Why These Impossible Machines Captivate and Deceive
Imagine a windmill that produced the breeze it needed to keep rotating, or a lightbulb whose glow provided its own electricity. For centuries, the dream of a machine that could run forever—powering our world without fuel costs or environmental impact—has captivated inventors, scientists, and visionaries alike . Yet this seemingly noble pursuit has a dark side: one populated by clever frauds, broken dreams, and fundamental misunderstandings of how our universe operates.
The quest for perpetual motion began long before we understood the rules that govern energy. As early as 12th-century India, mathematician Bhaskara the Learned sketched designs for an unbalanced wheel containing curved reservoirs of mercury that he believed would spin eternally 5 . Throughout the Middle Ages and into the modern era, this pursuit continued despite advancing scientific knowledge. What makes this story particularly compelling isn't the science of what's possible, but the human psychology behind the impossible—why we continue to chase this dream despite all evidence that it cannot be realized.
This article explores "perpetual motion of the worst kind"—not just scientifically impossible machines, but those that exploit this impossibility for profit, fame, or to prey upon our deepest hopes for unlimited energy. We'll examine how thermodynamics conclusively prohibits these devices, delve into historical hoaxes that fooled thousands, and explore why this impossible dream continues to resurface in every generation.
Creates energy from nothing
100% efficient energy conversion
Eliminates all friction
Perpetual motion machines are hypothetical devices that can do work indefinitely without an external energy source 1 . They're impossible because their existence would violate fundamental physical laws that have been tested and verified countless times—the laws of thermodynamics 2 6 .
| Type | What It Claims to Do | Law Violated | Why It's Impossible |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Kind | Create energy from nothing | First Law of Thermodynamics | Energy cannot be created or destroyed |
| Second Kind | Convert thermal energy to work with 100% efficiency | Second Law of Thermodynamics | Entropy always increases; no process is perfectly efficient |
| Third Kind | Maintain motion forever by eliminating friction | Practical limitations | Dissipation can never be completely eliminated |
The laws of thermodynamics represent some of the most robust and well-tested principles in all of physics. As physicist Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington famously stated:
"The law that entropy always increases—the second law of thermodynamics—holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations—then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation—well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation." 1
The conservation of energy is equally fundamental. As Donald Simanek, a former physics professor at Lock Haven University, explains: "You can't simply discard one law you 'don't like' without bringing the whole logical structure of physics crashing down" 8 .
In 1812, as America is engaged in the War of 1812, a mysterious inventor named Charles Redheffer appeared in Philadelphia with an extraordinary claim 8 . He opened a house near the Schuylkill River where visitors could view what he declared was a true perpetual motion machine 8 .
Redheffer's device was complex and impressive to look at. It featured a gravity-driven pendulum with a large horizontal gear on the bottom that interlocked with a smaller gear 8 . Placed on the gear were two ramps with weights that supposedly pushed the large gear away from the shaft, creating continuous motion 8 .
The machine was enclosed in a room with a locked door, and viewers could only observe it through a window—a detail that would later prove significant 8 .
The public reaction was sensational. Redheffer charged admission and drew large crowds fascinated by his invention 8 . He became so confident that he approached the Pennsylvania state government requesting funds to build a larger version 8 . This bold move triggered a series of investigations that would expose one of history's most famous scientific frauds.
When Pennsylvania sent inspectors to evaluate the machine before funding it, they encountered obstacles from the start. The room containing the machine remained locked, and Redheffer claimed the key was missing, forcing inspectors to view it only through a window 8 . Despite this limitation, one inspector, Nathan Sellers, brought his son Coleman, who noticed a critical flaw: the cogs in the gears were worn on the wrong side 8 . This indicated that the smaller gear was powering the larger device—the opposite of what Redheffer claimed 8 .
Rather than immediately confronting Redheffer, Sellers hired local engineer Isaiah Lukens to build a duplicate machine that replicated both the appearance and the hidden mechanism of Redheffer's device 8 . Lukens constructed a machine with a clockwork motor hidden in the baseboard, powered by a winder disguised as one of four decorative finials 8 . When they showed this device to Redheffer, he was astonished and even offered them money to learn how it worked, inadvertently revealing his own fraud 8 .
