rod or
tube, and the liquid, at the point of contact the liquid will
slightly rise in the tube and on the outside edges of the tube. In
other instances it will be depressed slightly at the same point.
Whether it will be elevated or depressed depends on whether the
adhesion of the liquid to the material of which the tube or rod is
composed is greater than the cohesion of the particles of the
liquid.

If there be a depression it is manifest that the entire surface
of the liquid will be slightly elevated by reason of the
depression. On the contrary, if the liquid adheres to and creeps
slightly upward on the tube or rod, then it is manifest that the
surface of the liquid will come to rest slightly lower than though
it did not so creep.

The net result finally gets back to the principle of flotation.
The immersion or insertion is a little more difficult in the case
of depression, and a little easier in the case of elevation. There
is no gain or loss of energy. It simply increases in one case, and
diminishes in the other case the amount of displacement, with all
the resulting mechanical phenomena.

182

### Sir William Congreve

As stated in the preface of this work, pursuit of Perpetual
Motion has by no means been confined to mechanics and tradesmen.
Many men eminent, and even famous in professions, art and science
have devoted much time and thought to the subject. Among such
eminent men is to be mentioned Sir William Congreve, of England, a
baronet. He was born 1772, and died in 1828. He was an artillerist
and an inventor, and was a son of Lieutenant General Sir William
Congreve; was distinguished as a military man, as a member of
parliament, and as a business man; was an inventor of note, having
invented a war rocket, a gun-recoil mounting, a time-fuse, a
parachute attachment for rockets, a hydro-pneumatic canal lock
sluice, a process for color painting, a new form of steam engine,
a method of consuming smoke, a clock which measured time by a ball
rolling down an inclined plane, besides other inventions and
discoveries. He published a large number of works on scientific
subjects.

It is not, therefore, surprising that whatever Sir William
Congreve said or did concerning any scientific or mechanical
subject should have attracted general attention.

He devised and made a Perpetual Motion Machine, which, like all
others, failed to work. We submit that his plan is peculiarly
ingenious,183
and we fail to see how, without a knowledge of the principles of
Conservation of Energy, the Congreve idea should not have appealed
to any one as reasonable, and its failure puzzling.

An account of the Congreve device and an explanation of his ideas
appeared in "The Atlas" in 1827, and the following description is
taken from the article appearing in "The Atlas":

The celebrated Boyle entertained an idea that perpetual motion
might be obtained by means of capillary attraction; and, indeed,
there seems but little doubt that nature has employed this force
in many instances to produce this effect.

There are many situations in which there is every reason to
believe that the sources of springs on the tops and sides of
mountains depend on the accumulation of water created at certain
elevations by the operation of capillary attraction, acting in
large masses of porous material, or through laminated
substances. These masses being saturated, in process of time
become the sources of springs and the heads of rivers; and thus,
by an endless round of ascending and descending waters, form, on
the great scale of nature, an incessant cause of perpetual
motion, in the purest acceptance of the term, and precisely on
the principle that was contemplated by Boyle. It is probable,
however, that any imitation of this process on the limited scale
practicable by human art would not be of sufficient magnitude to
be effective. Nature, by the immensity of her operations, is
able to allow for a slowness of process which184
would baffle the attempts of man in any direct and simple
imitation of her works. Working, therefore, upon the same
causes, he finds himself obliged to take a more complicated mode
to produce the same effect.

To amuse the hours of a long confinement from illness, Sir
William Congreve has recently contrived a scheme of perpetual
motion, founded on this principle of capillary attraction,
which, it is apprehended, will not be subject to the general
refutation applicable to those plans in which the power is
supposed to be derived from gravity only. Sir William's
perpetual motion is as follows:

![](i_183.jpg)

Let A B C be three horizontal rollers fixed in a
frame; *a a a*, etc., is an endless band of
sponge, running round these rollers; and *b b b*,
etc., is an endless chain of weights, surrounding the band of
sponge, and attached to it, so that they185 must move
together; every part of this band and chain being so accurately
uniform in weight that the perpendicular side A B will, in
all positions of the band and chain, be in equilibrium with the
hypothenuse A C, on the principle of the inclined plane.
Now, if the frame in which these rollers are fixed be placed in
a cistern of water, having its lower part immersed therein, so
that the water's edge cuts the upper part of the rollers B C,
then, if the weight and quantity of the endless chain be duly
proportioned to the thickness and breadth of the band of sponge,
the band and chain will, on the water in the cistern being
brought to the proper level, begin to move round the rollers in
the direction A B, by the force of capillary attraction,
and will continue so to move. The process is as follows:

On the side A B of the triangle, the weights *b b b*,
etc., hanging perpendicularly alongside the band of sponge, the
band is not compressed by them, and its pores being left open,
the water at the point *x*, at which the band meets its
surface, will rise to a certain height, *y*, above its
level, and thereby create a load, which load will not exist on
the ascending side C A, because on this side the chain of
weights compresses the band at the water's edge, and squeezes
out any water that may have previously accumulated in it; so
that the band rises in a dry state, the weight of the chain
having been so proportioned to the breadth and thickness of the
band as to be sufficient to produce this effect. The load,
therefore, on the descending side A B, not being opposed by
any186
similar load on the ascending side, and the equilibrium of the
other parts not being disturbed by the alternate expansion and
compression of the sponge, the band will begin to move in the
direction A B; and as it moves downwards, the accumulation
of water will continue to rise, and thereby carry on a constant
motion, provided the load at *x y* be sufficient to
overcome the friction on the rollers A B C.

Now, to ascertain the quantity of this load in any particular
machine, it must be stated that it is found by experiment that
the water will rise in a fine sponge about an inch above its
level; if, therefore, the band and sponge be one foot thick and
six feet broad, the area of its horizontal section in contact
with the water would be 864 square inches, and the weight of the
accumulation of water raised by the capillary attraction being
one inch rise upon 864 square inches, would be 30 lbs., which,
it is conceived, would be much more than equivalent to the
friction of the rollers.

The deniers of this proposition, on the first view of the
subject, will say, it is true the accumulation of the weight on
the descending side thus occasioned by the capillary attraction
would produce a perpetual motion, if there were not as much
power lost on the ascending side by the change of position of
the weights, in pressing the water out of the sponge.

The point now to be established is, that the change in the
position of the weights will not cause any loss of power. For
this purpose, we must refer to the following diagram.

187

![](i_186.jpg)

With reference to this diagram, suppose *a a a*,
etc., an endless strap, and *b b b*, etc., an
endless chain running round the rollers; A B C not having
any sponge between them, but kept at a certain distance from
each other by small and inflexible props, *p p p*,
etc., then the sides A B and C A would, in all positions of
this system, be precisely an equilibrium, so as to require only
a small increment of weight on either side to produce motion.
Now, we contend that this equilibrium would still remain
unaffected, if small springs were introduced in lieu of the
inflexible props *p p p*, so that the chain *b b b*
might approach the lower strap *a a a*, by
compressing these small springs with its weight on the ascending
side; for although the centre of gravity of any portion of chain
would move in a different line in the latter caseafor instance,
in the dotted lineastill the quantity of the actual weight of
every inch of the188 strap and chain would remain
precisely the same in the former case, where they are kept at
the same distance in all positions, as in the latter case, where
they approach on the ascending side; and so, also, these equal
portions of weights, notwithstanding any change of distance
between their several parts which may take place in one case and
not in the other, would in both cases rise and fall, though the
same perpendicular space, and consequently the equilibrium,
would be equally preserved in both cases, though in the first
case they may rise and fall through rather more than in the
second. The application of this demonstration to the machine
described in Fig. 1, is obvious; for the compression of the
sponge by the sinking of the weights on the ascending side, in
pressing out the water, produces precisely the same effect as to
the position and ascent of the weights, as the approach of the
chain to the lower strap on the ascending side, in Fig. 2, by
the compression of the springs; and consequently, if the
equilibrium is not affected in one caseathat is, in Fig. 2, as
above demonstratedait will not be affected in the other case,
Fig. 1; and, therefore, the water would be squeezed out by the
pressure of the chain without any loss of power. The quantity of
weight necessary for squeezing dry any given quantity of sponge
must be ascertained and duly apportioned by experiment. It is
obvious, however, that whether one cubic inch of sponge required
one, two, or four ounces for this purpose, it would not affect
the equilibrium, since, whatever were the proportion on the
ascending side, precisely the189 same would the
proportion be on the descending side.

This principle is capable of application in various ways, and
with a variety of materials. It may be produced by a single
roller or wheel. Mercury may also be substituted for water, by
using a series of metallic plates instead of sponges; and, as
the mercury will be found to rise to a much greater height
between these plates, than water will do in a sponge, it will be
found that the power to be obtained by the latter materials will
be from 70 to 80 times as great as by the use of water. Thus, a
machine, of the same dimensions as given above, would have a
constant power of 2,000 lbs. acting upon it.

We now proceed to show how the principle of perpetual motion
proposed by Sir William Congreve may be applied upon one centre
instead of three.

In the following figure, *a b c d*
represents a drum-wheel or cylinder, moving on a horizontal axis
surrounded with a band of sponge 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, and immersed
in water, so that the surface of the water touches the lower end
of the cylinder. Now then, if, as in Fig. 2, the water on the
descending side *b* be allowed to accumulate in the sponge
at *x*, while, on the ascending side D, the sponge at the
water's edge shall, by any means not deranging the equilibrium,
be so compressed that it shall quit the water in a dry state,
the accumulation of water above its level at *x*, by the
capillary attraction, will be a source of constant rotary
motion; and, in the present case, it will190 be found that
the means of compressing the sponge may be best obtained by
buoyancy, instead of weight.

For this purpose, therefore, the band of sponge is supposed to
be divided into eight or more equal parts, 1 2 3 4, etc., each
part being furnished with a float or buoyant vessel, *f*
1, *f* 2, etc., rising and falling upon spindles, *s s s*,
etc., fixed in the periphery of the drum; these floats being of
such dimensions that, when immersed in water, the buoyancy or
pressure upwards of each shall be sufficient to compress that
portion of the sponge connected with it, so as to squeeze out
any water it may have absorbed. These floats are further
arranged by means of levers *l l l*, etc., and
plates *p p p*, etc., so that, when the float *f*
No. 1 becomes immersed in the water, its buoyant pressure
upwards acts not against the portion of the sponge No. 1,
immediately above it, but against No. 2, next in front of it;
and so, in like manner, the buoyancy of *f* No. 2 float
acts on the portion of the sponge No. 3, and *f* No. 3
float upon No. 4 sponge.

Now, from this arrangement it follows, that the portion of
sponge No. 4, which is about to quit the water, is pressed upon
by that float, which, from acting vertically, is most efficient
in squeezing the sponge dry; while that portion of the sponge
No. 1, on the point of entering the water, is not compressed at
all from its corresponding float No. 8, not having yet reached
the edge of the water. By these means, therefore, it will be
seen that the sponge always rises in a dry state from191
the water on the ascending side, while it approaches the water
on the descending side in an uncompressed state, and open to the
full action of absorption by the capillary attraction.

![](i_190.jpg)

The great advantage of effecting this by the buoyancy of light
vessels instead of a burthen of weights, as in Fig. 2, is that,
by a due arrangement of the dimensions and buoyancy of the
floats immersed, the whole machine may be made to float on the
surface of the water, so as to take off all friction whatever
from the centre of suspension. Thus, therefore, we have a
cylindrical machine revolving on a single centre without
friction, and having a collection of water in the sponge on the
descending side, while the sponge on the ascending side is
continually dry; and if this cylinder be six feet wide, and the
sponge that surrounds it one foot thick, there will be a
constant moving power of thirty pounds on the192
descending side, without any friction to counteract it.

It has been already stated, that to perpetuate the motion of
this machine, the means used to leave the sponge open on the
descending side, and press it dry on the ascending side, must be
such as will not derange the equilibrium of the machine when
floating in water. As, therefore, in this case the effect is
produced by the ascent of the buoyant floats *b*, to
demonstrate the perpetuity of the motion, we must show that the
ascent of the floats *f* No. 1 and *f* No. 3 will be
equal in all corresponding situations on each side of the
perpendicular; for the only circumstance that could derange the
equilibrium on this system, would be that *f* No. 1 and *f*
No. 3 should not in all such corresponding situations approach
the centre of motion equally; for it is evident that in the
position of the floats described in the above figure, if *f*
No. 1 float did not approach the centre as much as *f* No.
3, the equilibrium would be destroyed, and the greater distance
of *f* No. 1 from the centre than that of f No. 3 would
create a resistance to the moving force caused by the
accumulation of the water at *x*.

It will be found, however, that the floats *f* No. 1 and
*f* No. 3 do retain equal distances from the centre in all
corresponding situations, for the resistance to their approach
to the centre by buoyancy is the elasticity of the sponge at the
extremity of the respective levers; and as this elasticity is
the same in all situations, while this centrifugal force of the
float *f* No. 1 is equal to193 that of the
float *f* No. 3, at equal distances from the
perpendicular, the floats *f* No. 1 and *f* No. 3
will, in all corresponding situations on either side of the
perpendicular, be at equal distances from the centre. It is
true, that the force by which these floats approach the centre
of motion varies according to the obliquity of the spindles on
which they work, it being greatest in the perpendicular
position; but, as the obliquity of these spindles is the same at
all equal distances from the perpendicular, and as the
resistance of the ascent of the floats is equal in all cases,
the center of buoyancy will evidently describe a similar curve
on each side of the perpendicular; and consequently the
equilibrium will be preserved, so as to leave a constant moving
force at *x*, equal to the whole accumulation of water in
the sponge. Nor will this equilibrium be disturbed by any change
of position in the floats not immersed in the water, since,
being duly connected with the sponge by the levers and plates,
they will evidently arrange themselves at equal distances from
the center, in all corresponding situations on either side.

It may be said that the equilibrium of the band of sponge may
be destroyed by its partial compression; and it must be admitted
that the centre of gravity of the part compressed, according to
the construction above described, does approach the center of
motion nearer than the center of gravity of the part not
compressed. The whole weight of the sponge is, however, so
inconsiderable, that this difference would scarcely produce any
sensible effect; and if it did, a very slight194
alteration in the construction, by which the sponge should be
compressed as much outwards as inwards, would retain the center
of gravity of the compressed part at the same distance from the
center of motion as the center of gravity of the part not
compressed.

---

195

## CHAPTER VII Liquid Air as a Means of Perpetual Motion

A few years ago air was liquefied. This was accomplished by a
very high compression accompanied by a very low temperature.

It is manifest that when liquid air is removed from the extremely
low temperature necessary for its liquefaction, and introduced
into ordinary atmospheric temperatures, it will exert a most
tremendous expansive force which can be utilized for driving
machinery and thereby producing heat or electricity, or for any
other purpose for which force is required. But, by the law of
Conservation of Energy, the liquefied air by expansion can yield
no more energy than was required to extract the heat from the air
and compress it into the liquid state.

One enthusiastic individual who had worked in a plant for
liquefying air announced throughout the United States of America,
and perhaps throughout the civilized world, that he had a device
by which the expansive force of three pounds of liquid air could
be made to liquefy ten pounds, and that seven of the ten could be
utilized for driving machinery, or for any other purpose for which
force is required, the remaining three being utilized in the
production of another ten196 pounds of liquid air, and so on
ad infinitum. He boldly announced that thereby he had discovered
an inexhaustible supply of energy at a nominal cost, whereby we
could all be warmed and have our machinery of all kinds driven
without the expense of gas, coal, fuel of any kind, wind, waves,
tides or streams. This enthusiastic individual produced
considerable excitement for a time, and then the public ceased to
hear about either him or his device. He dropped out of sight and
his name sank into oblivion. His claims were absurd, and the
absurdity is readily apparent to anyone versed in thermodynamics
or familiar with the principles of Conservation of Energy.

There was little excuse for his ever having made such pretentions
or for his pretentions ever to have been seriously listened to by
any one; for the principle of Conservation of Energy had years
before been fully established and heralded throughout the world.

---

197

## CHAPTER VIII Radium and Radio-Active Substances Considered as a Conceived Source of Perpetual Motion

A few years ago when the remarkable properties of radium were
discovered it was thought by many that here at last was the long
sought solution of the problem of Perpetual Motion. Radium seemed
to have the power of maintaining its own temperature *permanently*
above that of surrounding bodies. Many versed in the science of
thermodynamics (heat power) shook their heads in doubt. If,
indeed, it were really true that the substance, radium, or any
other substance had the quality of remaining permanently warmer
than surrounding bodies without having heat supplied to it, then,
indeed, there was an inexhaustible supply of heat, and
consequently power.

Hon. R. J. Strutt (Lord Rayleigh), devised a radium clock to
run on this principle, consisting of a vacuum vessel in which was
suspended a radio-active substance contained in a tube. At the
lower end of the tube are two gold leaves as in an electroscope.
Platinum wires extended through the glass and touched the gold
leaves. The other end of the platinum wires are extended to
connect with the earth. The radio-active substance198
electrifies the gold leaves and causes them to be extended, and
upon being extended they come in contact with the platinum wires
and their charge of electricity is lost, being conducted through
the wires and dispersed in the earth, and the leaves losing their
charge fall by the force of gravity from the wires back to their
position near the tube containing the radio-active substance to be
again charged, to again move to and touch the platinum wires, and
again lose their charge; this process to go on indefinitely.

Here, indeed, was Perpetual Motion, except for the fact that
further and more refined experiments and investigations
demonstrated that radio-active substances are not permanently
radio-active, but gradually, though very slowly, lose their
radio-activity just as a fire will finally burn out, no matter how
slowly it burns, or just as an electric battery will finally lose
its charge and become exhausted.

This loss, however, of radio-active energy in radio-active
substances is so slow that it is said the Strutt clock will run
for over one thousand years. But the fact that it will not run
permanently, and that the motion is the result of energy supplied
by the radio-active substance, and is not supplied by the
mechanism itself, deprives it of any right to be called a solution
of the problem of self-motive power.

199
It should be noted that Hon. R. J. Strutt (Lord Rayleigh) of
England, who devised the radium clock, above mentioned, is not to
be classed with the ordinary Perpetual Motion enthusiast. He was,
and is, in fact, a man of very great scientific ability and
attainments, and has to his credit many actual and splendid
achievements demonstrating him to be a genius of the rarest and
most exalted type. His radium clock is founded on correct
principles, and surely a clock that will run one thousand years
without having power supplied from an outside source is worth
while. It should be here also mentioned that the force derived
from radio-activity in the manner it is applied in the Strutt
clock is very slight, and the instrument necessarily extremely
delicate.

---

200

## CHAPTER IX Perpetual Motion Devices Attempting Its Attainment by a Misconception of the Relation of Momentum and Energy

The author, within twenty years last past, has had his attention
called by two different persons, each ignorant of the efforts of
the other, who were seeking to obtain Perpetual Motion by
utilizing certain physical facts concerning Momentum and Energy.
These facts and the principles out of which they grow are familiar
to all who understand thoroughly, even the rudiments of physics;
but to persons who are inclined to mechanics, but who have never
had the advantages of the presentation of clear principles, they
are confusing, and it is surprising that they have not become more
fertile fields for Perpetual Motion workers. However, we are
unable to find any written or printed account or description of a
plan or device of that kind, and our information is confined to
instances that have been brought to our personal observation, and
concerning which the advice and counsel of the author was sought.

The worker in each case was a man of more than ordinary natural
intelligence, and with a bent for mechanical pursuits and
reflection. Each201 had taken a course in what is
conventionally called High School Physics.

The idea in each case was so novel and interesting that we deem
the presentation worth while. They were so nearly alike that
instead of attempting to narrate what they said, we will endeavor
in our own way to present the idea, and then to give our
explanation, showing wherein lay their error.

The following definitions and laws of physics may be regarded as
established:

### Momentum

*Momentum* is the quantity of motion of a moving body, and
is the velocity multiplied by the weight.

Thus, a body weighing two pounds, moving at four feet per second,
may be represented as having a momentum of eight.

A body weighing two pounds moving at the rate of six feet per
second may be said to have a momentum of twelve.

A body weighing ten pounds moving at the rate of ten feet per
second will have a momentum of one hundredaand so on.

Now, a step further. A body in motion striking another body free
to move will lose part of its motion, and will impart some of its
motion to the body moved against. The aggregate momentum202
after the striking is the same as beforeathat is to sayaif a body
weighing ten pounds have a velocity of twenty feet per second, its
momentum we will call two hundred. Now, if in moving it strike
another body either larger or smaller its motion will be somewhat
retarded, and the body struck will possess some motion.

Multiply the weight of each by its motion after the striking, and
it will be found that the sum of the products is two hundred. This
may be illustrated by swinging balls like pendulums to cords of
equal length from a beam, having the arrangement such that balls
of different materials and sizes can be substituted at liberty. If
a body be drawn back parallel to the beam, and released so as to
swing against another swinging body, both will have motion. This
motion will, in some cases be a rebounding motion, as in the case
of a small elastic body swinging against and striking a larger
elastic body, but in all cases the sum total of the momentum after
the impingement is the same as before.

The following statement of the law then, is deducible:

*The Momentum* of one body in motion may be made to impart
momentum to another body, the amount of momentum lost by the
former being exactly equal to that thus acquired by the latter.

203
Before leaving these remarks on momentum the reader should observe
carefully what momentum is and bear in mind it is the *quantity
of motion* possessed by a moving body, and has to do only
with *mass* and *velocity*aand takes no account of
distance passed through.

### Energy

Energy is the *capacity to do work*, and the energy of a
moving body is the amount of *work* it will do, i. e.,
the *distance* it will move against a resistance by virtue
of its tendency to move, before being brought to a state of rest.

Now note, and note carefully, that the amount of *energy is
proportional* to the mass, and to the *square* of the
velocity.

Note this carefully: Any body in motion *has both momentum and
energy*. Its momentum is proportional to its velocity; its
energy to the *square* of its velocity. If the velocity be
doubled, the momentum will be doubled, but its energy quadrupled.
If the velocity be trebled, its momentum will be trebled, but its
energy increased nine-fold.

It is important that the student get clearly what is meant by
saying that Energy is the *capacity to do work*, and is
proportional to the square of the velocity.

The capacity to do work means the capacity204 to move against
resistance, i. e., to overcome resistance. The word "work"
being used in a purely mechanical sense and in that sense it is
used whether the result accomplished is destructive or beneficial.

A revolving fly wheel will run machinery for some time after the
application of force has ceased. This is doing work, and
represents energy.

A bullet fired from a gun will accomplish destruction before
having its motion arrested. This is workaenergy.

If a boy throw a ball into a snow bank, its motion will sink it
into the snow, but not far, the resistance of the snow will soon
bring the ball to rest. The ball overcomes resistance in passing
through the snow until it is brought to rest, and thus it does the
*work* of forcing itself through the snow, and possesses the
*energy* necessary to do that work.

The overcoming of the resistance of the air by a moving body is
work. A steamboat will move for some time in water after the steam
has been turned off. The overcoming of the resistance of the water
is work, and by virtue of the motion of the boat when the steam
was turned off it possessed the energy to do the work of forcing
itself for some time through the resistance of the water.

205
The Perpetual Motion worker in each case had reasoned himself into
this conclusion: That the same energy will impart the same *acceleration*
of velocity, regardless of the velocity at the beginning of the
application of energy. That the same amount of energy or work
necessary to impart to a body a velocity of ten feet per second
will increase that velocity to twenty feet per second, or from
twenty feet per second to thirty feet per second. In other words,
that the same amount of energy, and only the same amount of energy
is required for a given *increase* in velocity without
regard to the initial velocity. This appears plausible, and almost
self-evident. We believe the great majority of people, other than
mechanical engineers would, upon presentation of the theory accept
it as axiomatic, and as a matter of course. The fallacy becomes
manifest only from a critical and technical examination of the
Laws of Momentum and Energy.

The Perpetual Motion worker had learned from his text-books that
if the velocity be *doubled*, the energy would be *multiplied
by four*. His idea was to so arrange his mechanism that he
would apply the amount of energy to move a fly wheel free to
revolve, from a position of rest to a revolving velocity of ten
revolutions per second. Then apply again the *same amount of
energy*, and accelerate that velocity from ten revolutions
per206
second to twenty revolutions per second. Thus, the energy at the
end of the second second would be four times what it was at the
end of the first second. But to make it so, only double the amount
of energy had been applied that had been expended at the end of
the first second. Thus, he reasoned, his machine was by virtue of
its structure, accumulating energy, and this energy could be used
one-half to continue the motion of his machine, and the other half
to run other machinery, or for any other purpose for which energy
might be desired.

Wherein lies the fallacy of this supposition?

We will now endeavor to explain. And for the young student to get
the explanation fully, it will be necessary for him to pay the
closest attention to what we here state.

A force, for instance the pressure of the finger or the hand,
equal to one pound against a body free to move, will, we will say,
move that body in one second of time through a space of ten feet,
and at the end of that second the body will have a velocity of
twenty feet. It is manifest that at the end of the second the
velocity will be twenty feet per second for its initial velocity
is zero, and its average velocity ten feet per second, the
acceleration being, of course, presumed uniform.

Now, it is *not* true as the Perpetual Motion207
worker had assumed that the same energyai. e., the same work
that is required to increase the velocity from zero to ten feet
per second will increase the velocity from ten feet per second to
twenty feet per second, and *in that assumption* lay the
fallacy of our friends who were thus seeking Perpetual Motion.

The greater the velocity, the more energy is required to impart a
given acceleration. To increase the velocity from ten feet per
second to twenty feet per second, the applied force must continue
through one second of time, and more energy is required to follow
a rapidly moving body, and continue to apply to it a given force
for one second than would be required to follow and maintain the
application of the same force to a body moving more slowlyathe *distance*
traveled is greater in one case than in the other.

It must be plain that if the moving body have a velocity at the
end of the first second of twenty feet per second, it will, at the
end of the second second, with the same pressure (force) continued
against the same resistance, have a velocity of forty feet per
second, and at the end of three seconds have a velocity of sixty
feet, and at the end of four seconds a velocity of eighty feet,
and so on.

