ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
if perpetual motion is not possible as it opposes laws of physics then at what point does one define something as perpetual ?
Last edited:
perpetual motion and high energy output
- Thread starter ripleofdeath
- Start date
It is not perpetual motion that is ruled out by the laws of physics. For example, the electrons in atoms are in perpetual motion. The planets orbiting the Sun are in more-or-less perpetual motion.
The laws of physics rule out the existence of perpetual motion machines. These come in two types. Type 1 claims to produce more useful energy output than is required to run the machine, thus breaking the law of conservation of energy. Type 2 claims to produce energy purely from heat, with no other side-effects (i.e. to have 100% efficient usage of energy), which breaks the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
The laws of physics rule out the existence of perpetual motion machines. These come in two types. Type 1 claims to produce more useful energy output than is required to run the machine, thus breaking the law of conservation of energy. Type 2 claims to produce energy purely from heat, with no other side-effects (i.e. to have 100% efficient usage of energy), which breaks the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
Thanks James you mostly always post good stuff.
Soo... this idea of perpetual is purely a mathematical construct of a paradigm of unknown proportions ... ?
thus one must ask... why bother formulating an law of absolute mathematics when there is no such thing as absolute(perpetual)... ?
seems corrupted to me.
soo.. given that we may for the moment state that all mathematics is currently corrupted as it is based on absolutes that are in fact false of this reality "complete measures"
we are in part taking a measure of a flow of data instead thus making our mathematics more of a system of code breaking or algorithmic interpretation to find the right harmonic equation yes ?
Have you looked back here lately? The wheel you posted is still turning! They say that wild-living, native people back in the day didn't see ships on the horizon: because they'd never seen ships, they had no in-memory reference for what they were seeing and kinda glazed right over what was actually there. I think you do the same for that device you posted, dear native sir.
One of my favorite devices from years gone is this one:
Hollow balls, a tank of water (on the right). Self explanatory & simple. Is this device restricted from working by physics or design (getting the ball into the tank at the bottom without water leaking out)?
One of my favorite devices from years gone is this one:
Hollow balls, a tank of water (on the right). Self explanatory & simple. Is this device restricted from working by physics or design (getting the ball into the tank at the bottom without water leaking out)?
Why hasn't anyone been able to develop their perpetual motion machines on a large enough scale to be able to generate electricity for their house? To charge a car battery?
Every design I have seen is small and does nothing impressive. The wheel I posted doesn't work in reality. No matter which path a ball rolls along, the same amount of work is done by gravity.
Because in every application we've come up with thus far, the energy used to propel the motion is exactly or near exactly the same amount it creates. So any such machines create only enough energy to keep itself going. And never any more of great significance. This applies to magnets, homopolar motors and all of the gravity based "free energy" perpetual motion machines.
Thus far, anyone coming close to creating one has only been measuring energy output in the spinning disks, but they fail to measure the energy expended between the two to capture the enery itself.
I am pretty sure there is a guy out there offering a reward to anyone who can create a perpetual motion machine that produces something greater than a non-zero energy output.
Perpetual motion as an energy producer is an interesting theory, but no one can/has ever come close to creating a working model.
Oh yea, Liebling. I agree with you. My question is posed to the PM machine crowd.
Like, look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIvZJ9xGutI
My question is: why doesn't he use this to power a remote controlled toy car or something? They always build these gimmick devices that don't do anything useful. Geee..... I wonder why...
Like, look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIvZJ9xGutI
My question is: why doesn't he use this to power a remote controlled toy car or something? They always build these gimmick devices that don't do anything useful. Geee..... I wonder why...
We can build a perpetual motion machine that gives out more energy than it takes in. So, we'll harness this energy to build rockets that travel faster than the speed of light. This will allow us to travel back into time to introduce perpetual motion machines to the cave men. Then when we arrive at today (or something close to it since we changed history and introduced a number of paradoxes) producing more energy than the universe has to offer. We'll need perpetual motion machines to produce the energy we need to fuel the perpetual machines producing the energy we need to power the perpetual motion machines that we need to produce the....
this isnt even suited for free thoughts...
IT'S SCIENCE! I mean, we can create infinite heat removal to cool the Earth and we could eradicate black holes. Maybe later we could build a perpetual motion machine capable of evolving infinite intelligence that would trump God himself.
I dont thank so Lucy... lol.!!!
