Author Options:

The Newman Motor Challenge ! Answered

I was recently approached by someone claiming the old Newman Motor wouldn't be good for anything.
Well, I was a little bit offended by this as I already had my little toy version of it as kid.
At that time though it really was just a toy for me.

Critics still say the Newman Motor is nothing more than some interesting machine.
And even the biggest followers will admit it is not a free energy machine, just a very efficient one.
I experimented with, what some call fringe science, now for about 30 years.
And it all started with math and my interest in unusual ways of dealing with problems.
So what's behind the challenge?

The original design was suprisingly simple as you can see in the above Wiki link.
Just a spinning magnet in a (split) coil.
What you don't find anywhere though is real details on the how to.
Sure, you need to have some sort of contact linked to the rotation and timing is critical but what does it all do?
You can build a drt simple model in a few hours with stuff you might have around already.
Quite a few Youtubers are happy to share their creations.
The actual challenge is to come up with what Newman really did inside his drum.
And also why I think it is not the full potential his machine had.
Build a simple Newman motor and check for how long you can let it run on a charge super capacitor.
Then sit back and read some of the other magnet stuff I wrote.
After that come up with a better design ;)

I started to create some 3D models that need testing once I find more free time - should take some leave one day..
But for those with little patience and an interest in the Newman Motor I decided to share my current idea:
For some it might be really confusing although they know motors and magnetic fields.
Those just playing with magnets might have it easier for once as they can pretend they followed my thoughts ;)
The original design used two coils and a rotating magnet.
If you consider how the magnet creates an electromagntic field in the coils then you have to wonder right away how it can spin.
And most designs will indeed need a push start to get going!
You can't have electricity produced without the magnet spinning and you can't make it spin without electricity!
The current from the battery or capacitor can only flow at the short moment of contact on the axle.
This moment needs to be timed "mechanical" as we don't want to waste any power on not required electronics.
If you ever bothered to check the timing of a Newman Motor then you realised the collapsing electromagnetic field at the moment of contact actually is in reverse to what the manget has in that position.
Unlike any normal motor it means the magnet produces most of the power the coil needs to make the rotor spin!
So far for the well known facts, now for my fiction:
I would like to call my version the Aussie Newman Motor as all things downunder are just different ;)
Here are my current desing mods, that I freely share so everyone can benefit form many years of experimenting to save a lot of time.
1. Instead of two coils a not-really-bifilar coil is centered on the axle.
The coil is created like two stacked relay coild that have no bobbin and a "dint" to allow the axle to pass through.
Without the big gap of the original less of the magnetic field strenght is lost and the coil is far closer to a homogenous magnet.
2. The timing done by salvaging a simple DC motor's contacts and brushes.
This allows for far higher currents and if the salvaged motor had enough poles also for a very short "burst".
3. The axle contact is made with a cleaned steel bearing.
After cleaning very conductive copper based lubricant is used in tiny amounts to prevent corrosion and provide a lower resistance.
The clear benefit is that with the new timing system a lot more current can flow.

Initial tests with a mock up model showed an increase in run time from the capacitor of about 15% already.
With proper bearings and a salvaged DC motor I hope to reach 18 to 20% more than the original design.
Now why the DC motor if a reed contact or hall effect sensor would be even faster and with less resistence?
Neither can handle really high currents without additional electronics ;)
Plus of course I wanted to leave the door open for the Aussie Newman Motor 2020.
You might now say "Why bother if the above improvements are already so great?".
If you followed my elsewhere for a while then you know the Newman Motor is only 2D but I prefer 3D or more harmony if you like.
Right now the imagination of people re-inventing Newman's machine is limited.
They try to get on the horse from behind - literally.
Fancy electronics, machined parts and so on.
But they never go 3D ;)
You got it? :)
There is only two coils!!
The magnet rotates, same as the contact on the axle.
One set of coils for each contact the salvaged DC motor has.
Each set aligend to the corresponding contact.
And now you will ask "How do you plan to connect that to a single DC power source?
Well, that is why it will be the 2020 model - my time for tinkering is sadly limited because I still need to work to support myself.
But if you consider that the original as a good model can run for over 10 minutes on a supercapcitor then ask yourself how long it could run on 4 or even 8 coil sets.
And although there is no such thing as "free energy": There will be still space for more coils.
Or other coils to just provide electricity that does not power the motor.
Critics will now see their chance and state that if we add a load to these additional coils then this will cause a strain on the system.
Of course they are correct here.
If, however, the load is mechanical then the motor needs to supply basically the same additional energy.
Plus all mechanical losses.
The question is: How much mechanical load can we add before the motor is down to the same efficiency of a very efficient DC motor? ;)
And what if our Aussie Newman 2020 would actually violate the laws of physics?
We can calculate how much electrical energy would be required so a given motor produces a fixed amount of torque.
Or we can just measure it, the beauty of science...
We can do the same in reverse of course.
Let's say a mechanical pump would require 500RPM and 100Nm of torque to pump 100 liters per minute.
Then we could calculate what sized motor we need to drive the thing and how much power the motor would need.
So again: What if the Aussie Newman 2020 would require far less than what science makes us think and still does this job on a simple 12V lead acid batty of 4Ah?
Just saying... ;)

I hope to have a presentable and working 2 coil system by May, so stay tuned!
In case you are faster or even beter then of course feel free to show off your results or to post a link to your Instructable so everyone can verify it.