Now, at the beginning of the second second it had a velocity of
twenty feet, and at the end of208 that second a
velocity of forty feet. It therefore, traveled through that second
with an average velocity of thirty feet and, of course, during the
second second traveled exactly thirty feet. It traveled ten feet
the first second, and if it traveled thirty feet the second, then
in the two seconds it traveled forty feetafour times as far as it
traveled the first second. At the beginning of the third second it
had a velocity of forty feet, and at the end of the third second a
velocity of sixty feet. The average velocity then for the third
second would be one-half the sum of forty feet and plus sixty
feetathat is to say, it would be fifty feet, and that would be the
distance traveled during the third second. The first second it
traveled ten feet, the second second thirty feet, and the third
second fifty feet, making a total in three seconds of ninety
feetathat is to say, in three seconds it traveled nine times as
far as in one second.

It will be noticed from the above that the velocity is
proportional to the number of seconds, but that the distance
traveled is proportional to the *square* of the number of
seconds, and also proportional to the square of the velocity.

Momentum is mass multiplied by velocity; energy is measured by
the distance through which a body will move against a given
resistance.

Should you prop up one wheel of a carriage and revolve the wheel,
then with the pressure of209 the finger or the thumb on the
hub as a brake, stop it, it will be found that (omitting the
effect of atmospheric resistance), the wheel will make four times
as many revolutions before stopping with a doubled velocity; nine
times as many with a trebled velocity.

Falling bodies afford the most perfect illustration of the
principle of Momentum and Energy, and are so commonly used to
illustrate those principles that many students get the idea that
the application of those principles is confined to falling bodies,
and do not realize that they extend generally through the field of
mechanics.

A falling body is, of course, acted upon by gravity with uniform
force equal to the weight of the falling body, and that force
continues to follow the falling body and to be applied uniformly
and equally, however slowly, or rapidly the body may be falling.
And, omitting atmospheric resistance, the body is absolutely free
to move except for its natural tendency to remain at rest, or at
uniform velocity. It is well known that a body falls (almost
exactly) sixteen feet in one second, and at the end of one second
has a velocity of thirty-two. During the second second it falls
through a distance of forty-eight feet, and during the third
second a distance of eighty feet. In two seconds it falls
sixty-four feet, and in three seconds one hundred twenty-eight
feet, and so on.210 Thus, it will be observed that
the *velocity* is proportional to the time during which it
has fallen, but that the distance fallen in any number of seconds
is proportional to the *square* of the time.

This, indeed, is a property of numbers, and results from
mathematical law. If the reader will form a series of numbers,
setting down any number for the first term of the series, adding
to it its double for the second term, and adding to the second
term double the first term for the third, and adding double the
first term to the third term for the fourth, and so onain other
words, form any increasing arithmetical series with double the
first term for the common difference, he will discover that the *sum
of all the terms is equal to the first term multiplied by the
square of the number of terms*. Thus:

|  |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1st Term | 2nd Term | 3rd Term | 4th Term | 5th Term |
| 5 | 15 | 25 | 35 | 45 |

In the above series the sum of the first two terms is 20, which
is 4 times the first term. The sum of the first three terms,
i. e., 5 + 15 + 25 = 45-nine times the first term. The sum of
the first four terms, i. e., 5 + 15 + 25 + 35 = 80, sixteen
times the first term, and so on.

It will thus be seen that Momentum and Energy are entirely
different, although co-related; that momentum relates to velocity,
which includes the element of time, whereas energy relates211
to the amount of work done, and may be represented by a force
operating against a certain resistance, through a certain
distance, entirely irrespective of time. The energy is the same
with the same force operating against the same resistance, through
the same distance whether the time consumed be great or small. It
takes as much energy in the aggregate to wind up a bucket from the
bottom of the well if done slowly as if done quickly.

It would seem hardly necessary to do so, and yet it is worth
while remarking that the amount of energy necessary to impart a
given motion is exactly the amount of Energy that will be required
to arrest that motion, and represents the amount of Energy
possessed by the moving body by virtue of its motion. Work done,
i. e., Energy applied in giving motion is there in that
motion, ready to be returned in exactly an equal quantityano
moreano less.

In all the considerations in this chapter no notice is taken of
loss by friction or atmospheric resistance. We are considering
pure mechanics and the laws governing them only. In actual
mechanical devices it is always necessary to make allowance for
atmospheric, frictional and other unavoidable resistances.

---

212

## CHAPTER X The Alleged Inventions of Edward Sommerset, Sixth Earl and Second Marquis of Worcester, and of Jean Ernest Eli-Bessler (Councillor) Orffyreus

More interest has been taken, and more has been said and written
concerning the claimed inventions of the men forming the subject
of this chapter than of all other Perpetual Motion devices known
to history. The reason is not difficult to explain. It was the
rank and eminence of the inventors and of others whom they induced
to take an interest in their inventions, and to proclaim them to
the world. Intrinsically, neither their claims nor their devices
are entitled to any more notice than are those of the humblest
mechanic that ever labored to attain Perpetual Motion. However, so
much has been said and written concerning them that they have an
historical value and interest. Then, too, the interest taken in
their inventions brought forth some splendid discussions which
necessarily involve in a general way, at least, the entire
question of Self-Motive Power. The historical interest attaching
to their inventions and the discussions concerning them, entitles
them to more than a passing notice in this book.

213
They were not co-laborers; they were not even compatriots, nor
contemporaries. Worcester was an Englishman and Orffyreus a
Frenchman, though most of his labors were in what is now Germany.
The former died thirteen years before the latter was born.

Edward Sommerset, of England, Sixth Earl and Second Marquis of
Worcester, was born in the year 1601, and died in 1667. He was
famous not only for his noble birth and family rank, but for
personal attainments. He was the author of a work entitled
"Century of Names and Scantlings of Such Inventions as at Present
I Can Call to Mind Have Tried and Perfected" (1663), which has
often been reprinted, and is usually referred to simply as
"Century Inventions." He was very prominent in public life; was
greatly interested in mechanical experiments, and made valuable
suggestions, inventions and improvements in connection with the
use of steam as a motive power.

Henry Dircks, who is so frequently mentioned in this book, wrote
a book which was published in 1865, entitled "Life, Times and
Scientific Labors of the Second Marquis of Worcester." The Marquis
appears to have been all his life greatly interested in science,
mechanics and mathematical contrivances. His first wife died in
1635, and it seems probable that thenceforth214 he became and
remained more than ever devoted to mechanics, and sometime after
that period announced a successful Perpetual Motion machine, the
gist of all known information concerning which appears from the
articles and discussions hereinafter set forth in this chapter.

Jean-Ernest Eli-Bessler (Councillor) Orffyreus was born in 1680,
near Zittan, Alsace, France. He was a man of great ability and
attained an eminent place in public life. The title "Councillor,"
he acquired by having been selected Councillor to the Prince of
Hesse Castle. The best information concerning him indicates that
he was of very erratic temperament, given to fits of melancholy
and extreme anger. In early life he was a student of theology and
medicine, but his penchant was really for mechanics. He claimed
that in his search for whatever might prove curious and valuable
he had discovered Perpetual Motion, and that between the years
1712 and 1719 he had made two successfully working machines on his
system. The following discussions disclose all that is known of
the claimed inventions of these two distinguished Perpetual Motion
workers.

The alleged inventions of the Marquis of Worcester is stated by
him in the 56th article of his book entitled "Century of Names and
Scantlings of Such Inventions as at Present I Can Call to Mind to
Have Tried and Perfected," and translated215 from the ancient
English style in which his book is written into modern style of
English, reads as follows:

The inventor offers the accompanying sketch, with description of
an Hydraulic Mover, for communicating power to machinery, and
recently invented by him:a

"To provide and make that all the weights of the descending
side of a wheel, shall be perpetually farther from the center,
than those of the mounting side, and yet equal in number and
heft to the one side as the other. A most incredible thing, if
not seen; but tried before the late King (of blessed memory) in
the Tower by my directions, two extraordinary ambassadors
accompanying his Majesty, and the Duke of Richmond, and Duke of
Hamilton, with most of the Court attending him. The wheel was
fourteen foot over, and had forty weights of fifty pounds
apiece. Sir William Balfore, then Lieutenant of the Tower, can
justify it, with several others. They all saw, that no sooner
these great weights passed the diameter line of the lower side,
but they hung a foot farther from the center; nor no sooner
passed the diameter line of the upper side, but they hung a foot
nearer. Be pleased to judge of the consequence."

In October of 1719, Orffyreus published a small book, or
pamphlet, both in German and Latin, entitled "Perpetual Motion
Triumphant, by Orffyreus." The book commences:

216

It is a notorious fact that Perpetual Motion has not only been
sought after by ingenious mathematicians and artists with more
or less expense, but many have arisen here and there pretending
that they have made the discovery. Nevertheless, it appears that
to carry out this most subtle mechanical idea, namely, to make a
dead material not only move itself, but lift weights and perform
work, even the most profound mathematicians and the most learned
people have continually fallen into error. It is no less
notorious that those who have so sought, not only refuse their
consent, but have set their seal on the discovery as an
unsolvable problem.

On a subsequent page he proceeds thus:

When I, at last, an unworthy man, was made an instrument in
God's hands to solve this long-looked-for and valuable secret,
and to give a representation, proposition and instruction on
this rare invention; also to publish and propound it to all the
world, no longer do I doubt, nay I presume, that as the
discoverer I possess it, after many years of scrupulous doubts,
much calumny and exasperation from all my enemies.

He speaks of his opponents under four divisions: First, the
scientific world; second, persons in high authority; third, the
public in general; and fourth, the press;aobservinga

Now my wish was to convince the world that this illiberal, rude
and inhuman treatment was false, yet God's providence has
brought to my help, protection and succour the mighty Prince
Lord Charles, Landgrave of Hesse.

On a subsequent page he indulges in the following217
sycophantic adulation of the Prince of Hesse Castle, and
suggestion of the description of his claimed device:

It has not only pleased this mighty Prince to protect me
against my numerous enemies, but also to give me house-room in
his princely Castle of Weissenstein, near Cassel; to name me one
of his most honored servants, and restore me in a measure all
the honor and means that I had lost in my native country;
wishing no doubt to give to Hessin Cassel the high honor which
belonged to Saxony by right. In gratitude for all these gracious
acts, I consented to give another example of my Perpetuum Mobile
machine. I put all in fresh order, and began work in all
possible haste, doing everything in the manner of those I had
already made and destroyed, with only a few changes in the
dimensions of the so-named turning-wheel. For as a grindstone
may be called a wheel, so may the principal part of my machine
be named. The outward part of this wheel is drawn over or
covered with waxed linen in the form of a drum. This cylindrical
basis was 12 Rhenish feet in diameter, the thickness from 15 to
18 inches, the middle axle 6 feet long and 8 inches in
thickness. It is supported in its movement on two pointed steel
balance-pegs, each 1 inch thick; and the wheel is vertically
suspended. The movement is modified by two pendulums, as shown
in the engraving at the end of this book. The inward structure
of the wheel is of a nature according to the laws of mechanical
perpetual motion, so arranged that by disposed weights once218
in rotation they gain force from their own swinging, and must
continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose
its position and arrangement. Unlike all other automata, such as
clocks or springs or other hanging weights which require winding
up or whose duration depends on the chain which attaches them,
on the contrary, these weights are the essential parts and
constitute perpetuum mobile itself; as from them is received the
universal movement which they must exercise so long as they
remain out of the center of gravity; and when they come to be
placed together, and so arranged one against another that they
can never obtain equilibrium, or the *punctum quietus*
which they unceasingly seek in their wonderous speedy flight,
one or other of them must apply its weight vertically to the
axis, which in its turn will also move.

The author and inventor then suggests the following uses of his
machine: "raising weights, raising stampers, water," etc. He
criticises all critics of his scheme and denounces them as cunning
rogues, and fools who are contemptibly endeavoring to overthrow an
incontestable fact. He makes a quadrupled dedication of his
device:

* 1. To God,
* 2. To the Public in General,
* 3. To Men of Learning,
* 4. To Himself as Discoverer,

and he very modestly suggests a method by which he
could be approached on the subject of selling220 the secret of his
machine for one hundred thousand rix-thalers, and points out the
great importance to the public of such an acquisition. The book
contains a cut of his device with the following very brief
explanation:

![](i_218.jpg)

Number 1 shows the entire size of the wheel; 2, a cord wound
round the principal axle; 3, the wheel or pulley to guide the
cord; 4, the cord passed through a window and over 5, another
pulley; 6, the box of stones raised or lowered; 7, the lock to
prevent motion; 8, the pendulum with three weights; 9, a
winch-handle acting on the pendulum; and 10, shows above and
below transparent, so that the machine stands clear and can be
moved about.

In 1720 the following article was contributed to and published in
the "Gentleman's Magazine," concerning the Orffyrean Wheel:

Mr. Urban: Being an admirer of
improvements in mechanics and desirous of seeing the perpetual
motion discovered, I was much pleased on reading, some time ago,
an account of the automaton constructed by Orffyreus in two
letters, one from Professor 's Gravesande to Sir Isaac Newton,
the other from Baron Fischer to Dr. Desaguliers, with the
testimonial of the Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel (who had seen the
inside of it) in favor of its construction. To which are added
some remarks by William Kenrick, the writer of the pamphlet, who
takes that opportunity to propose a subscription for a similar
machine,221
which he says he has contrived and denominated a Rotator.

It is much to be lamented that the learned did not examine more
strictly into the merit of Orffyreus's wheel; but, on the
contrary, being prepossessed with a notion of the
impracticability of the perpetual motion, suffered it to be
neglected, and at last destroyed by the hands of a disappointed
mechanic, who, with unwearied application and steady
perseverance, had brought it to perfection. I wish we may not
again let slip an opportunity of becoming acquainted with an
invention, which, when made public, will reflect honor on the
inventor, and be of the utmost utility to the world. Such, I
would hope, is the rotator mentioned by W. Kenrick; for, unless
his discovery were real, I cannot think that he would have taken
the liberty to express himself as he does in p. 26, etc., "The
inventor flatters himself that, if the contents of the foregoing
pages are seriously attended to, and it be farther considered,
that not a penny of the proposed premium is required, till the
subscribers are fully satisfied of the reality and utility of
the invention, his proposal will not be treated with so
mortifying a neglect as that of Orffyreus." Again he says, "If
it does not supply the place of a first mover, at the expense
only of the construction and repair of a simple wheel subject to
very little friction, and that in all such engines and machines,
even from the slightest piece of clockwork to the waterworks of
Marli or London-bridge, he expects nothing for his discovery,
but to stand exposed222 to the contempt that will be
justly thrown on him for having so miserably misspent his time,
and frivolously engaged the attention of the public."

Now, I think that W. Kenrick's proposals are very fair; and
should be glad to be informed, whether any attention has been
paid to them, and whether Sir Isaac Newton took any notice of
the letter addressed to him by Professor Gravesande. I shall
consider it as a favor if any correspondent will oblige me with
an answer to these particulars.

A Constant Reader.

In 1721 Rev. Dr. J. T. Desaguliers, LL.D., F.R.S.,
contributed to an English periodical entitled "Philosophical
Transactions," the following article concerning the device of the
Marquis of Worcester, and the Orffyrean Wheel:

REMARKS ON SOME ATTEMPTS
MADE TOWARDS A PERPETUAL MOTION; BY THE REVEREND DR.
DESAGULIERS, F.R.S.

The wheel at Hesse-Cassel, made by Monsieur Orffyreus, and by
him called a perpetual motion, has, of late, been so much talked
of on account of its wonderful phenomena, that a great many
people have believed it to be actually a self-moving engine; and
accordingly have attempted to imitate it as such. Now, as a
great deal of time and money is spent in those endeavours, I was
willing (for the sake of those that try experiments with that
view) to show that the principle which most of them go upon is
false, and can by no means produce a perpetual motion.

223
They take it for granted that if a weight descending in a wheel
at a determined distance from the center, does, in its ascent,
approach nearer to it; such a weight in its descent will always
preponderate and cause a weight equal to it to rise, provided it
comes nearer the center in its rise; and accordingly as itself,
rises, will be overbalanced by another weight equal to it; and,
therefore, they endeavour by various contrivances to produce
that effect as if the consequence of it would be a perpetual
motion.

But I shall show that they mistake one particular case of a
general theorem, or rather a corollary of it, for the theorem
itself. The theorem is as follows:

Theor.aIf one weight in its descent
does, by means of any contrivance, cause another weight to
ascend with a less momentum or quantity of motion than itself,
it will preponderate and raise the other weight.

Cor. 1.aTherefore, if the weights be
equal, the descending weight must have more velocity than the
ascending weight, because the momentum is made up of the weight
multiplied into the quantity of matter.

Cor. 2.aTherefore, if a leaver or
balance have equal weights fastened or hanging at its ends, and
the brachia be ever so little unequal that weight will
preponderate which is farthest from the center.

Scholium.aThis second corollary
causes the mistake; because those who think the velocity of the
weight is the line it describes, expect that224
that weight shall be overpoised, which describes the shortest
line, and, therefore, contrive machines to cause the ascending
weight to describe a shorter line than the descending weight. As
for example, in the circle A D B *a* (Fig. 3)
the weights A and B being supposed equal, they imagine that if
(by any contrivance whatever) whilst the weight A describes the
arc A *a*, the weight B is carried in any arc, as B *b*,
so as to come nearer the center in its rising than if it went up
the arc B D; the said weight shall be overpoised, and
consequently, by a number of such weights a perpetual motion
will be produced.

This is attempted by several contrivances, which all depend
upon this false principle; but I shall only mention one which is
represented by Fig. 4, where a wheel having two parallel
circumferences, has the space between them divided into cells,
which being curved, will (when the wheel goes round) cause
weights placed loose in the said cells to descend on the side A
at the outer circumference of the wheel, and on the side D to
ascend in the line B *b b b*, which comes nearer
the center and touches the inner circumference of the wheel. In
a machine of this kind the weights will indeed move in such a
manner if the wheel be turned round, but will never be the cause
of the wheel's going round. Such a machine is mentioned by the
Marquis of Worcester in his "Century of Inventions," in the
following words, No. 56:

![](i_224.jpg)

"To provide and make that all the weights of the descending
side of a wheel shall be perpetually225 farther from
the center than those of the mounting side, and yet equal in
number and heft to the one side as the other. A most
incredible thing, if not seen; but tried before the late King
(of blessed memory) in the Tower by my directions, two
extraordinary ambassadors accompanying his Majesty, and the
Duke of Richmond, and Duke of Hamilton, with most of the court
attending him. The wheel was fourteen foot over and had forty
weights of fifty pounds a piece. Sir William Balfore, then
Lieutenant of the Tower, can justify it with several others.
They all saw that no sooner these great weights passed the
diameter line of the lower side, but they hung a foot farther
from the center; nor no sooner passed the diameter line of the
upper side, but they hung a foot nearer. Be pleased to judge
of the consequence."

![](i_225.jpg)

Now the consequence of this and such like machines, is nothing
less than a perpetual motion; and the fallacy is this: The
velocity of any weight is not the line which it describes in
general, but226 the height that it rises up to
or falls from, with respect to its distance from the center of
the earth. So that when the weight (Fig. 3) describes the arc A
*a*, its velocity is the line A C, which shows the
perpendicular descent (or measures how much it is come nearer to
the center of the earth), and likewise the line B C denotes
the velocity of the weight B, or the height that it rises to
when it ascends in any of the arcs B *b*, instead of the
arc B D: so that in this case whether the weight B in its
ascent be brought nearer the center or not, it loses no velocity
which it ought to do in order to be raised up by the weight A.
Nay, the weight in rising nearer the center of a wheel may not
only lose of its velocity, but be made to gain velocity in
proportion to the velocity of its counterpoising weights that
descend in the circumference of the opposite side of the wheel;
for if we consider two radii of the wheel, one of which is
horizontal, and the other (fastened to and moving with it)
inclined under the horizon in an angle of 60 degrees (Fig. 5)227
and by the descent of the end B of the radius B C, the
radius C D by its motion causes the weight at D to rise up
the line *p* P, which is in a plane that stops the said
weight from rising in the curve D A, that weight will gain
velocity, and in the beginning of its rise it will have twice
the velocity of the weight at B; and consequently, instead of
being raised, will overpoise, if it be equal to the last
mentioned weight. And this velocity will be so much the greater
in proportion as the angle A C D is greater, or as the
plane P *p* (along which the weight D must rise) is nearer
to the center. Indeed, if the weight at B (Fig. 3) could, by any
means, be lifted up to I2, and move in the arc I2 *b*, the
end would be answered; because then the velocity would be
diminished and become I2 C.

![](i_226.jpg)

Experiment (Fig. 5).aTake the leaver
B C D, whose brachia are equal in length, bent in an
angle of 120 degrees at C and moveable about that point as its
center: in this case a weight of two pounds hanging at the end
of B of the horizontal part of the leaver will keep in
equilibrio a weight of four pounds hanging at the end D.228
But if a weight of one pound be laid upon the end D of the
leaver, so that in the motion of D along the arc *p* A,
this weight is made to rise up against the plane P *p*
(which divides in half the line A C equal to C B) the said
weight will keep in equilibrio two pounds at B, as having twice
the velocity of it when the leaver begins to move. This will be
evident, if you let the weight 4 hang at D, whilst the weight 1
lies above it: for if then you move the leaver the weight 1 will
rise four times as fast as the weight 4.

![](i_227.jpg)

In 1770 Dr. William Kenrick published "A Lecture on the Perpetual
Motion." In it he has the following to say concerning the alleged
inventions of the Marquis of Worcester, and Councillor Orffyreus,
and Perpetual Motion in general. The following excerpts of and
comments on the lecture are taken verbatim from Dircks:

The mere exhibition of a self-moving machine without a display
of its mechanism, or the principles on which its motion is begun
and continued, could produce no conviction. The fate229
of Orffyreus and his machine is a proof of this. Scarce fifty
years ago that whimsical mechanician exhibited a perpetual
motion at Hesse Cassel, the constancy of whose operation was
experienced for many weeks under the most exact caution of the
Landgrave of that Principality, whose testimony of such
operation, as well as in favor of its construction (to the
secret of which he was admitted), was given in the most explicit
and determinate form. And yet, because Orffyreus could not
display the mechanism without the previous assurance of a
premium of 200,000 florins (near twenty thousand pounds), or
because he would not or could not discover the principles on
which it acted, his pretensions were neglected, his machine was
destroyed by his own hands, and his life made a sacrifice to the
chagrin attending his disappointment. Twenty years had he racked
his brains for invention, and expended a patrimonial competence
with parsimony in prosecuting his design. And when success
inspired the hope of reward, he found his ingenuity suspected of
imposture, and his industry rewarded with contempt.

Whether any of his successors in the same pursuit will meet
with a better fate is at length to be determined. One species of
our predecessor's merit, however, I (adds Dr. Kenrick) presume
myself at least entitled to, that of perseverance; it being now
fifteen years since I first engaged in this undertaking, which I
have since pursued with almost unremitted assiduity, and that
not only at a considerable waste of time230 and expense,
but under the constant mortification of hearing it equally
ridiculed by those who do know, and by those who do not know,
anything of the matter.

It is, indeed, generally supposed, and as confidently affirmed,
that the mathematicians have published demonstrations of the
impossibility of a perpetual motion. But I can safely take upon
me to affirm that no such demonstration was ever published by
any. Within these twelve years past the mathematicians who deny
the possibility of a perpetual motion have been repeatedly and
publicly called upon, both in the foreign and English prints, to
produce a single instance of these demonstrations. They have not
done it. They might have produced, indeed, the demonstrations of
Huygens, De la Hire, and others to prove, as Desaguliers very
properly expresses it the fallacy of the schemes of most of the
pretenders to the perpetual motion. They proved nothing more;
and this was so far unnecessary in that the fallacy evidently
appeared in the discovery of the principle on which they were
founded.

This was done in the last century by the celebrated Marquis of
Worcester, in the presence of the King and his Court, at the
Tower, by the exhibition of a wheel so contrived that in
revolving on its axis it carried up several weights nearer its
center on one side than they descended on the other. The scheme
was plausible and to appearance practicable; but, though the
wheel was polite enough to turn about while his Majesty was
present, it could not be prevailed upon to be so complaisant231
in his absence. The mathematicians avenged themselves of the
short triumph of the mistaken Marquis, but were equally mistaken
themselves in thinking they had routed the problem or that in
hunting down the jackal they had destroyed the lion. The
perpetual motion survived; it had still its advocates; Professor
Gravesande and John Bernouille maintained its practicability,
the former giving his testimony in favor of Orffyreus's machine,
after a long and scrutinous examination. It is not twelve years
since this testimony was republished by Dr. Allaman, the present
Professor of Natural Philosophy at Leyden, whose own opinion,
given at the same time, is also greatly in favor of the
discovery. It is even some years later that a dissertation still
more in its favor, written, if I am not mistaken, by the
celebrated De Gorter of Petersburg, appeared in the
"Philosophical Transactions" of Haarlem. My end is not to amuse
or persuade, but, with due deference, to inform and convince. To
remove every cause of objection, I must beg leave to expatiate
somewhat at large on the theory of this discovery. It is with
the more propriety I presume on this method, as the discovery to
which I pretend has not been (as frequently happens) the effect
of mechanical accident, but the premeditated result of
mathematical reasoning and physical experiment. I shall proceed
to elucidate the principal arguments *a priori*, that
prove the practicability of a perpetual motion to be the
necessary consequence of the known and established laws of
nature.

232
Having proceeded thus far, he opens his lecture at page 7 with the
introduction; and first "On the Nature of Motion in General,"
which, in fourteen pages, being more metaphysical than mechanical,
affords no extractable matter for our present object. Part I is
"On the Cause and Effect of Motion." This elementary part is
needlessly labored and elaborated through 27 pages. In the course
of his remarks he states:

The discovery of a perpetual motion, says De la Hire, would be
to discover a body at once heavier and lighter than itself. But
this is not a fair state of the question. It is not necessary
that all the parts of a perpetually-moving machine should be
attached to, and inseparable from each other; which they must
be, to constitute one gravitating body of a determinate weight.

