Huh? I think perhaps you misunderstand what a PMM is. Your statement is a non-sequitur.robotkid786 said:TL;DR Summary: If perpetual motion is impossible doesn't that mean that the universe has a definite beginning and end?
(1) Yes, but it only says that because it is true (although it is an understatement). You possibly don't really understand the Big Bang Theory either.robotkid786 said:I've only just clocked this to be the case. I asked chat gpt and the say big bang has a lot of merit apparently
ChatGPT is not a valid reference here.robotkid786 said:I asked chat gpt
PMMs are a forbidden topic at PF (for obvious reasons). Please follow the Insights Article link in the rules quote below for more information. This thread will remain closed.robotkid786 said:TL;DR Summary: If perpetual motion is impossible doesn't that mean that the universe has a definite beginning and end?
I've only just clocked this to be the case. I asked chat gpt and the say big bang has a lot of merit apparently
PF Forbidden Topics said:Pseudoscience, such as (but not limited to):
Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions (see our Insights Article here)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion
http://www.skepdic.com/freeenergy.html
http://www.skepdic.com/perpetual.html
No, perpetual motion is generally not considered a legitimate topic of study within the mainstream scientific community. The concept violates the fundamental laws of physics, specifically the first and second laws of thermodynamics, which makes it scientifically implausible.
Perpetual motion is impossible according to scientific principles because it would require a machine or system to produce more energy than it consumes without any external energy source. This violates the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Additionally, it also contradicts the second law of thermodynamics, which states that entropy, or disorder, in a closed system always increases over time, preventing perpetual motion machines from being feasible.
Yes, there have been numerous historical attempts to create perpetual motion machines, dating back to the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Notable inventors and thinkers, including Leonardo da Vinci, have sketched ideas for such machines. However, all these attempts have ultimately failed to achieve perpetual motion, serving instead to reinforce the understanding of thermodynamic laws.
The scientific community is generally skeptical when new claims of perpetual motion machines arise. Most scientists request rigorous peer-reviewed evidence and adherence to established physical laws before considering such claims. Typically, these claims are debunked through demonstrations that they either involve hidden energy sources or miscalculations.
While the concept of perpetual motion as traditionally envisioned is not viable, research into highly efficient and sustainable energy systems continues. Innovations such as improved renewable energy technologies and advances in materials science may yield systems that are highly efficient, though not truly perpetual. The pursuit of minimizing energy loss in various applications is a more scientifically grounded and promising field of study.