veecrawn wrote:I was playing with my lock last night (nothing sexual) when I got an idea for an unpickable lock.
The key is exactly like the ones we use now. Basically, the pins are replaced by very small magnets. To open the lock, you have to insert a key and since the tips of the keys are precisely configured magnets, they push back the small pins, the "magnets" inside the lock by exactly the good force, positioning the pins-magnets exactly at the shear line.
Any other key will not fit. There are no springs and there are still 2 pins for each hole in the chamber (one on the bottom magnetized, one of the top to block if the key is pushed too high). It would be unpickable because there is no spring and it's impossible to know the exact strength of the magnet on the key needed.
What do you think? You are pros so perhaps you could discuss my item, and perhaps I could get it protected/copyrighted
Aren't you the fellow who called me "stupid"?
So now I get a chance to give you some constructive "criticism".OK, the principle seems to be: magnetic positioning by pure equilibrium of force, i.e. upward force of repulsion supplied by magnets in key and pin =exactly= downward force of top pin due to gravity. The problem I see with this is that magnetic force varies as 1 on the distance (or is it 1/distance squared?). This will make the mechanism very sensitive to the actually weight and positioning of the magnets. I would think it could be so sensitive that specks of dirt and dust, etc, would stop it from lining up properly.
The other obvious problem is that it could be rapped open with a hammer.
If you've looked at my book (click on my signature), you might know that there's a chapter on magnetic locks. There was a lot of research on magnetic locks throughout the 20th century, accelerating from the 1960s. I would be amazed if someone hasn't already thought of this very idea, but discounted it because it didn't work very well.