He proceeds to consider the nature of the circulation of the
blood, pneumatic pressure, the steel-yard, real and relative
weight, and spiral action. Again, we have Hobbes, Locke, and
Stewart, in the same sentence with such language asa"I could
almost as readily impute ingenuity to vegetables and fossilsato
the sensitive plant and the loadstoneaas mediation to muscles, or
cogitabundity to cockles, periwinkles and rock oysters!" In
conclusions he says:

I have endeavoured to make it appear that motion is the
mechanical effect of the physical action of the primary
elements; that the direction233 of motion only
comes within the province of animal intellect; that the vital
system is supported by mere mechanic motion, kept up by the
elasticity of the solids and the gravity of the fluids composing
the animal body; that by the same means a more simple inanimate
system or machine may be framed which may have the same property
of continued action (or, as it is called, self-motion). And this
is all that is, or can be, expected of a perpetual motion; the
momentum of which may be increased to any degree, according to
the weight of the bodies employed and the work required to be
done.

The second part of this lecture commences with a Proem of
thirteen pages:

I am induced (he says) to trespass farther by extending in like
manner the subsequent divisions of it; making the second and
third parts of my printed syllabus the topics of the present
reading, and reserving the last part, with the concluding
experiment, to the third and final lecture.

I pretend merely to the investigation of the general principles
of mechanics, and even to illustrate these so far only as I
conceive they relate to the immediate object of my lecture, the
discovery of an artificial perpetual motion; leaving the
application of such principles, in the solution of particular
phenomena, or the construction of particular machines, to such
as make the different arts and sciences their peculiar study.

He very prudently ends, observing:

234

But I beg pardon, gentlemen, for the length of this digressive
introduction, and shall proceed to the more immediate subject of
my lecture.

Section 1 of this lecture is "On the Composition and Combination
of Motion." After discussing, in his own peculiar style,
mechanical principles of motion, he adds:

It would require a volume, and that not a small one, to
illustrate these subjects and support them by the necessary
demonstrations and experiments. Should Providence give me life
and health, therefore, they (his auditors) shall have it.
Indeed, I have already spent some years in preparing such a
volume for the press.

He is very prolix on gravity and motion, then commences Section 2
"On the Communication and Dissipation of Motion." Five pages are
occupied in discussing motion, in popular language, in the course
of which he remarks:

And as to the imperfectly elastic bodies, their power of
retaining or communicating motion depends entirely on their *vis
inertiae* and weight; nor can they on any occasion whatever
communicate a greater momentum to another body than they
themselves possess. It is sufficient for the purpose of a
perpetual motion that they can do this. And, indeed, here all
the difficulty lies, viz., in the means of communicating the
momentum or moving force of a heavy body to a light one. Now,
the most virulent opponents to the practicability of perpetual
motion have never pretended to demonstrate the impracticability
of this communication.235 The *quomodo*, or means
of effecting it, being the point in dispute. It is to this
discovery that I pretend; and to show that my pretensions are
well grounded, have taken the liberty to invite you to this
lecture.

The lectures appear to have been illustrated by a plate having
two figures of a simple apparatus used to demonstrate the action
of a spring and two unequal weights; also an inflexible ruler
suspended between two unequal ballsawith both he experimented
before his auditors; but the engraving is wanting in the edition
now used. In conclusion, he observes:

You see, gentlemen, I am purposely provided here with a very
simple and clumsy apparatus. The perpetual motion does not need
the assistance of friction wheels, or depend on the niggling
nicety of tooth and pinion. If the practical part of my
discovery be not superior to the manual dexterity of a village
carpenter or country smith, I am satisfied. There will be no
great discernment required to comprehend the design they are to
put in execution. You will permit me, however, at present, to
defer what I have farther to offer on the subject to another
opportunity.

In 1770 Dr. Kenrick published a quarto-pamphlet concerning the
Orffyrean Wheel, and in the pamphlet appears the following
regarding a letter from Prof. Gravesande to Sir Isaac Newton, and
a letter from Baron Fischer to Dr. Desaguliers:

236

### *A Letter from Professor 's Gravesande to Sir Isaac Newton, Concerning Orffyreus's Wheel*

Sir: Doctor Desaguliers has
doubtless shown you the letter that Baron Fischer wrote to him
some time ago about the wheel of Orffyreus; which the inventor
affirms to be a perpetual motion. The landgrave, who is a lover
of the sciences and fine arts, and neglects no opportunity to
encourage the several discoveries and improvements that are
presented him, was desirous of having this machine made known to
the world, for the sake of public utility. To this end he
engaged me to examine it; wishing that, if it should be found to
answer the pretensions of the inventor, it might be made known
to persons of greater abilities, who might deduce from it those
services which are naturally to be expected from so singular an
invention. You will not be displeased, I presume, with a
circumstantial account of this examination; I transmit you,
therefore, a detail of the most particular circumstances
observable on an exterior view of a machine, concerning which
the sentiments of most people are greatly divided, while almost
all the mathematicians are against it. The majority maintain the
impossibility of a perpetual motion, and hence it is that so
little attention has been paid to Orffyreus and his invention.

For my part, however, though I confess my abilities inferior to
those of many who have given their demonstrations of this
impossibility; yet I will communicate to you the real sentiments
with237
which I entered on the examination of this machine. It is now
more than seven years since I conceived I discovered the
paralogism of those demonstrations, in that, though true in
themselves, they were not applicable to all possible machines;
and have ever since remained perfectly persuaded it might be
demonstrated that a perpetual motion involved no contradiction;
it appearing to me that Leibnitz was wrong in laying down the
impossibility of the perpetual motion as an axiom.
Notwithstanding this persuasion, however, I was far from
believing Orffyreus capable of making such a discovery, looking
upon it as an invention not to be made (if ever) till after many
other previous discoveries. But since I have examined the
machine, it is impossible for me to express my surprise.

The inventor has a turn for mechanics, but is far from being a
profound mathematician, and yet his machine has something in it
prodigiously astonishing, even though it should be an
imposition. The following is a description of the external parts
of the machine, the inside of which the inventor will not permit
to be seen, lest any one should rob him of his secret. It is a
hollow wheel, or kind of drum, about fourteen inches thick and
twelve feet diameter; being very light, as it consists of
several crosspieces of wood framed together; the whole of which
is covered over with canvas, to prevent the inside from being
seen. Through the center of this wheel or drum runs an axis of
about six inches diameter, terminated at both ends by iron axes
of about three-238quarters of an inch diameter
upon which the machine turns. I have examined these axes and am
firmly persuaded that nothing from without the wheel in the
least contributes to its motion. When I turned it but gently, it
always stood still as soon as I took away my hand; but when I
gave it any tolerable degree of velocity, I was always obliged
to stop it again by force; for when I let it go, it acquired in
two or three turns its greatest velocity, after which it
revolved for twenty-five or twenty-six times in a minute. This
motion it preserved some time ago for two months, in an
apartment of the castle: the door and windows of which were
locked and sealed so that there was no possibility of fraud. At
the expiration of that term indeed his serene highness ordered
the apartment to be opened, and the machine to be stopped, lest,
as it was only a model, the parts might suffer by so much
agitation. The landgrave being himself present on my examination
of this machine, I took the liberty to ask him, as he had seen
the inside of it, whether after being in motion for a certain
time no alteration was made in the component parts; or whether
none of those parts might be suspected of concealing some fraud:
on which his serene highness assured me to the contrary, and
that the machine was very simple.

You see, sir, I have not had any absolute demonstration, that
the principle of motion which is certainly within the wheel, is
really a principle of perpetual motion; but at the same time it
cannot be denied me that I have received very good239
reasons to think so, which is a strong presumption in favor of
the inventor. The landgrave hath made Orffyreus a very handsome
present, to be let into the secret of the machine, under an
engagement nevertheless not to discover, or to make any use of
it before the inventor may procure a sufficient reward for
making his discovery public.

I am very sensible, sir, that it is in England only the arts
and sciences are so generally cultivated as to afford any
prospect of the inventor's acquiring a reward adequate to this
discovery. He requires nothing more than the assurance of having
it paid him in case his machine is found to be really a
perpetual motion; and as he desires nothing more than this
assurance till the construction of the machine be displayed and
fairly examined before such assurance be given him. Now, sir, as
it would conduce to public utility as well as to the advancement
of science, to discover the reality or the fraud of this
invention, I conceive the relation of the above circumstances
could not fail of being acceptable. I am, etc.

In the same book appear the following animadversions by Prof.
Allaman, on the neglect of Orffyreus's invention:

We see that the testimony of M. 's Gravesande was as
advantageous as possible to Orffyreus, not having seen the
interior of the machine, he could form no other judgment;
however, that extraordinary man was not contented, for in
consequence of the examination Orffyreus broke the machine into
pieces. By the accounts of M.240 's Gravesande,
Baron Fischer and the testimony of the Landgrave it appears
clear that the wheel was not moved by any exterior agent.
Orffyreus is, however, accused of being an impostor, of having
imposed on the good faith of the prince, deceived M. 's
Gravesande and all those who examined his machine. His own
servant deposed against him and said that she was made to turn
the wheel, and thus he has fallen into contempt; and everyone
who protected him, is ashamed of him. M. de Crousaz, who was at
that time at the court of Cassel, writes a letter to M. 's
Gravesande dated February 3, 1729, in these terms:a'First,
Orffyreus is a fool; Second, It is impossible that a fool can
have discovered what such a number of clever people have
searched for without success; Third, I do not believe in
impossibilities; Fourth, One can easily imagine that persons
keep a secret from which they are to receive benefit, but this
fellow, hoping only to receive reputation, allows it to be
tarnished by an accusation which he has in his power to
disprove, if false; Fifth, The servant who ran away from his
house, for fear of being strangled, has in her possession, in
writing, the terrible oath that Orffyreus made her swear; Sixth,
He only had to have asked, in order to have had this girl
imprisoned, until he had time to finish his machine; Seventh,
They publish that the machine is going to be exhibited, when
suddenly those who advertise it become silent; Eighth, It is
true there is a machine at his house, to which they give the
name of perpetual motion, but that cannot be removed; it is much241
smaller, and differs from the first, inasmuch as it only turns
one way.

This is what makes Orffyreus and his machine to be suspected;
can it be that M. 's Gravesande was so mistaken as to be his
dupe? Let us read what he himself says in answer to M. Crousaz,
which I have found among my papers, without date:a"I have
deferred replying to you until I had found a paper which I wrote
the day after I examined Orffyreus' machine, for although I
remember well all that passed, I believe that a paper, written
the day after the examination, and communicated to my Lord and
all those who were with him, must have more weight.

"This is what I heard; they say that a servant under oath,
turned Orffyreus' machine, being placed in an adjoining room.

"I know well that Orffyreus is a fool, but I ignore that he is
an impostor; I have never decided whether his machine is an
imposture or not, but this I know as certainly as anything in
the world, that if the servant says the above, she tells a great
falsehood.

"My Lord the Landgrave in the presence of the Baron Fischer,
Architect of the Emperor, and other persons at my request,
showed the supports of the machine; we saw the axles uncovered;
I examined the plates or brasses on which the axles rested and
in that examination there did not appear the slightest trace of
communication with the adjoining room. I remember very
distinctly the whole of the circumstances of that examination,
which put Orffyreus in such a rage with242 me, that the
day after he broke his machine in pieces, and wrote on the wall
that, it was the impertinent curiosity of Professor 's
Gravesande which was the cause. I read this myself the following
year, and the result of the examination is clearly explained in
the paper of which I spoke to you.

"They told me several circumstances on the testimony of the
servant, but I pay little attention to what a servant can say
about machines, perhaps in turning her master's roast-jack she
thought she saw a perpetual motion. If you know anything
concerning this matter I shall feel much pleasure if you would
communicate it."

It is difficult to determine what to believe about this
machine. It seems to me, however, that on examining minutely the
for and against Orffyreus we can come to these conclusions: 1.
That Orffyreus was evidently mad, as M. 's Gravesande and M. de
Crousaz both affirm; his machinery broken at different times
without either reason or necessity prove this. But his was a
sort of madness we do not often see: a folly fixed only on
certain objects, and merits more the name of fantasticalness or
whimsicalness; this kind of folly is often accompanied by much
genius, and when persons of this disposition apply themselves
solely to one subject, as it appears he did, it is not
surprising to find them making discoveries which had escaped the
sagacity of wiser people. Thus I do not wish to agree with M. de
Crousaz, that it is incredible that a madman, such as Orffyreus
should have found out something that learned243
men have searched for unsuccessfully. Added to this he is
mistaken in saying that Orffyreus could hope for no other reward
for his secrets than mere reputation: for he expected a
considerable profit seeing that he demanded for it 200,000
florins. 2. No exterior agent moved the machine; if it were a
servant that moved it, would it not have been apparent to eyes
so searching as those that made the examination, or to the
Landgrave, who had seen the interior of the machine? Besides how
can any one imagine that a wheel of so great a volume could have
been moved by such a cause, a cause which would act simply on
the axle in crossing the supports, and which must have been so
small as to have escaped the most rigorous examination? 3. If
the servant has not been paid to depose against Orffyreus, what
does her testimony prove? Only that her master made her believe
that by turning a little wheel, she moved the whole machine, and
we can fancy a singular character, such as he was might have
done this to prevent the curiosity of those who sought to
penetrate his secret; M. 's Gravesande's opinion of this strange
character is such that he doubts not his whimsicalness prevented
him from making a new machine. 4. It must be confessed that this
wheel was a very remarkable mechanical phenomenon, and this is
all we can say, not knowing more than the preceding details; it
were too much temerity to say that this invention was a
perpetual motion, as much as it would be wrong to call it an
imposture, seeing that no exterior agent was employed.

244
Dr. Kenrick proceeds to state that:aThe celebrated John
Bernoulli, speaking of the above demonstration, in a letter to
the author, remarks that it is very just; the principle assumed
necessarily involving an augmentation of force, *viz.*, a
perpetual motion. But this, continues he, is no more than
Leibnitz had long before demonstrated in his dispute with Papin
and others.

Having thus occupied twenty-three pages in fencing himself with
a screen against the ridicule he appears to have so much
dreaded, and reasonably anticipated from the many authors he had
himself similarly treated in the "London Review," we are
informed that,aAn accidental conversation, many years ago, on
the spot where Orffyreus exhibited his machine, awakened the
author's curiosity and directed his attention to an object which
he has ever since occasionally pursued. The experiments he has
made, even so long since as the year 1761, convinced him so far
of the reality of Orffyreus' discovery, that he applied for
letters-patent to secure an exclusive right to the construction
of a similar machine; which he had contrived and denominated A Rotator. Before his patent, however,
was expedited, he reflected that, though the model he had
constructed might serve to remove the prejudices of the public,
it was not so well calculated as it might be, to answer the
practical purposes of so important a discovery. To the
improvement of the Rotator, therefore, has he long since
dedicated all the time and attention he could245
possibly spare from his other, more immediately necessary,
pursuits.

Nothing can be more flimsy than the statement here made, and
the next sentence would seem to explain the true state of the
case. He proceeds: "Not that he believes he has contrived quite
so many different machines as Orffyreus did, though he has been
almost as many years engaged in the like undertaking; he has,
nevertheless, both contrived and constructed a considerable
number, many of them useless as costly, except indeed as they
served to assist him in completing his invention."

His invention, however, was *not* complete; the very
model of it was unsatisfactory. Like Orffyreus, he had spent
nearly twenty years, making numerous, and some costly, machines.
He no doubt had his own misgivings, and wished to reimburse
himself for the great outlay he must have incurred during that
long period, before the bubble finally burst! However, poor man,
he died nine years after publishing this elaborate advertising
prospectus, which concludes: "Such bodies corporate, private
companies or individuals, as are interested in the construction
or use of considerable mechanical engines, or are disposed to
encourage the present discovery, may receive any further
information they require, on applying to the inventor, William Kenrick, Charles street, St.
James's Square, March 1, 1770."

In 1803, Dr. Charles Hutton, LL.D., and F. R. S.,
contributed in a brief work entitled, "Recreations246
in Mathematics and Natural Philosophy," gave the following notice
to the Orffyrean Wheel:

The perpetual motion has been the quicksand of mechanicians, as
the quadrature of the circle, the trisection of an angle, etc.,
have been that of geometricians: and as those who pretend to
have discovered the solution of the latter problems are in
general persons scarcely acquainted with the principles of
geometry, those who search for, or imagine they have found, the
perpetual motion, are always men to whom the most certain and
invariable truths of mechanics are unknown.

It may be demonstrated, indeed, to all those capable of
reasoning in a sound manner on those sciences, that a perpetual
motion is impossible: for, to be possible, it is necessary that
the effect should become alternately the cause, and the cause
the effect. It would be necessary, for example, that a weight
raised to a certain height by another weight, should in its turn
raise the second weight to the height from which it descended.
But, according to the laws of motion, all that a descending
weight could do, in the most perfect machine which the mind can
conceive, is to raise another in the same time to a height
reciprocally proportional to its mass. But it is impossible to
construct a machine in which there shall be neither friction nor
the resistance of some medium to be overcome; consequently at
each alternation of ascent and descent, some quantity of motion,
however small, will always be lost: each time, therefore, the
weight to be raised will ascend to a less247 height; and the
motion will gradually slacken, and at length cease entirely.

![](i_246.jpg)

A moving principle has been sought for, but without success, in
the magnet, in the gravity of the atmosphere, and in the
elasticity of bodies. If a magnet be disposed in such a manner
as to facilitate the ascension of a weight, it will afterwards
oppose its descent. Springs, after being unbent, require to be
bent by a new force equal to that which they exercise; and the
gravity of the atmosphere, after forcing one side of the machine
to the lowest point, must be itself raised again, like any other
weight, in order to continue its action.

We shall, however, give an account of various attempts to
obtain a perpetual motion, because they may serve to show how
much some persons have suffered themselves to be deceived on
this subject.

248

![](i_247.jpg)

Fig. 52, plate 12, represents a large wheel, the circumference
of which is furnished, at equal distances, with levers, each
bearing at its extremity a weight, and movable on a hinge, so
that in one direction they can rest upon the circumference,
while on the opposite side, being carried away by the weight at
the extremity, they are obliged to arrange themselves in the
direction of the radius continued. This being supposed, it is
evident that when the wheel turns in the direction *a b c*,
the weights A B and C will recede from the centre;
consequently, as they act with more force, they will carry the
wheel towards that side; and as a new lever will be thrown out,
in proportion as the wheel revolves, it thence follows, say
they, that the wheel will continue to move in the same
direction. But, notwithstanding the specious appearance of this
reasoning, experience has proved that the machine will not go;
and it may indeed be249 demonstrated that there is a
certain position in which the centre of gravity of all these
weights is in the vertical plane passing through the point of
suspension, and that therefore it must stop.

The case is the same with the following machine, which it would
appear ought to move also incessantly. In a cylindric drum, in
perfect equilibrium on its axis, are formed channels as seen in
Fig. 53, which contain balls of lead, or a certain quantity of
quicksilver. In consequence of this disposition, the balls or
quicksilver must, on the one side, ascend by approaching the
centre; and on the other must roll towards the circumference.
The machine then ought to turn incessantly towards that side.

A third machine of this kind is represented in Fig. 54. It
consists of a kind of wheel formed of six or eight arms,
proceeding from a centre, where the axis of motion is placed.
Each of these arms is furnished with a receptacle in the form of
a pair of bellows, but those on the opposite arms stand in
contrary directions, as seen in the figure. The movable top of
each receptacle has affixed to it a weight, which shuts it in
one situation and opens it in the other. In the last place, the
bellows of the opposite arms have a communication by means of a
canal, and one of them is filled with quicksilver.

These things being supposed, it is visible, that the bellows on
the one side must open, and those on the other must shut;
consequently the mercury will pass from the latter into the
former, while the contrary will be the case on the opposite
side.

250
It might be difficult to point out the deficiency of this
reasoning; but those acquainted with the true principles of
mechanics will not hesitate to bet a hundred to one that the
machine, when constructed, will not answer the intended purpose.

![](i_249.jpg)

The description of a pretended perpetual motion, in which
bellows, to be alternately filled with and emptied of
quicksilver, were employed, may be seen in the "Journal des
Savans" for 1685. It was refuted by Bernouilli and some others,
and it gave rise to a long dispute. The best method which the
inventor could have employed to defend251 his invention
would have been to construct it, and show it in motion; but this
was never done.

We shall here add another curious anecdote on this subject. One
Orffyreus announced, at Leipsic, in the year 1717, a perpetual
motion, consisting of a wheel which would continually revolve.
This machine was constructed for the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel,
who caused it to be shut up in a place of safety, and the door
to be sealed with his own seal. At the end of forty days, the
door was opened, and the machine was found in motion. This,
however, affords no proof in favor of a perpetual motion; for as
clocks can be made to go a year without being wound up,
Orffyreus's wheel might easily go forty days, and even more.

The result of this pretended discovery is not known. We are
informed that an Englishman offered 80,000 crowns for this
machine; but Orffyreus refused to sell it at that price: in this
he certainly acted wrong, as there is reason to think he
obtained by his invention, neither money, nor even the honor of
having discovered the perpetual motion.

The Academy of Painting at Paris possessed a clock which had no
need of being wound up, and which might be considered as a
perpetual motion, though it was not so. But this requires some
explanation. The ingenious author of this clock employed the
variations in the state of the atmosphere for winding up his
moving weight. Various artifices might be devised for this
purpose; but this is no more a perpetual motion than252
if the flux and reflux of the sea were employed to keep the
machine continually going; for this principle of motion is
exterior to the machine, and forms no part of it.

But enough has been said on this chimera of mechanics. We
sincerely hope that none of our readers will ever lose
themselves in the ridiculous and unfortunate labyrinth of such a
research.

To conclude, it is false that any reward has been promised by
the European Powers to the person who shall discover the
perpetual motion; and the case is the same in regard to the
quadrature of the circle. It is this idea, no doubt, that
excites so many to attempt the solution of these problems; and
it is proper they should be undeceived.

The foregoing, we believe, are sufficient to disclose the gist of
all that is known, and all that has been said concerning the
claimed inventions of the distinguished Marquis and the
distinguished Councillor. It is manifest from reading the above
that Dircks himself, as well as nearly all the other eminent
persons quoted above, felt an extreme delicacy in stating their
honest belief concerning the claims of the distinguished
inventors. That delicacy arose from their deference to the rank
and prominence of the Marquis and the Councillor. The author of
this book is not thus encumbered, and has no such regard for
family or official rank, and feels at liberty to say exactly what
he thinks.

253
No one now actually believes that either the Marquis or the
Councillor ever made a wheel or machine that actually furnished
its own motive-power. Those who believe in the impossibility of
Perpetual Motion, of course, do not admit the possibility of such
a thing. Those who may still believe in the possibility of
Perpetual Motion devices admit, as they must, that had either of
these discoveries actually been made it would have supplanted
steam, electricity, wind, water and all other forms of power for
driving machinery, and, indeed, for furnishing heat. And, yet, the
above articles and comments show that the contemporaries of the
Marquis and the Councillor, and subsequent writers on their claims
sought to find excuses and explanations consistent with their good
faith and their claims. We do not accuse either one of them of
vicious falsehood, but the truth is that when the Marquis of
Worcester wrote that "all the weights of the descending side of a
wheel shall be perpetually farther from the centre than those of
the mounting side, and yet equal in number and heft to the one
side as the other. A most incredible thing, if not seen; but tried
before the late King (of blessed memory) in the Tower by my
directions," etc., he meant, if he meant anything, to convey the
idea that he had constructed such a machine, and had exhibited it
before King Charles I, and when Orffyreus wrote254
"The inward structure of the wheel is of a nature according to the
laws of mechanical perpetual motion, so arranged that by disposed
weights once in rotation they gain force from their own swinging
and must continue their movement as long as their structure does
not lose its position and arrangement," he meant, as clearly
appears from the entire context of what he wrote, to convey the
idea that he had constructed a wheel capable of moving perpetually
by virtue of the arrangement of its own parts until it should wear
out. Neither one spoke the truth. Each knew that he had done no
such thing as he claimed to have done. He probably thought the
solution so near at hand that he could safely announce it to the
world, and when called upon for a demonstration could produce the
finished working article.

The author of this book has known many Perpetual Motion workers
so confident and so enthusiastic that unhampered with extreme
discretion, they announced that they were near enough to the
solution of this ages-old puzzle that they were certain of
success. A little less discretion, with the slightest disregard or
even carelessness about the absolute truth could have easily led
them to announce that they had such a working machine. The author
has indeed known a few such announcements. It is therefore, not
surprising255
that in the history of Perpetual Motion labors, instances can be
found where the tireless, but enthusiastic worker being full of
confidence, and not secretive, and with the least bit of human
carelessness about the truth have announced the actual discovery
and successful operation of the machine. We will undertake to say
that there have been thousands of just such instances during the
last three or four centuries, probably tens of thousands. It is
probable that such an instance could be found in every township in
the United States. It is not, therefore, surprising that two
instances can be found in persons of sufficient personal eminence
to give credence and weight to their stories. Such we conceive the
facts with reference to the Marquis and the Councillor. Each
thought what he told when telling it to be a harmless stretch of
the truth, and felt sure that he could protect himself by a very
little added perfection to his device. How many many Perpetual
Motion devices have been perfect and ready for successful
operation except for "one little thing," which the inventor felt
sure of finding.

The Marquis and Councillor by their little indiscretion, and
their puerile carelessness about the truth, each made himself
neither famous, nor infamous, but ridiculous in history.

