Is a perpetual motion machine possible?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the impossibility of creating a perpetual motion machine (PMM), specifically highlighting that energy derived from diminishing magnetic fields cannot sustain perpetual motion. Participants agree that once the energy from these fields diminishes, the system will reach static equilibrium, thus disqualifying it as a true PMM. The conversation also touches on the concept of magnetic monopoles, which, if discovered, could revolutionize technology but remain theoretical at this stage.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics principles, particularly energy conservation
  • Familiarity with magnetic fields and their properties
  • Knowledge of equilibrium states in physical systems
  • Awareness of theoretical concepts in modern physics, such as magnetic monopoles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the laws of thermodynamics and their implications on perpetual motion
  • Explore the concept of magnetic monopoles and their significance in physics
  • Investigate historical attempts to create perpetual motion machines and their outcomes
  • Learn about energy conservation and its applications in engineering and technology
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, engineering students, hobbyists interested in physics experiments, and anyone curious about the principles of energy and motion.

Physics news on Phys.org
I guess I'm not all too clear with that drawing versus your statements.
In other words, what stops the system from reaching a static equilibrium?
 
Yeah, if the energy comes from the magnetic fields, and the magnetic fields deminish(sic), then the energy diminishes, too. Hence, you do not have a perpetual motion machine.
 
Tom Mattson said:
Yeah, if the energy comes from the magnetic fields, and the magnetic fields deminish(sic), then the energy diminishes, too. Hence, you do not have a perpetual motion machine.
Isn't that what I said?
 
Tom: Yeah, if the energy comes from the magnetic fields, and the magnetic fields deminish(sic), then the energy diminishes, too. Hence, you do not have a perpetual motion machine.

Trilairian: Isn't that what I said?

No, what you said is consistent with everything in my quote that comes before the word "Hence". You of course did not explicitly conclude that this is not the design of a bona fide perpetual motion machine. All you said about that is the title of the thread, which led me to assume that you believe that this is a design of such a machine.
 
I didn't find Trilairian's statement ambiguous.

By stating where the energy ultimately comes from, he is clearly disqualilfying it as a PMM.
 
DaveC426913 said:
I didn't find Trilairian's statement ambiguous.

Neither did I. He clearly stated that the fields are being diminished.

By stating where the energy ultimately comes from, he is clearly disqualilfying it as a PMM.

By stating where the energy ultimately comes from, he is clearly stating where the energy ultimately comes from. :biggrin: Nothing more.

It's not that what he wrote is unclear, it's that he didn't complete the thought. And it's not at all obvious from what was written that the correct "if...then" inference was meant. Indeed, the thread title seemed to indicate the opposite.
 
The left N repels the N-charged shuttle, then the right N repels the N-charged shuttle. Yes, it would merely stop at equilibrium.

If it were possible to build such a device.

Which it isn't.

The device requires a monopole - if such a thnig were actually found or manufactured, we would be well on our way to a new technological revolution.
 
  • #10
DaveC426913 said:
Yes, it would merely stop at equilibrium.

If it were possible to build such a device.

Which it isn't.
Would it work (seek equilibrium, that is) if that were the end view of 3 bar magnets riding in horizontal slots?
 
  • #11
Danger said:
Would it work (seek equilibrium, that is) if that were the end view of 3 bar magnets riding in horizontal slots?
What you're describing could be made fairly easily. 3 bar magnets with all N ends and all S ends together. If the end magnets were fixed and the middle magnet could slide, the middle magnet would behave exactly like a spring if pulled to one side and released. It would eventually come to rest more or less equidistant from the end magnets.
 
  • #12
Thanks, Zoob. That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure if some other effect might interfere when there were 3 magnets instead of just 2.
 
  • #13
Zoob is zooby is zoobie.
 
  • #14
The only Known Perpetual Motion 'Machine' is the Universe itself, going on since time = 0 stopping at time = ∞ or who knows?
 
  • #15
Lapin Dormant said:
going on since time = 0 stopping at time = ∞ or who knows?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :confused: That's possibly misleading. Technically correct, I guess, since time in our universe began with the same incident as everything else, but there was still a beginning and eventually there'll be some kind of end when entropy has fulfilled it's duties. (I think...:confused: )
 
  • #16
But it has NEVER stopped moving, BILLIONS of Years of Motion, all of the atoms, Molecules, masses, moving, all the time, has been that way since the beginning .. .. .. .. .. till the end .. .. .. .. ..
 
  • #17
Lapin Dormant said:
.. .. .. .. .. till the end .. .. .. .. ..
Aye, there's the rub. 'Perpetual' means 'without end'.:approve:
 
  • #18
Danger said:
Aye, there's the rub. 'Perpetual' means 'without end'.:approve:
.. .. .. .. And if the end, and the beginning, are the same thing, then it is Peeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrpetual! We will all Need to wait just a Little bit to find that out .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

LD
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. [/color]... .. .. .. .. ..[/color]
 
  • #19
You've got me a bit confused there, but I wonder if this might be starting to drift into philosophy. Defining the beginning and end of time is probably beyond the scope of this forum.
By the way, why on Earth do you keep leaving that trail of Trix behind you?
 