The forums are retiring in 2021 and are now closed for new topics and comments.

5 months ago

I can't find plans for one of these anywhere, and people that seem to get one working go dark. Been chasing the dragon for 40 years and have failed every time, but the Newman design seems to work. I just can't figure out how to assemble one of these. I have the equipment. Frustrating!


Reply 5 months ago

There are no plans of the original, sadly - at least none that I am aware of.
And yes, you are correct with your suspicions.
Once someone has success with this kind of technology they seem to vanish from this earth :(
You can only try and if you succeed keep it to yourself until the time is right and people are ready to accept.

Can't give you any plans or detailed instructions but maybe a few hints here and there to give you new ideas.
Newman stated that his motor can't really be made much smaller with the technology and materials available to him.
With that in mind it becomes rather obvious that the large "drum" doubles as a gyroscope to store the energy from the anglular momentum.
To get a grasp of how much energy can be stored take a truck tire on a nice working hub.
Get it by hand to a slow spin, then then try to stop it quickly by hand ;)
I suspect the system to be intentionally just slightly out of balance.
Not enough to cause any serious vibrations but enough to make it rest in always the same position when not operating.

A simple, brushed DC motor like you find in toys has two magnets providing a north and sout pole on the inside.
In this "single" magnet a set of coils sits on a rotor.
The brushes make sure that always the correct coils are energised so they are repelled/atracted to the magnet.
Ever wondered what would happen if you have multiple magnets that DON'T have any even spacing ?
Ever wondered what would happen if instead of symmetrical and individual coil sets you would "loops" that are connected?
It is said that a conductor in a changing magneic field creates electrical energy.
If a coil with "uncommon" winding configuration has one part energized externally while another is actually being energized by passing a magnet....
And if instead of many contact elements for many coils you just have two rings with an "interrupter"....
What again happens if an electromagnetic field collapses?
Could there be a reason for these "capacitors" in the design after all...

Don't allow yourself to be limited by what you might have learned in school or read in books.
Make up your own mind, do your own experiments.
We know, as said, that a conductor in a changing magnetic field creates electric energy.
We know this happens because we are told it is so.
And we are also told that and ellectric current creates a magnetic field around a conductor - righ hand rule and such.
We can not have without the other.
And the conclusion is that the magnetic field is created.
What if, in reality, it would be the other way around?
Not saying it is so, just opening doors so to say.
We are only told the basics we need to know, like when kids from farming communities in the old days had "no need" for higher math in school.
what do we really know how magnetic fields interacts and influence each other? ;)


1 year ago

I just found links to the book Newman Motor Disclosure by Geoffrey Miller. And also found the link to your post here. Did you get the book and are still stumped? I was going to get it but not if it does not reveal the Newman Motor workings as promised. I also want to say that I am not as knowledgeable as you but followed your reasoning no problem. For sure the air core, fly wheel effects, firing / timing, axle single wire, harmonics, all jumped out at me on the video, but your expanding on all the effect the split second critical timing has, and what is happening at those exact moments was awesome. There appears to be less mystery to the electromagnetic effects upon mass, in this case copper. At any rate, I still feel this motor holds the key to free energy for all.


Reply 1 year ago

There are several books claiming to address the problem, provide insight info or drawings.
I had a quick look at a few I could get my hands on and have to say it is not really worth bothering.
Newman did not leave much behind that made into the right hands, so the chance that one author actually hit pay dirt is slim to non existing.
If a book would reveal what we actually need to know to replicate the motor than Newman would have provided that at the peak of his fame.
These days we would not see a book published if it would contain the secrets of these impossible machines....

I had a really lenghty reply in work with some more info but realised it was going too much out of context when I tried to explain certain links and similarities with other machines.
So let me try again:
For all these so called free energy or overunity machines from back in the day we fight two battles.
The first is that despite the best of the having checked these machines and confirmed it can't be a hoax they are now declared to be exactly this.
That it means totally disrespting and discrediting some of the most knowledgable people from that time is no issue either.
"Everyone can make mistakes or overlook things!" That is the claim to justify the condemnation.
The second battle is that it seems not too many people are still interested in wasting endless hours in a shed trying to figure things and mechanims out.
Once you start it is easy to waste year after year without ever really reaching the finnish line.