---

256

## CHAPTER XI Conservation of EnergyaA Discussion of the Relation of the Doctrine of Conservation of Energy, and the Possibility of Perpetual Motion

*Conservation of Energy* is a doctrine to the effect that
energy, like matter, is indestructible, and, except by the
infinite, can neither be created nor destroyed; that the sum total
of all Energy in the world remains constant; that it may manifest
itself in different forms, as heat, magnetism, electricity,
mechanical motion, vaporization, but that the sum total remains
the same.

Nothing could be more satisfactorily proved than this doctrine,
and, yet, like Newton's theory of universal gravitation the proof
does not amount to a mathematical demonstration. Mathematics
demonstrates the conformity of the doctrine of universal
gravitation, and of Conservation of Energy with all known natural
processes and observed phenomena; but mathematics does not
otherwise prove the Universality of Gravitation nor Conservation
of Energy.

Writing on this subject of proof, with reference to gravitation,
the late and eminent Simon Newcomb says:

257

"It may be inquired, is the induction which supposes
gravitation universal so complete as to be entirely beyond
doubt? We reply that within the solar system it certainly is.
The laws of motion as established by observation and experiment
at the surface of the earth must be considered as mathematically
certain. Now, it is an observed fact that the planets in their
motion deviate from straight lines in a certain way. By the
first law of motion, such deviation can be produced only by a
force; and the direction and intensity of this force admit of
being calculated once that the motion is determined. When thus
calculated, it is found to be exactly represented by one great
force constantly directed toward the sun, and smaller subsidiary
forces directed toward the several planets. Therefore, no fact
in nature is more firmly established than is that of universal
gravitation, as laid down by Newton, at least within the solar
system."

It will thus be observed that the theory of Universal Gravitation
is not by scientific men claimed to have been mathematically
demonstrated, but its proof is regarded as resting upon its
conformity with known natural phenomena. The same thing is true of
Conservation of Energy. Scientists and mathematicians do not claim
proof of this doctrine other than by its universal coincidence
with all natural manifestations, and, yet its proof rests upon
such a solid structure of coincidence and conformity with all
known things in nature, that now all scientific research258
begins with its assumption, and with the exclusion of the
possibility of Perpetual Motion.

It is not within the purview of this work to give a history of
the origin and establishment in science of the doctrine. While, as
heretofore noted in this book, a number of scientists of the past
few centuries are shown by their reflections to have had a measure
of appreciation of its ultimate effect, and to have applied that
effect in their scientific researches, there is no evidence that
they ever dreamed of its establishment as a basic fact of science.
The real establishment and acceptance of the doctrine dates not
much over a half century back. Since that time many scientists
have in their researches and writings contributed to its evolution
and formation. The experiments of Joule, of England, and the
generalizations of Helmholtz, of Germany, are entitled to special
mention.

Scientists are naturally and necessarily conservative. So many
startling pseudo-scientific facts are announced, that every
startling scientific theory, before it is accepted, is submitted
to the most careful and crucial tests. No modern scientist will
announce a scientific fact as having been demonstrated until the
demonstration is complete and fortified with repeated tests of
mathematical rigidity, and as long as there remains a phenomenon
that does not conform to the supposed259 theory,
acceptance and promulgation will be withheld. It is, therefore,
not surprising that the doctrine of Conservation of Energy has
been thoroughly intrenched as an established indisputable and
accepted fact of science, less than a single generation.

The student of natural science should be warned against the
common error of supposing that the discovery of a scientific fact
or theory, means demolition of the old theories. The rule is the
other way. New theories are additional information to the world,
and usually conform to, and are built upon what was known before.
Conservation of Energy was generalized from previously known facts
conformed to them and reflexively elucidated them, and left them
standing clearer than before.

The proof that Conservation of Energy conforms to all other known
phenomena of nature has been aided, and hastened by the refinement
of scientific instruments by which forms of energy such as heat,
electricity, and magnetism can be more delicately measured and
determined than ever before, and if instruments for measuring and
determining the amount of energy in its various forms were as
crude as they were even a single century ago, it is probable
Conservation of Energy would still be the undiscovered foundation
of all natural phenomena.

260
Let us now consider a few well-known facts which it has been
determined positively by the most delicate instruments, prove and
illustrate the doctrine of Conservation of Energy.

Resistance to motion, or which is the same thing, motion against
resistance, is always accompanied by heat. This developed heat is
not always readily perceptible to our sense of touch. A stone,
ball or other object thrown through the air has its motion
gradually arrested by the air. Heat is developed, but the heat is
distributed through so much air and the object thrown is heated so
little that this development of heat was not known until
scientifically discovered. Where the resistance is friction, the
development of heat is quite perceptible, and has always been well
known. Suppose a coin be rubbed on a cloth or blotter. Heat is
developed both in the coin and the blotterathe more vigorous the
rubbingai. e., the more energy expended, the greater the
heat. Science has determined that the developed heat is exactly
proportional to the expended energy. Every machinist knows that in
turning a tap on a bolt where the threads are rusty so that it
turns only with the application of great force, a considerable
amount of heat is readily developed. The heat developed is
proportional to the energy expended in turning the tap.

A wheel revolving on a spindle will develop261 heat exactly
proportional to the resistance the spindle offers to the wheel
turning upon it. Thus, we often see smoke and a blaze rising from
the spindles of the car wheels where oil is lacking, and they turn
with difficulty.

Every farmer knows that if a buggy wheel turns with difficulty
for want of lubrication, or for any other reason, the spindle will
heat, expand and lock the wheel, so that it will often either
grind out the boxing or slide on the ground. Whereas, if the parts
be kept lubricated so that less energy is required to turn the
wheel on the spindle, there is no perceptible heat developed, but
in all cases heat is developed to some extent, and the heat
developed is exactly proportional to the energy necessary to force
the revolution.

With heat we can boil water and make steam under a pressure, and
with the steam under a pressure we can run an engine, and with the
engine make heat by friction, or make electric current that can
produce heat. Carry this proposition back to the fuel box, and
knowing the amount of heat developed by the burning of a certain
quantity of fuel, it is found that, counting the heat that rises
in the air through the smoke stack, the heat that is radiated from
the boiler, the heat that is carried away in warmed ashes, the
heat that exists in the steam after it is exhausted from the
cylinder, and all other heat expended262 whether utilized
in driving the machinery or going to waste, the sum total is in
every case equal to the heat developed by the fuel box combustion.
The most striking thing about all this is that when the steam goes
into the cylinder where it is cooled as it expands and drives the
pistons, the heat *thus lost by the expanding steam is the
exact equivalent of the mechanical energy realized against the
piston head*. Not all of the energy that is realized at the
piston head is delivered to the driving shaft. Some of it is lost
in the friction of the piston rings wearing against the cylinder
lining; some, of course, is lost in friction at the journals
connecting with the driving shaft. It is usual in counting engine
efficiency to count the amount of energy delivered to the belt, or
to the driving shaft, and because of the frictional resistance of
the pistons working in the cylinder, there is always found a
little discrepancy between the energy represented by the cooling
of the steam in the cylinder and the energy delivered to the belt,
or the driving shaft.

It is quite surprising how much energy a small amount of heat
represents if it could all be converted into the obvious forms of
energy. Owing to the great waste suffered in all modern machinery,
heat represents much more energy than is ordinarily supposed, in
the absence of exact knowledge. One would hardly think it possible263
that the amount of heat that will raise the temperature of one
pound (almost exactly one pint) of water, one single degree
(Fahrenheit) is the equivalent of energy required to elevate one
pound seven hundred seventy-eight feet high against the force of
gravity. Yet, such is the case. This was one of the demonstrations
of the immortal Joule. It was he who enabled us to cross the
bridge with calculations from mechanical force and motion to heat.
He stated the equivalent to be seven hundred seventy-two feet, but
more delicate instruments than could be had in his day have shown
a slight discrepancy in his calculations, and it is now known to
be almost exactly seven hundred seventy-eight feet. Thus, if the
Falls of Niagara be considered as being one hundred sixty feet
high, the energy developed by the descent is only the equivalent
of the heat necessary to raise the temperature of the water about
one-fifth of one degree. A modern railroad locomotive does well to
realize to the driving rod two per cent of the total energy
developed in the fuel box. An ordinary thrasher engine realizes no
more than one per cent. The very best steam engines known in large
stationary plants do not realize as much as fifteen per cent.

The amount of heat necessary to raise the temperature of one
pound of water one degree is taken as a standard for heat
measurement, and is264 known as a British Thermal
Unitanearly always in scientific works abbreviated to
B. T. U. The common standard of energy is the amount of
energy or work necessary to elevate one pound one foot against the
force of gravity. This in scientific works is usually referred to
as the foot-pound.

From what is said above it is manifest that one
B. T. U. is the equivalent of seven hundred
seventy-eight foot-pounds, and vice versa.

The *amount* of energy must not be confused with the *rate*
of expending energy, or doing work. The horse-power is the common
measurement of the rate of delivery of energy or of doing work and
is equivalent to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute. It is what one
horse can do, and continue doing several hours with reasonable
ease. For a short time a horse can exert several horse-power.

Remember, and remember always that heat and electricity are just
as much forms of energy as the motion of concrete objects.

We have introduced the above statement of equivalents for the
purpose of enabling us to present a few fundamental facts more
clearly than could otherwise be done.

Everyone knows that if paddles be revolved rapidly in a vessel
containing a liquid, such as a churn, or the like, the liquid will
offer considerable resistance to their motion, the amount of265
resistance depending upon the nature of the liquid, and the
rapidity of the motion.

Our scientific instruments have determined the fact to be that
the B. T. U. developed in the liquid and on the paddles
is the exact equivalent to the foot-pounds of energy required to
drive the paddles, i. e., the number of B. T. U. is
778 times the number of foot-pounds.

An engine is run with steamathe engine drives an electric
generator. Electricity is developed. This electricity is conducted
over a wire to a motor. It is always found that not as much energy
can be derived from the motor as is supplied from the generator to
the wire. Where is the loss?

It is found that the loss is in the resistance of the wire to the
current, and that the wire is warmedapossibly not sufficient to be
perceptible to the ordinary sense of touch, and, yet, it is warmed
to some extent, and the B. T. U., developed in, and
radiated away by the wire, amounts precisely and exactly to the
difference in foot-pounds between the energy supplied to the wire
at one end of the wire, and the energy supplied by the wire at its
other end.

Capillary Attraction is one form of motion by which liquids are
elevated and carried considerable distance. The moisture is taken
from the earth and carried up the trunks of trees, and266
out through their limbs to their leaves. This cannot be done
without force and energy, but where is the heat? It has been
determined and proven that there is an expenditure of heat in
doing that work, and that the expenditure of heat is precisely
equivalent to the work done. It is hardly believable that there is
a loss of heat by coal oil or water, or other liquid performing
the work of ascending the wick, and yet, science has determined
that that work is only done at the expense of that other form of
energyaheat.

If an object falls a distance of twenty feet, and it strikes one
end of a lever having two arms of equal length, and at the other
end of the lever there be a ball of equal weight, the other ball
will be thrown upward twenty feet, less an allowance for the
resistance of the air in the descent and ascent, and for the
frictional resistance of the motion of the lever. It would throw a
ball of twice the weight half the height by adjusting the levers
properly. Or, it would throw a ball of one-third the weight three
times as high, and so on.

A ball rolling down an inclined plane is found to have a
velocity, and consequently a striking force, and an energy equal
to that acquired in falling the vertical distance of its descent,
due allowance being made for the resistance offered to its rolling
motion. It makes no difference267 whether the
incline be great or small, the velocity, the energy are the same
as though it had fallen perpendicularly through the same vertical
distance.

Instances and illustrations can be multiplied indefinitely.
Millions of tests have been made by scientific men, and the basic
fact of Conservation of Energy is found true everywhere. That fact
is that energy cannot be created. So much as is given is returned
in some other form, or else in the form of heat, but in some form,
precisely the equivalent is always found to exist.

One of the most beautiful experiments is with the pendulum.
Imagine a nail or peg driven into a wall and projecting outasay
six inches from the wall. Hang a pendulum four feet longalet the
pendulum swing parallel to the wall in the annexed figure. Let "A"
represent the point from which the pendulum is suspended. Draw the
pendulum back to C, and release it. Its lowest descent in the
swing will be at B. It will swing to D, and a line connecting D
& C is exactly horizontal, showing that the energy represented
by the motion of the pendulum at B was sufficient to elevate it to
the point D. Now, on a line on the wall downward from where the
nail or peg is driven into the wall, let there be made holes into
which a nail or peg can be inserted, and suppose a peg be driven268
at the point F. If now pendulum be released at C, it will be found
that when the cord strikes F the pendulum will swing to the point
J, which is on the horizontal line D C. It makes no
difference where the interrupting peg or nail be placed, the
pendulum will rise to the same horizontal from which it was
released. It is said that this was one of Gallileo's experiments.
If so, it is another example of the masterly force and originality
of his genius, and shows that he subconsciously had some
appreciation of the basic facts of the now accepted doctrine of
Conservation of Energy.

![](i_267.jpg)

We believe it is useless to multiply instances further, to
illustrate the doctrine of Conservation of Energy, and show the
character of proof upon which it rests. There is no fact in
nature, but what in the hands of modern science appears to conform
to this doctrine. A few years ago when radio-active properties
were first discovered it269 was thought that it was an
exception, but even that has been found to conform to this
wonderful generalized doctrine.

If the doctrine of Conservation of Energy be true about which
there seems to be no doubt, then all hopes of ever attaining
Perpetual Motion must cease, for the idea of Perpetual Motion is
predicated and has its foundation upon the creation of energy. The
mechanism must give more energy than is imparted to it. It must
make energy, and this in the light of the generalized truth of
Conservation of Energy is an impossibility. We might as well talk
about making substance, and the creation of substance, or the
creation of energy either one is not an attribute of man. It is an
attribute to be accredited only to the infinite, and can not be
conceived as an attribute of the finite.

---

270

## CHAPTER XII Will Perpetual Motion Ever Be Accomplished?

The antiquity of the problem of Perpetual Motion, and the
countless attempts by clever and ingenious minds to accomplish its
solution, and the uniform failure of such attempts is no proof at
all, scientifically speaking, that Perpetual Motion is an
impossibility. If there be scientific proof that Perpetual Motion
is unattainable, that proof must be found elsewhere than in the
number of attempts and the universality of failures, or in the
number or eminence of the people who believe it to be impossible.

Dircks in his work printed in 1861, being "A History of the
Search for Self-Motive Power, During the 17th 18th and 19th
Centuries," says on the subject:

"The subject of Perpetual Motion opposes paradox to paradox. It
is viewed both as being most simple and most difficult to find.
The learned justify both its possibility and impossibility. Many
mechanics believe it possible \* \* \* Its pursuit always commences
in confidence, only to end in doubt. \* \* \*

We think a careful perusal of all that has been gathered
respecting Perpetual Motion clearly establishes that much remains
to be done to271 prove the impossibility of
practically solving this knotty problem; and that a full
demonstration of the difficulties that environ it is worthy of
being attempted, even by the most exalted mathematicians. It is
not requisite that they should descend to the level of the most
ordinary minds, but leave it for others to reduce their elaborated
reasonings on the subject to some generally comprehensible form.
We fear the proposal partakes too much of the difficulty of
proving a negative; but still, as the attempt has been made by
celebrated savants, and is generally considered insufficient; and
as data may have been wanting, which we conceive a collection of
the chief known examples will supply; we recommend the
consideration of this matter to all geometers. \* \* \*

In a mathematical point of view, we think this subject is far
from being exhausted; and, after what has been advanced, may very
properly be considered as claiming grave considerations. And that,
scientifically examined, it is a mark of mere shallowness and
querulousness to attempt the substitution of ridicule and satire
for the more difficult, but consistent course of sound, close
reason and argument, such as the wonted sobriety and severity of
scientific criticism accords to its investigations generally."

At the time of the publication of Dircks's work from which the
above quotation is taken272 (1861), the doctrine of
Conservation of Energy had not been announced and accepted as an
established generalization of a scientific fact, and it is
apparent was not understood by him. Dircks's statement "as data
may have been wanting, which we conceive a collection of the chief
known examples will supply," shows that he misconceived the nature
of the problem of proving the impossibility of Perpetual Motion.
If, however, the principle of Conservation of Energy is a true
scientific fact, the impossibility of self-motive power follows as
an inevitable scientific corollary, and the ignis fatuus hope of
attaining Perpetual Motion which has deluded so many bright minds
is forever destroyed and demolished.

A perusal of the arguments against Perpetual Motion made by
thinking men with scientific minds even though long before the
thorough establishment of the doctrine of transmutation and
Conservation of Energy, discloses the fact that those arguments in
fact depend finally on the principle now known and designated
Conservation of Energy.

It is amusing to note in reading the arguments on the subject by
our greatest philosophers, Newton, Gallileo, Huyghens, and
Descartes, that while they lived and labored long before
Conservation of Energy in its generalized form was known, or
announced, they seemed to have a perception273 that energy could
not be created; that energy must produce an effect commensurate
with its own activity; that the existence of energy in one body is
proof positive that some agency furnished and lost an exact
equivalent of that energy. In other words, these men in reasoning
on specific problems presented to them, and on the problem of
Perpetual Motion in particular, appear to have appreciated and
applied in their reasonings, the principle of Conservation of
Energy.

Men who have worked at the problem of Perpetual Motion before the
establishment of the doctrine of Conservation of Energy, and men
who still work at the problem, who, through lack of opportunity
have not become familiar with that doctrine, are not to be blamed
or thought stupid because of that folly, but those who knowing
that principle, or being in a situation to know it, must be
mechanically and mathematically stupid not to realize that
Perpetual Motion and Conservation of Energy are irreconcilable,
and that both cannot be possibilities. In this day when the
principle of Conservation of Energy is taught in the High Schools
of the United States, and in every other civilized country in the
world, it is not surprising that fewer people work on Perpetual
Motion than formerly, and that public interest274
in the subject is waning, as waning it surely is.

A generation ago, however, this principle was not known and
taught, and the state of the world's learning was at such a stage
that many even scientific minds thought Perpetual Motion possible,
and worked for its attainment.

The principle of Conservation of Energy as applied to all
Perpetual Motion devices can be stated as follows: There can be no
mechanical effect without an equal mechanical cause.
Energyai. e., the capacity to do work, can only be imparted
by an equal amount of work done. It therefore follows
axiomatically that Perpetual Motion is possible only if and when a
machine be produced that runs absolutely without friction and
absolutely without atmospheric resistance, or the resistance of
bending of cords, or other like mechanical resistance. If there be
such resistance, then the energy imparted to the machine will be
diminished by that resistance, with the result that the machine
can only yield the amount of energy imparted, less the energy
required to overcome such resistance. That no machine can be built
free of such resistance is patent to even a tyro in mechanics.

It will be interesting here, and perhaps more interesting than
useful, to add some of the arguments quoted by Dircks and
reproduced in his275 work for and against the
possibility of Perpetual Motion. They have little scientific value
at this time, as they were all made by men who were unfamiliar
with the decisive principle of Conservation of Energy.
Nevertheless, for their historical interest we offer a few:

### The Possibility of Perpetual Motion Denied Remarks of Dr. Papin on a French Contrivance

In 1665, Dr. Papin, Fellow of the Royal Society, brought before
the Royal Society of London, a paper concerning a French
contrivance for Perpetual Motion. The following excerpt will
illustrate and explain the contrivance:

The paper printed in French, and containing contrivance for
perpetual motion, being set down in such a manner that can
hardly be understood but by those that are much acquainted with
such descriptions, I have endeavored to explain it as follows:

Let D E F be a pair of bellows forty inches long,
that may be opened by removing the part F from E; let them be
exactly shut everywhere but at the aperture E; and let a pipe
E G, twenty or twenty-two inches long, be soldered to the
said aperture E, having its other end in a vessel G, full of
mercury, and placed near the middle of the bellows.

A is an axis for the bellows to turn upon.

B, a counterpoise fastened to the lower end of the bellows.

276

![](i_275.jpg)

C, a weight with a clasp to keep the bellows upright.

Now, if we suppose the bellows opened only to one-third or
one-fourth, standing upright, and full of mercury, it is plain
that the said mercury, being forty inches high, must fall, as in
the Torricellian experiment, to the height of about twenty-seven
inches, and, consequently, the bellows must open towards F, and
leave a vacuity there. This vacuity must be filled with the
mercury ascending from G through the pipe G E, the said
pipe being but twenty-two inches long; by this means the bellows
must be opened more and more, till the mercury continuing to
ascend makes the upper part of the bellows so heavy that the
lower part must get loose from the clasp C, and the bellows
should turn quite upside down; but the vessel G being set in a
convenient place, keeps them horizontal, and the part F engageth
there in another clasp C; then the mercury, by its weight, runs
out from the bellows into the vessel G through the pipe
E G, and the bellows must shut closer and closer until the
part E F comes to be so light that the counterpoise B is
able to make the part F get loose from the clasp C; then the
bellows come to be upright again; the mercury left in them falls277
again to the height of twenty-seven inches, and, consequently,
all the other effects will follow as we have already seen, and
the motion will continue forever. Thus much for the French
author.

![](i_276.jpg)

Upon this it is to be observed, that the bellows can never be
opened by the internal pressure, unless the said pressure be
stronger then the external; now, in this case, the weight of the
atmosphere doth freely press up the outward part of the bellows,
but it cannot come at the inward part but through the pipe
G E, which, containing twenty-two perpendicular inches of
mercury, does counterpoise so much of the weight of the
atmosphere, so that this being supposed to be twenty-seven
inches of mercury, it cannot press the inward part of the
bellows but with weight equivalent to five perpendicular inches
of mercury. From this we may conclude, that the pressure of the
atmosphere, being weakened within the bellows more then it can
be helped by the mercury contained in the same, as may easily be
computed, the said bellows standing upright must rather shut
then open. Thus, without losing any labor and charges in trying,
people may be sure that the thing can never do.

278

### Two "Certain" Plans for (Not) Producing Perpetual Motion

In 1834, the following article was contributed to "Mechanics'
Magazine." The contributor was very frank, and presents some
splendid suggestions for Perpetual Motion workers. His article is
as follows:

Very few young mechanicians escape being seduced into an
attempt to produce a perpetual movement, by making gravitation
counteract itself. They are not contented with being told by
older men, that a cause can never be made to exceed its own
power; yet gravitation is expected by them to lift up on one
side more weight than sinks on the other, with some percentage
of friction into the bargain. Nature, however, is too true to
itself to be so taken in by all or any of the multitudes of
various ways the inventive genius of man has contrived, and
still keeps contriving, to circumvent her immutable laws, with
no other effect than to render the case so complicated as to
puzzle the judgment of the inventors, which ends usually in
their firm belief that they have outwitted nature instead of
themselves. I acknowledge that in my youth I was one of this
class, and, for the benefit of the young, I beg to present you
with two *certain* plans for producing perpetual motion,
and compelling gravity to be frolicsome, and do more work than
she ought.

Let A (Fig. 1) be a cistern full of oil or water, above 4 feet
deep. Let B be a wheel; freely279 suspended
within it, on its axle, let there be four wide glass tubes, 40
inches long, *c c c c*, having large bulbs,
holding, say a pint, blown at the closed end. Fill these tubes
with mercury, fix on an Indian-rubber ball or bladder, that will
hold a pint, to each of them at the open end, and let them be
attached round the wheel, as exhibited in the figure. As the
pressure of 40 inches of mercury will exceed the atmospheric
pressure, and also that of the four-foot column of water, when
the Indian-rubber bottle is lowest, and the tube erect, at D,
the mercury will fill it, leaving a vacuum in the glass bulb
above. On the opposite side the mercury will fill the glass
bulb, and the Indian-rubber bottle will be pressed flat, as will
also be the case in the two horizontal tubes. Now, it is evident
that the two horizontal tubes exactly balance each other; but
the tube D, with its bulb swelled out, displaces a pint of water
more than its opposite tube, and hence will attempt to rise with
the force of about one pound; and each tube, when it arrives at
the same position, must produce the same result, the wheel must
have a continual power, equal to about one pound, with a radius
of two feet.aQ. E. D.

Let Fig. 2 represent a light drum of woodaone-half of which is
inserted into a cleft in a water-cistern A, which fits it, and
from which the water is prevented from escaping by a strip of
leather, which the water presses against the drum, and which
thus operates as a valve, without much friction (especially if
oil be substituted for water in the cistern). Now, as this drum
is much lighter280 than water, it must ever
attempt to swim, and thus, in perpetually rising, cause the drum
to revolve forcibly round its axle.aQ. E. D.

![](i_279.jpg)

I tried this last method thirty years ago, but it was so
obstinate as not to move one inch at my bidding, though it
obviously is proved, to demonstration, that it ought to have
gone on swimmingly. I have just heard that an Italian gentleman
has hit upon the same plan; so it seems that the mania is not
confined to England.

The article above quoted elicited a varied correspondence on the
subject of self-motive power. The editor finally made the
following apt and happy remark concerning the two "Certain" plans:

281

We think our correspondent, S. F., has entirely
misconceived the scope of the playful account, given in our last
number, of two plans of perpetual motion. The object of the
writer seems to have been, to impress on the minds of young
mechanicians the folly of wasting their time in vain endeavors
to render the effects of causes greater than the causes
themselves; or, in other words, to gain power out of nothingaa
process without limit or value, were it not cut short by the
want of all limit to its folly; and this he could not, perhaps,
have done in any way so well, as by exhibiting a couple of
infallible perpetual movers that would not stir at all, though
they bade as fair for it as any of their kindred.

### Article by Rev. John Wilkins

Rev. John Wilkins of England, born 1614; died 1672, published a
work called "Mathematical Magic," in which he discoursed
scientifically and technically on efforts that had been made up to
that time to attain Perpetual Motion. His work shows great
scholarship, diligent search, and a thorough knowledge of
mathematics and mechanics. Considering the state of scientific
knowledge at the time when he lived and worked, his insight into
scientific subjects is truly remarkable.

