Perpetual motion and free energy possible?

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

perpetual motion and free energy possible?

acording to many inventors, they have invented a perpetual motion machine, from a guy in Norway, USA, Canada, France. but according to todays laws in physics, perpetual motion is imposible, one guy said aliens from Kandlon, or something, visited him and told him to build a flying saucer based on perpetual motion, he said he succeeded, oh that planet, he claims its on the other side of the sun, so we can never see it. there is a lot of factors to this perpetual motion, all, so far, hase been rejected from this orginization, i forget what its called, hardcore physicist and mathematician still believe that perpetual motion is imposible and everyone who claims they made a machine that makes free energy is a lunatic, but back in the day they used to say that to everyone who had a different view, and they were burnt at the stake, hence the 800 years of no singnificant technological advancement. so in all these claims, one could be true, maybe modern physics is being proven wrong, because a theory is only a theory until proven wrong, it is never right and/or the only way, maybe there really is something in the perpetual motion.

oh and that flying saucer guy, the US military is devloping a flying saucer which has the same basic idea as the guy who claims he's built one.

what are your thoughts on this subject. Njorl, I'll be eager to read what you have to say

 

[check]

Hey, I just watched that on the Discovery Channel too!

Anyway, I think it's impossible.

 

[Janus]

oh that planet, he claims its on the other side of the sun, so we can never see it.

This in itself is proof that the claim is bogus. It is impossible for such a planet to exist without our knowing about it. Its very presence would disturb the orbits of the other planets and we would detect it through that. Also, such a orbit would not be stable. The planet would tend to drift out of its position directly opposite the Earth and into a position where we would see it. This is generally a telling factor in many of these types of claims; the person making the claim doesn't even know enough in order to even make their story plausible.

 

[KingNothing]

Well, perpetual motion is pretty impossible, for reasons already known to science well before I replied in this thread.

If there was such a grand invention, we would have heard about it.

At the time, alternating current was a grand invention...so was electricity, and wheels, and steam engine, and car motors, and so on...we've all heard of them.

Its kind of propostrous to think such a grand invention would be hidden.

I could just as easily claim "I have discovered a new particle - the adamon...it's unobservable."

 

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

This in itself is proof that the claim is bogus. It is impossible for such a planet to exist without our knowing about it. Its very presence would disturb the orbits of the other planets and we would detect it through that. Also, such a orbit would not be stable. The planet would tend to drift out of its position directly opposite the Earth and into a position where we would see it. This is generally a telling factor in many of these types of claims; the person making the claim doesn't even know enough in order to even make their story plausible.

i never said i believed the guy, i was merely stating his story

 

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

Well, perpetual motion is pretty impossible, for reasons already known to science well before I replied in this thread.

If there was such a grand invention, we would have heard about it.

At the time, alternating current was a grand invention...so was electricity, and wheels, and steam engine, and car motors, and so on...we've all heard of them.

Its kind of propostrous to think such a grand invention would be hidden.

I could just as easily claim "I have discovered a new particle - the adamon...it's unobservable."

government secrecy these days is far greater than government secrecy in the days of all those inventions though

 

[Moe]

Please try not to get into the whole "UFOs are everywhere, the CIA is covering it up" hype. As it has been stated previously, that planet would have been noticed by us. By the way, we sent probes to other planets, and at one time or another they should have been able to see this "hidden planet".
According to everything we know, there is no such thing as a perpetual motion device, or free energy.

 

[JohnDubYa]

RE: "government secrecy these days is far greater than government secrecy in the days of all those inventions though"

Actually, government secrecy is much harder to pull off today than in the past. And it would be almost impossible to pull off if the inventor was a civilian.

 

[Entropy]

I think energy from nothing is pretty impossible, but I did see a show on PBS a long time ago about a theory where in certain conditions like during the big bang when all the matter in the universe was compressed together all the forces combinded into one force and somehow energy is created. Thats all I remember it was like five years ago and I was twelve.

 

[Gokul43201]

I think energy from nothing is pretty impossible, but I did see a show on PBS a long time ago about a theory where in certain conditions like during the big bang when all the matter in the universe was compressed together all the forces combinded into one force and somehow energy is created. Thats all I remember it was like five years ago and I was twelve.

During the inflationary stage of evolution, you didn't have temporal symmetry, and hence were not required to have energy conservation.

 

[techwonder]

I haven't investigated deeply, but I have read a couple of times about the possibility that when deriving the equations for GR then it is assumed that rotating magnetic fields are symmetric (if somebody knows better, then please correct). That leads to the vanishing of gravitation-magnetic part in GR. If that part does not vanish then it can be shown that a closed system can be devised with net-energy output.

I know that NASA investigated a lot of the serious possibilities for "free" energy and came up with NADA. NASA had a project called the Breakthrough Propulsin Project - you can still find it referenced on their website.

