Natural, or Pseudo? I'm confused.

[bilby]

Trouble is with that idea is that the idea is so simple it would have been invented many times over by so many people that it would have wiped out all the top researchers. Amazing that the idea is still around even as in this case a joke.

So... what is it - hidden batteries, or under-the-table induction? Simplicity argues for the former, but the way the guy handles it argues for induction.

There is insufficient evidence to determine the answer to that question.

This is a classic case of a situation where the correct answer cannot be known with any certainty, but we are nevertheless able to definitively rule out a wrong answer that might be promoted to the gullible.

It is a great example of why the "If you don't know exactly how it happened, then you must accept the possibility of my preferred explanation" argument is fallacious; We don't know how this machine works, but we can rule out perpetual motion, or any other breaches of the laws of thermodynamics. We don't know how life arose on Earth, but we can rule out act of God.

It is impossible, from the video alone, for us to be certain how this works; but that does not mean that all explanations are possible, nor that all possibilities are equally plausible.

If we were allowed to challenge the maker of the device, we might say 'Ah, I know there are hidden batteries in those coils!'; and if he then shows that there are not, we might be fooled into thinking that our being wrong about batteries must mean that he is right to assert that it breaks the laws of thermodynamics - this is a common trick for fraudsters (and stage illusionists). It exploits the tendency for people to be excessively open minded about something once they are convinced that their initial hypothesis is false.

There are several ways this video could be made without breaking any physical laws. Without any information other than the video, it is not possible to say which of these was the actual way it was done.

"I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer. "I don't know, but it isn't X, Y or Z" is also a perfectly acceptable answer. Not everything can be known; Not every question has an answer; And these facts do not imply that anything goes.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

My money is on angels with batteries.

 

[barbos]

The only thing I am confused about is that thing made of plywood, what is its purpose?

Wait. it looks like a Reed switch. Sorry guys there is definitely a battery there.
one of the coils contains a battery, or both coils have batteries. You don't really need a big battery anyway. AAA size is more than enough.

If video had better resolution it would not had fool me for a second, they did not even try to hide it.

Also, the way it behaves is consistent with reed switch being on that plywood stick. In the beginning it's under the magnet and therefore closed and you can see that there is a current in coils. But for a motor to work switch has to be about 45 degrees from the coil position, 0 and 90 degrees it will not work
and LEDs serve a purpose there, they prevent voltage spike when switch opens. Also brightness of LED clearly does not depend on the speed of the rotation, therefore it does not come from induction but from self induction.
Also if you look at the video frame by frame you will see that LEDs flashes when magnets far from the coils, again clearly shows moment when switch opens and inconsistent with induction.

Also note that direction of rotation changed when switch angle went from 45degrees to 45+90 degrees, in full accordance with it being an ordinary motor.


This is one lazy scam.