Considering the state of scientific learning in his day, his
observations on the subject of Perpetual Motion show him to have
possessed really a great scientific and analytical mind. Of all
those who wrote or thought extensively on the282 subject in that
century we regard what he had to say as being the most worthy of
reproduction. The following excerpt from "Mathematical Magic,"
will give the reader an idea of his course of reasoning and
conclusions on the subject of self-motive power:

#### CHAP. IX.a*Of a Perpetual MotionaThe seeming facility and real difficulty of any such contrivanceaThe several ways whereby it hath been attempted, particularly by Chemistry.*

It is the chief inconvenience of all the automata
before-mentioned, that they need a frequent repair of new
strength, the causes whence their motion does proceed being
subject to fail, and come to a period; and, therefore, it would
be worth our enquiry to examine whether or no there may be made
any such artificial contrivance, which might have the principle
of moving from itself so that the present motion should
constantly be the cause of that which succeeds.

This is that great secret in art which, like the Philosopher's
Stone in Nature, has been the business and study of many more
refined wits for divers ages together; and it may well be
questioned whether either of them as yet have ever been found
out; though if this have, yet like the other, it is not plainly
treated of by any author.

Not but there are sundry discourses concerning this subject,
but they are rather *conjectures* than *experiments*.
And though many inventions in this kind may at first view bear a283
great show of probability, yet they will fail, being brought to
trial, and will not answer in practice what they promised in
speculation. Any one who has been versed in these experiments
must needs acknowledge that he has been often deceived in his
strongest confidence; when the imagination has contrived the
whole frame of such an instrument, and conceives that the event
must infallibly answer its hopes, yet then does it strangely
deceive in the proof and discovers to us some defect which we
did not before take notice of.

Hence it is that you shall scarce talk with any one who has
never so little smattering in these arts, but he will instantly
promise such a motion as being but an easy achievement, till
further trial and experience has taught him the difficulty of
it. There being no enquiry that does more entice with the *probability*
and deceive with the *subtilty*.

I shall briefly recite the several ways whereby this has been
attempted, or seems most likely to be effected, thereby to
contract and facilitate the enquiries of those who are addicted
to these kind of experiments; for when they know the defects of
other inventions, they may the more easily avoid the same or the
like in their own.

The ways whereby this has been attempted may be generally
reduced to these three kinds:

* 1. By Chemical Extractions.
* 2. By Magnetical Virtues.
* 3. By the Natural Affection of Gravity.

1. The discovery of this has been attempted by chemistry.
Paracelsus and his followers have284 bragged that by
their separations and extractions they can make a little world
which shall have the same perpetual motions with this microcosm,
with the representation of all meteors, thunder, snow, rain, the
courses of the sea in its ebbs and flows, and the like. But
these miraculous promises would require as great a faith to
believe them as a power to perform them; and though they often
talk of such great matters:

At nusquam totos inter
qui talia curant,  
 Apparet ullus, qui re miracula
tanta  
 Comprobeta

yet we can never see them confirmed by any real
experiment; and then, besides, every particular author in that
art has such a distinct language of his own (all of them being
so full of allegories and affected obscurities), that 'tis very
hard for any one (unless he be thoroughly versed amongst them)
to find out what they mean, much more to try it.

One of these ways (as I find it set down) is
this: Mix five ounces of a? with an equal weight of a; grind them
together with ten ounces of sublimate; dissolve them in a cellar
upon some marble for the space of four days, till they become
like oil olive; distil this with fire of chaff, or driving fire,
and it will sublime into a dry substance; and so, by repeating
of these dissolvings and distillings, there will be at length
produced divers small atoms, which, being put into a glass well
luted and kept dry, will have a perpetual motion.

I cannot say anything from experience against this; but I think
it does not seem very285 probable, because things that
are forced up to such vigorousness and activity as these
ingredients seem to be by their frequent sublimings and
distillings, are not likely to be of any duration. The more any
thing is stretched beyond its usual nature, the less does it
last; violence and perpetuity being no companions. And then,
besides, suppose it is true, yet such a motion could not well be
applied to any use, which will needs take much from the delight
of it.

Amongst the chemical experiments to this purpose may be
reckoned up that famous motion invented by Cornelius Dreble, and
made for King James; wherein was represented the constant
revolutions of the sun and moon, and that without the help
either of springs or weights. Marcellus Vranckhein, speaking of
the means whereby it was performed, he calls it *Scintillula
animae magneticae mundi, seu astralis et insensibilis spiritus*;
being that grand secret for the discovery of which those
dictators of philosophy, Democritus, Pythagoras, Plato, did
travel unto the Gymnosophists and Indian Priests. The author
himself, in his discourse upon it, does not at all reveal the
way how it was performed. But there is one Thomas Tymme who was
a familiar acquaintance of his, and did often pry into his works
(as he professes himself), who affirms it to be done thus: By
extracting a fiery spirit out of the mineral matter, joining the
same with his proper air, which included in the axletree (of the
first moving wheel), being hollow, carried the other wheels,
making a continual rotation, except issue286 or vent be
given in this hollow axletree, whereby the imprisoned spirit may
get forth.

What strange things may be done by such extractions I know not,
and, therefore, dare not condemn this relation as impossible;
but I think it sounds rather like a chemical dream than a
philosophical truth. It seems this imprisoned spirit is now set
at liberty, or else is grown weary, for the instrument (as I
have heard) has stood still for many years. It is here
considerable that any force is weakest near the center of a
wheel; and therefore, though such a spirit might of itself have
an agitation, yet 'tis not easily conceivable how it should have
strength enough to carry the wheels about with it. And then, the
absurdity of the author's citing this, would make one mistrust
his mistake. He urges it as a strong argument against
Copernicus; as if, because Dreble did thus contrive in an engine
the revolution of the heavens and the immovableness of the
earth, therefore it must needs follow that 'tis the heavens
which are moved, and not the earth. If his relation were no
truer than his consequence, it had not been worth the citing.

#### CHAP. XIII.a*Concerning several attempts of contriving a Perpetual Motion, by Magnetical Virtues.*

The second way whereby the making of a perpetual motion has
been attempted, is by Magnetical Virtues, which are not without
some strong probabilities of proving effectual to this purpose;
especially when we consider that the287 heavenly
revolutions (being as the first pattern imitated and aimed at in
these attempts) are all of them performed by the help of these
qualities. This great orb of earth, and all the other planets,
being but as so many magnetical globes, endowed with such
various and continual motions as may be most agreeable to the
purposes for which they were intended. And, therefore, most of
the authors who treat concerning this invention, do agree that
the likeliest way to effect it, is by these kind of qualities.

It was the opinion of Pet. Peregrinus, and there is an example
pretended for it in Bettinus (apiar. 9, progym. 5, pro. 11) that
a magnetical globe, or terella, being rightly placed upon its
poles, would of itself have a constant rotation, like the
diurnal motion of the earth. But this is commonly exploded as
being against all experience.

Others think it possible so to contrive several pieces of steel
and loadstone that, by their continual attraction and expulsion
of one another, they may cause a perpetual revolution of a
wheel. Of this opinion were Taisner, Pet. Peregrinus, and
Cardan, out of Antonius de Fantis. But D. Gilbert, who was more
especially versed in magnetical experiments, concludes it to be
a vain and groundless fancy.

But amongst all these kinds of inventions, that is most likely,
wherein a loadstone is so disposed that it shall draw unto it on
a reclined plane a bullet of steel, which steel, as it ascends
near to the loadstone, may be contrived to fall down288
through some hole in the plane, and so to return unto the place
from whence at first it began to move; and, being there, the
loadstone will again attract it upwards till coming to this
hole, it will fall down again; and so the motion shall be
perpetual, as may be more easily conceivable by this figure:

![](i_287.jpg)

Suppose the loadstone to be represented at A B, which,
though it have not strength enough to attract the bullet C
directly from the ground, yet may do it by the help of the plane
E F. Now, when the bullet is come to the top of this plane,
its own gravity (which is supposed to exceed the strength of the
loadstone) will make it fall into that hole at E; and the force
it receives in this fall will carry it with such a violence unto
the other end of this arch, that it will open the passage which
is there made for it, and by its return will again shut it; so
that the bullet (as at the first) is in the same place whence it
was attracted, and, consequently, must move perpetually.

But, however, this invention may seem to be of such strong
probability, yet there are sundry particulars which may prove it
insufficient; fora

289
1. This bullet of steel must first be touched, and have its
several poles, or else there can be little or no attraction of
it. Suppose C in the steel to be answerable unto A in the stone,
and to B; in the attraction C D must always be directed
answerable to A B, and so the motion will be more
difficult; by reason there can be no rotation or turning round
of the bullet, but it must slide up with the line C D,
answerable to the axis A B.

2. In its fall from E to G, which is *motus elementaris*,
and proceeds from its gravity, there must needs be a rotation of
it; and so 'tis odds but it happens wrong in the rise, the poles
in the bullet being not in the same direction to those in the
magnet; and if in this reflux it should so fall out, that D
should be directed towards B, there should be rather a flight
than an attraction, since those two ends do repel, and not draw
one another.

3. If the loadstone A B have so much strength, that it can
attract the bullet in F, when it is not turned round, but does
only slide upon the plane, whereas its own gravity would rowl it
downwards; then it is evident the sphere of its activity and
strength would be so increased when it approaches much nearer,
that it would not need the assistance of the plane, but would
draw it immediately to itself without that help; and so the
bullet would not fall down through the hole, but ascend to the
stone, and, consequently, cease its motion: for, if the
loadstone be of force enough to draw the bullet on the plane, at
the distance F B, then must the strength of it be
sufficient to attract it immediately unto itself, when it290
is so much nearer as E B. And if the gravity of the bullet
be supposed so much to exceed the strength of the magnet, that
it cannot draw it directly when it is so near, then will it not
be able to attract the bullet up the plane, when it is so much
further off.

So that none of all these magnetical experiments, which have
been as yet discovered, are sufficient for the effecting of a
perpetual motion, though these kind of qualities seem most
conducible unto it; and perhaps, hereafter, it may be contrived
from them.

#### CHAP. XIV.a*The seeming probability of effecting a Continual Motion by Solid Weights in a Hollow Wheel or Sphere.*

The third way whereby the making of a perpetual motion has been
attempted is by the Natural Affection of Gravity; when the
heaviness of several bodies is so contrived, that the same
motion which they give in their descent, may be able to carry
them up again.

But (against the possibility of any such invention) it is thus
objected by Cardan:aAll sub-lunary bodies have a direct motion
either of ascent or descent; which, because it does not refer to
some term, therefore cannot be perpetual, but must needs cease
when it is arrived at the place unto which it naturally tends.

I answer, though this may prove that there is no natural motion
of any particular heavy body which is perpetual, yet it does not
hinder, but that it is possible from them to contrive such an
artificial291
revolution as shall constantly be the cause of itself.

Those bodies which may be serviceable to this purpose are
distinguishable into two kinds:

1. Solid and consistent; as weights of metal, or the like.

2. Fluid or sliding; as water, sand, etc.

Both these ways have been attempted by many, though with very
little or no success. Other men's conjectures in this kind you
may see set down by divers authors. It would be too tedious to
repeat them over, or set forth their draughts.

I shall only mention two new ones, which (if I am not
over-partial) seem altogether as probable as any of these kinds
that have been yet invented; and, till experience had discovered
their defect and insufficiency, I did certainly conclude them to
be infallible.

The first of these contrivances was by solid weights being
placed in some hollow wheel or sphere, unto which they should
give a perpetual revolution; for, as the philosopher has largely
proved, only a circular motion can properly be perpetual.

But, for the better conceiving of this invention, it is
requisite that we rightly understand some principles in
Trochilicks, or the art of wheel instruments; as, chiefly, the
relation betwixt the parts of a wheel and those of a balance;
the several proportions in the semi-diameter of a wheel being
answerable to the sides in a balance, where292 the weight is
multiplied according to its distance from the center.

![](i_291.jpg)

Thus, suppose the center to be at A, and the diameter of the
wheel, D C, to be divided into equal parts (as is here
expressed), it is evident, according to the former ground, that
one pound at C will equiponderate to five pound at B, because
there is such a proportion betwixt their several distances from
the center. And it is not material whether or no these several
weights be placed horizontally; for though B do hang lower than
C, yet this does not at all concern the heaviness; or though the
plummet C were placed much higher than it is at E, or lower at
F, yet would it still retain the same weight which it had at C;
because these plummets (as in the nature of all heavy bodies),
do tend downwards by a straight line;293 so that their
several gravities are to be measured by that part of the
horizontal semi-diameter, which is directly either below or
above them. Thus, when the plummet C shall be moved either to G
or H, it will lose one-third of its former heaviness, and be
equally ponderous as if it were placed in the balance at No. 3;
and if we suppose it to be situated at I or K, then the weight
of it will lie wholly upon the center, and not at all conduce to
the motion of the wheel on either side; so that the straight
lines which pass through the divisions of the diameter may serve
to measure the heaviness of any weight in its several
situations.

These things thoroughly considered, it seems very possible and
easy for a man to contrive the plummets of a wheel, that they
may be always heavier in their fall, than in their ascent; and
so, consequently, that they should give a perpetual motion to
the wheel itself; since it is impossible for that to remain
unmoved as long as one side in it is heavier than the other.

For the performance of this, the weights must be so ordered: 1.
That in their descent they may fall from the center, and in
their ascent may rise nearer to it. 2. That the fall of each
plummet may begin the motion of that which should succeed it, as
in the following diagram:

Where there are sixteen plummets, eight in the inward circle,
and as many in the outward. (The inequality being to arise from
their situation, it is therefore most convenient that the number
of them be even.) The eight inward plummets294 are supposed to
be in themselves so much heavier than the other, that in the
wheel they may be of equal weight with those above them, and
then the fall of these will be of sufficient force to bring down
the other. For example, if the outward be each of them four
ounces, then the inward must be five; because the outward is
distant from the center five of those parts whereof the inward
is but four. Each pair of these weights should be joined
together by a little string or chain, which must be fastened
about the middle, betwixt the bullet and the center of that
plummet which is to fall first, and at the top of the other.

![](i_293.jpg)

When these bullets, in their descent, are at their farthest
distance from the center of the wheel, then shall they be
stopped, and rest on the pins placed to that purpose; and so, in
their rising,295 there must be other pins to
keep them in a convenient posture and distance from the center,
lest, approaching too near unto it, they thereby become unfit to
fall when they shall come to the top of the descending side.

This may be otherwise contrived with some different
circumstances, but they will all redound to the same effect. By
such an engine it seems very probable that a man may produce
perpetual motion; the distance of the plummets from the center
increasing with weight on one side, and their being tied to one
another, causing a constant succession in their falling.

But now, upon experience, I have found this to be fallacious;
and the reason may sufficiently appear by a calculation of the
heaviness of each plummet, according to its several situation;
which may easily be done by those perpendiculars that cut the
diameter (as was before explained, and is here expressed in five
of the plummets on the descending side). From such a calculation
it will be evident, that both the sides of this wheel will
equiponderate; and so consequently, that the supposed inequality
whence the motion should proceed, is but imaginary and
groundless. On the descending side, the heaviness of each
plummet may be measured according to these numbers (supposing
the diameter of the wheel to be divided into twenty parts, and
each of those sub-divided into four):

296

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| *The Outward Plummets.* | *The Inward Plummets.* |
| 7.0} | 1.0} |
| 10.0} The sum 24. | 7.2} The sum 19. |
| 7.0} | 7.2} |
|  | 3.0} |

On the ascending side, the weights are to be

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| *The Outward.* | *The Inward.* |
| 1.3} | 4.1} |
| 7.2} | 7.0} The sum 19. |
| 9.0} The sum 24. | 5.2} |
| 5.3} | 2.1} |
| 0.0} |
|  |

The sum of which last numbers is equal with the former, and
therefore both the sides of such a wheel in this situation will
equiponderate.

If it be objected, that the plummet A should be contrived to
pull down the other at B, and then the descending side will be
heavier than the other; for answer to this, it is considerablea

1. That these bullets towards the top of the wheel, cannot
descend till they come to a certain kind of inclination.

2. That any lower bullet hanging upon the other above it, to
pull it down, must be conceived, as if the weight of it were in
that point where its string touches the upper; at which point
this bullet will be of less heaviness in respect of the wheel,
than if it did rest in its own place; so that both the sides of
it, in any kind of situation, may equiponderate.

297

#### CHAP. XV.a*Of composing, a Perpetual Motion by Fluid WeightsaConcerning Archimedes his Water ScrewaThe great probability of accomplishing this enquiry by the help of that, with the fallibleness of it upon experiment.*

That which I shall mention as the last way, for the trial of
this experiment, is by contriving it in some Water Instrument;
which may seem altogether as probable and easy as any of the
rest; because that element, by reason of its fluid and subtle
nature (whereby, of its own accord, it searches out the lower
and more narrow passages), may be most pliable to the mind of
the artificer. Now, the usual means for the ascent of water is
either by suckers or forces, or something equivalent thereunto;
neither of which may be conveniently applied unto such a work as
this, because there is required unto each of them so much or
more strength, as may be answerable to the full weight of the
water that is to be drawn up; and then, besides, they move for
the most part by fits and snatches, so that it is not easily
conceivable, how they should conduce unto such a motion, which,
by reason of its perpetuity, must be regular and equal.

But, amongst all other ways to this purpose, that invention of
Archimedes is incomparably the best, which is usually called *Cochlea*,
or the Water Screw; being framed by the helical revolution of a
cavity about a cylinder. We have not any discourse from the
author himself concerning it, nor is it certain whether he ever
writ anything298 to this purpose; but if he did,
yet, as the injury of time hath deprived us of many other of his
excellents works, so likewise of this amongst the rest.

[Near five pages are occupied in describing the use of this
screw, and the form and manner of making it; then follows:]

The true inclination of the screw being found, together with
the certain quantity of water which every helix does contain; it
is further considerable, that the water by this instrument does
ascend naturally of itself, without any violence or labor; and
that the heaviness of it does lie chiefly upon the centers or
axis of the cylinder, both its sides being of equal weight (said
Ubaldus); so that, it should seem, though we suppose each
revolution to have an equal quantity of water, yet the screw
will remain with any part upwards, according as it shall be set,
without turning itself either way; and, therefore, the least
strength being added to either of its sides should make it
descend, according to that common maxim of Archimedesaany
addition will make that which equiponderates with another to
tend downwards.

But now, because the weight of this instrument and the water in
it does lean wholly upon the axis, hence is it (said Ubaldus)
that the grating and rubbing of these axes against the sockets
wherein they are placed, will cause some ineptitude and
resistency to that rotation of the cylinder; which would
otherwise ensue upon the addition of the least weight to any one
side; but (said the same author) any power that is greater than299
this resistency which does arise from the axis, will serve for
the turning of it round.

These things considered together, it will hence appear how a
perpetual motion may seem easily contrivable. For, if there were
but such a water-wheel made on this instrument, upon which the
stream that is carried up may fall in its descent, it would turn
the screw round, and by that means convey as much water up as is
required to move it; so that the motion must needs be continual,
since the same weight which in its fall does turn the wheel is,
by the turning of the wheel, carried up again.

Or, if the water, falling upon one wheel, would not be forcible
enough for this effect, why then there might be two or three, or
more, according as the length and elevation of the instrument
will admit; by which means the weight of it may be so multiplied
in the fall that it shall be equivalent to twice or thrice that
quantity of water which ascends; as may be more plainly
discerned by the following diagram:

![](i_299.jpg)

Where the figure L M, at the bottom, does represent a
wooden cylinder with helical cavities cut in it, which at
A B is supposed to be covered over with tin plates, and
three water-wheels upon it, H I K; the lower cistern,
which contains the water, being C D. Now, this cylinder
being turned round, all the water which from the cistern ascends
through it, will fall into the vessel at E, and from that vessel
being conveyed upon the water-wheel H, shall consequently give a
circular motion to the whole screw. Or, if this alone300
should be too weak for the turning of it, then the same water
which falls from the wheel H, being received into the other
vessel F, may from thence again descend on the wheel I, by which
means the force of it will be doubled. And if this be yet
unsufficient, then may the water which falls on the second wheel
I, be received into the other vessel G, and from thence again
descend on the third wheel at K; and so for as many other wheels
as the instrument is capable of. So that, besides the greater
distance of these three streams from the301 center or axis
by which they are made so much heavier, and besides that the
fall of this outward water is forcible and violent, whereas the
ascent of that within is naturalabesides all this, there is
thrice as much water to turn the screw as is carried up by it.

But, on the other side, if all the water falling upon one wheel
would be able to turn it round, then half of it would serve with
two wheels, and the rest may be so disposed of in the fall as to
serve unto some other useful delightful ends.

When I first thought of this invention, I could scarce forbear,
with Archimedes, to cry out Iua1/2II*IoI+/-, Iua1/2II*IoI+/- {heurAaka, heurAaka};
it seeming so infallible a way for the effecting of a perpetual
motion that nothing could be so much as probably objected
against it; but, upon trial and experience, I find it altogether
insufficient for any such purpose, and that for these two
reasons:

1. The water that ascends will not make any considerable stream
in the fall.

2. This stream, though multiplied, will not be of force enough
to turn about the screw.

1. The water ascends gently, and by intermissions; but it falls
continually, and with force; each of the three vessels being
supposed full at the first, that so the weight of the water in
them might add the greater strength and swiftness to the streams
that descend from them. Now, this swiftness of motion will cause
so great a difference betwixt them that one of these little
streams may spend more water in the fall than a stream six times
bigger in the ascent, though we should302 suppose both of
them to be continuate; how much more, then, when as the
ascending water is vented by fits and intermissions, every
circumvolution voiding so much as is contained in one helix;
and, in this particular, one that is not versed in these kind of
experiments may be easily deceived.

But, secondly, though there were so great a disproportion, yet,
notwithstanding, the force of these outward streams might well
enough serve for the turning of the screw, if it were so that
both its sides would equiponderate the water being in them (as
Ubaldus had affirmed). But now, upon farther examination, we
shall find this assertion of his to be utterly against both
reason and experience. And herein does consist the chief mistake
of this contrivance; for the ascending side of the screw is
made, by the water contained in it, so much heavier than the
descending side, that these outward streams, thus applied, will
not be of force enough to make them equiponderate, much less to
move the whole, as may be more easily discerned by this figure:

Where A B represents a screw covered over, C D E
one helix or revolution of it, C D the ascending side,
E D the descending side, the point D the middle; the
horizontal line C F showing how much of the helix is filled
with water, viz., of the ascending side, from C the beginning of
the helix, to D the middle of it; and on the descending side,
from D the middle, to the point G, where the horizontal does cut
the helix. Now, it is evident that this latter part, D G,
is nothing near so much, and consequently not so heavy as the
other, D C;303 and thus is it in all the other
revolutions, which, as they are either more or larger, so will
the difficulty of this motion be increased. Whence it will
appear that the outward streams which descend must be of so much
force as to countervail all that weight whereby the ascending
side in every one of these revolutions does exceed the other.
And though this may be effected by making the water-wheels
larger, yet then the motion will be so slow that the screw will
not be able to supply the outward streams.

![](i_302.jpg)

There is another contrivance to this purpose, mentioned by
Kircher de Magnete, 1, 2, p. 4, depending upon the heat of the
sun and the force of winds; but it is liable to such abundance
of exceptions that it is scarce worth the mentioning, and does
by no means deserve the confidence of any ingenious artist.

Thus have I briefly explained the probabilities and defects of
those subtle contrivances whereby the making of a perpetual
motion has been attempted. I would be loath to discourage the
enquiry of any ingenious artificer by denying the possibility of
effecting it with any of these304 mechanical
helps; but yet (I conceive) if those principles which concern
the slowness of the power in comparison to the greatness of the
weight were rightly understood and thoroughly considered, they
would make this experiment to seem, if not altogether
impossible, yet much more difficult than otherwise, perhaps, it
will appear. However, the inquiring after it cannot but deserve
our endeavors, as being one of the most noble amongst all these
mechanical subtilties. And, as it is in the fable of him who dug
the vineyard for a hidden treasure, though he did not find the
money, yet he thereby made the ground more fruitful, so, though
we do not attain to the effecting of this particular, yet our
searching after it may discover so many other excellent
subtilties as shall abundantly recompense the labor of our
inquiry.

And then, besides, it may be another encouragement to consider
the pleasure of such speculations, which do ravish and sublime
the thoughts with more clear angelical contentments. Archimedes
was generally so taken up in the delight of these mathematical
studies of this familiar siren (as Plutarch styles them) that he
forgot both his meat and drink, and other necessities of nature;
nay, that he neglected the saving of his life, when that rude
soldier, in the pride and haste of victory, would not give him
leisure to finish his demonstration. What a ravishment was that,
when, having found out the way to measure Hiero's crown, he
leaped out of the bath, and (as if he were suddenly possessed)
ran naked up and305 down, crying Iua1/2II*IoI+/-, Iua1/2II*IoI+/-
{Greek: heurAaka, heurAaka}! It is storied of Thales that, in his
joy and gratitude for one of these mathematical inventions, he
went presently to the Temple, and there offered up a solemn
sacrifice; and Pythagoras, upon the like occasion, is related to
have sacrificed a hundred oxen; the justice of Providence having
so contrived it, that the pleasure which there is in the success
of such inventions should be proportioned to the great
difficulty and labor of their inquiry.

### The Paradoxical Hydrostatic Balance

The following was contributed to an English scientific journal in
1831, the name of the author of the article is unknown to us, but
here is what he wrote:

![](i_304.jpg)

This hydrostatic balance, like the compound balance of
Desaguliers, may be introduced to illustrate the impossibility
of perpetual motion by a weight removed from the centre of a
wheel.

Take the hollow-rimmed wheel A B; let it be air-tight and
half filled with water. Let C be306 the axle; at B
place a hollow ball loaded to near sinking. Such a wheel,
however fine its axle may be, or however well lubricated, will
not make a single revolution, though the weight B occupies that
part at which every deluded perpetual-motionist is desirous it
should be placed; concluding that, by such an arrangement, the
production of another Orffyrean wheel must be inevitable.

