Is perpetual motion impossible?

  • 219 Replies
  • 60173 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #150 on: 26/11/2008 16:39:40 »
ABH
Quote
I have had 3 near runners up to date.
That's like saying you're almost a virgin. PM is an absolute.

Don_1
Your two magnets will eventually come to rest with the strings pushed outwards a bit - depending on actual angles and magnet strengths etc.  Balancing forces has nothing to do with transferring energy. This is SO fundamental. If you are to have a sensible conversation about these things you can't avoid the meanings and the definitions of Energy, Work, Efficiency etc.
A force of 100N, 10000N or 100000N can't do any work until it starts to MOVE something. Just sitting there doesn't involve any energy transfer at all.

You know, there really are better things to concern oneself with than what is, frankly, untried nonsense. If these odd ideas were to have any merit, the PM machine would have been working and giving us free energy for years. It hasn't because much much greater minds than yours have applied themselves to it and concluded that it is a failure. Let's be a little humble before we say that past Science is full of dolts who have 'missed something'.
How many, would-be, PM inventors have managed to understand all of Newtonian Mechanics, Classical EM theory and Classical Thermodynamics? You'd need to be at least that smart before you could reject the Science which has shown how much nonsense PM is. Optimism and arrogance are not enough.

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #151 on: 26/11/2008 16:50:03 »
I have to agree.
People seem very ready to reject classical physics without really understanding it.
Many of them (and I'm not suggesting this applies here) even cite quantum physics to support their lack of understanding of classical physics, thus we frequently see;
"don't bother learning Newtonian physics because it's all quantum innit"

Once you have a sound understanding of classical physics (which includes the boundaries where it breaks down) then you can take a more considered view of this type of proposal. Unfortunately for the proponents, the considered view is - it dun't work!

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #152 on: 26/11/2008 19:45:28 »
Absolutely. I couldn't agree more.
How can you possibly claim to understand the new stuff if you don't get the stuff it's based on. I think it's a love of buzz words rather than a love of trying to understand things.

*

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 6890
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #153 on: 27/11/2008 08:02:12 »
WOWGOLDS, BUZZ OFF!
If brains were made of dynamite, I wouldn't have enough to blow my nose.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #154 on: 27/11/2008 08:21:23 »
Warcraft. That says it all.
Fantasy.

*

Offline dentstudent

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3146
  • FOGger to the unsuspecting
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #155 on: 27/11/2008 08:27:02 »
WOWGOLDS, BUZZ OFF!
I've just reported them.....

*

Offline daveshorts

  • Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2583
  • Physics, Experiments
    • View Profile
    • http://www.chaosscience.org.uk
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #156 on: 27/11/2008 09:54:05 »
I have fairly comprehensively banned wowgolds

*

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 6890
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #157 on: 27/11/2008 10:07:39 »
sophiecentaur, This was not an attempt to outsmart anyone or anything of the sort, my appologies if it came across that way, it was really just a thought and as I asked 'would the magnets eventually come to rest?' was an admission of the probable failings of such a set-up.

BTW, I don't think that any PM machine, even if one could be invented, would be able to generate power in excess of the power it requires to move itself.
If brains were made of dynamite, I wouldn't have enough to blow my nose.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #158 on: 27/11/2008 15:44:27 »
Don_1
Sorry if I over reacted but this thread has been verging on the ridiculous.
Any system which is free to move will come to rest, eventually, in a minimum energy state as energy is lost from it. It's only a matter of time.

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #159 on: 27/11/2008 18:49:37 »
Don_1
Sorry if I over reacted but this thread has been verging on the ridiculous.
Any system which is free to move will come to rest, eventually, in a minimum energy state as energy is lost from it. It's only a matter of time.

Careful Sophie...you need to qualify that....

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #160 on: 28/11/2008 10:37:15 »
Very few virgins, I'll admit but some of it is ridiculous.

*

Offline dentstudent

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3146
  • FOGger to the unsuspecting
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #161 on: 28/11/2008 10:44:27 »
virgin on the ridiculous?

(Just thought i'd state the blindingly obvious...)

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #162 on: 28/11/2008 13:17:28 »
LMAO ridiculous? LMAO

  Strong word for science. The same word was used for the Wright Brothers, Tesla, and many more. The term impossible and ridiculous are never good words for science, but prove the hypothesis by research and "trial and error". History of failure is not proof that it can not be done either, but it does give a warning to those who try. My studies of Bessler says it was done. I get my info from eye witnesses and how much he had to fight, which logic says he truly had done it. You need to look up John Collins books and the letters written about Bessler. It makes for interesting reading.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #163 on: 28/11/2008 14:40:06 »
Only ignorant people laughed at the Wright Brothers - birds have been flying for years - there's nothing fundamentally different about powered flight, it's just a matter of degree. If you had claimed to have made a bearing which is more efficient than any bearing made so far no one would be laughing at the idea.
Tesla was a showman who claimed more than he achieved. He was far from wrong in everything, though, of course.

