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 hawkiye
reply to post by boncho
Your definition of perpetual motion relies on a premise science does not acknowledge i.e "forever" there for your whole argument is fallacious and not even based on science since it relies on an unscientific term.
Are you. Really goikng to say nobody said, heavier than air flight is impossible?
The 1880s became a period of intense study, characterized by the "gentleman scientists" who represented most research efforts until the 20th century. Starting in the 1880s advances were made in construction that led to the first truly practical gliders. Three people in particular were active: Otto Lilienthal, Percy Pilcher and Octave Chanute. One of the first modern gliders appears to have been built by John J. Montgomery; it flew one flight outside of San Diego on August 28, 1883. It was not until many years later that his efforts became well known. Another hang-glider had been constructed by Wilhelm Kress as early as 1877 near Vienna.
Also, "free" energy, "perpetual motion" are real, just because we can't do them yet, doesn't make them "impossible". We will one day learn to harnass all these things, as we do every other thing man imagines. It all always comes to fruition at some point, or haven't you read Jules Verne? All the things he wrote about were "impossible" in his time, they all occured.
It is fully within the laws of thermodynamics to only put in 1 calorie of energy and extract 6000 calories of energy, as long as by the time the equation ends I give 5999 calories of energy back. It still equalls 0. It is the basis of math.
I can add 1+1=2 and subtract 9million at any point before or after either 1 ant any point as long as before the =2 I give them back.
This is the basis, of zero point energy, and the basis of the bigbang theory.
Boncho obviously has his mind made up, and will simply drone on and on, repeating the same things " perpetual means forever, even longer than the universe, and absolutley nothing else ever"
Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by boncho
I will. Reply one last time, because after my trip to the bath room I see that you responded, and I consider it quite rude to walk away from people.
It is perfectly within the laws of thermodynamics to do just that, here is how.
I take 1 litter of water, and don't strike the match at all. I instead use probablility to create heat out of raw potential, and boil the water. as the water cools, and evaporates taking the heat away with it, it returns from whence it came. No energy was lost, as none was gained, the laws of thermodynamics are preserved, and your water was boiled.
Or do you believe particles don't just "pop in and out of existance"? Because I assure you that they do all time everyday in all of space/time.
Please don't try to say I don't know what I am talking about, as I assure you, every single quantum physicist in the world will agree with me. It is quite possible, and it is perfectly within the laws of thermodynamics.
This is the root of the bigbang theory"which is within the laws of thermodynamcis" and the zero point energy theory, which is also within the laws of thermodynamics.
Matter of fact, your pot of water appearing and bioling itself then just evaporating back to the void is perfectly probable, it may even have happened at some point someplace already, it could even happen right now in front of you, it has a very low probablility, but it is still quite possible.
Originally posted by inverslyproportional
Ok guys I tire of this conversation, unless someone has anything else besides symantics to discuss.
Boncho obviously has his mind made up, and will simply drone on and on, repeating the same things " perpetual means forever, even longer than the universe, and absolutley nothing else ever" dispite the fact it is quite an absurd position. " 1+1=2 and it is against the laws of thermodynamics for anything to happen anywhere between the 1+1 and the =2" even though zero point theory was written within the laws of thermodynamics, and the simplest kindergarten level math disagrees with him.
Just leave him to it, or keep beating your head against the wall, I wash my hands of this madness.
Good evening Gentlemen.
Originally posted by ken10
Haha, here we go again.
Soooo, The Moon rotates around the Earth, The Earth rotates around the Sun, The Sun is constantly moving within its solar system, The Solar system is moving around within its Galaxy, All the Galaxies are moving around the universe, AND the Universe is expanding at an increasing rate.......With no evidence of entropy or boundaries !!!.
BUT.......In a universe where NOTHING is stationary, Perpetual motion is impossible.....Riiiiiight.
Originally posted by hawkiye
Isn't amazing how far people will go to try and justify their cultist beliefs in their own mind no matter how irrational they are... Its an ego massage so they can feel like they know something reason and logic be damned...
Isn't amazing how far people will go to try and justify their cultist beliefs in their own mind no matter how irrational they are... Its an ego massage so they can feel like they know something reason and logic be damned...
Originally posted by Hawking
Originally posted by hawkiye
Isn't amazing how far people will go to try and justify their cultist beliefs in their own mind no matter how irrational they are... Its an ego massage so they can feel like they know something reason and logic be damned...
So since it is possible, I'll ask to see what energy you're able to harness from your perpetual motion device.
It's funny if I had said you have won the lottery but you need to come and fill out the paper work to get your check most would probably be willing to drive a hundred miles or more if necessary to do it but they can't even spend a few hours reading to see if there might be anything to these devices they could build for free energy.
Originally posted by XPLodER
Originally posted by hawkiye
reply to post by XPLodER
i could go on but conservation of energy laws are sacred to science, and to challenge them pits you against some of the great minds of times past.
it also gets you labelled as a crack pot
Neither I nor the sources I cite are challenging the laws of conservation...
i agree, but i am,
before the idea can even be addressed by "scientists" the conservation of energy laws pop up in their brain and any thing after that is tainted by the belief that these laws are fixed and nothing could possibly shake their perfect understanding of how energy systems operate.
that is until you ask them "where did the energy come from in the first instance" ?
at which point they will answer "the big bang"