Well to tell the truth I didn't, but I did do the post, and then the form showed me many related threads on perpetual motion, and so I looked over those to see if I was repeating someone else's concepts, and then discovered that technically I shouldn't of done it.
I understand why there's a...
Well, if its impossible to transfer energy uphill without losses bigger than the gain in potential energy of the equivalent (E=mc^2) mass on the way down, then yup, yet another loony perpetual motion idea bites the dust. How sad ...
This is very much, a ... what's wrong with this approach...
Consider a large mass with no atmosphere, i.e. the moon. On it, construct a tower of arbitrary height. On the tower build an energy to mass machine, to convert energy to mass via E=mc^2. Once the mass is created, drop it from the...
I've read many explanations of time dilation and relativity, that describe things from the point of an observer, and then some other object moves away from it at some fraction of light speed. i.e. say a spacecraft moves away from an observer at 0.1c for 1 year ship time. Then presumably, to an...
I know its risky to rely on wikipedia, but on the page on quantum entanglement, it claims that possibly instantly, as soon as one of a pair of entangled particles is measured (say A), then the opposite one (say B) takes on the opposite value.
Now to know this, I assume B must somehow know the...