BTW, it's not 'a history of failure' that tells us it can't be done. It's a history of SUCCESSFUL Science which supplies a lot of evidence that it can't be done. If the only evidence which you have is from some reports of some events hundreds of years ago then you should use your head and not your heart before committing to it.

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #164 on: 28/11/2008 15:59:27 »
It really is quite simple. There is no combination of gravitational potential energy, angular momentum and rotational inertia which can possibly produce PM. This is kids stuff - Newtonian physics 101.

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #165 on: 28/11/2008 22:25:59 »
Only ignorant people laughed at the Wright Brothers

 Main stream science learned a new understanding when the Wright Brothers flew. And once I am done, there will be another new understanding. You just have to learn what to overcome and do it.

 I wish I could show what I have learned but it would expose my hand to soon. You can call me names, and believe I am mistaken and such. But in the end the names will change and you will have your very own V8 moment with understanding. [;D]
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #166 on: 28/11/2008 23:51:28 »
Quote
Main stream science learned a new understanding when the Wright Brothers flew
You, of course, have references to support that statement? Their's was an engineering first - not a Scientific breakthrough. Do you seriously think they upset anyone's theory when they got an aircraft to fly? Do you understand the difference between Scientific advance and Engineering development?

Quote
I wish I could show what I have learned
Unless you showed me something  that bikerman didn't mention in his last post then you would have nothing worthwhile to show me. And, if it was that brand new, you wouldn't be flailing wheels around. Your machine would be totally unlike anything your historical idol could have assembled. It would be beyond your imagination


*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #167 on: 29/11/2008 01:12:27 »
OK sophiecentaur

 I will tell you that it is simple. and most likely you have seen what has to be done in other machines. But you have to know the correct combination to make it happen.  [O8)]

LOL The secret to the universe is? I will tell you when I am good and D@#7 ready. [:D]
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #168 on: 29/11/2008 10:47:03 »
Do you have to say a magic spell at the same time?

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #169 on: 29/11/2008 10:48:11 »
Which Scientific Law did the Wright Brothers violate, btw?

*

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 569
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #170 on: 29/11/2008 12:24:58 »
Tesla is a bit of a fraud.  Not a good example to quote.




*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #171 on: 29/11/2008 14:05:18 »
Which Scientific Law did the Wright Brothers violate, btw?

They didn't. That is what I have been trying to say. A new understanding, for main stream science felt that Man flight outside of a baloon was improvable back then, but now say PM is impossible when improvable would be a better statement up till now.

Pumblechook

 Tesla may have been a bit flaky, but he was no fraud. You need to look into his history and you will see how much impact he had made into our lives. Alternating current, remote control, Radio, and on and on. But big money did try to bury his name and Hollywood villainized him as a mad scientist. 
« Last Edit: 29/11/2008 14:08:04 by AB Hammer »
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #172 on: 29/11/2008 15:28:14 »
Quote
for main stream science felt that Man flight outside of a baloon was improvable back then
You must be able to quote someone from 'mainstream Science' before you can make a statement like that. Newton wouldn't have said it was impossible if he had been told about the internal combustion engine.

How can you 'improve' beyond a fundamental limit? It's not just a matter of getting better oil, you know.

There were a lot of vested interests in the ENGINEERING of Tesla's day. AC vs DC was only a VHS vs Betamax argument. And, of course, there were a lot of ignorant people about then, too. Can't you distinguish  between that category of discussion and what you are proposing. I can only conclude that you haven't understood what you are saying and what, in your ignorance, you are rejecting. It is just naive enthusiasm talking.
Or perhaps you could assure me (and demonstrate) that you are perfectly familiar with Thermodynamic principles and all of Classical Mechanics and can tell me the essential hole in all the arguments against PM. Also, of course, if you are correct, then there will be all sorts of 'knock-ons' which would seriously change the world as we see it.
I'm afraid that you are demonstrating some fantastic arrogance about the matter.

*

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 569
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #173 on: 29/11/2008 16:24:10 »
Tesla didn't invent very much at all.

Totally overrated.

E.G 3 phase AC was pioneered in Britain by John Hopkinson before Tesla had even arrived in the USA.

