It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by XPLodER
what do you keep insinuating i don't read?
why would you think i haven't studied Einstein?
Or, you know, you could not do that, because you can't because you don't actually know anything about the subject.
i want YOUR answer
Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Sly1one
The laws of thermodynamics in regards to perpetual motion machines (or the idea thereof) are clearly referencing usable energy. I had a good article earlier I wish I bookmarked it. Showing how some are negative, positive energies, in relation to the energy we use or how we use it.
It's like how you can create electricity by pouring water down hill with resistance.
the hill would be +1 the water being -1.
At the end you have 0.
If the water could get back to the top of the hill without using a -1 to get there, you would have perpetual motion.
But the only way you are getting it back there is by doing -1 of work. Whether that is you carrying a bucket back to the top of the hill, or the sun's heat evaporating the water to get it there. No matter what, -1 is needed to get usable energy out of the system.
Originally posted by xxshadowfaxx
If something lasts 20 years on its own power I'd call it perpetual.
Why is the point of complaining that something wont be perpetual forever? If it works for us during our lifetimes, that is perpetual! When you really think about, if you really want to get technical, then nothing at all is perpetual. The sun will eventually die, anything and everything has an expiry date.
The new definition of perpetual should be something that produces energy perpetually for as long as you need it.
The total energy of the universe consists of the energy due to the motion of all the particles (called kinetic energy), the energy that is stored because of the gravitational forces between the particles (called potential energy), and the energy associated with the mass of all the particles (usually referred to as rest energy).
The key feature to bear in mind is that the gravitational potential energy is a negative quantity. You can see this by realizing that in order to separate two objects, one has to overcome the attractive gravitational force and this requires one to supply positive energy from outside
Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by Sly1one
I believe this was the article (Found here.):
The total energy of the universe consists of the energy due to the motion of all the particles (called kinetic energy), the energy that is stored because of the gravitational forces between the particles (called potential energy), and the energy associated with the mass of all the particles (usually referred to as rest energy).
The key feature to bear in mind is that the gravitational potential energy is a negative quantity. You can see this by realizing that in order to separate two objects, one has to overcome the attractive gravitational force and this requires one to supply positive energy from outside
Those for, still saying " there have been countless times in history that all those "brilliant" scientists said it was impossible, and they were wrong, flight, telephone, radio, moon landing, orbit, celphone, home computer, internal combustion, electricity, nuclear fusion, nuclear fission, television,organ transplants,remote control,electric motors,satellite communications,etc...
Saying "X" is impossible, is an impossible position.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by hawkiye
No need to call people names, you call people who aren't completely convinced by perpetual motion devices a cult, yet a broad definition of "cult" is a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre.
Perpetual motion, whilst not bizarre is as of today abnormal.
You are part of the cult my friend, not them.
But I digress, you need to bring the beef, as it were.
All someone needs to do is bring forward a device that can run an alternator or similar, it truly is that simple.
Torque is the key here, it's the beef your cult needs.
Those who claim it is impossible deny that electrons of rock formations that have been spinning in motion for millions of years are perpetual motion, refuse all reason and logic and stick to a narrow definition are closed minded etc. are a cult they are religious fanatics.
The impossible kinds of perpetual motion machines are those from which you can extract usable energy and the system continues exactly the same way as it did before the energy was extracted, providing an infinite supply of energy. These certainly don't exist. But systems in which the components are constantly in motion and never slow down do in fact exist. The electrons in orbit around the nuclei of atoms are in effect little perpetual motion machines, at least in one construe of what those words mean, because they are perpetually in motion. But energy cannot be extracted from motion of such electrons if they are in the "ground state" (and most atoms are) because there are no lower-lying energy states allowed by quantum mechanics. If the electrons are not in the ground state, you can extract useful energy, but then the atoms go into lower energy states until they reach their ground state, from which no further energy can be extracted.