With the Newman motor we have the additional problem that the inventor was living in his own creation of magnetism and electricity.
Even the brightest minds could not follow him because the terms and links he used made no sense to anyone but himself.
I would tell someone that I use a nupsdupsy in a rotor and some fine strings of humpies around it then anyone would think I have a problem already.
If I then say that once I sping it fast enough the humpy string make a lightbul glow even you would just laugh and walk away.
Replace the term nupsydupsy with permanent magnet and make the strings out of copper wire instead of humpies and have a simple electromotr that everyone understands ;)

We learned that losses are either to be expected or to be reduced.
Otherwise we ould have never invented the wheel or later the bearing for it.
What we forgot to learn however is that losses in a mechanical system are totally different from losses in a magnetic or electrical system, especially if said system is a moving one.
All we learned are were willing to understand that it is possible to reduce certain losses through optimised mechanical designs.
Like the shape of rotors and pole configurations on the stator side.
Certain losses, like the pure electrical resistance can't be overcome.
At least not if you keep thinking inside that box that the powers that control us implemented.
Conductors with a zero resistance are impossible! We trusted that until some guy figured out that certain materials actually get a zero resistance if cooled down enough.
Same for the statement that a transformer is always the best option to get one AC voltage to another.
Someone realised that at high frequencies a transformer can be not just quite small but also quite powerful.
The losses we accepted for so many years were reduced to a negligable level, thanks to the invention of switch mode power supplies.

A transformer system is not much more than a static motor where the magnet is a secondary or primary winding.
Instead of mechanical energy we "make" electrical energy on a different level.
Mechanical systems in resonance are usually quite dangerous as we know from many bridges around the world.
Even soldiers break their step when going over a bridge in large numbers....
Energies, in this case mechanical and unwanted are often a problem if we can't use them in a positive way.
A transformer in resonance can do big things, like a Tesla transformer making huge arcs.
Air core is the way to go here as a core means we have a really hard time making sense out of things.
Saturation is just one thing here that messes with us.

Imagine you would start a motor or "transformer" design not with the hindsight of reducing mechanical, electrical or magnetic losses but to utilise them instead...
No compromises because there is a cheap way to get quite close with the reductions...
As a hint:
Companies with a huge amount of flouroscent tubes need ways to compensate for the change of load being not totally resistive.
Same if a company has huge amounts of really big AC motors.
Until we got digital electricity meters it was basically impossible to measure correctly if the compensation factor was unknown.
The load on the grid can't go to far either way pure resistive either as it messes with everything all the way to the generators.
If a motor would utilise for example the energy generated when the electromagnetic field collapses it would already make a big difference.
Same if we would be able to properly understand how and where magnetic fieldlines change and compress.
And optimised desgin here would be an effeciency boost.
Combined that would mean a motor would have a loss from the electrical input to the mechanical output that is so low we wouldn't believe it.

Some people back in times where we did not really bothered with anything new claimed to have done just that.
It even got confirmed in many cases but never made it into the open range so to say.
did deep enough trying to seperated real from the possible hoxes and one thing becomes clear quickly.
The more legit it seems to be the more you see the involvement of governments, threads and inventions simply disappearing.
However if look really close we can often find fascinating similarities in modern designs that are always claimed to be totally new and independent.
Take the modern QI charging as just one example.
Or for simplifying things our cheap induction cooktops.
Where early models and the expensive ones for our ovens come with tons of electronics, a $50 unit does basically the same thing.
And the efficiency in terms how much electrical energyis converted into electromagetical (not heating!) is surprisingly high.
We see bits and pieces here and there with so obvious connection - until go much further back in time for your checks...
And where we can't solve it by smart thinking we solve it by adding more electronics and still create more losses instead of using them ;)
The Newman motor is not impossible, understanding it and replicating however seems to be....

Once we free ourself from the constraints we learned in school and later in life we can start re-inventing the wheel properly.
Science and physics are nothing more than our flawed attempt of understanding things we can not always fully explain or even create.
By ignoring what we learned in terms of fixed things, limitations and being impossible we allow us once again to see how our world works with open eyes...


1 year ago

Just to satisfy the cirtics a bit:

What we know from old documents, videos and so on does not show all the little details of Newman's invention.
And if you ever checked a standard DV motor with brushes then you certainly notice the similarities.
main difference is that no core material is used, just air and that the
thing also only has one contact for the coil, the other one is directly
connected to the axle.
No matter how often you watch the videos, if you see the machine starting one majory problem emerges.
Unless the battery provides power the system only works if something actually spins it.
The battery can only provide energy for a split second through the contact area on the axle.
you do some checks with a model you realise quite quickly that the coil
would provide just a tiny impulse that creates and opposing magnetic
field to push the magetes on the rotor away.
Hook a small motor with a
crank system to a wheel and you ca observe how it gets a little kick
every time the motor touches wheel.
But to get it spinning at all you
would need a longer impulse as otherwise the wheel might not spin far
enough to engage the motor again.
Through the mass and at enough RPM this pulsing effect would minimise but it won't at low RPM's.
They key that is missing is what is required to actually get the Newman motor working at all.
Model replicas use very low friction bearings and quite high operating voltages.
A coil with thick wire might produce more amps but no usable voltage.
Too many turns and the resistance is so high that you need to increase the voltage to generate a sufficiently strong field.
Imagine pushing a kid on a swing with just one finger and you can only push the finger for 2cm each time.
Will be quite hard to give the little one a decent fun time.