### Discussion by P. Gregorio Fontana

P. Gregorio Fontana was professor of higher mathematics at the
Royal University of Pavia, in the Province of Lombardy, Italy. In
1786 he published what he designated "Examination of a New
Argument in Favor of Perpetual Motion." In part he says:

1. A vertical wheel (Fig. 2) divided in two halves by a
vertical plane which passes through its diameter F O, has
the half F P O immersed in water under the level
M N, and the other half wholly out of the water, being cut
off in F O by a peculiar mechanism from all communication
with the reservoir, the exterior half of the wheel being
F Q O; this turns freely round on an axle passing
through the centre C. Now the wheel being specifically lighter
than the water, the immersed part F P O comes with a
continual rotation to the top with a force equal to the excess
of the weight of a volume of water corresponding to the immersed
portion, over the weight of the immersed portion; which rotation
passing through the centre of gravity of the exterior part, and
consequently307 out of the centre C, obliges
the wheel to turn around C.

Such being the case, the question to be asked is whether the
wheel has itself a perpetual motion, as may be judged at first
sight.

![](i_306.jpg)

2. To reply adequately, it is at first necessary to know what
effect is produced on the wheel by the horizontal pressure which
the water exercises on the semi-circumference F L O.

Having taken for this purpose, a part P *p*, and having
drawn to the diameter the ordinate P. R, *p r*, and
marked the radius P C, and from it P G perpendicular
to the radius C L, which determines the quadrant O L,
the distance of the lowest point O from the level of the water
will be = *b*, the semi-diameter of the wheel = *a*,
C R = *x*, and the specific gravity of the water = 1;
the perpendicular pressure against the part P *p* =
P *p* . R D, which resolved in two, one
horizontal308
P R, the other vertical P G, gives the proportion

PG : PR :: P*p* . RD : (P*p* . PR . RD)
/ (PG).

Thence the horizontal pressure against P *p*, and =
(P *p* . P R . R D .) / (P G), that is
to say P *p* . P R = R *r* . P G,
the given horizontal pressure is found to be = R *r* .
R D = (*b* - *x*) *d* *x*, and
which, multiplied by R D, giving *b* - *x*,
becomes the momentum of the pressure relatively to M N = (*b*
- *x*)A2 *d* *x*, and the sum of the momenta of
pressure exercised upon the indefinite arc, O P = *f*
(*b* - *x*)A2 *d* *x* = -(1/3)(*b* -
*x*)A3 + the side. And since acting together such momenta
equal *x*, there comes the side = (1/3)*b*A3; and as
the already-given sum of the momenta = (1/3)(*b*A3 - (*b*
- *x*)A3) = *bA2 x* - *b x*A2 + (1/3)*x*A3.
Whence, taking *x* = 2*a*,309 the sum of all
the momenta of the horizontal pressure exercised on the whole
semi-circumference O L F of the wheel, will be = 2*b*A2*a*
- 4*b* *a*A2 + (8/3)*a*A3, and dividing that sum
by the whole horizontal pressure, that is to say by *f*(*b*
- *x*)*d* *x* = (1/2)(*b*A2 - (*b*
- *x*)A2) = *b* *x* - (1/2)*x*A2 = 2*b*
*a* - 2*a*A2, gives *x* = 2*a*, we have the
formula

(2*b*A2 - 4*b* *a* + (8/3)*a*A3)
/ (2*b* *a* - 2*a*A2) = (*b*A2 - 2*b* *a*
+ (4/3)*a*A2) / (*b* - *a*) = ((*b* - *a*)A2
+ (1/3)*a*A2) / (*b* - *a*) = *b* - *a*
+ ((2/3)*a*A2) / (*b* - *a*),

which represents the distance of the level M N from
the result of all the horizontal pressure against the
circumference, which distance exceeds D C, and consequently
the direction of the result passes from below the centre C of
the wheel to a310 distance from the said centre,
which is = ((1/3)*a*A2)/(*b* - *a*).

If this distance be multiplied by the result of all the
horizontal pressure, that is, by 2*a*.(*b* - *a*);
there
is obtained (2/3)*a*A3 for the momentum of the force which
tends to make the wheel revolve from L towards O. This being
established, it is known that the force which causes the half of
the wheel F L G to revolve vertically to the top
(calling *g* the specific gravity of the wheel) is = (1 -
*g*) F C O L, and which force passes through
the center of gravity of F L O. And consequently the
gravity of any circular segment divided by the half of the
radius, is distant from the centre of the circle by a quantity
equal to the twelfth of the cube of the chord divided by the
segment; and therefore the centre of gravity of the semicircle
F C O L, will be distant from the centre C by the
quantity (1/12)8*a*A3/(E C O L) = (2/3)*a*A3/(E C O L).
Consequently the momentum of this force tending to make the
wheel revolve from O towards L will be = (2/3*a*A3)/(E C O L)
. (1 - *g*)(E C O L) = 2/3(1 - *g*)*a*A3.
311

But moreover a certain momentum will be derived from the other
half F Q O of the wheel, which being out of the water,
tends by its own weight downwards with a force = *g* .
(E C O Q) = *g* . (E C O L),
which multiplied by the distance (2/1*a*A3)/(E C O L)
of the centre of gravity of the semicircle F Q O from
the centre of the wheel gives as a momentum of force tending to
turn the wheel from O to L the quantity 2/3*g* *a*A3.
Thus the whole momentum to make the wheel turn from O to L, will
be 2/3(1 - *g*)*a*A3, + 2/3*g* *a*A3 =
2/3*a*A3, that is to say the same that is found to turn the
wheel in the opposite direction, viz., from L to O, and thence
the wheel remains perfectly motionless.

3. Cor. I. If the wheel were specifically heavier than the
water, one would not be able to conceive in that case any motion
from L to O, as seemed probable in the former supposition.
Since, then, the momentum of the force, which turns vertically
downwards the portion of the wheel F C O L, and
tends to make it revolve from L to312 O is = 2/3(*g*
- 1)*a*A3 to which momentum should be added a certain
portion of the horizontal pressure, that is to say 2/3, and thus
is obtained the whole momentum 2/3*g* *a*A3,
tending to cause the wheel to turn from L to O; and to which
momentum precisely, is equal such of the weight of the half
F C O Q as tends to give to the wheel a contrary
revolution, that is, from O to L.

3. Cor. II. If the wheel in place of being a circular plane
were a zone bounded by two concentric peripheries (Fig. 3), then
from the sum of the horizontal pressure of the water against the
exterior periphery should be taken the sum of the opposite
horizontal pressure against the other interior semi-periphery of
the zone. So calling *a* the greater radius of the zone,
and I>> its breadth, the sum of the first horizontal pressure is =
2*a*(*b* - *a*) and the sum of the second = 2(*a*
- I>>)(*b* - I>>) - (*a* - I>>) = 2(*a* - I>>)(*b* -
*a*). Then subtract the latter from the former and there
remains 2(*b* - *a*)I>> for the sum of the whole
pressure, which acts upon the zone (*sic*) of the half of
the wheel immersed in the fluid in a direction tending from the
outside to the interior of the wheel.

Moreover the sum of the momenta of all the horizontal pressure
on the exterior circumference relatively to the level

313

M N is = 2*b* *a* - 4*b* *a*
+ 8/3*a*A3.

And similarly the sum of the momenta of the horizontal pressure
opposite, on the interior semi-circumference, relatively to the
given level is = 2(*b* - I>>)A2 - (*a* - I>>) - 4(*b*
- I>>) A (*a* - I>>)A2 + 8/3(*a* - I>>)A3.

Subtracting this sum from the preceding, there remains the sum
of the momenta acting on the zone of the half-wheel from the
exterior to the interior = 2*b*A2 *a* - 4*b* *a*A2
+ 8/3*a*A3 - 2(*b* - I>>)A2 (*a* - I>>) + 4(*b* -
I>>) (*a* - I>>)A2 - 8/3(*a* - I>>)A3 - 2*b*A2 I>> - 4*b* *a*
I>> + 4*a*A2 I>> - 2*a* I>>A2 + 2/3I>>A3 = 2I>> (*b*(*b*
- *a*) - *b* *a* + 2*a*A2 - *a*I>>
+ 1/3I>>A2) = 2I>> ((*b* - *a*)(*b* - *a*) + *a*A2
- *a*I>> + 1/3I>>A2) Then dividing this sum of the momenta by
the sum of the pressure there will be 2I>>(((*b* - *a*)(*b*
- *a*) + *a*A2 - *a*I>> + 1/3I>>A2)/(2I>>(*b* - *a*)))
= *b* + *p* (*a*(*a*A2 - *a*I>> +
1/3I>>A2)/(*b* - *a*)) the distance of the314
center of the pressure from the level of the fluid, that is, to
the distance of the result of all the pressure from that level.
From this it is evident that the center of pressure falls under
the center of the wheel, C, to the distance (*a*A2 - *a*I>>
+ 1/3I>>A2)/(*b* - *a*) .

Whence multiplying this distance by the result of the pressure,
or by 2I>>(*b* - *a*), we obtain 2I>>(*a*A2 - *a*I>>
+ 1/3I>>A2) to express the momentum of the horizontal pressure of
the water, directed to make the wheel turn from L to O.

Now the momentum with which the vertical impulse of the fluid
tends to make the semicircle F C O L turn from O
to L (supposing the wheel not with a simple zone, but with a
circular plane) is = 2/3*a*A3. Likewise the momentum of the
impulse of the fluid to cause the internal semicircle
V C I G from O to L is - 2/3(*a* - I>>)A3. Then
taking this second momentum from the first, the momentum of the
zone from the fluid V G I O L F to give the wheel
an impulse from O to L will be = 2/3(*a*A3 - (*a* -
I>>)A3) = 2I>>(*a*A2 - *a*I>> + 1/3I>>A2) which is precisely the
momentum with which the horizontal pressure of the fluid to
impress on the wheel an impulse in the opposite direction, that
is to say from L to O. Consequently from the pressure315
of the fluid the wheel cannot have any motion around its center.

The weight of the wheel itself, by which the half-zone immersed
in the water tends to make the wheel turn from L to O, and the
half which is out of the water, to make it turn in the reverse
direction, such a weight, I say, cannot induce any motion of
rotation, and both halves remain in equilibrium around the
center C.

### Article by William Nicholson

William Nicholson was born in London in 1753; died in 1815. He
was a scientist of note, and a writer of scientific subjects. In
1797 he established in London and continued publishing until 1814,
a periodical entitled "Journal of Natural Philosophy, Chemistry
and the Arts," known, however, throughout the civilized world as
"Nicholson's Journal."

A Perpetual Motion device of Dr. Conradus Schwiers, in 1790, and
the Richard Varley device, in 1797, described at page 132 et seq.,
ante, had attracted a great deal of attention, and were the
occasion of much discussion. A consequent increased interest in
the subject of self-moving mechanism was thus created.

Mr. Nicholson, whose scientific attainments were recognized by
all, was asked to publish an article on the subject. His article
appeared in316
his publication, "Nicholson's Journal," and is as follows:

#### *On the Mechanical Projects for Affording a Perpetual Motion*

In consequence of the notice taken of Mr. Varley's attempt to
produce a perpetual motion, I have been requested by several
correspondents to state how far the mechanical scheme for which
Dr. Conrad Schwiers took out a patent in the year 1790, for the
same object may be worthy of attention. I have, on that
occasion, mentioned the difficulties which have prevented any
clear general demonstration of the absurdity of this pursuit
from being produced, though it has not been difficult to show
the fallacy of the individual plans. It does not, indeed, seem
easy to enunciate the scheme itself. What in universal terms is
the thing proposed to be done? Is it to cause a body to act in
such a manner that the reaction shall be greater than the action
itself, and by that means generate force by the accumulation of
the surplus? Or, can the motion communicated be greater than
that lost by the agent? Since these positions are evidently
contrary to the physical axioms called the laws of nature, and
frictions and resistances would speedily destroy all motions of
simple uniformity, it may be presumed that 's Gravesande, who
thought that all the demonstrations of the absurdity of schemes
for perpetual motion contained paralogism, would have stated the
proposition under different terms. But without entering upon
this apparently unprofitable317 disquisition,
it may be useful, as well as entertaining, to make a few
observations on the mechanical contrivances which depend on a
mistaken deduction from the general theorem respecting the
balance, among which that of Dr. Schwiers must be classed.

There is no doubt but numerous arrangements have been made, and
still are labored at by various individuals, to produce a
machine which shall possess the power of moving itself
perpetually, notwithstanding the inevitable loss by friction and
resistance of the air. Little, however, of these abortive
exertions has been entered upon record. The plans of Bishop
Wilkins, the Marquis of Worcester, and M. Orffyreus, are all
which at this time occur to my recollection.

![](i_317.jpg)

There is no doubt but the celebrated Wilkins was a man of
learning and ability. His essay towards a real character and a
philosophical language is sufficient to render his name
immortal. Twenty years before the appearance of that work he
published his "Mathematical Magic," namely, in the year 1648,
containing 295 pages, small octavo, which, from the number of
copies still in being, I suppose to have been a very popular
treatise. It is in this work that I find, among other
contrivances for the same purpose, a wheel carrying sixteen
loaded arms, similar to that delineated in Fig. 4, plate 15, in
which, however, for the sake of simplicity, I have drawn but
six. Each lever, A B C D E F, is
movable through an angle of 45 degrees, by a joint near the
circumference of the wheel, and the inner end or tail of318
each is confined by two studs or pins, so that it must either
lie in the direction of a radius, or else in the required
position of obliquity. If the wheel be now supposed to move in
the direction E F, it is evident that the levers
A B C D, by hanging in the oblique position
against the antecedent pins, will describe a less circle in
their ascent than when, on the other side, they come to descend
in the positions E F. Hence, it was expected that the
descending weights, having the advantage of a longer lever,
would always predominate. Dr. Wilkins, by referring the weights
to an horizontal diameter, has shown that in his machine they
will not. A popular notion of this result may also be gathered
from the figure, where there are three weights on the ascending
and only two on the descending side; the obliquity319
of position giving an advantage in point of number, equal to
what the other side may possess in intensity. Or, if this
contrivance were to be strictly examined, on the supposition
that the levers and weights were indefinitely numerous, the
question would be determined by showing that the circular arcs
A K, H I, are in equilibrio with the arcs A G,
G L.

The simplest method of examining any scheme of this kind with
weights, consists in inquiring whether the perpendicular ascents
and descents would be performed with equal masses in equal
times. If so, there will be no preponderance, and, consequently,
no motion. This is clearly the case with the contrivance before
us.

The Marquis of Worcester, who will ever be remembered as the
inventor of the steam engine, has described a perpetual motion
in the fifty-sixth number of his "Century of Inventions,"
published in the year 1655, and since reprinted in 1767 by the
Foulis's at Glasgow. His words were as follows:

"To provide and make, that all the weights of the descending
side of a wheel shall be perpetually further from the center
than those of the mounting side, and yet equal in number and
heft to the one side as the other. A most incredible thing if
not seen, but tried before the late King (of blessed memory) in
the Tower by my directions, two extraordinary ambassadors
accompanying his Majesty, and the Duke of Richmond and Duke
Hamilton, with most of the Court attending him. The wheel was
fourteen feet over, and forty320 weights of
fifty pounds apiece. Sir William Balfour, then Lieutenant of the
Tower, can justify it with several others. They all saw that no
sooner these great weights passed the diameter line of the lower
side, but they hung a foot further from the center; nor no
sooner passed the diameter line of the upper side, but they hung
a foot nearer. Be pleased to judge the consequence."

![](i_320.jpg)

Desaguliers, in his "Course of Experimental Philosophy," Vol.
I, page 185, has quoted this passage, and given a sketch of a
pretended self-moving wheel, similar to Fig. 5, plate 15, as
resembling the contrivance mentioned by the Marquis of
Worcester. The description of this last engineer agrees,
however, somewhat better with the contrivance Fig. 4. It must,
of course, be a mistake in terms, when he says the weight
receded from the center at the lower diameter and approached
towards it at the upper: the contrary being, in fact, necessary
to afford any hope of success; and accordingly in the quotation
it is so stated. I am, therefore, disposed to think that Fig. 5
represents the wheel of Orffyreus at Hesse Cassel, much talked
of about the year 1720, and which probably was made to revolve,
during the time of exhibition, by some concealed apparatus. It
consists of a number of cells or partitions, distinguished by
the letters of the alphabet, which are made between the interior
and exterior surfaces of two concentric cylinders. The
partitions being placed obliquely with respect to the radius, a
cylindrical or spherical weight placed on each, it is seen from
the figure, that these weights321 will lie
against the inner surface of the larger cylinder whenever the
outer end of the bottom partition of any cell is lowest; and, on
the contrary, when that extremity is highest, the weight will
rest on the surface of the interior cylinder. Let the wheel be
made to revolve in the direction A B C; the weights in
C D E F G H I being close to the
external circle, and the weights K L M A B close
to the inner, for the reasons last mentioned. As the cell B
descends, its weight will likewise run out, at the same time
that the weight in the cell I will run in in consequence of its
partition being elevated. By the continuation of this process,
since all the weights on the descending side pass down at a
greater distance from the center, while those of the ascending
side rise for a considerable part of their ascent at a less
distance from the same point, it is concluded that the wheel
will continue to maintain its motion. On this, however, it is to
be remarked that the perpendicular ascent and descent are alike,
both in measure and in time of performance; and that the
familiar322
examination, even to those who know little of such subjects, is
sufficient to show that the preponderance is not quite so
palpable as at first it appears. For the weights G and F, H and
E, I and D are evidently in equilibrio, because at the same
horizontal distance from the center; and if the favorable
supposition that the weight B has already run out be admitted,
it will then remain a question whether these two exterior
weights, B and C, can preponderate over the four inner weights,
K L M A. The more accurate examination of this
particular contrivance will lead to the following theorem: In
two concentric circles, if tangents be drawn at the extreme
points of a diameter of the smaller, and continued till they
intersect the larger, the common center of gravity of the arc of
the greater circle included between the tangents and of the half
periphery of the smaller circle on the opposite side of the
diameter, will be the common center of the circles. If,
therefore, the balls were indefinitely numerous and small, the
supposed effective parts of the wheel (Fig. 5) would be in
equilibrio, as well as the parts beneath the horizontal tangent
of the inner circle.

Fig. 6 represents the contrivance of Dr. Schwiers, which, in a
periodical publication, in other particulars respectable, has
been said to continue in motion for weeks and even months
together. There is not the smallest probability that it should
continue in motion for half a minute, or nearly as long as a
simple wheel would retain part of its first impulse. The
external323
circle denotes a wheel carrying a number of buckets,
A B I L, etc. C represents a toothed wheel, on
the same axis which drives a pinion D; and this last drives
another pinion E upon the axis of a lanthorn, or wheel intended
to work a chain-pump with the same number of buckets as in the
larger wheel A B I. The lanthorn G is made of such a
size as to receive the buckets *a b i l*
with a due velocity. K represents a gutter through which a
metallic ball, contained in the bucket *m*, may run and
lodge itself in the bucket A of the wheel. Each of the buckets
of the wheel, B I L M, which are below the gutter, is
supplied with a metallic ball, and so likewise are the ascending
buckets, *a b i l m*, of the
chain-pump. As the pump supplies the wheel, it is again supplied
at M, where the balls fall into its ascending buckets. Now, it
is presumed that the balls in the wheel I suppose on account of
their distance from the center of motion, will descend with more
than sufficient force to raise those on the chain, and,
consequently, that the motion will be perpetual.

The deception in this contrivance has much less seduction than
in the two foregoing, because it is more easily referred to the
simple lever. This, like the others, exhibits no prospect of
success, when tried by the simple consideration of the quality
of the ascent and descent in the whole time of the rotation of a
single ball. It may also be shown from the principles of
wheel-work, which are familiar to artisans, that whatever is
gained by the excess of the diameter of the great wheel beyond
that of the wheel C, is again lost324 by the excess
of the lanthorn A beyond the pinion E.

![](i_323.jpg)

The fundamental proposition of the simple lever or balance,
that equal bodies at an equal distance from the fulcrum will
equiponderate, but that at unequal distances the most remote
will descend, has, in these and numberless other instances, led
mechanical workmen and speculators to pursue this fruitless
inquiry with labor and expense often ill-afforded, and with a
degree of325
anxiety and infatuation which can hardly be conceived by those
who have never suffered the pain of hope long deferred. For this
reason chiefly, it has appeared desirable and useful to treat
the subject in a familiar way without descending to those
expressions of contempt, which ignorance, harmless to all but
itself, is surely not entitled to. If such reasoners were well
convinced that the power of a machine is to be estimated by the
excess of motion referred to the perpendicular, without any
regard to the apparent center of the machine, and that in
machines very little compounded it is possible to produce
effects directly contrary to the rule which is true of the
simple lever, they would probably renounce many flattering
projects, grounded only on the supposition of its universality.
Desaguliers contrived an apparatus in which two equal weights
may be placed at any distance whatever from the center of
motion,326
and still continue in equilibrio. Fig. 3 represents this
instrument. A D denotes a balance with equal arms, and
E F another of the same dimensions. These move on the
centers B and C, and are connected by the inflexible rods
A E and D F; the motion being left free by means of
joints at the corners. Across the rods A D, E F, are
fixed two bars, I K, L M. Now, it is unnecessary to
show that the weight G will describe exactly the same line or
circular arc, when the levers are moved into the position *a d f e*,
or any other position, as it would have described in case it had
been suspended at A, or K, or E; and that it is of no
consequence in this respect at what part of the line A E or
I K it be fixed. The same observations are true of the
weight H on the other side. And accordingly it is found that
these equal weights may be suspended anywhere on the lines
I K and L M without altering their equilibrium.

![](i_324.jpg)

By this contrivance it is most evidently proved to those who
are totally unacquainted with the theory, that weights do not
preponderate in compound engines on account of their distance
from the center. Several contrivances may be made to the same
effect. The following combination of wheel-work presented itself
to me as one which would most probably be mistaken for a
perpetual motion. (Fig. 2, plate 15.) The five circles represent
the same number of wheels of equal diameter and number of teeth,
acting together. The middle wheel A is fixed between two upright
pillars, so that it cannot revolve. The other four wheels are
pinned in a frame H I, in327 which they can
revolve, and through which the axis of A likewise passes. From
the extremity of the axis of D, and also of *d*, proceed
the horizontal levers H K and I L, which are equal,
and point in the same direction parallel to the plane of the
wheels. At the extremity of these arms hang the equal weights P
and *p*. Let it now be imagined that the end I of the
frame is depressed, the wheel B will turn round by the reaction
of the fixed wheel A in the same direction as H I, and it
will make one revolution in the same time relative to the frame,
or two with regard to absolute space, by reason of its being
carried round. The action of B upon D will328 produce a
rotation relative to the frame in the opposite direction during
the same time. Instead, therefore, of two revolutions like the
wheel B, this wheel D, with regard to absolute space, will not
revolve at all, and in every position of the apparatus the arm
I L will continue horizontal, and point the same way. For
similar reasons the arm H K will retain its position.
Consequently, it is seen that the descending weight will move at
a great horizontal distance from the center N, while the
ascending weight rises very near that center. But there will,
not on this account, be a perpetual motion: for the action of
the levers H K and I L upon the frame H I, by
means of the toothed wheels, will, in the detail, be found
precisely alike, and in the general consideration of the motions
of P and *p*, the opposite motions in the circle
E F G will be accurately the same.

![](i_326.jpg)

It has always been considered as essential to a perpetual
motion that it should be derived from some energy which is not
supposed to vary in its intensity. Such are the inertia, the
gravity or magnetism of bodies. For an occasional or periodical
variation of intensity in any force is evidently productive of
motion, which requires only to be accumulated or applied, and
the apparatus for applying it cannot be considered as a machine
for perpetual motion. Neither in strictness can any machine
whose motion is derived from the rotation of the earth, and the
consequent change of seasons and rotation of events, be so
considered, because it does not generate, but only communicates.
The perpetual flow of rivers; the329 vicissitudes of
the tides; the constant, periodical and variable winds; the
expansions and contractions of air, mercury, or other fluids, by
daily or other changes of temperature; the differences of
expansions in metals, by the same change; the rise and fall of
the mercury in the barometer; the hygrometric changes in the
remains of organized beings, and every other mutation which
continually happens around us, may be applied to give motion to
mills, clocks, and other engines, which may be contrived to
endure as long as the apparatus retains its figure.

Mr. Nicholson's article, published above, shows, if nothing else
had ever shown, the fact that he was endowed with a real
scientific mind. It also shows what is still most interestingathat
his mind anticipated and that he had a subconscious conception of
the principle of Conservation of Energy.

In 1824 and 1825 there was published in London a mechanical
journal called "The Artisan"; or "Mechanic's Instructor." In one
of the issues the following occurred on the subject of Perpetual
Motion:

Perpetual motion is a motion which is supplied and renewed from
itself without the intervention of any external cause: to find a
perpetual motion, or to construct a machine which shall have
such a motion, is a subject which has engaged the attention of
mathematicians for more than 2,000 years; though none perhaps
have330
prosecuted it with so much zeal and hopes of ultimate success as
some of the speculative philosophers of the present age.

Infinite are the schemes, designs, plans, engines, wheels,
etc., to which this longed-for perpetual motion has given birth;
and it would not only be endless but ridiculous to attempt to
give a detail of them all, especially as none of them deserve
particular mention, since they have all equally proved abortive;
and it would rather partake of the nature of an affront than a
compliment, to distinguish the pretenders of this discovery, as
the very attempting of the thing conveys a very unfavorable idea
of the mental powers of the operator.

For among all the laws of matter and motion, we know of none
which seems to afford any principle or foundation for such an
effect. Action and reaction are allowed to be ever equal; and a
body which gives any quantity of motion to another, always loses
just so much of its own; but, under the present state of things,
the resistance of the air, and the friction of the parts of
machines, necessarily retard every motion.

To keep the motion going on, therefore, there must either be a
supply from some foreign cause, which, in a perpetual motion, is
excluded.