Some of Teslas claims and/or the claims of his fans are plain barmy.  Like a radio controlled boat in 1896 when most of the components needed to make such a thing possible hadn't been invented then.   It is just about possible he might have made a boat which started off..no steering.. and possibly a stop signal.   

And the suggestion that Tesla invented technology which has been suppressed in these more than one hundred years is particularly barmy. 
« Last Edit: 29/11/2008 16:31:16 by Pumblechook »

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #174 on: 29/11/2008 17:29:31 »
LOL

 How many of you believe that the earth travels around the sun? Or to put it another way.
How many of you believe the sun is the center of our solar system?  [;D
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8750
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #175 on: 29/11/2008 17:32:09 »
Get back to us when the machine works for a year without stopping.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #176 on: 29/11/2008 17:35:20 »
Quote
How many of you believe that the earth travels around the sun? Or to put it another way.
How many of you believe the sun is the center of our solar system?
Err..I do.
I believe it to be the case based on sound theoretical and observational evidence (ie NOT faith, but belief).
What has that got to do with perpetual motion wheels?

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #177 on: 29/11/2008 17:49:25 »
I believe that the Earth won't be in its present orbit for ever. We are pretty sure that it wasn't there for ever, either.
But what has that to do with your whirly wheel?

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #178 on: 29/11/2008 17:50:51 »
Quote
How many of you believe that the earth travels around the sun? Or to put it another way.
How many of you believe the sun is the center of our solar system?
Err..I do.
I believe it to be the case based on sound theoretical and observational evidence (ie NOT faith, but belief).
What has that got to do with perpetual motion wheels?

 Well put it this way. If you use the sun as the center of our solar system to project space travel in our solar system you will not make it home. But if you use the earth as the center of out solar system you will make it home. As for perpetual motion what we perceive is deceptive in a similar manner.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #179 on: 29/11/2008 19:16:39 »
 Well the sun is perceived as our center of our solar system. But what anchors the sun in the center? Each solar system we see in space has a wobble due to conflicting gravitational pulls so what may look like a planet on one side and then the other is more like changing places. Our solar system is no different the bodies pull at each other and we wobble. Our planetary paths are from observation, but when you add all the mass of the planets and the sun the earth fits between the larger masses in the wobble so as they change places the earth is in the center. This is why NASA does all there math calculations as if the earth is in the center of out solar system.

 As for perpetual motion each mass works for and against each other which makes the shift a wobble effect which creates the wobble over onto the descending side. This is just one of the approaches.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #180 on: 29/11/2008 19:21:10 »
I think you are deceiving yourself actually.

You haven't managed a directly parallel argument to your situation yet.
It's not true to say that you couldn't navigate using a geocentric model. More complex, maybe, because you would need a lot of friggery.
Interestingly enough, the later model is much simpler than the earlier one. Your bolt-on for the present model makes everything else but your PM machine much more complicated.

In any case, Science doesn't rely on past stories of 'hard done by' revolutionary Scientists. It aims, at least, to be evidence based and nothing is ever accepted without proper evidence. You have none so how can you be surprised that no one believes your ideas?
Perhaps you could risk learning some of the evidence which shows how your cursory approach will take you nowhere. Get down to some serious learning; Know your enemy.

Just read your last post. Do you actually know how much the Sun 'wobbles'? Could you actually believe that I didn't know that it does? And is it relevant?

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #181 on: 29/11/2008 20:08:50 »
This whole line of argument is just silly.
Motion is relative - this much has been know since (and probably before) Galileo. In fact we call such a notion Galilean Relativity.
The notion that the sun wobbles is nothing new and nor is it of any relevance to this particular debate. NASA doesn't do 'maths calculations' as if the earth is the centre of the solar system - they know fine well that it isn't. They simply calculate relative to a 'stationary' earth for motion important relative to earth. This much is obvious. When, however, they come to calculate orbits, then the motion of the earth is (almost) entirely irrelevant. If you want to calculate a trajectory for insertion into Mars orbit, for example, you calculate using Mars as a 'stationary' point. That's one reason we use the word 'relativity'.
None of this has any bearing on this debate. This debate is about whether you can construct a PM system in an inertial frame of reference centred on the earth.
You can't.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #182 on: 29/11/2008 20:29:02 »
Ok so a PM is defined as being in a closed box?
What defines closed?
Can we ever prove a universe to be closed?
How about instant tunneling, wormholes, kaons, virtual particles, Black holes.
We can define a 'system' as being closed i suppose, same as we can discuss 'two-dimensional' objects in lattices, but do they exist? 
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #183 on: 29/11/2008 20:36:10 »
You have none so how can you be surprised that no one believes your ideas?