No toy sized model I ever tested did more than to run for a long time on a battery - without any load applied.
Add a load and it either stops or the battery drains really quick.

I think it would make sense to try a visualisation of the currents, voltages and magnetic fields.
The battery is pretty clear for the providing side of things, unclear on how much, if any juice is actually going back in it.
But the coil...
We not only have two air coils that are seperated but also a magnetic field between and inside them that rotates.
In an open air coil system voltages can build up through harmonics.
That is how for example, a Tesla transformer can produce such high voltages.
We however have a capicotr missing for this.
doing this just with two coils is a damn hard task as just calculating
coils for a specific harmonic frequency is a true pain in the behind.
The axle however could be seen a capacitor with a really low capacitance.
To make this in any form usable the timing is extremely tricky.
contact to close the system needs to happen exactly when the power
output from this resonant oscillator is at max level AND when the
rotating magnet is at the exact right position to be replelled.
At least this explains why there is just one contact and the half of the rotating mating seems to be unused.
I have to assume the effects of the electromagnetic field and the rotating magnet are somehow influencing each other.
To say it like some of the old folks would have:
The magnet pulls the electromagnetic field with it while the generated voltages remain in the coil.


Reply 1 year ago

If I have now so nicely proven that the Newman motor could never
actually work, then why bother to create a 3D printed model that
everyone can experiment with?
Did you check the "Big ureka" video already? ;)
If the Newman motor used a rotating magnet between two coils then where does this massive drum come into play?
That is not the point where the critics might start to hate me...

We don't fully understand magnetic fields and their interactions or for that matter manipulations quite that good.
Mostly because we have nothing invented yet to visualise magnet fields in real time or at least halfway accurate.
But I already mentioned the resonant oscillator bit wih the axle...
All copies of the Newman generator are based on the early drawings but not on the final Big Eureka machine.
Here, all of a sudden, we get a rotating drum but no longer a stack of magnets and two visible coils anywhere!
The drum is a much larger capacitor and in series with the battery and coil.
It is also a quite efficient flywheel as all the mass is outside.
I wondered for quite a while how it would be possible to incorporate the original design with a rotating drum like Newman did.

Of course the drum is now also the axle, otherwise it wouldn't need to rotate.
The previously used magnet stack however could not work inside it.
Unless of course we would reverse the entire action and align the magnets differently.
Using coils mounted on the inside of the drum with a fixed magnet in the center would work the same way as rotating the magnet.
But it wouldn't be too efficient.
close to the metal drum the coils would no longer form any usuable air
coil system as the magnetic fields would prefer to use the metal as a
Aluminium would be an alternative at first glance until you
consider that it would generate a lot of eddy currents interacting with
the coils.
BUT! If the magnets are mounted on the inside wall of the
drum their magnetif field would be much stronger, especially if the
drum is used to create to create poles cvering 180° of the hull.
Then we would end up with an immensly strong magnetic field going through the coils.
From my initial tests about 4 times as strong as with magnets rotating inside the coils and no magnetic shielding.
And now we suddenly can also match the coil dimensions and positions to how and where the field lines of the magnets go!
Means we can place the coils at the exact same distance as the highest flux zone going from north to south pole.
return we get a much more instant switching between the corresponding
fields as even tiny changes of the magnets positions will already cuase
relatively high responses from the coils.
Same when the contact is closed.
the magnets and drum would be positioned at the point where a reversal
of the electromacnetic field would have the greatest effect.
IMHO this point would be when the magnets flux sone has just passed the horizone line of the coils.
My initial tests here show that a 1/4 ratio here is beneficial.
Not going into Tesla on the why here, but have to explain it somehow...

We need harmonics for this system to work as advertised and no simple model can do this properly.
If you know a bit about HAM radio then you know the 1/4 ratio is very common for all sorts of antennas.
For us it is on so far two levels:
The coils and drum form a resonant oscillator.
That means our magnet must be timed in sync with these harmonics.
The easiest way to do this seems to be forcefully.
Newman and others stated quite often that we normal sientists will never understand magnets properly.
And those who ever tried to understand what Tesla did with his transformers still fail to fully understand it.
lets just go with the flow and do the thinking like these old guys and
just assume magnets and their fields actually work a bit differently
than what we learned in school.