Or, all resistance from the friction of the parts of matter
must be removed; which necessarily implies a change in the
nature of things.

For by the second law of motion the changes made in the motions
of bodies are always proportional to the impressed moving force,
and are produced331 in the same direction with it;
no motion, then, can be communicated to any engine, greater than
that of the first force impressed.

But, on our earth, all motion is performed in a resisting
fluid, namely, the atmosphere, and must, therefore, of
necessity, be retarded; consequently, a considerable quantity of
its motion will be spent on the medium. Nor is there any engine
or machine wherein all friction can be avoided; there being in
nature no such thing as exact smoothness or perfect congruity;
the manner of the cohesion of the parts of bodies, the small
proportion which the solid matter bears to the vacuities between
them, and the nature of those constituent particles not
admitting it.

Friction, therefore, will also, in time, sensibly diminish the
impressed or communicated force; so that a perpetual motion can
never follow, unless the communicated force be so much greater
than the generating force as to supply the diminution occasioned
by all these causes; but the generating force cannot communicate
a greater degree of motion than it had itself. Therefore, the
whole affair of finding a perpetual motion comes to this, viz.,
to make a weight heavier than itself, or an elastic force
greater than itself; or, there must be some method of gaining a
force equivalent to what is lost by the artful disposition and
combination of the mechanical powers: to this last point then,
all endeavors are to be directed; but how, or by what means such
a force can be gained, is still a mystery!

The multiplication of powers or forces avails332
nothing; for what is gained in power is lost in time; so that
the quantity of motion still remains the same.

The whole science of mechanics cannot really make a little
power equal or superior to a larger; and wherever a less power
is found in equilibrio with a greateraas, for example,
twenty-five pounds with one hundredait is a kind of deception of
the sense; for the equilibrium is not strictly between one
hundred pounds and twenty-five pounds moving (or disposed to
move) four times as fast as the one hundred pounds.

A power of ten pounds moving with ten times the velocity of one
hundred pounds would have equalled the one hundred in the same
manner; and the same may be said of all the possible products
equal to one hundred: but there must still be one hundred pounds
of power on each side, whatever way they may be taken, whether
in matter or in velocity.

This is an inviolable law of nature; by which nothing is left
to art, but the choice of the several combinations that may
produce the same effects.

The only interest that we can take in the projects which have
been tried for procuring a perpetual motion must arise from the
opportunity that they afford of observing the weakness of human
reason.

For a better instance of this can scarcely be supplied than to
see a man spending whole years in the pursuit of an object,
which a single week's application to sober philosophy would have
convinced him was unattainable.

333
But for the satisfaction of those who may not be convinced of
the impossibility of attaining this grand object, we shall add a
few observations on the subject of a still more practical nature
than the above.

![](i_332.jpg)

The most satisfactory confutation of the notion of the
possibility of a perpetual motion is derived from the
consideration of the properties of the center of gravity; it is
only necessary to examine whether it will begin to descend or
ascend when the machine moves, or whether it will remain at
rest. If it be so placed that it must either remain at rest or
ascend, it is clear, from the laws of equilibrium, that no
motion derived from gravitation can take place; if it may
descend, it must either continue to descend forever with a
finite velocity, which is impossible,334 or it must
first descend and then ascend with a vibratory motion, and then
the case will be reducible to that of a pendulum, where it is
obvious that no new motion is generated, and that the friction
and resistance of the air must soon destroy the original motion.

One of the most common fallacies by which the superficial
projectors of machines for obtaining a perpetual motion have
been deluded, has arisen from imagining that any number of
weights ascending by a certain path on one side of the center of
motion, and descending on the other at a greater distance, must
cause a constant preponderance on the side of the descent; and
for this purpose weights have been made to slide or roll along
grooves or planes, which lead them to a more remote part of the
wheel, from whence they return as they ascend, as represented in
the following figure: Or they have been fixed on hinges which
allow them to fall over at a certain point so as to become more
distant from the center; but it will appear on the inspection of
such a machine that although some of the weights are more
distant from the center than others, yet there is always a
proportionally smaller number of them on that side on which they
have the greater power; so that these circumstances precisely
counterbalance each other.

We have heard it proposed to attach hollow arms to a wheel by
joints or hinges at the circumference, and to fill these arms
with quicksilver or small balls instead of the plan represented
by the above figure; but though we have never heard of335
it having been tried, we are perfectly convinced that it would
end as all other attempts have done; that is, in a total
failure.

### The Possibility of Perpetual Motion Asserted

The enthusiastic earnestness with which the subject of Perpetual
Motion was formerly discussed is illustrated by the fact that the
Holy Scriptures were dragged in to support arguments on the
proposition.

The following is a verbatim copy of an article published in an
English scientific magazine in 1829:

"Notice to Perpetual Motion Seekers."aThe following is a
literal copy of a communication which we have received under
this head. We publish it for the benefit of all concerned:
"Perpetual Motion Seekers! see Coloss., ch. ii., v. 8a'Beware
lest any man spoil you, through philosophy and vain deceit,
after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world.'
Ye are making the words of God of none effect by your traditions
in publishing these things to the world. How can such toys and
baubles as these be perpetual? See Malachi, ch. iv., v. 1a'For
behold the day cometh that shall burn as an oven; and all the
proud, yea, all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble.' Here is
the end of them. I, the undersigned, have to inform the public,
the model for making perpetual motion is to be found in that too
much neglected book of models, the Bible. I called upon the
Lord, and he showed it to me. I336 said, 'Lord,
shall I show this unto them? This was the answer to me: See
Isaiah, ch. xli., v. 29a'Behold, they are all vanity; their
works are nothing.' I said, 'Lord, be pleased to show me some
more about it.' 'Bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King
of Jacob.'aIsaiah, ch. xli., v. 21. This was the answer: See
Isaiah, ch. xli., v. 14a'Fear not, thou worm Jacob. \* \* Behold,
I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth;
thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shall
make the hills as chaff.' See also Jeremiah, ch. vii., v. 9a'The
wise men are ashamed; they are dismayed and taken,' etc. See
also Jeremiah, ch. ix., v. 12a'Who is the wise man that may
understand this?' If there is not a wise and learned man who can
show this, there is a deaf and unlearned man that will, by the
blessing of God, set it forth to you. I am that deaf and
unlearned man, George Lovatt, Stafford.

"P. S.aMr. Editor: I have told you what I was commanded to
do. See Ezekiel, ch. iii., v. 4 to the end. Now, see thou forget
it not; let those models which come from the Word of God have
the first place.aJoshua, ch. xxiv., v. 15."

### John Bernoulli's Dissertation on Perpetual Motion

John Bernoulli was born in 1667, and died in 1748. He belonged to
the famous Belgian family bearing the name. His family seems to
have been peculiarly prolific in men of great genius for
mathematics and science. Almost any encyclopedia337
with any pretense for thoroughness will mention and give the
sketch of the life of from five to nine members of the Bernoulli
family.

John Bernoulli possessed perhaps the greatest genius of any
bearing the name for pure mathematics and pure mechanics. He was a
contemporary of such men as Leibnitz, Euler and Newton, a
co-laborer with the two former, but never conceded the merits of
Newton. He was of a peculiar disposition, of intense likes and
dislikes and among his peculiarities it may be mentioned that he
harbored an unreasonable hatred toward a worthy and deserving son.

In 1742 he wrote a work entitled "Dissertation on Effervescence
and Fermentation." To this work he added an appendix entitled
"Concerning Artificial Perpetual Motion." The appendix translated
into English and as published by Dircks, is as follows:

Scarcely had I finished this dissertation, when, attentively
considering the nature of precipitation and secretion, briefly
explained in the last pages, there accidentally occurred to me a
mode of constructing, by means of some continually flowing
liquid, the much-talked of and long-desired Perpetual Artificial
Motion; and this as a completion to my work, on account of the
affinity of the subject, I now propose for the consideration of
the learned.

No one need be told how eagerly for a length338
of time this same Perpetual Motion has been sought after by the
most celebrated men, how ardently desired; what indeed have they
not contrived? To what expense have they not gone? How many
machines have they not constructed? But all in vain.

The secret desire of this Perpetual Motion still perplexes and
torments many, and excites their minds to such a degree that we
see the ears and minds of learned men carried away by it; yet
many philosophers reject the idea, unanimously asserting that
Perpetual Motion cannot be communicated and cannot be invented;
which opinion is nevertheless not of any weight, seeing that
they rashly judge that no one should be listened to who boasts
of having found out such a thing; and their reasons (as I
confess) do not suffice to convince me; for I do not hesitate to
assert not only that Perpetual Motion may be discovered, but
that it has now actually been discovered, as will be confessed
by any one who reads these lines; and what is this labor to
many? does not Nature herself (who is never said not to operate
by mechanical laws) indicate Perpetual Motion to be possible? To
recall but one instance, what is the constant flux and reflux of
the rivers and seas but Perpetual Motion? Does it not all belong
to Mechanics? Therefore, you must confess that it does not
exceed the limits of mechanical laws, and is not impossible;
what then hinders that following Nature in this, we should be
able perfectly to imitate her? as indeed I shall so conclude, by
declaring339
to these the possibility of Perpetual Motion and the manner of
obtaining it; and lest thou come to an adverse conclusion, or
regard it as a Titanic enterprise, I pray that thou mayest first
well weigh the thing, or, if it so please thee, put its truth to
the test of experience.

First of all the following must be premised:

1. If there are two fluids of different density, the weights of
which respectively are in the ratio G to L; the altitudes of
cylinders of equal weight, and having the same base, will be in
the ratio L to G.

2. Therefore, if the altitude A C of one fluid contained
in the vessel A D to be the altitude E F of the other
fluid contained in an open tube, as L to D; the fluids so placed
will remain at rest.

![](i_338.jpg)

3. Therefore, if A C to E F be in a greater ratio
than L to G, the fluid in the tube will ascend; or if the tube
be not sufficiently long, the fluid will escape by the orifice
E. (These are proved by Hydrostatics.)

4. It is possible to have two fluids of different gravity,
which are capable of being mixed one with the other.

5. It is possible to have a filter, strainer or other
separator, by means of which the lighter fluid may be separated
from the heavier.

340

#### *Construction*

These being pre-supposed, I construct Perpetual Motion in the
following manner:

Let two fluids of different gravity and capable of mixing
together (which is possible by Hyp. 4) be taken in any
quantities, in equal quantities, if desired; let the ratios of
their gravities be first determined, which suppose as G to L,
the heavier to the lighter; and being mixed, let a vessel,
A D, be filled to A.

This having been done, let a tube be taken, open at both ends
E F; and of such a length that A C : E F > 2 L
: G + L; and the orifice F stopped, or rather filled with a
filter or some substance separating the lighter fluid from the
heavier (as is possible also by Hyp. 5); when the tube filled in
this manner with fluid is immersed to the bottom of the vessel
C D; I say that the fluid will continually ascend by the
orifice of the tube F, and by the orifice E will fall into the
fluid below.

#### *Demonstration*

Because the orifice of the tube F is occupied by a filter (by
Constr.) which separates the lighter fluid from the heavier; it
follows, that if the tube be immersed to the bottom of the
vessel, the fluid lighter by itself, which is mixed with the
heavier fluid, must ascend in the tube, and as it will ascend
above the surface of the surrounding fluid as A C :
E F = 2 L : G + L : which is (by Const.) A C :
E F > 2 L : G + L, it necessarily follows (by Hyp. 3)
that the lighter liquid, through the orifice E, will fall in the
vessel below;341 there it again mixes with the
heavier (by Hyp. 4); and then, penetrating the filter, ascends
again into the tube, and escapes by the upper orifice. So,
therefore, the flow is continued perpetually.aQ. E. D.

#### *Corollary*

Hence a reason may easily be given, why water from the depths
of the ocean, ascending into the summits of the mountains,
bursts from them in the form of rivers and flows again into the
ocean; so does Nature offer to us the spectacle of perpetual
motion.

Hence I say, they do not well explain who allege that the water
ascends to these heights through the pores of the earth, as a
fluid ascends in narrow tubes above the surface of the fluid
surrounding; for if such were the explanation of the thing, they
would never be able to demonstrate it; for the water so raised
to a height from the bosom of the earth, falls again, whereas we
see that the fluid in these narrow tubes, although slightly
elevated above the surrounding surface, never issues from their
orifices and falls into the fluid below. The following is then
the more feasible explanation. It is known that water in which
much salt is held in solution is heavier than fresh water; now
sea-water, as is sufficiently evident from the taste, contains
many saline particles; consequently it is heavier than spring or
river water; so that it is credible that the earth acts like a
filter through the pores of which only fresh water can pass, the
saline particles being left behind, and this increases the
weight of the342 water; the fresh water must
ascend much higher on account of the immense profundity of the
ocean, as it is forced to the highest peaks of the mountains by
the presence of the sea-water; and thence, not being able to
ascend any higher, it falls in rivers.

### P. Christopher Scheiner

That an earnest belief in the possibility of Perpetual Motion has
not been confined entirely to scientific tyros and enthusiastic
dreamers, is sufficiently attested by the fact that a respectable
number of eminent scientists, many of whom had done great service
in their scientific labors, have believed in such possibility.

Among these is to be mentioned P. Christopher Scheiner, a German,
born 1575, and died 1650. He was a mechanic of note; in his day
made valuable additions to what was known of light and optics,
invented the Pantagraph, discovered solar spots, besides
benefiting mankind by many other distinguished fruits of his
genius.

The subject of Perpetual Motion claimed some of his attention. He
wrote in defense of its possibility. The substance of what he
said, translated into English, is as follows:

Let the centre of the universe then, or of gravity, be A, and
the gnomon A B C, of which the extremity A is pierced
and traversed by an axis going through the centre of the world,
so that it may turn and revolve freely and easily343
around the said centre; to the other extremity of the gnomon, C,
let a phial full of water be attached.

The weight C will turn around the centre A and will first come
to D, thence to E, thence to F and G; then it will return to C,
having described a complete circle,
C D E F G; then it will again move to D, E,
F, etc., and so perpetually, since there is no reason for its
stopping in any point of the circle rather than in another.

![](i_342.jpg)

That indeed the weight C affixed to the gnomon will move from C
to D, is proved by daily experience, by which it is established
that a gnomon so contrived and placed erect on any flat space,
will not be able to stand, but the arm B C, C
preponderating, will move towards D.

It may in the second place be proved, that if, on the other
hand, another arm B G be added to the gnomon, equal in
weight and similar to the other, the whole
G B C A will remain motionless in equilibrium;
therefore the arm B G being taken away and equilibrium
being destroyed, the arm B C must move in the opposite
direction.

The above, from Scheiner, called forth the following from Schott,
who was also an eminent mathematician:

Whether there could be a perpetual artificial motion around the
centre of the earth?

344

![](i_343.jpg)

We have treated this question in our Hydraulico-pneumatic
Mechanics, Part 2, Class 2, Machine 13, not however universally,
but only in one particular case, that of the Gnomon of Scheiner.
For P. Christopher Scheiner, in "Mathematical Disquisitions," in
Number XV., Corollary 4, asserts Perpetual Artificial Motion not
to be repugnant to Nature, and attempts to prove it in the
following manner. Let a gnomon of a certain weight
A B C be suspended around A, the centre of the
universe, and bound to the beam D F, which is supported by the
columns D F and E G and turns at the pole D or E; or
let it be fixed at the poles, but the gnomon revolving at A.

These being the conditions, I say that the gnomon
A B C will revolve from C to H and towards I, thence
will return to C, thence to H as before, and so on perpetually.
The cause of this continual motion is the forcible suspension;
for the whole gnomon preponderates in C on account of the
perpendicular tangent B A; which effect becomes more marked
if a globe of iron S be supposed suspended at C. As therefore
the whole of345 this mass, as well from the
supports of the balance as from the momentary diameter, hangs
suspended at C, and the vertex A, on account of the firm beam
D E, cannot fall from the centre of the universe; it comes
to pass that all points as well of the globe S, as of the gnomon
A B C, with a continual motion turn round A; but
because, by the line B A in the fixed point A, they are
held from falling to the centre; therefore the greatest force of
that tendency is exerted in the line B, and induces it to
inclination; which inclination on account of the continuous
solidity of the gnomon cannot be at all abated, so that the
whole impetus is exerted either at the point A about the movable
beam or at the movable poles of the beam D and E; which poles
being free in their sockets D and E, abandon themselves to the
motion of Nature, and thus do not in any wise hinder a perpetual
circular motion. What indeed is self-evident in this, reason
confirms, and daily experience in statics manifests. For if a
short gnomon stand either on the terrestrial superficies
M N, O P, or Q R; it will always fall towards the
part C, or N, by the preponderating portion M K C;
which is manifested in daily experiments.

Thence it is evident that if the gnomon were entire, the force
which it exerts at N would pass into the line B A still
hanging over the centre. And this is one argument. The other is
from the contrary. For if an equal and similar gnomon were
attached towards the part D, then the whole mass hanging on its
centre would remain in equilibrium and there would be no motion;
consequently346 the one half being taken away,
the other would necessarily move according to the laws and
experience of statics. If the shortened gnomon
M B C N were bound only to the point M, the rest
being left free, it would certainly revolve, and in the same
case, the point C would describe almost a semicircular arc till,
coming down to a perpendicular position, it would there remain.

Now as the force of the entire gnomon falls in the vertex A,
there would be an entire and perpetual revolution around A. Much
more would this be the case if on the centre C stood either the
small curve A C L A or the larger one
A K C, or finally the globe S alone, hanging from two
iron rods A B and B C, or from one arc,
A N C. From this, therefore, it may be demonstrated
that a perpetual circular motion is possible.

In 1825, the following was contributed to and published in
"Mechanics' Magazine." We are unable to give the name of the
contributor, but he writes in encouragement of Perpetual Motion.
The gist of his article is as follows:

We can now, however, soar above the clouds, explore the depths
of the ocean, and skim over its surface. \* \* \* And be it
remembered that we owe these and many other advantages to a few
persevering individuals who were, in all probability,
stigmatized as chimerical visionaries by those who seem to have
an unconquerable propensity to condemn everything above the
level of their own understanding.

If by perpetual motion nothing more is meant347
than the putting in motion some of the most durable substances
with which we are acquainted, in such a manner as to ensure a
continuance of motion as long as those substances will resist
the effects of time and friction, I do not despair of seeing it
accomplished. \* \* \* [He thinks there is] reasonable ground to
hope that the time is not far distant when even this
impossibility must yield to persevering ingenuity. In the
present state of public opinion with regard to its
practicability, it would be looked upon as an empty boast, were
I to assert that the discovery is already made.

### T. H. Pasley

T. H. Pasley in 1824, contributed an article to "Mechanics'
Magazine," asserting the possibility of Perpetual Motion. The
following excerpts give the substance of his article:

I feel no hesitation in standing up in support of this grand
desideratum,athis almost forsaken friend of science,awhether the
thing be practicable or not.

On the contrary, "Persevere" should be every one's advice; to
do so, or discontinue, every one's own pleasure. And why should
the impossibility of anything be pronounced unless it be
established wherein the limits of possibility consist?

It is puerile in the extreme to be foretelling defeat when so
many other objects may be gained by the highly laudable pursuit,
perhaps of greater advantage to society at large than the
discovery in question. \* \* \* In a word, were the perpetual348
motion discovered tomorrow, it would be wise of all the
governments of the world to offer a very high reward for some
species of discovery that would be universally sought after,
although it might never be found out. \* \* \* The effects of
industry areaenlargement of the mind, accumulation of knowledge,
and rendering ourselves ignorant of the torments which idleness
and dulness always engender. \* \* \* In the next place, there are
no solid grounds for the assertion that the discovery of a
perpetual motion is an impossibility. In the present state of
human knowledge respecting the powers of nature, it is not
demonstrable one way or another. \* \* \* The study of what relates
to the perpetual motion has this great advantage, that it
directs to the discovery of error as well as of truth; whereas,
what are they which are called truths of science at present but
vacillating human opinions, or erroneous assumptions of what we
call natural causes? What are they but such as consist in mere
assumption, sanctioned by time, and admitted by existing
authorities in science, and of course generally acquiesced in,
without previous investigation?

So far, then, from being guided in our decision respecting what
is possible by the "unerring laws of nature," by "mathematical
demonstration," and by "experimental proofs," we are continually
misled by an erroneous faith in the nonentity, attraction.

On such an imperfect knowledge of the349 causes of
phenomena, who should say he knows what can or what cannot be
discovered?

### Article From Pamphleteer

In the "Pamphleteer," published in London, the following by a
correspondent whose name we cannot give was published in March of
1822:

"A few words inducing towards the discovery of Perpetual Motion,
perhaps the actual discovery thereof:"

London, March, 1822.

What is meant by the term "Perpetual Motion?" Is it supposed
that there is an undiscovered substance in the world, that will
of itself perpetually move, with as little apparent cause as
that which actuates the needle in becoming motionless in one
particular position? Or, is it to be found in the combined
reaction of mechanical powers?

The first idea is stamped with a degree of probability, by the
mystery of the needle; yet I imagine the latter is relied on
with the greater confidence of mankind, and is the pith of the
following few words:

It is well known that the weight of a pendulum will almost
regain the level from which it descended, losing a little space
at every vibration, until it becomes motionless; if of itself it
could exceed or even regain the level, doubtless it would become
a perpetual motion.

To find a power that will aid the motion of the pendulum, and
in conjunction renew its350 strength, is what is wanted to
create perpetual motion.

What I shall endeavor to explain will at least induce towards
the discovery of this power.

The principal parts of the machinery about to be shown are in
number three:

A vibrating pendulum.

A revolving pendulum, and

A tubular lever.

A vibrating pendulum in motion describes a segment of a circle,
and returns on the same segment, and at every vibration its
described segment decreases.

A revolving pendulum is composed of two or more pendulums,
united at their lighter extremities, there revolving on an axis,
the heavier extremities being placed at equal distances in the
outer circle: this, I believe, is what is termed a fly-wheel
when affixed to hand-mills, etc.

The tubular lever is the chief instigator of the whole, and
must contain a weight apportioned to the weights of the two
pendulums.

Fix the lever on a cross axis; thus, on an axis within a
circle, the circle on an axis at opposite angles, thereby is
given to each extremity of the lever a revolving power of
motion; attach one extremity of the lever to the outer circle of
a revolving pendulum, the other extremity confine within the bar
of the vibrating pendulum; thus combined, the effect to be
produced when put in motion will be this:

The two pendulums will guide the motion of the lever, which
then partakes of the power of a351 pendulum,
giving fresh impulse at every vibration of the pendulum, and
every half revolution of the revolving pendulum; for, as each
extremity of the lever rises, the weight within falls to the
opposite extremity, and gives fresh impulse to the whole: thus
(if my idea is correct) will be produced motion perpetualathat
is to say, perpetual so long as the materials of which it is
made will hold together. I have given this short description
merely by way of example, as I believe there are several ways of
combining these three powers, so as to produce perpetual motion,
if my idea on the subject is correct.

The lever may contain mercury or a solid orb of heavy
substance; and if the tube be exhausted of air the weight will
pass more freely, and certainly increase the power of the lever.

### J. Welch

In 1825 the following article was published in "Mechanics'
Magazine," having been contributed by J. Welch:

Those who condemn the notion altogether seem to have taken but
a very confined view of the subject. What they say about mere
matter is right enough; but they seem to forget that there are
other active agents in nature which possess wonderful powers,
that have nothing to do with either bulk, weight, or form. Such
are electricity, magnetic attraction, capillary attraction, and
the irregular pressure of the atmosphere. The powers of
electricity are great, and, indeed, it seems to be the *primum
mobile* that gives life and352 motion to the
animated part of the creation. Dr. Franklin shows us how to give
a circular coated plate, revolving on an axle, sufficient power
to roast a chicken, merely by once changing (charging?) it.
Could not a plate of this kind be made to turn a small
electrical apparatus, so situated as to keep the charge in the
plate always at its maximum? The whole might be kept dry by
having it enclosed in a glass case.

It has often been attempted to give motion to a wheel by the
power of a loadstone, but hitherto without effect; no substance
in nature being found to have the power, by interposition, of
cutting off its attractive property. Still I think it should be
further investigated. Is a small piece of steel in the form of a
wedge as strongly attracted at the smaller end as at the
thicker? And would not twenty or thirty pieces of steel, of that
form, placed round the circumference of a circle, the point of
one towards the head of the other, cause a magnet placed in the
centre, to revolve in the direction in which their points lie? I
think, perhaps not; but still such experiments should be tried.

In capillary attraction we have a power that at once raises
fluids above their level. It is this which carries the oil up
the wick of a lamp as fast as the flame consumes it. Water and
other fluids rise through cotton even quicker than oil; and he
who can contrive to collect them as they arrive at the top will
discover perpetual motion. Would not water run constantly
through a siphon, one leg of which was made of a collection of
capillary353
tubes, and the other in the usual way? or would the water above
and below the tubes neutralize and destroy their power?

I now come to the pressure of the atmosphere, a thing easily
understood. \* \* \* Make a cast-iron barometrical tube, with a top
sufficiently large to contain 2 cwt. of mercury; invert it in a
basin large enough to contain 2 or 3 cwt. more, and let a piece
of iron of 10 or 12 stones weight float on the mercury in this
basin, so as to rise and fall along with it at every change of
the weather. We have here both motion and power. The motion,
indeed, will sometimes stand still, but then it can easily be
regulated, and made a constant quantity in the machine to be
attached. I have no doubt but clocks, etc., may be made to
derive their chiming principle from a contrivance of this
nature.

### Article From Mechanics' Magazine

In 1831, the following article was contributed by an unknown
correspondent to, and published in "Mechanics' Magazine":

"Yes; we shall conquer! All those dangers past  
Will serve to enrich the future story."

The application to the subject, on my part, has been
accompanied by continual experimental elucidations of the
subjects considered, and comparisons of these with the axioms,
theorems, and demonstrations of one of the best authorities, if
I354
may be allowed so to call my favorite author, Emerson, whose *I
says* are generally correct.

