Is a 100% Efficient Machine Considered a Perpetual Motion Machine?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YashaTheBest
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
A machine that is 100% efficient cannot be classified as a perpetual motion machine (PMM) because it does not produce more energy than it consumes. The laws of thermodynamics dictate that a PMM must output more work than it inputs, which a hypothetical 100% efficient machine does not achieve. While the discussion acknowledges that both PMMs and perfectly efficient machines do not exist, the distinction remains that a PMM performs work beyond its energy input. Therefore, a machine that merely breaks even cannot be considered a PMM. The consensus emphasizes that terminology matters in defining these concepts.
YashaTheBest
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Can perpetual motion machine not produce extra energy just be 100% efficient and still be considered a perpetual motion machine?

I understand the laws of thermodynamics states that a machine cannot make more energy than it uses. But theoretically if you remove all the losses and have a 100% efficient machine could I call it a PMM or it has to produce more energy to be called a PMM.

This question is purely whether or not can I call it a PMM.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A PMM (which does not exist) does work. Your hypothetical machine (which ALSO does not exist --- there's no such thing as zero load) does no work so it is not a PMM
 
phinds said:
A PMM (which does not exist) does work. Your hypothetical machine (which ALSO does not exist --- there's no such thing as zero load) does no work so it is not a PMM

This doesn't answers my question.

I know that It doesn't exist and I'm not claiming anything. I do not need people saying "it is impossible" or "does not exist" or "there is no such things". I simply want to know whether or not can I call 100% efficient machine a PMM.
 
Since there isn't any such thing, I'm not at all clear that it MATTERS what you call it.

As I specifically said in my post, a PMM does work and yours doesn't so yours isn't a PMM. Was that not clear?
 
I think that, by definition, a PMM has to output more work than is input. So a machine that just breaks even is not a PMM.
 

Thread 'Need help understanding particle physics and quantum physics'

So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
View full post »

Thread 'Raman Spectroscopy help'

I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
View full post »

Similar threads

B Solve Feymann's Irreversible Machines Puzzle
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • Sticky
Insights Why We Don’t Discuss Perpetual Motion Machines (PMM)
Replies
31
Views
14K
Feynman explanation of gravitational energy
Replies
2
Views
3K
Feynman: Reversible machines, no perpetual motion?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Wondering if a machine could be said to be 100% efficient
Replies
1
Views
2K
Why Can't Permanent Magnets Create a Perpetual Motion Machine?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Perpetual motion machine - Intuitive meaning
Replies
35
Views
5K
Overunity Questions: Is Energy Added in Space?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Is a Zero Efficiency Machine Possible and Thermodynamically Stable?
Replies
11
Views
6K
What Are the Odds of a Perfect Machine? Perpetual Motion Possibilities
Replies
4
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top