After being exposed in Philadelphia, Redheffer moved his operation to New York, where the scam was still unknown 8 . There, he again attracted large crowds, including Robert Fulton, the renowned engineer who developed the first successful commercial steamboat 8 .
Fulton immediately noticed something suspicious: the machine's speed and sound were uneven, similar to what would occur if it were being cranked by hand 8 . Some reports noted the machine wobbled slightly 8 . Fulton publicly challenged Redheffer, offering to pay for any damage if he failed to expose the true energy source 8 .
With Redheffer reluctantly agreeing under pressure from the crowd, Fulton pried off boards from the wall next to the machine, revealing a catgut cord that ran through the wall to the upper floor 8 . Following the cord upstairs, Fulton discovered an old man sitting on a chair, turning a crank with one hand while eating bread with the other 8 . The perpetual motion machine was powered by nothing more than a hidden manual crank.
The crowd's reaction was swift and furious. Upon realizing they had been deceived, they destroyed the machine on the spot, and Redheffer fled the city immediately 8 . The story became national news, serving as a cautionary tale about the perils of perpetual motion claims.
| Date | Event | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| 1812 | Redheffer demonstrates his machine in Philadelphia | Captures public imagination and draws paying crowds |
| January 21, 1813 | Pennsylvania state inspection | Coleman Sellers identifies incorrect gear tooth wear |
| Early 1813 | Lukens builds duplicate machine | Redheffer inadvertently reveals guilt by offering payment for the secret |
| Late 1813 | Redheffer moves operation to New York | Attempts to repeat success in a new market |
| 1813 | Robert Fulton exposes the hidden crank | Physical proof of fraud is revealed; Redheffer flees |
| 1820 | Redheffer receives a patent for another device | Little is known about this device; the patent was later lost in a fire |
The Redheffer case illustrates several enduring patterns in perpetual motion claims:
This hoax also highlights the critical role of proper experimental methodology and peer review in science. As the University of Houston's Engines of Our Ingenuity project notes, Redheffer's case demonstrates why independent verification and transparent experimental conditions are essential for validating scientific claims 8 .
The study of perpetual motion concepts—both legitimate and fraudulent—involves specific components and principles. Understanding these elements helps explain why certain designs consistently fail and how hoaxes are constructed.
| Component or Principle | Function in Perpetual Motion Devices | Why It Fails to Produce Perpetual Motion |
|---|---|---|
| Overbalanced Wheel | Uses shifting weights to create perpetual imbalance | The energy required to reset weights exceeds any energy gain from imbalance 1 6 |
| Magnetic Propulsion | Uses permanent magnets to create motion | Magnetic fields do work only when moving against each other; no net energy gain 1 3 |
| Capillary Action | Uses liquid flow through narrow tubes | Surface tension forces cannot create net upward flow against gravity 5 |
| Gravity Wheels | Uses gravity acting on rolling balls or weights | Energy gained from falling equals energy required to lift weights back up 1 |
| Electrostatic Effects | Uses static electricity to create rotation | Requires continuous input of energy to maintain the electric field 4 |
| Brownian Ratchets | Attempts to harness molecular motion | Thermal motion works randomly in all directions; no net directional work 1 |
| Zero-Point Energy | Claims to extract energy from quantum fluctuations | No validated method exists; considered pseudoscience by mainstream physics |
The story of perpetual motion represents one of the most persistent disconnects between human ambition and physical reality in scientific history. Despite our thorough understanding of thermodynamics and countless failed attempts, the dream persists. As one physicist researcher notes, "For now, the one thing that seems truly perpetual is our search" for these impossible machines .
The "worst kind" of perpetual motion isn't merely the scientifically ill-conceived devices, but those that exploit hope and curiosity for personal gain. From Redheffer's hidden crank to modern fake energy devices, the pattern remains the same: the promise of free energy taps into our deepest desires for technological liberation from resource constraints.
Yet there's value in this endless pursuit. Each failed attempt reinforces our understanding of thermodynamics. Each exposed hoax strengthens scientific literacy. And perhaps most importantly, our relentless imagination—even when misdirected—testifies to our innate drive to push beyond boundaries and reimagine what's possible within the fundamental rules that govern our universe.
While perpetual motion machines remain firmly in the realm of impossibility, our fascination with them continues to teach us valuable lessons about physics, human psychology, and the enduring power of a seductive idea.