The true perpetual motion machines

Is a windmill not technically perpetual? Same with the energy we harness from running water systems? So I take it we're speaking of a portable device here, right? A perpetual motion device is only as perpetual as the energy that is extruded on it. So no portable device I know of can be conjured. Energy is not everywhere. Other than gravity or magnetics, which is one in the same. And still, that is linear energy. One has to have the energy to deflect that energy back to regain the energy. So, of course, Newton's law comes into play. The universe is perpetual, as is the earth's energy perpetual with the universes. I know of no energy coming to one, soul individual which is strong enough and which is everywhere to give one energy where ever he so wishes. I say it is impossible.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This put a random thought into my head... given enough time and assuming the universe does not eventually collapse, won't all energy eventually die down? Like putting balls into a box and shaking it... everything is in motion, you sit it down, everything is still in motion but after a finite amount of time, all the balls stop.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The 'laws' are not made by physicists, they are just the way they are. Some kooks refuse to accept them, that's their issue. They can work with the hand we are dealt, or bluff, but in this life, you always get called.

Entropy disagrees with you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is my belief, no, as law of conservation of energy states. The universe works differently. It is full of the balls, per se. There is no void. Just as you move your hand in the sea, your energy is not lost, it is just converted. Even where there seemingly is no matter, there is, even if it's purpose is just as a filler, so to speak, or else energy could not be sufficiently converted from one particle to the next. In the box you stated, there is a void. My model would be as a globe full of marbles. Any energy applied on or within the globe would not be nulled. If you took your hand and moved the marbles around, sure, they won't continue forever because of friction, but that energy is tranferred at the molecular level as heat. And your model is not absent from the universe. The energy applied to the box is also converted to the rest of the universe. The force applied to the balls in the box creates vibration, which transfers force to the environment outside. God being perfect and the universe perfect as God declared, there is no loss in energy. Loss in energy equals imperfection. None wasted. And that would equal an imperfect universe, hence, imperfect God.

 

eehee. yr so funny.

 

So when is this guy or his look-alike assistant going to better explain how these blocks of wood and the disc of iron is going to solve my problems?

 

So they're saying nowadays. The universe is supposedly going to expand forever, and as the law of conservation of energy shows us, there won't be any extra energy added to fill in the new space. So the energy density of the universe decreases constantly, and eventually there won't be enough energy around to maintain motion in even the most insanely efficient machine.

 

If the universe were one compressed ball, it doesn't matter if it's expanding or not. Still no more energy is created or lost. As the space is expanding, so is the pressures on the energy particles lessened, they are more free to move, and hence grow proportionally to the universe. As pressure is relieved off the seemingly ungravitational particles or particles with energy, so does it give the energetic particles more room to expand.
Just to elaborate; If you had, say, a globe of bouncy balls that are packed pretty tight with just enough room to minutely move and set them in motion, pretending there is no friction and this is space, then you could somehow expand that globe like a balloon, there would be no energy lost, they would only expand in the void that is created. Not expand in size but expand in the territory covered, which you could argue would increase in mass since territory covered increases. Just as mass increases with energy, then the more energy, inertia or pressure the particle exerts on others around it thereby replacing more space for it to cover, making it seem larger. So therefore, the mass of all the galaxies, planets, molecules, even down to the quantum level for any particle that moves and exerts pressure, the mass will increase for it.

 

you are clouding the issue here

lets define perpetual motion
its the ability to do usefull work without outside energy input

so taking your magnet example you can see that it takes outside energy to seperate them

 

Um, no. Sorry, but this is simply not true. You're actually describing the creation of energy in a roundabout way.

 

Can you debate and elaborate? What is so roundabout about it? It is described down to the smallest particle up to the largest object. Do you have a reason to call it unreasonable? If so, if you have fingers, let them type.

 

Well, if I interpret your words correctly, you're saying that the mass of every particle will increase. E=mc^2 means that every unit of mass contains a proportional "mass energy." It is a very real energy released in nuclear and matter-antimatter reactions. If the mass of every particle increases, then the amount of energy in the universe will also increase.

Also suspect is your description of matter exerting "pressure" on energy particles. I am not a physicist, but I'm pretty sure this is a mischaracterization of the way that matter and energy interact.

 

If the universe is expanding, I take it, particle pressure is decreased, and more particles aren't added to the universe. That is how I see it and assuming how you and most others see it, am I right? If the universe is viewed as one giant balloon, sure, adding more air to it will increase the pressure, and heating it also. But heating requires energy to be added, and the same with adding more air which is against the law of conservation of energy. That is the only way in which the balloon can expand. Maybe that is how you took it in thinking more particles are added or energized.

But what is outside the realm of the universe? Is it less dense than the universe itself? By the expansion of the universe, that would seem true. Because any other way for it to expand would require energy to be added to it. Therefore, the only other option is to state that the pressure on the particles consisting of the universe is decreased, and therefore, given more play room, so to speak. In which case, they don't lose any energy, nor gain any energy. They just increase their mass in proportion to the universe gaining mass.

 

the subject of the thread is perpetual motion

to my knowledge there is no such animal.

 

The pressure of the air inside the balloon increases only because the balloon has a solid membrane containing the air on which pressure is exerted. Space has no such membrane, so while the density (both matter and energy here) of the universe decreases as it expands, there is no pressurization involved. Remember, the universe constitutes *everything* in physics. There's no such thing as an outside.

 

Nope, a windmill is not a pepetual motion machine, it harnesses energy from the sun.

 

Well, physics is wrong then. If the universe is everything, that would mean it is finite. If the universe encompasses all null space in which it is given, it would have no space to expand. Only in an infinite universe could it be ever expanding. And that would mean the universe has area in which it isn't in in which it can expand. And yes, the balloon has a solid membrane. As does our universe. What contains the pressures of the universe then if it has no solid membrane? Energy creates pressure. All physicist know, or should know, the universe is pressurized. Unless I know something they don't know.

So in your theory, there's no such thing as an outside. If that's the case, then stars that are observable are just moving farther apart inside a universe which is finite.

 

You are just being irrational or you meant wind instead of sun. It is not a 'mobile' PMM, but it is perpetual in as much as the wind and the energy to create wind is perpetual.

 

wind is created by the differences in temperature.
the sun provides that source on earth

 

Yes, and so do we, if you want to get technical. I meant as a direct influence.