Curiosity, and doubt, is why this string is still going strong or why are you guys here? To see what doubt may be wrong? Maybe this guy has done something?
Under this case the final evidence is the machine. But I can't show it or them at this time, if I have any at all. A flower is at its best in full bloom.  

Quote
Get down to some serious learning; Know your enemy.

 I know my enemy but my enemy, and it is also my friend. It is established thinking inside the box of what we have been tout to the point of almost becoming a religion. Outside the box is our freedom of our minds but never leave good knowledge behind.

 
Quote
Just read your last post. Do you actually know how much the Sun 'wobbles'? Could you actually believe that I didn't know that it does? And is it relevant?

(Do you actually know how much the Sun 'wobbles'?)
No.

(Could you actually believe that I didn't know that it does?)
does it really to me mater if you know it or not in this argument?

(And is it relevant?)
More than you can accept at this time without seeing the machine.

« Last Edit: 29/11/2008 20:40:41 by AB Hammer »
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #184 on: 29/11/2008 20:48:29 »
Ok so a PM is defined as being in a closed box?
What defines closed?
Can we ever prove a universe to be closed?
How about instant tunneling, wormholes, kaons, virtual particles, Black holes.
We can define a 'system' as being closed i suppose, same as we can discuss 'two-dimensional' objects in lattices, but do they exist? 
It is simple. Can we create a system which, without external input, can continue to move ad-infinitum? Such a system would be a 'unity' system, with no energy lost to the 'outside'. (Most PM proponents go beyond this and (as Bessel did) claim that their particular devices are 'over unity' - ie they generate excess energy which can, presumably, be extracted from the system ad-infinitum). The claim was, and is, bogus, as anyone familiar with basic physics can tell you.

Now, if you want to consider more esoteric systems (such as zero point energy) then there is some interesting physics to be done. Zero point energy does not contravene energy conservation on the macro scale of things - it (apparently) does it on the micro scale and only for very small periods of time (in accordance with uncertainty principle). Overall there is a balanced 'budget' of energy since the final sum total must be zero.
Wormholes are speculative and would not, in any case, necessarily be subject to the laws of spacetime that are in 'normal' operation, since they require a 'fracture' or 'folding' of spacetime. I'm pretty sure that no violation of thermodynamic laws would occur in any case.
Black holes seem to obey the laws of energy conservation. You stick mass/energy into a black hole and it increases its mass/energy accordingly.
With the Kaon I presume you are intending to talk about CP violation? That would require a whole new thread to discuss, but let's just say that this would not allow contravention of thermodynamics on any macro scale.
Quantum tunnelling does not violate thermodynamic laws. In fact quantum tunnelling can ONLY occur from a high energy state to a lower energy state, in strict conformance with thermodynamic laws (the fact that it goes 'through' a higher energy 'peak' is another matter).
« Last Edit: 29/11/2008 22:03:19 by Bikerman »

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #185 on: 29/11/2008 21:44:33 »
ABH
If it is so Earth shattering, why are you wasting time on this website?

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #186 on: 29/11/2008 23:32:01 »
ABH
If it is so Earth shattering, why are you wasting time on this website?

 I told you I have been sick with pneumonia, and I am just starting to catch up with my armour work and then I can finish constructing of my wheels and there are 3 different designs that pass my pre-test. So if I am correct which I believe I am, you know the rest.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #187 on: 29/11/2008 23:51:55 »
But how can our humble little forum compare in importance with your fantastic field of research?
If you have the energy to bicker with us then why not use it to investigate a bit more theory and speed your success?

*

Offline Bikerman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 119
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #188 on: 30/11/2008 00:02:33 »
I told you I have been sick with pneumonia, and I am just starting to catch up with my armour work and then I can finish constructing of my wheels and there are 3 different designs that pass my pre-test. So if I am correct which I believe I am, you know the rest.
But the simple fact is that you either don't know, or can't/won't communicate the theory behind your invention.
If you can't/won't tell us the theory then why post? All you have posted to date is a lot of nonsense which anyone with a basic education in Newtonian physics can dismiss instantly.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have none.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #189 on: 30/11/2008 00:29:50 »
Perhaps it's just attention seeking.

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #190 on: 30/11/2008 01:45:38 »
Greetings all

 When I found this forum I was stick in the house, and bored out of my gourd sick with pneumonia. Now I am still restricted to good weather since my shop has to much weather exposure being a blacksmith. At home I did allot of drawing design adjustments ect. Tried a few magnet arraignments trying to manipulate the field with only moderate improvement for a magnet design. Due to my sickness I am also looking for a better shop set up to fight against weather exposure. Today was heavy moister so I was limited in how long I was aloud to be out. I do not want a relapse, my lungs hurt to much.

