Jump to content
Science Forums

Perpetual motion


Recommended Posts

Hi Dark Mind. If PMM has no outside intervention, it will eventually come to a grinding halt. Otherwise, it will go on forever and you would be correct. :naughty:
Actually, I believe both statements are incorrect...

 

I believe my model would need no outside intervention (other than construction), and it would go forever (if left untouched) :rolleyes:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I believe both statements are incorrect...

 

I believe my model would need no outside intervention (other than construction), and it would go forever (if left untouched) :rolleyes:.

 

Both of you are on the right track and the same page. But your discussion seems to be culminating in the old, "which came first, the chicken or the egg" argument. The point is, neither can exist with outside intervention at some point. Whether the results of outside intervention outlaw the feasibility of a PMM or allow humans the ability to set one in motion, does not put into question that outside intervention is a prerequisite to both scenarios.

 

By the way, I really like both of your chosen signature quotes (Dark Mind and Guadalupe) and intellectually cherish the concepts behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'll just BUMP this since Guadalupe is online now :friday:.

 

Sorry to keep you waiting, but there is so much out there and sometimes I’m a little slow. But the good news is, I always have time for my :rolleyes: .

 

Both of you are on the right track and the same page. But your discussion seems to be culminating in the old, "which came first, the chicken or the egg" argument. The point is, neither can exist with outside intervention at some point. Whether the results of outside intervention outlaw the feasibility of a PMM or allow humans the ability to set one in motion, does not put into question that outside intervention is a prerequisite to both scenarios.

 

Hi! zmweaver. Has anyone ever considered a third option, maybe a Rooster? :naughty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A perpetual motion machine would be a wonderous thing. However, anything that needed supercooled magnets would be having a huge heat input used to make the refrigerant, costing a fortune in cryo liquids.

 

Further, tiny eddie currents would make the system lose energy from any part that was not superconducting, slowing the system until it stopped, just like a magnetic braking system.

 

Even if you could devise a very expensive toy that ran for several years without loss, it wouldn't do anything useful. Most people would expect a small battery somewhere, for one thing.

 

If you want a "perpetual motion machine" to fool people at home, buy a knife, a heavy iron poker, and a small vaccuum set-up. Hang the poker on the knife edge, start it swinging. It should run all night. Now put the bell jar over it and pump out the air. It will run for long enough to amaze anyone who looks at it. If you want to get it to run "forever" a small battery transferring charge from one side to the other, with the electrostatics giving a slight pull, might well be enough.

 

Aside from that, give up. A PMM can do no useful work. Set your brain to doing something more useful, like using tethers to slow the movement of the earth's crust, whilst generating power, or a good way to get wind power to work without killing all the birds...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A perpetual motion machine would be a wonderous thing. However, anything that needed supercooled magnets would be having a huge heat input used to make the refrigerant, costing a fortune in cryo liquids.

 

Further, tiny eddie currents would make the system lose energy from any part that was not superconducting, slowing the system until it stopped, just like a magnetic braking system.

This is my main set back... I'm just waiting until they develop Super conductive magnets that are super conductive at room temperature... I hear they're making great strides at this :). A couple degrees closer is a hell of a lot better than a couple degrees further :D.

 

Even if you could devise a very expensive toy that ran for several years without loss, it wouldn't do anything useful. Most people would expect a small battery somewhere, for one thing.

 

If you want a "perpetual motion machine" to fool people at home, buy a knife, a heavy iron poker, and a small vaccuum set-up. Hang the poker on the knife edge, start it swinging. It should run all night. Now put the bell jar over it and pump out the air. It will run for long enough to amaze anyone who looks at it. If you want to get it to run "forever" a small battery transferring charge from one side to the other, with the electrostatics giving a slight pull, might well be enough.

Sounds fun :).

 

Aside from that, give up. A PMM can do no useful work. Set your brain to doing something more useful, like using tethers to slow the movement of the earth's crust, whilst generating power, or a good way to get wind power to work without killing all the birds...
Already on it :D.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...By the way, I really like both of your chosen signature quotes (Dark Mind and Guadalupe) and intellectually cherish the concepts behind them.
Thanks! :)

 

I really like them too, but one of my favorite's is Killean's... "All that we see or seem, is but a dream within a dream." ~ Edgar Allen Poe :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dark Mind, if anything created or constructed be put into motion from a ground state, will it eventually come to a grinding halt?

 

I ask around by e-mail and NASA replied saying, that if anything, with a ground state, were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt.

 

If you were to create or construct such a device, I believe it's considered a form of "outside of intervention". :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I made a call to Merriam-Webster to see if I could get a better understanding of the word, “Perpetual” and based on the information from someone in the Editing Department. They said, “The word “Perpetual”, could be used as Infinite or as Finite. I guess if one were to wait a few years, words begin to change their meaning.

