- #1
codered1
- 2
- 0
- TL;DR Summary
- Feynmans reversible and irreversible machines
I started reading "Feyman Lectures on physics" and stuck on his explanation about reversible and irreversible machines. I've tried to read other answers to this question, but I couldn't get the point. Here is the first thing:
"If, when we have lifted and lowered a lot of weights and restored the machine to the original condition, we find that the net result is to have lifted a weight, then we have a perpetual motion machine because we can use that lifted weight to run something else. That is, provided the machine which lifted the weight is brought back to its exact original condition, and furthermore that it is completely self-contained—that it has not received the energy to lift that weight from some external source—like Bruce’s blocks. "
I image myself a see-saw (weight-lifting) with some weight A on one side, which will be lifted by putting some weight B (by myself) on otherside. Then when I take away weight B from the see-saw, clearly the weight A will drop down on the ground, but not entierly, so we have some free enegry from this see-saw (weight-lifting machine)
Here is illustrations of what told above:
Do I understand perpetual motion right?
Then Feyman says:
"We imagine that there are two classes of machines, those that are not reversible, which includes all real machines, and those that are reversible, which of course are actually not attainable no matter how careful we may be in our design of bearings, levers, etc. We suppose, however, that there is such a thing—a reversible machine—which lowers one unit of weight (a pound or any other unit) by one unit of distance, and at the same time lifts a three-unit weight. Call this reversible machine, Machine A. Suppose this particular reversible machine lifts the three-unit weight a distance X. Then suppose we have another machine, Machine B, which is not necessarily reversible, which also lowers a unit weight a unit distance, but which lifts three units a distance Y. We can now prove that Y is not higher than X; that is, it is impossible to build a machine that will lift a weight any higher than it will be lifted by a reversible machine. Let us see why. Let us suppose that Y were higher than X. We take a one-unit weight and lower it one unit height with Machine B, and that lifts the three-unit weight up a distance Y. Then we could lower the weight from Y to X, obtaining free power, and use the reversible Machine A, running backwards, to lower the three-unit weight a distance X and lift the one-unit weight by one unit height. This will put the one-unit weight back where it was before, and leave both machines ready to be used again! We would therefore have perpetual motion if Y were higher than X, which we assumed was impossible. With those assumptions, we thus deduce that Y is not higher than X, so that of all machines that can be designed, the reversible machine is the best. "
1. Reversible machine is the machine that can lift one weight by lowering another and returns to it's inital state, without any external source of enegry, so it can lift weight again?
2. How Machine B can obtain free power by lowering weight from Y to X so it can work again?
I imagine myself that we need to lower weight by ourselfs (that means putting power to lower three-unit weight) so when we release the machine, it's will bring the three-unit weight (and machine) to it's balance state (Height = Y). So where is free enegry and how does it explain that Machine B becomes perpetual motion machine?
I would be glad to get any help.
Also English is not my native language, so I'm sorry, if I've been wrong somewhere
"If, when we have lifted and lowered a lot of weights and restored the machine to the original condition, we find that the net result is to have lifted a weight, then we have a perpetual motion machine because we can use that lifted weight to run something else. That is, provided the machine which lifted the weight is brought back to its exact original condition, and furthermore that it is completely self-contained—that it has not received the energy to lift that weight from some external source—like Bruce’s blocks. "
I image myself a see-saw (weight-lifting) with some weight A on one side, which will be lifted by putting some weight B (by myself) on otherside. Then when I take away weight B from the see-saw, clearly the weight A will drop down on the ground, but not entierly, so we have some free enegry from this see-saw (weight-lifting machine)
Here is illustrations of what told above:
Do I understand perpetual motion right?
Then Feyman says:
"We imagine that there are two classes of machines, those that are not reversible, which includes all real machines, and those that are reversible, which of course are actually not attainable no matter how careful we may be in our design of bearings, levers, etc. We suppose, however, that there is such a thing—a reversible machine—which lowers one unit of weight (a pound or any other unit) by one unit of distance, and at the same time lifts a three-unit weight. Call this reversible machine, Machine A. Suppose this particular reversible machine lifts the three-unit weight a distance X. Then suppose we have another machine, Machine B, which is not necessarily reversible, which also lowers a unit weight a unit distance, but which lifts three units a distance Y. We can now prove that Y is not higher than X; that is, it is impossible to build a machine that will lift a weight any higher than it will be lifted by a reversible machine. Let us see why. Let us suppose that Y were higher than X. We take a one-unit weight and lower it one unit height with Machine B, and that lifts the three-unit weight up a distance Y. Then we could lower the weight from Y to X, obtaining free power, and use the reversible Machine A, running backwards, to lower the three-unit weight a distance X and lift the one-unit weight by one unit height. This will put the one-unit weight back where it was before, and leave both machines ready to be used again! We would therefore have perpetual motion if Y were higher than X, which we assumed was impossible. With those assumptions, we thus deduce that Y is not higher than X, so that of all machines that can be designed, the reversible machine is the best. "
1. Reversible machine is the machine that can lift one weight by lowering another and returns to it's inital state, without any external source of enegry, so it can lift weight again?
2. How Machine B can obtain free power by lowering weight from Y to X so it can work again?
I imagine myself that we need to lower weight by ourselfs (that means putting power to lower three-unit weight) so when we release the machine, it's will bring the three-unit weight (and machine) to it's balance state (Height = Y). So where is free enegry and how does it explain that Machine B becomes perpetual motion machine?
I would be glad to get any help.
Also English is not my native language, so I'm sorry, if I've been wrong somewhere