 It is plain as day the patronizing, and I learned along time ago to ignore it. As for showing my designs. Only a fool shows his/her hand before the bet is made. If you want I'll show you some other designs that I have posted on other forums if you wish and we can discuss why, or how it won't work or possibly can.

 I tell you what I will post my anti buoyancy devices. This should make for good fun.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #191 on: 30/11/2008 11:26:22 »
Are you 'avin a larf?

*

Offline Pumblechook

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 569
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #192 on: 30/11/2008 13:32:50 »
I am.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8750
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #193 on: 30/11/2008 14:04:06 »
AB Hammer,
Do you realise that, if you turn those devices upside down they look like the perpetual waterwheels that were shown not to work in the middle ages?
Of course these "new" versions won't work for the same reason.

Anyway, I wish you a speedy return to full health so that you can go and  make these designs of yours. It's clear that nothing, apart from their failure, is going to convince you that they will not work.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #194 on: 30/11/2008 14:11:40 »
sophiecentaur ,Pumblechook
 Ha Ha do you even understand it?

It is real simple "if" you can get the bubbles you reduce the buoyancy in the channel tube. Even myth busters proved this about air bubbles and buoyancy. The air line feed back is valved to keep the air feed from filling up with water to be pumped out. A while back I use to work with vacuum cleaners doing repair work. And as a black smith I am well knowledgeable about blowers and compressors. The second version is the best of the 2. The trick is "if" you can get the bubbles it will work. It all depends on the source for the bubbles. Once the bubbles are added will the buoyancy side have enough lift to run the blower/compressor, "if" it can, we have a winner, "if we can't we have another design for the museum of unworkable devices. The other thing to look at, is in what other ways we can use the basics of the design.

PS. again I don't post my best designs, even though this one has a slim possibility.


Bored chemist

Well it is a new approach despite the similarities. No one had tried to reduce the buoyancy before.
« Last Edit: 30/11/2008 14:13:28 by AB Hammer »
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

lyner

  • Guest
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #195 on: 30/11/2008 14:45:22 »
And how do the bubbles get down under the water? Energy is needed to displace the water. Whether you can spot it or not, there is a net loss of energy when any fluid flows.
What's revolutionary in your design which eliminates this energy loss?

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #196 on: 30/11/2008 14:51:26 »
Ok, good answers Bikerman. And yes, it was 'cp violations'
(On the other hand, on this site I don't expect anything less:)
Than good answers I mean, or, at least 'imaginative answers':)
And when I get both at the same time:)
That's a real 'kick'

Ah, 'zero point energy' do sounds like a way to get 'free' energy.
M..m.aybe???

"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #197 on: 30/11/2008 14:59:42 »
And how do the bubbles get down under the water? Energy is needed to displace the water. Whether you can spot it or not, there is a net loss of energy when any fluid flows.
What's revolutionary in your design which eliminates this energy loss?

 How do you think they got air down to a deep sea diver, and I am only talking about 3 feet. The depth will depend on how strong the pump mechanism needs to be.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12188
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #198 on: 30/11/2008 15:06:11 »
AB :)
Somehow any CP machine needs to 'produce' more energy than it uses.
(as compared to being in a equilibrium I mean:)

Do you think this one will?

------
Btw: where would you say that this 'extra energy' would come from?
And how does it gets replaced?

To have a true CP you can't allow the energy in the universe to 'run down' can you:)
« Last Edit: 30/11/2008 15:13:52 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline AB Hammer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 88
    • View Profile
Is perpetual motion impossible?
« Reply #199 on: 30/11/2008 15:22:24 »
AB :)
Somehow any CP machine needs to 'produce' more energy than it uses.
Do you think this one will?

 If I can get enough bubbles. When designing you try for any possibility and then put it to the test grid to check to see if it can be provable. The anti buoyancy design can't be tested with the grids of displacement. Also you look for thing that haven't been tried, or at least look to see what you came up with has been tried by someone else. While I was in the US Coast Guard I observed a river harbor tugboat get pulled down into the Mississippi river due to it's loss of buoyancy due to bubbles. So on this design I am running on experience and what I know. Will it work? that will remain to be seen until I finish my projects on hand that show a 20%+ gain, according to the grids. The grids are my design that uses math in all angles to determine the effects expected. The grids have been tested with other machines with so far 99% accuracy on what would happen. The grids are for regular gravity effects only.
With out a dream, there is no vision.

Alan