 

If I understood correctly from our conversation, there may be two types of Perpetual Motion Machines. One that violates laws of physics and the other does not.

 

The First Perpetual Motion Machine is classified as Infinite, because its claims to have no beginning and no end.

 

The Second Perpetual Motion Machine is classified as Finite, because its claims to have a beginning and an end.

 

I could see why the First Perpetual Motion Machine could not exist in a universe that is Finite. But, the Second Perpetual Motion Machine could. Correct?

 

I’m still waiting to hear from Oxford. ;)

 

 

Mail Call! Just in from Oxford University Press, UK. I quote,"Perpetual means "eternal" or be used in more limited sense."

 

Sounds like they concur with Merriam-Webster. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NASA replied saying, that if anything, with a ground state, were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt.
Of course! The meaning of 'grinding' is "bringing to a ground state".

:hihi:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dark Mind, if anything created or constructed be put into motion from a ground state, will it eventually come to a grinding halt?

 

I ask around by e-mail and NASA replied saying, that if anything, with a ground state, were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt.

Well NASA isn't privy to see my theory for Perpetual Motion now are they :eek:.

 

If you were to create or construct such a device, I believe it's considered a form of "outside of intervention". :rant:
I thought that's what I said earlier... I'll check though :eek:.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dark Mind, if anything created or constructed be put into motion from a ground state, will it eventually come to a grinding halt?

 

I ask around by e-mail and NASA replied saying, that if anything, with a ground state, were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt.

 

If you were to create or construct such a device, I believe it's considered a form of "outside of intervention". :rant:

 

Hi! Dark Mind. Maybe you didn’t understand the point I was trying to make. Allow me sometime to think about what NASA said, “Anything, with a ground state, (created or constructed), were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt”, and what Merriam-Webster and Oxford’s definition of the word “Perpetual” to be used as “Infinite or Finite”. :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! Dark Mind. Maybe you didn’t understand the point I was trying to make. Allow me sometime to think about what NASA said, “Anything, with a ground state, (created or constructed), were to be put into motion, it will eventually come to a grinding halt”,
I don't think I misunderstood it at all. The people at NASA just don't think it's possible to create a Perpetual Motion Machine at will proclaim as much to their death beds until proven wrong by my creation :eek:. Because up until this point science has not been able to show that perpetual motion is possible (Second law of thermo-dynamics, entropy) NASA treats PM as something of fantasy or philosophy :eek:, I believe it will happen someday though :eek:.
and what Merriam-Webster and Oxford’s definition of the word “Perpetual” to be used as “Infinite or Finite”. :eek:
...I guess the finite :rant:.

It has a beginning...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! Dark Mind.

 

Hmmm. Lets try it this way. Infinite has 0 (zero), outside interventions. So, if a perpetual motion machine were to have “no end”. It must have no outside intervention of any kind and your perpetual motion machine well have many. Please, allow me to point out just a few for you.

 

1. Creation

2. Giving it a point of origin (a beginning), when its put into motion.

3. Time.

 

I do mean 0 (zero) D.M., otherwise it will come to rest. :rant:

 

Here is something that maybe you could help me with. Do you know anything that is infinite in our universe. I'm not asking for theories but for something that is known to be a fact? :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! Dark Mind.

 

Hmmm. Lets try it this way. Infinite has 0 (zero), outside interventions. So, if a perpetual motion machine were to have “no end”. It must have no outside intervention of any kind and your perpetual motion machine well have many. Please, allow me to point out just a few for you.

 

1. Creation

2. Giving it a point of origin (a beginning), when its put into motion.

3. Time.

 

I do mean 0 (zero) D.M., otherwise it will come to rest. :rant:

But why must something come to an end just because it has a beginning? Is it because of conventional thoughts on Perpetual Motion? If so, I already know that, and that is why I think that my creation would overcome this (Super-conductive magnets would never lose their magnetic charge :eek:), and if they were angled against each other with gravity driving them towards each other then their would be rotation from them trying to repel away from one another. The only thing left for me to overcome is friction :eek:...

 

Here is something that maybe you could help me with. Do you know anything that is infinite in our universe. I'm not asking for theories but for something that is known to be a fact? :eek:

No.

 

Everything has a beginning except for "in theory" :eek:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But why must something come to an end just because it has a beginning? Is it because of conventional thoughts on Perpetual Motion? If so, I already know that, and that is why I think that my creation would overcome this (Super-conductive magnets would never lose their magnetic charge :ud:), and if they were angled against each other with gravity driving them towards each other then their would be rotation from them trying to repel away from one another. The only thing left for me to overcome is friction :)...No.

 

Hi! Dark Mind. You may very well be the vanguard in “Perpetual Motion Machine”, but to make a claim that your creation of a “Perpetual Motion Machine”, is the only exception to the rule, to have a beginning with no end? :lol: :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...