Into what kind of energy does the potential energy transforms in this example

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of perpetual motion, specifically regarding a hypothetical system involving a magnet inside a frictionless sphere. It is acknowledged that perpetual motion is impossible, as energy must convert to another form rather than remain indefinitely in motion. The oscillating magnet would lose energy over time, primarily through photon emission, leading to a decrease in its motion. The conversation highlights a misunderstanding of perpetual motion terminology, clarifying that it refers to a net energy output without input. Ultimately, the energy transformation in this scenario would involve potential energy converting to other forms, such as heat and electromagnetic radiation.
fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,928
Reaction score
272
Talking with a friend about the perpetual motion (we both know it don't exist but don't know how to prove it) I came with the following system.
Say you have an almost empty magnet sphere. I say almost because at its center it has a little magnet such that it is repulsed by the internal walls of the sphere. If we shake the system a little bit I guess the magnet at the center of the sphere will start to oscillate. Ah I forgot to precise that there's no air into the sphere so that there is not friction in the motion of the little magnet at the sphere's center. If I didn't know that perpetual motion don't exist, I'd say the little magnet would oscillate forever. Clearly it has a potential energy and as there's no perpetual motion, this energy must convert itself into another form of energy. In this case, what would it be? (I'm pretty sure the sphere would gain energy like heat due the electronic stuff... but I didn't study this part of Physics yet so I'm just speculating).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The term "perpetual motion" is a little bit of a misnomer, since via Newton's first law, an object in motion will remain in motion forever unless acted upon by an outside force. So too a hypothetical frictionless oscillation.

What is really meant when people talk about "perpetual motion" being impossible is a net output of energy from a machine that has no input.
 
Said magnet will radiate away some energy in the form of photons and slow down.
 
Thanks to both.
Ok maybe I misused the term "perpetual motion" but this wasn't my intention. :-p
So what would happen is that the magnet would give its potential energy to the sphere via a photon emission... Nice. I really want to study electromagnetism or quantum mechanics right now but I better wait getting there.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top