B Is perpetual motion a forbidden topic in the scientific community?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter robotkid786
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Motion
robotkid786
Messages
36
Reaction score
10
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
 
Space news on Phys.org
No. Supposed perpetual motion machines always lose energy to somewhere, which is why true perpetual motion machines are impossible. The universe is all there is - there is nowhere for it to lose energy to. So your analogy is flawed.

Do not trust large language models on physics. They are trained on the internet and there is way too much misinformation and not enough maths.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
robotkid786 said:
TL;DR Summary: If perpetual motion is impossible doesn't that mean that the universe has a definite beginning and end?
Huh? I think perhaps you misunderstand what a PMM is. Your statement is a non-sequitur.
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
(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.
(2) Do NOT use ChatGPT as a reference here. The moderators have decided (rightly I think) that it's not appropriate. It makes too many mistakes.
 
  • Like
Likes robotkid786
Thread locked pending moderation.
 
robotkid786 said:
I asked chat gpt
ChatGPT is not a valid reference here.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and robotkid786
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
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.

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
 
  • Like
Likes robotkid786
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
1K
Replies
31
Views
13K
Replies
9
Views
343
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top