If the coils are dimensioned and
positioned so that the magnetic field passes the outside at an angle
close to 90° we get the 1/4 we need.
So really flat and wide coils
wouldn't work, too stumpy and you have the magnet right on 90° and it
become very tricky to get any decent contact timing done.
Ideally the magnet would reach exactly 90° at the same moment the contact opens again.
elecromagnetic pulse would then act like the spark plug igniting the
mix in the clylinder and all power goes into the down stroke of the
According to Some in Newman's machine the magnet pulls the voltage and current generated by coils out of phase.
It also creates more electromagnetic fields in the coils.
You can check this nice on some oscilloscope and by wiggling a magnet inside a coil at different angles.
As we have no core material the electromagnetic field would be pulled along with the magnet.
This continues until the interacting fields are no longer strong enough and the effect reverses.
And like switching off a coil it would create and electric impulse at this moment.
Since our rotor is in sync this energy adds up.
Like a Tesla coil with a magnet instead of a primary coil...
The really interesting part is now the drum again.
Like in a Tesla transformer it is our "topload".
like in a modern ignition coil the impulse set loose when the contact
closes is forced through the axle inside - against the magnetic field
generated in it!
When the contact opens both the impulse and magetic field collapse here.
only a fraction of energy could make it back to the battery or
capacitor it explains why the machine can not run without an external
power supply.
With the system in sync we not only get a quite high DC resistance but also the correct polarity for our connected battery.
nice why the motor runs at fixed voltages from the batteries but never
from something like an adjustable power supply ;)
It is much harder to explain why you wouldn't increase the voltage slowly.
(You would need to time the increase with the rotation as otherwise it too obvious what really happens here)
Check the videos closely and you notice he does not choose the voltages randomly!

Ok, then, how would the real deal have worked back in the day?
A normal motor always has a lot of waste to deal with.
Be it the brushes, bearings, magnetic binding effects and so on.
On top we have the problem with the core materials and contruction.
We aim for maximum efficiency in a way our understanding of science allows us.
We FORCE things to fit.
Newmans motor however goes the exact opposite way.
a normal motor generates a lot of heat due to the high current
involved, it only deals with voltages and resonances in an air coil
What would otherwise be seen as loss of magnetic flux density is now a resonant system in itself.
The beauty of it seems to be that it is kept in resonance mainly by the magnet...
Being resonant also means there is no need for massive wires to handle insane currents.
We only need to be able to create a suffiently strong electromagnetic field.
I leave it up to your imagination if a few turns of copper pipe or a lot of turns of wire are the better options ;)
All we have is a little friction and some other losses but in return we have a big flywheel that can storee a lot of energy.

The last question or puzzle to solve would be how the capacitor drum reacts with the magnetic fields.
We know that we can affect electrons with magnetic fields, otherwise we would have never had analog TV's...
Wouldn't that in return mean that charging a massive magnet causes a majory of the electrons to move onto one side? ;)
Is it then coincidence that the contact is directed from the coil, through the inner (and insulated) axle and the out through the drum?
Let's consider this option for a second...
In the moment the contact closes we would not just discharge the coil but also the capacitor.
The collapsing field drives the magnet away, the current of the coil however is out of phase at that moment - by 180° or close around it.
When the contact opens we have short on the capacitor removed, causing a short for the coil in terms of accepting the stored energy and getting it into the empty capacitor.
Means in reality we remove the electromagnetic resistance from the magnet as the coil now can use the out of phase current together with the newly generated voltage from the rotation.
Instead of building up a huge force against the rotating magnet this force will be at max when the magnet switches the magnetic field in the coils around by its position.
Now the capacitor drum gets a massive burst and the same cycle as before happens again, just this time with the voltage.
The cycle continues and the motor only needs from the batteries what is required to overcome friction and electrical losses.
But no longer what would be required to overvome magnetic binding forces, saturation and losses caused by the air gaps plus a few more.

Newman proved this concept to be true by stating that only the size of Big Eureka and the strengh of the magnets matter.
If all those "fringe scientists" are correct on their understanding of magnets and their fields then we are indeed going the wrong wroute in terms of creating motion from electricity or electricity from motion.
We desire the strongest magnetic fields at the lowest input cost to make a motor move.
But we also desire a very compact form factor for this.
Meant we learned to compromise and use the current understanding of things to improve.
A very often used phrase in this content is "The perfect AC motor is actually a DC motor!"
Tesla invented AC for us but I think only to solve the problem of distributing electricity and having a source for his projects that later all required AC to work at all.
An asyncronous AC motor for example "drags" a magnet along - the rotor.
The megnetic field in this rotor is generated by the field of the electromagnetic coils.
And ideally we would love to have the rotor is sync with the field.
In reality it always runs a bit slower and the higher the load the slower it gets.
In return the input power needs to increase and more heat is generated through losses.
As said we learned to accept that we need much more input power than what we can expect in output as it is impossible to create the perfect motor.
Sadly this impossible meant we gave up on trying to improve or change the concepts we learned so far.
It was more convinient for everyone involved to keep it that way.


