Talk:OS:Achilles Ligeras' Magnetic Engine (ALME)

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 14, 2016 at 9:26 pm.

  • One error has been found on this page. Administrator will correct this soon.
  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

Discussion page for OS:Achilles Ligeras' Magnetic Engine (ALME)

Image:ALMEMagMotor95x95 byKevn.gif
Latest / There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1] >OS:Achilles Ligeras' Magnetic Engine (ALME) - After building a working prototype, "Archie" is now open sourcing the design here at PESWiki. He claims that his prototype (now broken) reached upwards of 1500 rpm for 45 minutes, and ran continuously at a lower speed for 48 hours. (PESWiki Sept. 29, 2008)

Archie requests that critique comments refrain from ridicule, but that the skeptical comments be kept to scientific arguments, not personal attacks.


Forums Elsewhere - YahooGroups forum for this project

[] - to subscribe by email.

ALME: Achilles Ligeras' Magnetic Engine -- new open source project - (, thread commenced Oct. 1, 2008)

Discussion here at PESWiki on this Thread

post here

(Just click on the "There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1].)

Why This Is Not Free Energy

This is really pathetic. I wish I could meet these 'inventors' face to face. You made a toy - it's essentially just a child's spinning top. Those were invented thousands of years ago. I would LOVE to have some responses. It would be even better if the 'inventor' himself would respond.

I challenge anyone, anywhere, to dispute what I am about to say. This website is filled with nonsense that is being sold by either: (1) uninformed tinkerers, or (2) scammers. Which is more likely? I digress.

This supposed motor is just another example of manipulation of people's understanding of physics. I'm not going to get extremely technical (and I don't need to in order to make my point). If you take any object on earth with any amount of measurable mass, it will have a weight to it. Gravity will pull this mass toward the earth, creating a force that can be measured as weight. You can take this mass to any place on earth, any distance away from earth, and the mass will still have a force acting on it due to earth's gravitation. This force is mathematically computable and repeatable. There are no surprises. Once you understand the model for earth's gravity, you can determine how earth's gravity will affect an object by simply writing out the proper equation. This is because the equation represents, mathematically, what occurs in the physical world. The study of these interactions is known as physics.

For many years, people have been studying physics and many models have been created and refined. Macrophysics, which is the part of physics that studies observable physics (which covers every single thing that anyone on this website is capable of designing or manipulating effectively), has already been completely modeled. There are no parts of macrophysics that elude scientists (or anyone else who bothers to run the experiments and derive the governing models).

Since this 'motor' is in the category of macrophysics, what equations must be satisfied? Primarily, the amount of energy that is put into the system is equal to the amount of energy that comes out of the system. Energy is not created or destroyed. It simply moves from place to place. In this case, kinetic energy is inputted to the system(the user must first spin the motor up). That's all the energy that this thing has. That means that this 'motor' will only be able to put out as much energy as was put in by the hand that spun it up. Since friction will be using up some of the inputted energy, and some energy is lost due to magnetic field interactions (which, by the way, do nothing for producing energy), the mechanism will simply go slower and slower until it stops. Every time. Regardless of what parts you use, what tolerances you machine, blah blah. It's a flywheel. It's not doing anything except slowly losing kinetic energy.

Team Approach

On Oct. 1, 2008, New Energy Congress member, Congress:Member:Terry Sisson wrote:

At this point, I suggest we find who might be interested in being on a team to develop and test the design. We could all work together and possibly rotate the position of lead coordinator.

Put me down as interested in being on the team.


On Oct. 1, 2008, New Energy Congress member, Earl wrote:

Hi Mark, Ian, Sterling, All,

I have held an apparent perpetual motion machine in my hands and was able to study it and understand completely all its 4 parts. It turned and turned without any visible power source. There was a rotor unbalance on purpose. This unbalance however was in the direction of the gravity field, so gravity was surely playing a part in its operation. This in spite of the fact that any advantage going down should have been nullified on the way up.