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
i designed a perpetual motion motor when i was about 16 years old.
but i already knew at that age how terribly corrupt most people in the world were so just forgot about it.
lots of things are probable but what is actually possible all hinges on the egos of homicidal maniacs that run countries where people are killed just because they dont agree to the same religion or sexual orientation.
if you are going to get real about physics then you need to GET REAL about the world we live in and the insane psychopaths that are otherwise called world leaders and heads of global organisations.
i was thinking of a good example the other day.
typical militant rebel group oppose central corruption to try and secure resources for the poor and the usa label them as terrorist while they go and bomb the shit out of iraq just to get some oil lining their own pockets.
how different is that to theft ?
its not really, its just accepted theft where more people agree to do nothing about it.
look at all the retards calling Barak a muslim spy or something.
there is no shortage of nutters in all shapes and forms.
anywho... rant finished
soo back to science & hopefully all the self stated skeptics and conspiracy theorists have left the thread.
maths which is the measure of science must surely recognize that if we can formulate a relative equation to define perpetual motion then it must be possible based purely on the the law of maths through probability statistics.
(whos maths is maths if ya get me point)
why are soo many ignoring quantum duality ?
that tends to throw everything on its side but yet we still have soo much collective sedentary thought.
again i put it to you as a challenge to those who say perpetual motion is not possible, how can we define a maths equation of something that does not exist ?
but i already knew at that age how terribly corrupt most people in the world were so just forgot about it.
lots of things are probable but what is actually possible all hinges on the egos of homicidal maniacs that run countries where people are killed just because they dont agree to the same religion or sexual orientation.
if you are going to get real about physics then you need to GET REAL about the world we live in and the insane psychopaths that are otherwise called world leaders and heads of global organisations.
i was thinking of a good example the other day.
typical militant rebel group oppose central corruption to try and secure resources for the poor and the usa label them as terrorist while they go and bomb the shit out of iraq just to get some oil lining their own pockets.
how different is that to theft ?
its not really, its just accepted theft where more people agree to do nothing about it.
look at all the retards calling Barak a muslim spy or something.
there is no shortage of nutters in all shapes and forms.
anywho... rant finished
soo back to science & hopefully all the self stated skeptics and conspiracy theorists have left the thread.
maths which is the measure of science must surely recognize that if we can formulate a relative equation to define perpetual motion then it must be possible based purely on the the law of maths through probability statistics.
(whos maths is maths if ya get me point)
why are soo many ignoring quantum duality ?
that tends to throw everything on its side but yet we still have soo much collective sedentary thought.
again i put it to you as a challenge to those who say perpetual motion is not possible, how can we define a maths equation of something that does not exist ?
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
james i thought newton's cradle was theoretically a perpetual motion?
Ie if you could eliminate energy loss by friction and noise it SHOULD go for ever (i THINK that means it needs to be in a perfect vacume but not sure if that fixes the noise problem)
Ie if you could eliminate energy loss by friction and noise it SHOULD go for ever (i THINK that means it needs to be in a perfect vacume but not sure if that fixes the noise problem)
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
nope cos it relies on gravity energy transference & that declines from the dual directional shed of energy.
across and down using up as what is left to create across and then up again etc.
diminishing returns.
err no, that loss is due to friction. In a perfect vacume you WOULDNT diminish the energy that way. Ie it would be a never ending series of elastic collisions. Basically if your right where does the energy go? no energy can ever be lost and nither can momentium. There for it must go SOMEWHERE, in a non vacume its "lost" to heat and noise because of friction but if you were in a vacume (even ON earth i might add, its the vacume not the gravity which matters) it SHOULD keep going.
The 2nd kind is possible. I will PROVE it. ANd once I do, I will be the pimp-prince of Quackerre, capital of skull island. At this time the scientists from solar power peninsula and bioethanol bay will come and try to kill me, not to mention the diamond studded rulers of the coal coast and the tamers of the oil-orcas, who are hoping for at least another 20 years before renewable energy takes over.
Humility aside, building a perpetual motion machine isn't even close to Einstein. Free Electricity vs SPACE-TIME COMBINED!!! Sure its practical, but it ain't high science.
The one thing I am most excited about with the technology is the possibility of flying cars/skateboards and the never ending laptop battery
Humility aside, building a perpetual motion machine isn't even close to Einstein. Free Electricity vs SPACE-TIME COMBINED!!! Sure its practical, but it ain't high science.
The one thing I am most excited about with the technology is the possibility of flying cars/skateboards and the never ending laptop battery
Last edited: