There is a purported comment from the inventor. (We can't be
sure this comment was posted by the inventor, but it seems likely to me.)
Response from the inventor
This patented invention has nothing to do with the myth of perpetual motion as it is intended to harness nature in a far more efficient way than has been done before. The basis of this is to eliminate the characteristic of current day generators which slow down under load, therefore possibly harnessing more electricity from magnetism by being more efficient. The present prototype demonstrates the principle, and the next two years of development hopes to first improve all electrical generators large and small. We may also be able to improve the efficiency far enough to produce a net output of electricity by harnessing far more powerful magnets. Go to nullgrav.com for more information.
— Richard Rogala, UP
This tells more than the "more info" website tells.
The patent cited issued this month, and is apparently not yet on Google Patents. Rogala does have an Application in GP which covers improvements to alternators, but does not Claim any specific degree of improvement (patents generally don't). A man of the same name has an older patent, assigned to a large company, for a way to put computers together (dull stuff which just might make a penny more profit per PC, or be used to hammer a competitor).
Note: "eliminate the characteristic of current day generators which slow down under load".
At first glance, EVERYthing slows down under load. Horses, electrons, sled-dogs, blenders. I won't try to abstract a Universal Law from these observations, but others have. I just note that he is fighting "common sense", which is sometimes wrong, but often right.
"improve all electrical generators large and small"
"Improve" is a reasonable hope; but many wise men and hoards of workers have been at the task for a century, and modern generators are pretty darn efficient.
"improve the efficiency far enough to produce a net output of electricity"
If you have a small gen giving 70% efficiency, you can probably improve it to 80% easily. Some stuff like friction scales-down with size, and large machines do over 90%. But from 90% to 95% is tough, and it keeps getting tougher. The curve of efficiency appears to never reach 100%.
Maybe we "just have to try a little harder". If we can get to 99.9%, and just get 0.2% more, we get 100.1% efficiency. Then we have "Free Power" (although a 100.1% efficient system would require a massive machine to yield small power, and the finance charges could be more than the power is worth).
Brain-strainers have poked this problem. Obviously it would be nice if a type 1 perpetual motion machine were possible. Either for free power, or to get bought-out and supressed by the coal/oil/nuke interests who buy-out all type-2 ("Zero point") PM machines. They say if any such thing could work, the universe would not be anything like what we think we see. Or if such processes did work, they would quickly turn the universe inside-out, which basically is OK but we would not be around to know it.
"This perpetual motion machine Lisa made is a joke, it just keeps going faster and faster,"
"Lisa, get in here... In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
It is very possible Rogala has a new way to build generators. It is possible it is better than existing ways. It is remotely possible he can sell his idea to GE Siemens et al, although historically the big guy has found ways around the small inventor's puny patent (RCA re-invented everything Farnsworth did). Those are points I'd want cleared up before investing (as if I had anything to invest!). And the odds that Rogala can hit 100.1% efficiency are lower than the odds of cash in my wallet growing 100.1% every time I open it.