 

[i_wish_i_was_smart]

Please try not to get into the whole "UFOs are everywhere, the CIA is covering it up" hype. As it has been stated previously, that planet would have been noticed by us. By the way, we sent probes to other planets, and at one time or another they should have been able to see this "hidden planet".
According to everything we know, there is no such thing as a perpetual motion device, or free energy.

like i said, i never said i believed the guy, i was stating what he said, and i do not believe in any hidden planets

 

[Adrian Baker]

...I could just as easily claim "I have discovered a new particle - the adamon...it's unobservable."

Not with my newly invented 'Detectertron' it isn't!

(I'd tell you how it works but the Govt sent spies to watch me and prevent the knowledge from getting into the publics hands... They keep my device in Area 51... next to the Alien spacecraft ...)

 

[Guadalupe]

Perpetual Motion Machines

Anything with a ground state, that is put forward into motion, will eventually come to a grinding halt. Example: planes, trains, automoblies, solar panel generators, windmill generator, nuclear power generators, etc, and because all thing that are put forward into motion from a ground state, does not violate any laws of thermodynamics.

Interesting point: Perpetual motion machines also have a ground state once they are put into motion making them finite and not infinite.

 

[ArmoSkater87]

if u would spin an object in a vacuum without the influence of any forces, wouldn't the object keep spinning forever? and if so, wouldn't this be an example of perpetual motion?

 

[check]

if u would spin an object in a vacuum without the influence of any forces, wouldn't the object keep spinning forever? and if so, wouldn't this be an example of perpetual motion?

As stated before, yes perpetual motion is possible, however, a device with > 100% efficiency (puts out more energy than it takes in) is not.

 

[omin]

Can a Perpetual Motion Believer prove energy comes from nothing?

Can a Perpetual Motion Believer prove energy comes from nothing?

Since nothing is an abscence of what a human can sense, perpetual motion can never be proven, because someone would have to first prove nothing(literally) was sensed and then energy appeared. Not knowing the origin of energy is not the same as saying it comes from nothing.

The energy that exists, which is the only energy we know, can be proven to flow from one state to another, therefore it can be proven to come from something.

 

[Guadalupe]

perpetual motion machines

Can a Perpetual Motion Believer prove energy comes from nothing?

Since nothing is an abscence of what a human can sense, perpetual motion can never be proven, because someone would have to first prove nothing(literally) was sensed and then energy appeared. Not knowing the origin of energy is not the same as saying it comes from nothing.

The energy that exists, which is the only energy we know, can be proven to flow from one state to another, therefore it can be proven to come from something.

There is a new book on the market called, "Guerra's Law". It talks about the "Law of Time, Energy And Motion & Law of Origin". This two laws basically state that all things that are put into motion, from a ground state, a beginning, a point of origin, will eventually come to a grinding halt. The book helps explain what is finite and what is not. It also helps explain that perpetual motion machines and energy are finite and not infinite.

 

[russ_watters]

...which directly contradicts Newton's 1st law and is therefore wrong.

 

[Guadalupe]

Perpetual Motion Machines

...which directly contradicts Newton's 1st law and is therefore wrong.

O.K. But, what about Newton's 3nd law of motion? It states: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

 

[russ_watters]

O.K. But, what about Newton's 3nd law of motion? It states: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Yes, I forgot - it also contradicts Newton's 3rd. Thanks.

 

[Guadalupe]

perpetual motion

Yes, I forgot - it also contradicts Newton's 3rd. Thanks.

Correction. No, it does not.

Newton's 3rd Law of Motion has a ground state, a beginning, a point of origin, making this law finite. But, Newton's 1st Law of Motion does not have a ground state, a beginning, a point of origin, making this law infinite.

Based on this information one may see that Newton's 1st & 3rd Law of Motion contradicting each other.

But, Newton's 3rd Law of Motion does agree with the Law of Time, Energy And Motion & Law of Origin.

 

[omin]

There is a new book on the market called, "Guerra's Law". It talks about the "Law of Time, Energy And Motin & Law of Origin". This two laws basically state that all things have a ground state, a beginning, a point of origin, for without it, nothing can exit forward in motion. Not even energy.

When you say something has a beginning, do you mean something has no cause or has an unknown cause?

 

[Guadalupe]

perpetual motion machines

When you say something has a beginning, do you mean something has no cause or has an unknown cause?

All things have a beginning, all things have a cause and all the unknowns are known. The question is, how far back in time, history, past, does one want to go to find the answers to where it all began, its point of origin, its beginning, its ground state. Example: Energy. How far back do you want to go to find the answer to your question? If you do find the answer to your question, are you willing to accept the truth in what you find? Not many do.

 

[JohnTownsendUCF]

If you read down a few threads back...

 

[omin]

All things have a beginning, all things have a cause and all the unknowns are known. ...How far back do you want to go to find the answer to your question?...If you do find the answer to your question, are you willing to accept the truth in what you find?QUOTE]

'Cause to effect' to me will always be a dispostion of the all the elements that exist in any given situation. The first position of the elements are the cause and the disposition of the element is the effect.

When I think of beginning, I see the limit of my knowledge. To say all the unknowns are known can only be accepted by me at this present time if all the elements of the unknown are what is known by me because they reside in the present or are in memory from direct experience. Although, the form they appear in has a shape which is only known when it occurs, whether in the objective world or determined by a persons subject circumstance.

