posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 04:14 AM
The Atmos clock is not a perpetual motion machine.
A perpetual motion machine is (and always has been) understood to be a device which continues to run (and here is the most important part) WITH NO
The Atmos clock is continually supplied with external power (via temp and pressure changes) therefore it cannot possibly be considered a perpetual
The form the energy takes doesn't matter.
Would you consider a water powered mill a perpetual motion machine? It's not. It uses no electricity, but neither does a steam engine, and neither
are perpetual motion machines. Because you have to continually supply them with power in order to run, just like the Atmos clock.
How convenient or cheap the energy supply is doesn't matter. Just because you can't physically see the energy being introduced into the system (like
an electrical cord, fuel supply, etc.) doesn't matter either.
The only thing that matters is that a perpetual motion machine will continue to run without ANY source of external power. The second you introduce
external power, it becomes no different in effect than a coal power plant powering your home AC, a nuclear reactor powering a light bulb, etc. Would
zero point energy be perpetual motion? Not anymore than nuclear power is perpetual motion. It doesn't matter how wonderful and powerful the
technology is, if you are introducing external power to a system that system is no longer a perpetual motion device. So far nobody has ever figured
out a way to make a machine operate without any external application of power.
It's no surprise people who support the perpetual motion idea don't understand this simple difference. I don't mean that as an insult, just that if
you are not very knowledgeable about a subject obviously it's much easier to make incorrect assumptions. The fact that someone is asking if the Atmos
is perpetual motion, means they are asking a question, and you only ask questions if you don't know something, so by definition that's a lack of
knowledge on the subject.