Reply 1 year ago

What would that actually mean for us if all the above is really true or at least close enough to it?
Keep in mind I am only trying for about 30 years and am still learning...)

In todays times we not only have super powerful magnets but also the ability to create extremely complex structures with tolerances next to nothing.
Ceramic bearings or if you dare magnetic ones reduce the friction of heavy things by far more than anything Newmand would have had access to.
And with our conviently invented computers we can even design the perfect coils - at least as far as our current understanding goes.
And to abuse the term, yes, we could have free energy for everyone.
Solar and wind farm as we already have can provide the electricity to charge batteries and run our Newman based motors.
A car sized system should certainly be enough for most household needs if you exclude heating and airconditioners until we can provide the motor principles for those compressors as well.
But with a half decent solar heater it wouldn't be a problem to have a heatpipe running an ammonia based refirigeration system.
And since the input energy came for free we can accept the slightly higher energy losses compared to a compressor system...
At night we can still use battery power for our motor and create the heat we need for the refrigeration system from it.
In return the amount we would need from the electrical grid would be reduced to those times when our sources fail to provide the little we need for our motor.
Like during the winter when you are in an area with no wind for the entire season and have no wood or fuel to run a tiny generator...
Basically it means our independence from fossil fuels and electricity providers would be reduced to under 5% from what it currently is....
Well, of course only if ully implemented like by no longer using cars that require fossil fuels and corresponding other machines and power plants.
Global warming could be stopped dead in its tracks too and would only have to fight the outcome from the damages done already.
And suddely all those plans to bind the greenhouse gasses somehow become plausible too as the ongoing supply of them would be cut off.
To spin this a bit into the future and include some proper development on all of this it could mean we could run a family car all day long on a battery the size of about 20% of the capacity current systems provide - and those only go for a few hundret kilometers if are really careful, then they need a long recharge.
You could use the same sized battery to drive a week or multiple to overcome the charging problem.
But by that time it would make much more sense to have roads working like ongoing wireless charging pads.
Use a tiny battery and otherwise use what the road provides for basically free.
The electrictiy for the roads cost nothing anymore, so we would only have to pay off the costs to build them.
Quite cheap too if you consider free energy...
OOOPS, suddenly the governments lost billions in tax revenue and go bankrupt.
No fuel, no electricity, no emissions, means these politians would need to start to work for their money and stop wasting money they don't actually have.
But then again, who would still need money if the basic costs of literally everything exclude energy costs?
Like in Star Trek, the concept of money would become obsolete.
Abandone all greed and hate and suddenly a peacful and sharing world has all the time to really focus on developing not only the brain and free time but also really new technologies that change our way of understanding science as it is.
I means we could no longer be controlled and wouldn't have a need for war or fights for ressources either.

The human already does its best to eliminate the "human factor".
Automation is everything these days and entire factories can run with just a hand full of people checking monitor screens and stepping in if the computer system ever fails or the equippment for that matter.
Humans are required to work so they have the money to pay for all the things that cost money, and there is always someone who takes his share along the long way.
Really (production cost-) free energy would literally destroy how our entire society currently works.
You energy costs and running costs for the car are basically zero?
Then wouldn't a half time job be enough to pay for what is left without loosing any money?
And in some situations you might not have to work at all anymore, like when having access to clena water and some lifestock - you could just trade for what you need.
Spin it further and there is always someone how needs something and someone who can supply it.
In reality it wouldn't really matter anymore if you give it for free because what you need to make it would come for free as well.

Money or currency started as a means to make trading easier.
Instead of finding someone who would need your bear skins and has some corn and flour in return you just go to someone who give you "money" for it.
Money was like a scale.
Depending on how much product there is and how much demand the scale would swing in your favour or in the tradesmans favour, but always a bit more to his side for providing the service.
The leading elite realised the potential of using money as control machanism.
After all, they also needed ways to trade with other "rulers".
And of course they all required their fair share of the newly created "easy trading" - taxes were invented.
And the more those in charge require(d) to satisfy their personal and controlloning/developing needs the more taxes were created.
With money now at the base everyone had new ways of getting a "fair" share.
Having enough money suddenly meant you could get things you don't really need, luxury was born.
With that came status, desires, demands, supply control...
Now imagine a big supercomputer "in the cloud" would provide everyone with a Google like connection in terms of what is needed and what is available where and when - globally.
No more overproduction as there is always someone who needs it.
No more limited supplies or restrictions and demand is now only directly linked to availability and all is shared equally without a need for hoarding.
Add free energy and our two major control factors in the world start to fade away.
Damand and supply....
Money would be so plentyful that it bcomes worthless.
Really all that would be left is to use our intelligence to abandone all things that divide us.
Who then needs territory, ressources or control?
We are all just humans, we all share the same ressources as we all are constrained to the same habitat.
It is not your home, your state or contry, not even your continent, it is just our world.
We are all, one is everyone and everyone is equal.