 

[HallsofIvy]

Yes, IF the laws of physics which prevent perpetual motion were not true, then you could have perptetual motion!

 

[Guadalupe]

Perpetual Motion Machines

Yes, IF the laws of physics which prevent perpetual motion were not true, then you could have perptetual motion!

Perpetual motion machines never did violate any laws of physics.

Perpetual motion machines are finite, not infinite.

Perpetual motion machines are simply misunderstood.

 

[alpha_wolf]

Perpetual motion machines never did violate any laws of physics.

Perpetual motion machines were simply misunderstood.

Perpetual is not infinite but finite.

There are two types of PMMs - the 1st and 2nd kind. These are defined as machines that violate the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics, respectively. Anything else is, by definition, not a PMM.

Edit: and there is no such thing as "free energy" - energy has to come from somewhere, else you have a PMM of the 1st kind.

 

[Guadalupe]

There are two types of PMMs - the 1st and 2nd kind. These are defined as machines that violate the 1st or 2nd laws of thermodynamics, respectively. Anything else is, by definition, not a PMM.

Edit: and there is no such thing as "free energy" - energy has to come from somewhere, else you have a PMM of the 1st kind.

Perpetual motion machines (PMMs)of the 1st, 2nd, or of any kind, does not or has ever violated any laws of physics.

Infinite meaning, "with no beginning and no end". All PMMs of any kind, are finite, because they all have a point of origin, a ground state, a beginning.

Laws of Physics state, "Anything with a beginning, will come to an end". Again, PMMs are simply misunderstood.

But, if you want to talk about "free energy". My money is on solar panel energy generators or windmill generators.

 

[russ_watters]

Perpetual motion machines (PMMs)of the 1st, 2nd, or of any kind, does not and have never violated any laws of physics.

Reread what alpha posted. By definition, they violate the laws of physics.

Laws of Physics state, "Anything with a beginning, will come to an end".

There is no law of physics that says that.

Guadalupe, we are patient people, but our patience is finite. You are welcome to try to overturn the laws of physics in the Theory Development forum, but not in other forums. Other forums are for discussing the real laws of physics.

 

[Guadalupe]

perpetual motion machines

Reread what alpha posted. By definition, they violate the laws of physics.
There is no law of physics that says that.

Guadalupe, we are patient people, but our patience is finite. You are welcome to try to overturn the laws of physics in the Theory Development forum, but not in other forums. Other forums are for discussing the real laws of physics.

Forgive me for not being too specific. But, can anyone give me one example, by difinition, that is infinite in this whole universe? Just one?

Oh! God is a given. Sorry.

 

[alpha_wolf]

Perpetual motion machines (PMMs)of the 1st, 2nd, or of any kind, does not and have never violated any laws of physics.
Infinite meaning, "with no beginning and no end".
All PMMs of any kind, are finite, because they all have a point of origin, a ground state, a beginning.
Laws of Physics state, "Anything with a beginning, will come to an end". Again, PMMs are simply misunderstood.

Guadalupe, it seems it is you who has misunderstood PMMs. I do not blame you - the word "perpetual" is rather missleading; and the word "motion" is somewhat misplaced (see below). As I wrote earlier, PMMs are defined as machines that violate one of the first two laws of thermodynamics. Typically, these are machines that are supposed to produce continuous motion, hence the name. They are not expected to run forever, but only for as long as their structure remains intact.

To be honest, PMMs shouldn't really be called PMMs. Nothing in their definition talks about motion. And in fact perpetual motion is possible, and is occurring all the time. The Earth is in perpetual motion around the sun and around its own axis, the same goes for the moon, the other planets, and so on. What is not possible, is to produce work from such motion.

But if you want to talk about "free energy". My bet is on solar energy generator or windmill generator.

These examples are not free energy, in the sense that energy is not being created out of nothing. It is simply being converted from one form to another. And that is indeed quite possible.

 

[russ_watters]

Forgive me for not being too specific. But, can anyone give me one example, by difinition, that is infinite in this whole universe? Just one?

We're not even sure if the universe itself is infinite (though it looks like it may be). In any case, this has nothing to do with why what you are saying isn't physics.

 

[Guadalupe]

perpetual motion machines

Having a point of origin is the very foundation in which engineering basis their building blocks upon. Without it, one can not build on the ideas, thoughts, even their insperations.

The word "Perpetual" to mean: forever, never change, etc. But, has anyone stopped to ask as to how can anything be forever in motion without having a point of origin? The answer is, sadly, no.

We claim that perpetual motion machines to do all kinds of wondrous things, like giving us free energy, runs forever, etc, and all because we are making the mistake of defining the word "perpetual" with Newton 1st Law of Motion (infinite) and overlooking his 3rd Law of Motion (finite).

I'm not talking about "free energy", but about "perpetual motion machines" as having a beginning, a ground state, a point of origin, onces its put forward into motion.

Why is it soooooo important about having a point of origin you ask? It means, "Any object set in motion, from a ground state, a beginning, a point of origin, will eventually come to a grinding halt".