  • #20
Look! is' ****

Danger said:
You've got me a bit confused there, but I wonder if this might be starting to drift into philosophy. Defining the beginning and end of time is probably beyond the scope of this forum.
By the way, why on Earth do you keep leaving that trail of Trix behind you?
I haven't defined it, simply noted that they could be the same thing, so the 'perpetual' is beyond the scope of human thought. :bugeye:

As for the trail of trix as you so quaintly put it, it isn't "Trix" it is a Rabbit's footprints 'hopping along' and the other part, is a remnant of my diet! :-p :-p :blushing: :biggrin:
:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:
 
  • #21
ok this might seem like a very stupid question ,still can anyone relieve me of my ignorance about how to isolate a single magnetic pole ?
does anyone know about the vapour -wheel perpetual motion machine ?
 
  • #22
extreme_machinations said:
ok this might seem like a very stupid question ,still can anyone relieve me of my ignorance about how to isolate a single magnetic pole ?
The only way I could ever think of would be to make a hollow sphere in parts. Magnetize it so the outside was all one pole, and the inside the other, then bond the parts together strongly.
does anyone know about the vapour -wheel perpetual motion machine ?
I might know what you're talking about. This is a hollow wheel with hollow spokes on a hollow cylindrical shaft. Inside is some volatile liquid, and a hanging, weighted port opening and closing mechanism. As the wheel turns, the liquid flows into a spoke, over balancing that side of the wheel putting torque on it. However, since it's volatile it vaporizes before it stops the wheel at BDC. The vapor is lead back into the cylindrical shaft where it condenses back into a liquid. It keeps running so long as the shaft temperature is kept below the vaporization point of the liquid, which can be done by just keeping it wet. It's not perpetual motion: just a low temperature differential heat engine. If we're talking about the same thing.
 
  • #23
Yupp ! Thats Exactly What I Was Talking About .
 
  • #24
extreme_machinations said:
ok this might seem like a very stupid question ,still can anyone relieve me of my ignorance about how to isolate a single magnetic pole ?

As far as I know, you can't get a magnetic monopole. Scientists are still searching for one though because if it exists, it would explain the quantization of charge.
 
  • #26
russ_watters said:
That's the operating principle behind http://www.mmmetals.com/pages/heat_pipe_heat_sinks/heat_pipe_heat_sink.htm" heat exchangers, btw.
That's cool, russ. I wasnt aware of that system.
The function of the thing Extreme_Machinations mentioned is not heat exchange, though, but to actually produce torque. I ran across it in a very old issue of Popular Mechanics, or Popular Science, maybe 1960's, and actually went to the library and looked up the patent for a detailed explanation of how it worked. It was a really interesting devise, to me, but probably never went anywhere since it hardly produces any power for its size.
I think you could configure your heat pipe to tilt up and down like a seesaw and take the same amount of power off it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #27
sid_galt said:
As far as I know, you can't get a magnetic monopole. Scientists are still searching for one though because if it exists, it would explain the quantization of charge.
I can't understand anyone looking for a magnetic monopole. Once you see how the dipole is created it seems completely obvious there's no monopole possible.
 
  • #28
zoobyshoe said:
I can't understand anyone looking for a magnetic monopole. Once you see how the dipole is created it seems completely obvious there's no monopole possible.

Magnetic monopoles are predicted by a few theories, including all Grand Unified Theories (GUT theories).

See for instance

http://budoe.bu.edu/~corth/monopole_faq.html

which doesn't appear to be any sort of "official" faq, but is fairly well written IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
pervect said:
Magnetic monopoles are predicted by a few theories, including all Grand Unified Theories (GUT theories).
See for instance
http://budoe.bu.edu/~corth/monopole_faq.html
which doesn't appear to be any sort of "official" faq, but is fairly well written IMO.
Yes, but we see it says:
How much of my tax dollars are going into this joke?
People often wonder ask what good pure research is doing them. It's often hard to come up with a convincing answer. The bottom line is that all science, even wacky sounding science like looking for magnetic monopoles, can have far reaching affects in the future. Quantum Mechanics doesn't have a lot to do with daily life either, but computers wouldn't work without someone having understood something about it.
When you understand the magnetic field around a current carrying conductor to be, sort of, pointing around in a circle at right angles to the current flow, it seems absurd to suppose that this force could be "halved" somehow, any more than you could "halve" anything that is going in circles. Just imagine half of this guy::smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #30
The only real perpetual motion is the motions these folk perpetually go through to try and prove that there is perpetual motion.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K