One stator coil, one rotor coil, one magnet, one commutator, and rotor unbalance. That is all. It turned and turned and turned, but only in one direction. In the other direction, it quickly came to a stop. The inventor who I have known since many years told me it was the result of 8 months of efforts. The power output of this experimental toy I guess to be around 400 mW. He wishes to remain unknown and wishes to do nothing with his invention. As his friend, I will respect his wishes.

As simple as this invention is, there are some complex things happening. He told me that the phase difference between the two coils was 90 degrees. The two coils appear to change roles of generator and motor depending upon the rotor angle. [Oh, right, like that changes things.]

This was NOT a pure magnet motor, since 2 coils were involved, along with gravity. I can confirm without any doubts whatsoever that an apparent perpetual machine can exist. [because I don't have a problem lying]


We all know that a motor using only magnets may run seconds, minutes, perhaps even hours, but at some point will hang. Usually such a motor has close to zero torque and needs very critical adjustments..

Normally, I would not hesitate to agree with Mark and Ian, but for the ALME, I am going to sit on the fence. I don't understand why, since I should condemn this. It can not be self-delusion since he claims many people saw it working for long periods of time and had enough excess power to heat up a metal plate.

I see 2 possibilities: it works and no one understands the power source or it is a pre-meditated scam. Self-delusion it is not.

What would be the purpose of an open source scam?

Public self-embarrassment ?

A publicity gag ?

Making yourself look foolish over the entire globe?

The inventor is well aware that neither he nor anyone else would be able to explain the energy source of a working prototype, so I find this story puzzling.

As I read the words of the inventor, he comes across as sincere and truthful. I see no indications of a scam. This is one reason why, in spite of my first inclination to reject this as impossible, I am not now willing to say this will not work.

He is spending his own money to build a second prototype and opening this to open source in USA. Should this second prototype function as claimed, and should others build it with a positive peer review, it will prove that the inventor is a very clever and intelligent businessman also.

You see, by making this open source and providing detailed plans, should in the next year positive peer review arrive, the road is clear for world-wide patents. So while the inventor loses USA, he gains the rest of the world, including China. Not dumb. He will not be able to obtain patents in Europe or elsewhere for a device that obviously can not function, however, should a dozen peers build the device and find that it works, the road to patents is opened up.

It is to be expected that this invention will be dragged into the mud. No one, but absolutely no one can come up with even the slightest idea of what the source of power could be. The inventor knows this and will not be surprised at negative comments, I am sure he is expecting them and has a thick skin.

What jumped off the page at me was his comments about a personal transportation pod. To me, this is a sign of a thinking, pondering, sane, rational person with inventive talents. I was very positively impressed by his comments about this pod having an egg shape.

I see the following steps as obligatory passage to success:

1- completion of a second, working prototype

2- filming of this device

3- prony brake testing of torque and power while filming

4- distributing free, or low-cost click-through detailed building plans

5- confirmation by peer review, that the device functions and functions with sufficient power output to make the device useful - - instead of a working, but only laboratory curiosity like cold fusion has been until now.


All moving magnets should NOT be in the near vicinity of any metallic or conductive material.


I'll Build One

One Oct. 2, 2008, New Energy Congress member, There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1] wrote:

I have a full machine shop and electronic lab just waiting to help out. Have the inventor

send me an email, and I will build his next device for cost of materials only. It doesn't

get any better then that.

The Laws of Thermodynamics Still Apply

--Penny Gruber 19:25, 19 October 2008 (PDT)

We are presented with another big claim that were it true would violate not just well evidenced laws, but very well studied behaviors of all the constituent parts.

Let Eddie build one and test it. I trust he will give us an honest assessment. I do not expect it to do anything new.

See also

OS:Achilles Ligeras' Magnetic Engine (ALME)

Directory:Magnet Motors

- Directory







There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1]

Open Source??

What a blatant use of the term.