For the whole decision click here: o10011
Summary
The three applications each relate to an invention concerned with the idea of arranging sets of magnets so that magnetic repulsion acts between the magnets in a particular way which is said to produce motion. In the first application, the motion is used to generate a current to create a “Perpetual Battery”. In the second application, the motion is used to drives the bristles of a “Perpetual Toothbrush”. In the third application, the motion is used to power a “Perpetual Torch”.
The Hearing Officer noted that there was no suggestion of any energy input into the devices, either to start the motion or to maintain it. He held that, even if he could accept that the arrangement of magnets could result in some motion, the inventions as described took no account of the fact that energy losses must occur and so there must be an input of energy in order for the device to run perpetually.
He was satisfied that the inventions were alleged to operate in a manner clearly contrary to well-established physical laws, and so were incapable of industrial application. There was also not a sufficient disclosure which would enable a skilled person to perform the inventions as claimed.