Reply 1 year ago

Even if we never get a new Newman machine by online order, we can still try to understand and learn from it!
A single inventor might always fail to get his machine on the market.
He would at least need the money back to build the damn thing for you in the first place, then labour, and so on.
And lets face it, if it is close enough to be impossible then it will disappear.
But no longer if all over the world people start to follow and make improvements.
Try what their limits allow and share what they know and developed so far.
You can silence one, but try to silence that went viral, to make a link to our favourite video platform...
Sooner or later there will be someone with enough money and interest and that person provides a few fully working machines to keen people thinking like the person for free.
Like the chinese people would start to copy it, build it in the garage...
Before anyone could step in the electricity providers would fail to make any money from us.... ;)
Shortly after fossil fuels would only be for someone who still loves to drive his oldtimer on the roads...
The question is not if we can have free energy, only when everyone will have it ;)

Jack A Lopez
Jack A Lopez

1 year ago

I noticed the Wikipedia article, for "Newman's energy machine", links to one of J L Naudin's pages, here:


I just wanted to mention, for anyone not familiar with JLN,


that guy has been around for years, and he's done huge amounts of work in attempts to replicate a huge number of different, "free energy", inventions, with varying degrees of success.

Well, what I mean is success from his perspective; i.e. his conclusions, as written in his web pages.

I dunno. He seems sincere. Although, I can't blame anyone who wants more proof than taking someone at his or her word for it, especially for this topic.

I should also note, the word of authorities on this topic, their conclusions are not trustworthy either. That will come as shock to some reading this, especially students of the justice business. In that field, in courts of law, testimony from experts is actually given more weight than is physical evidence, and that fact probably seems shocking, to those of us in the reality business.

What I am saying is this: If you want to see one of these inventions work, or fail, really the only intellectually honest way to make that happen is to build one yourself.

Or if you don't like building things (and if you don't like building things, what are doing reading Instructables.com?) find a friend to build one for you. By the way, a local friend would be best, because you probably want to inspect the machine, and observe it directly, with your test equipment, or plug a toaster into it, etc.

A toaster is a kind of, "test equipment." For reals.


Reply 1 year ago

That is why I am making a small 3D printed model ;)
Basic 8mm smooth rod from printer left overs, two bearings, bobbins for coils and of course a holder for the magnets.
Allows for easy building and gives still the freedom to tinker a bit.
Will have to some tests if with PLA the bearings are really necessary, should be good enough without.

Anyone who can 3D print somehow can then just do their own little tests.
Won't have any fancy shielding or such, just the plain basics.
More might come when I have time to update the general model I have.

Jack A Lopez
Jack A Lopez

Reply 1 year ago

Well, that sounds like a plan!

One of these days I am going to get myself one of these 3D printers...

Then I guess I would have fewer excuses not to try building one of these "free energy", magnet motor, gizmos.


1 year ago

What's it really about with the 2020 version?

Some "fringe scientists" a long time ago stated that an AC motor is actually just a really, really bad DC motor.
If only gets its efficiency from the fact that the electromagnetic field is rotating.
Their theory is that it is nothing than a rotating electromagnet.
And those can be far more efficient than anything AC.
If you check the magnetic fields from a standard Newman Motor's permanent magnet then it is the same as any other magnet.
At least for the official drawings.
The real deal did not use such a simple configuration but instead has several magnets aligned to produced a choked field.
In essence a ring magnet with another magnet inside that is of opposing polarity but weaker than the rest.
The resulting "dome is then flattened quite a bit and the field strength is at a max where the coils are.
Take a meter and check yourself - on the edges your permanent magnet has a much stronger field.
You can only do so much choking and shielding on a hobby level....
But imagine the created field lines are flat enough to allow 3 more coil sets without interfering.
Then the main arguement would be that we have three additional drains on the battery/capacitor...
Is that so?
You see in the original design, that everyone follows, the battery only activates once per revolution.
As it is quite easily possible to add another battery and set of conection we could and should actually work like a double piston system.
Why just use the push once if we can use two batteries and a push at both magnet positions? ;)
You might say now because that other impulse we get from the reversed field without contact will charge the capacitor.
Again: The battery only connects at the contact point.
Means that revers pulse is totally unused!
The second battery not only provides twice the torque but also a more uniform "pushing" - like having one person pushing you either side on a swing.
The worst critics say Newman did exactly that with a hidden and quite powerful battery...