I disagree with Mr. B., and do trust that even a perpetual
motion seeker might deserve encouragement, if it be found that
such a character may exist in a person who is not so ignorant of
first principles as Mr. B. supposes *all* are who have
this bias; especially if it be found that the person's
researches have been connected with subjects of a more tangible
nature, relating to the improvement of the useful arts, and
particularly to some modern inventions of high importance that
are not perfectly correct in their construction.

In this article, Mr. B. advises those who are misspending their
time in this pursuit, to consider the question in its most
simple form, divested of more complicated operations, which
simple form is that of a pulley accurately constructed so as to
reduce the resistance to motion as much as possible. He says,
"it will be found, as long as the weights are equal," there will
be no motion produced, but wherever the weights are placed they
will remain; and to produce vertical motion in the smallest
degree, it will be necessary to add a weight to one of the
former to create a preponderancy. This weight he calls the
mechanical loss, and an insurmountable bar to perpetual motion,
etc. We need not follow Mr. B. to his conclusion, as I think
this insurmountable bar can be easily removed; and I shall be
able to show that this equilibrium, for such it merely is, can
be destroyed without adding to one of the weights, or355
absolutely taking from the other; though this may virtually be
considered to be the case, inasmuch as we can at least produce
an effect on the system as if the weight were reduced. Mr. B.
says, under this arrangement, "wherever the weights are placed
they will remain, unless an addition is made to one of them." We
will therefore suppose the following diagram to represent the
arrangement on a small scale, delicately constructed.

![](i_354.jpg)

A B are the two weights connected to each other by the
string passing over the pulley, and being nicely equalized in
their weight, here would, of course, be an equilibrium on the
principle of the lever. But take a flat piece of wood, such as a
ruler, and place it obliquely in a way so as not to interfere
with the pulley *m* in the direction *d*, and then
bring the weight to impinge upon it in a way so as not to move
the weight A *m*, C *d*, the least, or alter its
position. What will be the consequence? Some would say, why, the
weight A would then descend, and cause the weight B to ascend.
But I should rather say, the reaction of the plane when acted on
by the weight B, having destroyed the equilibrium of the forces,
motion takes place. Now, if we attribute this motion to the
reaction of the plane on the weight, though we will not go so
far as to say motion is generated,356 yet if we say,
by this simple arrangement the equilibrium is destroyed and
motion takes place, the least we can admit is, that motion is
communicated to the system, and that by the agency of part of
the machine itself, the apparatus employed being considered as
such. Then, why so much objection to the term self-moving
machine in limited sense? But I will not dispute about words,
which are but the images of things, and images may be strangely
distorted by the medium through which they are receivedaof which
distorting mediums, there is none equal to that of prejudice in
favor of abstract notionsawhich notions perhaps, if rigidly
examined, would be found to have no foundation in facts or in
common sense.

Another demonstrator of the impossibility of perpetual motion,
is Mr. Mackinnon (see "Mechanical Magazine," Vol. 1, Page 363).
As no doubt the different attempts to produce, or communicate,
continued and perpetual motion, at least, such as are often
brought forward by persons unacquainted with the science of
mechanics, are generally to those who are acquainted with that
science, if not absolutely ridiculous, yet of a nature to excite
a smile at their futility: still there are a few (perhaps a very
few) who entertain an opinion that such a thing is not
impracticable, and who have, from practical experience as well
as study, acquired a tolerable insight into the laws of nature
(so far as relate to this subject); who in their turn cannot
help smiling at the weak reasoning of some other would-be
philosophers,357 who gravely give their dictum
in the case. In this class I include Mr. Mackinnon, who very
gravely goes to work to prove, etc., and flatters himself he
shall, if rightly understood, help to prevent much future waste
of time on the subject. He then goes on to give us his
definition of inertia, by which he informs us that a body in a
state of rest will remain so until it is moved (wonderful!)athat
it cannot move itselfathat it has not that poweraand that no
mechanical contrivance can give it that power. (How profound!)

---

358

## SUMMARIZED TABLE OF CONTENTS

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
|  | Page |
| Introduction | [3](#Page_3) |
| Contents | [5](#Page_5)a[6](#Page_6) |
| Preface | [7](#Page_7)a[10](#Page_10) |
| Introductory Essay | [11](#Page_11)a[21](#Page_21) |
| CHAPTER IaDEVICES BY MEANS OF WHEELS AND WEIGHTSa |
| Wilars De Honecort; A Repetition of Wilars Honecort's plan; Leonardo da Vinci; A. Capra's Device; The Device of Dixon Vallance; Furman's Device; Schirrmeister's "Mechanical Movement;" James Ferguson's Device; B. Belidor's Device; Desagulier's Proposition on the Balance; John Haywood's Device; Explanation of the Failure of Wheels and Weights Devices to Accomplish Perpetual Motion | [22](#Page_22)a[67](#Page_67) |
| CHAPTER IIaDEVICES BY MEANS OF ROLLING WEIGHTS AND INCLINED PLANESa |
| Device by Mercury in Inclined Glass Tube and Heavy Ball on Inclined Plane; Series of Inclined Planes; Devices by Oscillating Trough and Cannon Balls; Unpublished Inclined Plane and Weights Devices Noted by the Author | [68](#Page_68)a[75](#Page_75) |
| CHAPTER IIIaHYDRAULIC AND HYDRO-MECHANICAL DEVICESa |
| Enbon and Anderson's Pump; Device of "Ed. Vocis Rationis;" BAPckler's Plates; John Linley's Hydraulic Device; Device of Author of the "Voice of Reason;" An Italian Device; P. Valentine Stansel's Device; Vogel's Device; A Water Wheel-Driven Pump; "A Journeyman Mechanic's" Device; James Black's Device; Archimedean Screw and Liquid; John Sims's Problem; A Perpetual Pump, by an Unknown Inventor; Explanation of the Failure of Hydraulic and Hydro-Mechanical Devices to Accomplish Perpetual Motion | [76](#Page_76)a[117](#Page_117) |
| CHAPTER IVaPNEUMATIC, SIPHON AND HYDRO-PNEUMATIC DEVICESa359 |
| The Hydrostatical Paradox; Pickering's Device; Stuckey's Device; Prof. George Sinclair's Device; Jacob Brazill's Device; LAcurrencyserson's Device; Von Rathen & Ellis' Device; Richard Varley's Device; Siphon and Funnel Device; Orchard's Vacuum Engine; Robert Copland's Device; Eaton's Perpetual Siphon; Legge's Hydro-Pneumatic Power Device; Waterblowing Machine; Device by Means of Buoyancy Through Media of Different Densities; Device by Compressible and Distensible Bags in Liquid; George Cunningham's Mercurial Pneumatic Device; Explanation of the Failure of Pneumatic, Siphon and Hydro-Pneumatic Devices to Accomplish Perpetual Motion | [118](#Page_118)a[162](#Page_162) |
| CHAPTER VaMAGNETIC DEVICESa |
| A Magnetic Pendulum; Magnetic-Driven Wheel; Mackintosh's Experiment; Spence's Device; Joannis Theisneri's Semi-Circle; Device of Dr. Jacobus | [163](#Page_163)a[174](#Page_174) |
| CHAPTER VIaDEVICES UTILIZING CAPILLARY ATTRACTION AND PHYSICAL AFFINITYa |
| Ludeke & Wilcken's Device; the Jurin Device; Sir William Congreve, Notice of; His Perpetual Motion Devices and Writings | [175](#Page_175)a[194](#Page_194) |
| CHAPTER VIIaLIQUID AIR AS A MEANS OF PERPETUAL MOTIONa |
| Liquefaction of Air; Explanation of Conservation of Energy Applied to; Perpetual Motion by Means of Liquid Air Pompously Heralded; Failure Explained | [195](#Page_195)a[196](#Page_196) |
| CHAPTER VIIIaRADIUM AND RADIO-ACTIVE SUBSTANCES CONSIDERED AS A CONCEIVED SOURCE OF PERPETUAL MOTIONa |
| Perpetual Emanation of Energy; Radium Clock by Lord Rayleigh (Hon. R. J. Strutt); Lord Rayleigh Not a Perpetual Motion Worker but Thoroughly Scientific | [197](#Page_197)a[199](#Page_199) |
| CHAPTER IXaPERPETUAL MOTION DEVICES ATTEMPTING ITS ATTAINMENT BY A MISCONCEPTION OF THE RELATION OF MOMENTUM AND ENERGYa360 |
| Works of Tyros Known to Author; Momentum Defined, Differentiated, Measured and Explained; Energy Defined, Differentiated, Measured and Explained; Explanation by Author of Common Misconception of the Relation of Momentum and Energy and Attempts to thus Realize Perpetual Motion; the Fallacy Explained by Illustrations of Energy Required for and Represented by Acceleration and Retardation of Velocity; Property of Numbers Relating to; Arithmetical Progression Illustration | [200](#Page_200)a[211](#Page_211) |
| CHAPTER XaTHE ALLEGED INVENTIONS OF EDWARD SOMMERSET, SIXTH EARL AND SECOND MARQUIS OF WORCESTER, AND OF JEAN ERNEST ELI-BESSLER (COUNCILLOR) ORFFYREUSa |
| Intense Interest Caused by; Notice of Marquis of Worcester and Councillor Orffyreus and Periods in Which They Lived; Description by Marquis of Worcester of the Essentials of His Claimed Inventions; Excerpts From Remarks of Councillor Orffyreus on His Claimed Invention; Dedication by Councillor Orffyreus to God, the Public, to Men of Learning and to Himself as the Discoverer; Article Concerning the Orffyrean Wheel Published 1720 in Gentlemen's Magazine; Criticism by "A Constant Reader" of Attitude of W. Kenrick Concerning the Orffyrean Wheel; Article by Rev. J. T. Desagulier Concerning the Device of Marquis of Worcester and the Orffyrean Wheel; Excerpt from Dr. William Kenrick's Lecture on Perpetual Motion; De la Hire's Remarks Concerning Perpetual Motion; Letter from Prof. 's Gravesande to Sir Isaac Newton; Animadversions of Prof. Alliman on the Neglect of the Orffyrean inventions; Dr. Charles Hutton's Scientific Works and Notice of the Orffyrean Wheel; Remarks by the Author on the Historical Celebrity of These Inventions | [212](#Page_212)a[255](#Page_255) |
| CHAPTER XIaCONSERVATION OF ENERGY. A DISCUSSION OF THE RELATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, AND THE POSSIBILITY OF PERPETUAL MOTIONa361 |
| Statement of Doctrine of Conservation of Energy; Upon What Proof of Doctrine Rests; Not Mathematically Proved; Conforms to Natural Phenomena; Multiplied Illustrations; Inter-changeability and Convertibility of Heat with Mechanical and Other Forms of Energy; Explanation of Heat and Energy Units, and Their Relative Equivalents; British Thermal Unit, Foot-Pound and Horse-Power and Their Mutual Relationship Explained; Further Illustrations; Galileo's Famous Pendulum Experiment; Apparent Anticipation of the Principle of Conservation of Energy | [256](#Page_256)a[269](#Page_269) |
| CHAPTER XIIaWILL PERPETUAL MOTION EVER BE ACCOMPLISHED?a |
| The Antiquity of the Problem; Remarks by Dircks, Newton, Galileo, Huyghens and Descartes; Generalizations of; Remarks by Author Concerning the Possibility of Perpetual Motion. Comments from Other Sources: |
| 1 Denying the Possibility of Perpetual Motion,aArticle by Dr. Papin; Article by Rev. John Wilkins; Article Based on Paradoxical Hydrostatical Balance; Article by P. Gregorio Fontana; Article by William Nicholson; Article Published in "The Artisan"; Article Published in "Mechanic's Magazine." |
| 2 Asserting the Possibility of Perpetual Motion,aScriptural Argument; Article by John Bernoulli; Article by P. Christopher Scheiner; Article by T. H. Pasley; Article Published in "The Pamphleteer"; Article by J. Welch; Article Published in "Mechanic's Magazine" | [270](#Page_270)a[357](#Page_357) |

---

362

## INDEX

* Air (See [Liquid Air](#liquid)).
* "A Journeyman Mechanic's" Device, [99](#Page_99)
* Allaman's Animadversions on the Neglect of Orffyreus's
  Inventions, [239](#Page_239)
* Anderson & Enbom's Pump, [76](#Page_76)
* Archimedean Screw and Liquid, Device by Means of, [104](#Page_104)
* "Artisan, The," Article Published in, [329](#Page_329)
* Bags in Liquid, Compressible and Distensible,
  Device by Means of, [155](#Page_155)
* Bellidor, B., His Account of Perpetual Motion Device, [46](#Page_46)
* Bernoulli, John, Notice of, [336](#Page_336)  
  + Arguments Supporting Possibility of Perpetual Motion, [336](#Page_336)
* Black, James, His Device, [102](#Page_102)
* BAPckler, George Andrew, His Plates, [81](#Page_81)
* Buoyancy Through Media of Different Densities, [151](#Page_151)
* Brewster, Sir David, Edited Lectures of James Ferguson, [44](#Page_44)  
  + In Appendix to Ferguson's Lectures Gives Description of
    "Water-Blowing Machine",  [148](#Page_148)
  + Is Attracted by Spence's Device, and Writes Letter
    Affording Description of Same, [170](#Page_170)
* British Patents, [58](#Page_58); [120](#Page_120); [121](#Page_121); [125](#Page_125); [127](#Page_127); [129](#Page_129); [132](#Page_132), [140](#Page_140)
* British Thermal Unit Defined and Explained, [264](#Page_264)
* Cannon Balls and Oscillating Trough, [71](#Page_71)
* Capillary Attraction and Physical Affinity, Devices by Means
  of (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Capra, A., His Device, [32](#Page_32)
* Compressible and Distensible Bags in Liquid, [155](#Page_155)
* Congreve, Sir William, Notice of;  
  + His Perpetual Motion Devices, [182](#Page_182)
* Conservation of Energy, Its Relation to
  Possibility of Perpetual Motion (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)  
  + Considered with Reference to Perpetual Motion, [269](#Page_269)
  + Proof and Illustration of, [200](#Page_200)
  + Anticipated by Newton, Galileo, Huyghens and Descartes,
    [272](#Page_272)
* Copland, Robert, His "Improved Method of Gaining Power", [140](#Page_140)
* Cunningham, George, His "Mercurial Pneumatic
  Device", [157](#Page_157)
* "Darius Green and His Flying Machine", [16](#Page_16)
* Desagulier, Rev. J. T., Proposition on
  the Balance, [47](#Page_47)  
  + Article of, Concerning the Device of Marquis of
    Worcester and the Orffyrean Wheel, [222](#Page_222)363
* Dircks, Henry, Title Page Mention, [3](#Page_3)  
  + His Books Mentioned, [7](#Page_7)
  + Comments by Author on His Works, [8](#Page_8)
  + Information Furnished by, Rearranged, [9](#Page_9)
  + His Classification of Devices, [19](#Page_19)
  + His "Life, Times and Scientific Labors of the Second
    Marquis of Worcester", [213](#Page_213)
  + Excerpt from, [228](#Page_228)
  + His Statement Concerning Arguments For and Against the
    Possibility of Perpetual Motion, [270](#Page_270)
  + Arguments by Others For and Against the Possibility of
    Perpetual Motion, Published by Dircks, Copied in This
    Work, [274](#Page_274)
* Eaton's Perpetual Siphon, [145](#Page_145)
* "Ed. Vocis Rationis," His Device, [78](#Page_78)
* Ellis, George Henry (See [Rathen &
  Ellis](#rathen)).
* Energy (See [Momentum and Energy](#momentum)).
* Energy, Conservation of (See [Conservation
  of Energy](#conservation)).
* Energy and Heat Convertible and Commensurable, [262](#Page_262)
* Energy Defined, Explained and Distinguished from Momentum, [203](#Page_203)
* Enbom and Anderson's Pump, [76](#Page_76)
* Explanation by Author of Failure of
  Hydraulic and Hydro-Mechanical Devices, [112](#Page_112)  
  + of the Failure of Pneumatic, Siphon and Hydro-Pneumatic
    Devices, [159](#Page_159)
  + of the Failure of Momentum and Energy Devices, [206](#Page_206)
  + of Failure of Wheels and Weights Devices, [61](#Page_61)
* Failures (See [Explanation
  of Failures](#explanation)).
* Ferguson, James; "Peasant Boy Philosopher,"
  His Device, [43](#Page_43)
* Fontana, P. Gregorio, Notice of; His Arguments on the
  Impossibility of Perpetual Motion, [306](#Page_306)
* Foot-Pound, Defined and Explained, [265](#Page_265)
* Furman, George H., "A New and Improved Motor," U. S.
  Patent, [36](#Page_36)
* Gallileo, His Pendulum Experiment, [267](#Page_267)
* Gravesande, Prof. S., Letter to Sir Isaac Newton, [236](#Page_236)
* Haywood, John, His Device, [58](#Page_58)
* Heat and Energy Convertible and Commensurable, [261](#Page_261)
* Helmholtz, Notice of, [258](#Page_258)
* Honecort, Willars de, Account of His Device, [22](#Page_22)
* Horse-Power, Defined and Explained, [264](#Page_264)
* Hydro-Pneumatic Devices (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Hydrostatical Paradox, [118](#Page_118)
* Hydrostatical Paradoxical Balance, Article on, [305](#Page_305)
* Hydraulic and Hydro-Pneumatic Devices (See Table of
  Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* 364Inclined Planes and Rolling
  Weights (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Inclined Planes and Weights Devices, Unpublished. Noted by
  the Author, [73](#Page_73)
* Inclined Planes, Series of, [69](#Page_69)
* Italian Device, An, [92](#Page_92)
* Introductory Essay, [11](#Page_11)
* Jacobus, Dr., His Magnetic Device, [173](#Page_173)
* Joule, Notice of, [258](#Page_258)
* Jurin's Device, [176](#Page_176)
* Kenrick, Dr. William, His Remarks Concerning the
  Inventions of the Marquis of Worcester and Councillor
  Orffyreus and Perpetual Motion in General, [228](#Page_228)
* Langley, Prof. Samuel P., His Attempts and Labors
  at Heavier Than Air Flight, [14](#Page_14)
* Lardner, Ignatius, Attempts to Show Impossibility of
  Crossing Ocean With Steam Power, [14](#Page_14)
* Leonardo da Vinci (See [Vinci](#vinci)).
* LAcurrencyserson, Louis Diodor, His "Improvements in Production of
  Motive Power", [127](#Page_127)
* Legge's Hydro-Pneumatic Power Device, [146](#Page_146)
* Linley, John, His Hydraulic Device, [87](#Page_87)
* Liquid Air, as a Means of Perpetual Motion, [195](#Page_195)
* Lord Rayleigh (See [Rayleigh](#rayleigh)).
* Mackintosh, F. S., Experiment by, [166](#Page_166)
* Magnetic Devices (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Magnetic-Driven Wheel, [164](#Page_164)
* Magnetic Pendulum, [163](#Page_163)
* Magnetic Semi-Circle, [172](#Page_172)
* Mechanic, A Journeyman (See ["A Journeyman
  Mechanic"](#a)).
* Mechanics' Magazine, Article Published in, [278](#Page_278), [353](#Page_353)
* Media of Different Densities, Devices by Means of Buoyancy
  Through, [151](#Page_151)
* Mercurial Pneumatic Device (See [Cunningham,
  George](#cunningham)).
* Mercury, Inclined Glass Tube and Ball, [68](#Page_68)
* Momentum, Defined, Explained and Distinguished from Energy,
  [201](#Page_201)
* Momentum and Energy, Account and Explanation
  of Perpetual Motion Devices by Means of, [205](#Page_205)
* Momentum and Energy, Distinguished and Considered; Attempted
  Devices for Perpetual Motion by Means of (See Table of
  Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Munro, R., Comments on Mackintosh's Experiment, [169](#Page_169)
* Newcomb, Simeon, Notice of, [15](#Page_15)
* Newton, Sir Isaac, Mention of, [135](#Page_135),
  [220](#Page_220)  
  + Letter to from Prof. 's Gravesande, [236](#Page_236)365
* Nicholson, William, Notice of, [315](#Page_315);  
  + His Article Against the Possibility of Perpetual Motion,
    [316](#Page_316)
* Orchard's Vacuum Engine, [137](#Page_137)
* Orffyreus, Jean Ernest Eli Bessler (Councillor), His
  Perpetual Motion Labors (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5);  
  + Remarks of Author Concerning Claims of, [252](#Page_252)
* Papin, Dr., Argument by Against the Possibility
  of Perpetual Motion, [275](#Page_275)
* Pasley, T. H., Article by, [347](#Page_347)
* "Pamphleteer, The," Article Published in, [349](#Page_349)
* Paradox, Hydrostatical, [118](#Page_118)
* Patents, U. S. (See [U. S. Patents](#us));
  Patents, British (See [British Patents](#british)).
* "Peasant Boy Philosopher" (See [Ferguson,
  James](#ferguson)).
* Pendulum, Gallileo's Experiment with, [268](#Page_268)
* Perpetual Motion Defined, [11](#Page_11)
* Perpetual Pump, [109](#Page_109)
* Perpetual Motion, Its Possibility Considered with Reference
  to Conservation of Energy, [269](#Page_269)
* Perpetual Motion, Consideration of Its Possibility, [270](#Page_270)  
  + Arguments Against Its PossibilityaArticle by Dr. Papin,
    [275](#Page_275);
  + Article by Rev. John Wilkins, [281](#Page_281);
  + Article Based on Paradoxical Hydrostatical Balance, [305](#Page_305);
  + Article by P. Gregorio Fontana, [306](#Page_306);
  + Article by William Nicholson, [316](#Page_316);
  + Article Published in "The Artisan," [329](#Page_329);
  + Article Published in "Mechanic's Magazine," [278](#Page_278).
  + Arguments Maintaining Its PossibilityaScriptural
    Arguments, [335](#Page_335);
  + Article by John Bernoulli, [336](#Page_336);
  + Article by P. Christopher Scheiner, [342](#Page_342);
  + Article by T. H. Pasley, [347](#Page_347);
  + Article Published in "The Pamphleteer," [349](#Page_349);
  + Article by J. Welch, [351](#Page_351);
  + Article Published in "Mechanic's Magazine," [353](#Page_353).
* Physical Affinity and Capillary Attraction, as a Means of
  Perpetual Motion (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Pickering, Peter, His "Atmospheric Engine", [120](#Page_120)
* Pneumatic Devices (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Preface, [7](#Page_7)
* Proposition on the Balance (See [Desagulier,
  Rev. J. T.](#desagulier))
* Radium and Radio-Active Substances as a Means of
  Perpetual Motion (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Rayleigh, Lord, His Radium Clock, Notice of, [197](#Page_197), [199](#Page_199)
* Rangley's Patent Roller Pump, Adaptation of, [97](#Page_97)
* Rathen and Ellis's Device, [129](#Page_129)
* Rationis, Ed. Vocis (See ["Ed. Vocis Rationis"](#ed)).
* 366Rolling
  Weights and Inclined Planes as a Means of Perpetual Motion
  (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Scheiner, P. Christopher, Notice of; Argument by Supporting
  Possibility of Perpetual Motion, [342](#Page_342)
* Schirrmeister, Charles, His "Mechanical Movement", [38](#Page_38)
* Schott, Gaspar, Mention of in Connection with Perpetual
  Motion, [172](#Page_172), [173](#Page_173)
* Scriptural Argument, [335](#Page_335)
* Self-Motive Power Defined, [11](#Page_11)
* Semi-Circle, Magnetic, [172](#Page_172)
* Siphon Device for Perpetual Motion (See Table of Contents).
* Sims, John, His Perpetual Motion Problem, [106](#Page_106)
* Sinclair, Prof. George, His Pneumatic Device, [124](#Page_124)
* Siphon, Eaton's Perpetual, [145](#Page_145)
* Siphon and Funnel Device, [135](#Page_135)
* Sleigh, Burrowes, Willcocks Arthur, His Perpetual Motion
  Labors, [111](#Page_111)
* Sleigh, William Willcocks, His Perpetual Motion Labors, [110](#Page_110)
* Sommerset, Edward (Marquis of Worcester) (See
  Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Spence, John, Notice of; His Magnetic Device, [170](#Page_170)
* Stansel, P. Valentine, Device of, [95](#Page_95)
* Strutt, Hon. R. J. (See [Rayleigh](#rayleigh)).
* Stuckey, William Henry, His "Pneumatic Engine", [121](#Page_121)
* Theisneri, Joannis, His Magnetic Semi-Circle, [172](#Page_172)
* Trough, Oscillating and Cannon Balls, [71](#Page_71)
* U. S. Patents, [36](#Page_36),
  [38](#Page_38), [76](#Page_76)
* Vacuum Engine, Orchard's, [137](#Page_137)
* Vallance, Dixon, His Device, [34](#Page_34)
* Varley, Richard, His "New Perpetual Moving Power", [132](#Page_132)
* Vinci, Leonardo da, Notice of, [27](#Page_27);  
  + His Perpetual Motion Labors, [29](#Page_29),
    [32](#Page_32)
* "Voice of Reason," Device by Author of, [88](#Page_88)
* Vogel, A. F., His "Hydrostatic General Mobile", [96](#Page_96)
* Water Blowing Machine, [147](#Page_147)
* Water-Wheel Driven Pump, [97](#Page_97)
* Welch, J., Article by, [351](#Page_351)
* Wheel, Magnetic Driven (See [Magnetic-Driven
  Wheel](#magnetic)).
* Wheels and Weights Devices (See Table of Contents), [5](#Page_5)
* Wilckens (See [Ludeke and Wilckens](#Page_175)).
* Wilkins, Rev. John, Argument Denying Possibility of
  Perpetual Motion, [281](#Page_281)
* Worcester, Marquis of (Edward Sommerset) (See [Sommerset](#sommerset)).
* X-Ray Machine, Notice of, [16](#Page_16)

367

---