With the same principle we could place four more coils into the gaps.
And even with just a simple diode recitifier stack we would get some nice output going.
The key is to use fast diodes so the short impulse through the contacts can be fully utilised.
And of course you will need a suitable energy storage system capable of handling high current impulses, like the upcoming graphene batteries.
"Big Eureka" was running at quite low speeds for obvious reasons, like that such home made stuff simply is not balanced enough.
It also used normal batteries that can't really handle quick impulses very well.
Our modern alternatives do much better here.
In all videos you see that the RPM's go along with the battery voltage.
And it seems there no relation as such to the current drawn in return.
A normal motor requires more and more amps the faster it runs, Newmans did not.
To apply some vortex ideas and out of the law thinking we need to go one step further though.

Some people really like to play with high voltages, so a Tesla coil might be something you already played with, or one of these plasma balls.
The simple ones use basic oscillators.
And if those are tuned to the RESONANT frequency of the coil then the magic happens with long arcs of fun.
Hold on a minute....
We have a coil and a capacitor.
So we might have some LC oscillator...
Too bad we have those pesky contacts and no freely swinging oscillator...
But we could use the additional coils and matching capacitors for this.
And if we drive the input voltage so we match the resonant frequency of our newly created LC oscillators....
The the critic of course has to reply: "You will slow the motor down because the megnetic field from the oscillators will interfere with it!"
I say: "Will it?"
In reality the field from the magnet will affect them much worse - or would the oscillators in resonance actually support it? ;)
Think about the facts of using multiple harmonics from different energy sources!
In resonance the additional coils create a rotating electromagnetic field.
And this field is in sync with the rotor.
A shielded magnet will not be affected by this rotating field.
As long as the rest of the system acts like an air core transformer we only need to get enough RPM to make it into frequencies commonly used for Tesla coils...

A good engineer could then go as far as to add a rotating ring of magnets on the outside of the coils to generate an even higher magnetic flux from the permanent magnets on the inner rotor.
Like commonly used for hard drives or the generators i wind mills.
Newman officially did not usitlise any of the above.
Instead he even claimed it would not improve the performance at all.
This was based on his theory of sinning "particles" in the magnetic field of permanent magnets.
The system would only work if the coils would be free.

If Newmans motor really had the efficiency those old engineers in the original videos claimed it had, than how much higher would it be if fully modified?
Maybe Newman simply did not dare to go that far as then a motor without a load would spinout of control quickly.
And how would you explain to someone that you have no issues breaking our known laws of physics? ;)
Since we operate in resonance the coils wouldn't really need to have have massive wire diameters.
Litz wire will do just fine for a small model and copper piping for a bigger model.
The limit is really only set by how far you can go with your magnets and tolerances.
And far here in terms of real distance for the magnetic field.
Like any big generator in the real world you would need to upsize the magnet according to your coil diameter.
Vortex stuff comes into play when you consider the relations between all fields and rotation of the system as whole.
The coils must be within the region of maximum flux.
So, the thickness of our donut ring is limited by this.
If you max this out AND have the ability to also max the resulting electromagnetic pulse, then even I currently fail to even imagine the efficiency of such a system.

Why the powered axle??
It would be as easy to use some insulator and a contact finger like on old car ignition systems.
Battery contact on one side, the coil contact on the other.
Well, this secret can only be found if you dig much deeper and into older inventions.
Or if you check modern ingnition coils, the ones that go directly onto your spark plug.
The core is supported by strong magnets on either end and creates a long rod magnet.
The generated impulse then must first "pull" down the pre-charged coil, preferably to the point where the geerated field in the primary equals the one from the permanent magnets.
When it collpses the core "pushes" back and increases the speed of the field change and the overall field strength.
And you get a much more powerfull spark from a tiny coil than what you could ever get out of a standard , full sized old style coil.
Newmans theory was now that by getting the battery power through the axle the impulse from the coil will add energy to it in the same way but "reversed".
It magnetises the axle.
And this magnetisation is often overlooked in modern copies.
There is a reason a Newman Motor won't work if you spin it in the other direction ;)
For us and any decent sized motor it is the ultimate limitation.
The axle must be able to allow a shortcut for the field without getting saturated.
Final questions for the geeks:
Considering the field from the magnet at the point of contact, how would the resulting field in the axle look like?
And how would electrons travel in such a twisted field considering they start to travel at the creation of the impulse from the coil?

If it works in one direction for an ignition coil, than what would be consequences for the current- and voltage flow in the axle?
Physics tells us we can not accelerate electrons in a conductor, they always travel at the speed of light.
But do they really follow that rule all the time?
And if we consider the coil would be like like one half of a transformer and the axle the other then we would get quite some high currents and a very low voltage....
So what again would happen to a magnetic field if a conductor in it has a current flowing through it?
Right, the field of our permanent magnet is now affected and twisted as well...
Calculate that spin and the resulting twist and funny enough you end up with the geometry for a Rodin coil...
I leave it up to you to find out if a rodin coil around a Newman 2020 motor would produce electricity and at what power levels.