Is Perpetual Motion Truly Impossible or Simply Misunderstood?

[Epsilon Pi]

1. Field derived from the motion of electric charges.
2. Field derived from the motion of weak charges.
3. Field derived from the motion of color charges.

Only the 1st kind has been well understood and applied in science and technology.
In quantum physics, from results of much empirical data, the intrinsic angular momentum of a particle is called spin and this spin gives rise to an intrinsic magnetic moment.

Here is where I clearly deviate from modern physics as how can you explain the fact that the neutron that does not have any electric charge, it does have however a magnetic field represented in its intrinsic magnetic moment? You will certainly need then to introduce sort of theoretical "patch" that will never be understood well, and as so be applied in science and engineering, and this concept is precisely the spin concept with which you will try to explain, hiding at the same time what is its real origin, I mean, the intrinsic magnetic field.
A magnetic field is a self-consistent-entity, that is expressed in the fact that you cannot have magnetic monopoles, which is quite well understood if we think in a complex concept such as the basic unit system based on Euler relation, that by definition includes both a wave nature and a radical duality separated by the symbol i.
But if you have taken that path to explain the whole by the part or a whole/part entity as the magnetic field by one of its derived features, spin or charge, I know it will be quite imposible for you to take this other path, and here is where we come across with an incommensurability problem, and you will certainly try by all means to correct the inconsistencies in your mathematical symbolism introducing all kind of patches, that make thing quite entangled.

Regards
EP

 

[Antonio Lao]

the neutron that does not have any electric charge, it does have however a magnetic field represented in its intrinsic magnetic moment?

a free neutron will decay into a proton and electron along with an antineutrino of the electron in about 15 minutes (roughly, the attention span of an average person). So neutron is not really an authoritative base to disregard or question the notion of magnetic field generated by charged particles.

Actually, according to Particle Data Group at http://PDG.LBL.gov the neutron does have a negative charge about 10^{-21} of the electron charge.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

Yes, I know, that those entities as the neutron cannot be free as the electron...in fact it seems that in a certain sense they depend on it and as so all those entities of the chemistry of nuclear interactions...but again mine is quite another point of view in which we do not need to make physical entities such as the magnetic field dependent on such theoretical and mathematical abstractions...it is this deviation of those physical certitudes, the ones, that seem to me untenable in modern physics. My rational mind cannot follow that path.
How can you explain a whole/part as the magnetic field by the part or charge? Is it not true that the contrary is already included in Maxwell's equations: the charge can be explained naturally as a result of time-varying magnetic field. But Western science since Descartes took the path to explain what is complex by the simple...and the complex must be taken to a minumum triadic symbolism so we can manage it, i.e., complex numbers.
The greatest drawback of dualism is precisely that its language becomes incommensurable even in that same field of physics, and worst with other fields of science.

Regards
EP

a free neutron will decay into a proton and electron along with an antineutrino of the electron in about 15 minutes (roughly, the attention span of an average person). So neutron is not really an authoritative base to disregard or question the notion of magnetic field generated by charged particles.

Actually, according to Particle Data Group at http://PDG.LBL.gov the neutron does have a negative charge about 10^{-21} of the electron charge.

 

[Antonio Lao]

The greatest drawback of dualism is precisely that its language becomes incommensurable even in that same field of physics, and worst with other fields of science.

The dualism that I'm working on is that of two quantities such that the product is equal to the difference such that

ab=a-b

where

b=\frac{a}{1+a}

and

a=\frac{b}{1-b}

If we look at the law of universal gravitation given by

F=G \frac{m_1 m_2}{R^2}

m1 and m2 are duals such that

m_1 m_2 = m_1 - m_2

where m1 >> m2

m1 and m2 are equal iff both vanish.

Likewise, this can be applied to Coulomb's law of static electricity.

 

[Antonio Lao]

In electrostatics, when one charge q1 >> q2 then Coulomb's law defined an electric field such that the electric force is given by

F_E = q_2 E

where q2 is the unit test charge and

E = k \int_{n} \frac{q_{i}}{r^2_{i2}}

 

[Antonio Lao]

In magnetostatics, the dualism between two incremental currents i1 and i2 can also be describe but is a little more complicated because of the directional property of the currents for an incremental distance.

F_B=k \frac{i_1 i_2}{d} L_2

F_B= k i_2 L_2 B_1

B1 is the magnetic field and i2 L2 is the product of charge and speed.

 

[juju]

how can you explain the fact that the neutron that does not have any electric charge, it does have however a magnetic field represented in its intrinsic magnetic moment?

Hi EP,

According to the standard model, the neutron's magnetic moment is generated by the magnetic moments of its constituent quarks which are charged.

There are also additional aspects that may come into play, such as virtual particles within the neutron, and motion of the constituent quarks.

juju

 

[omin]

This is a fresh reply after reading the original comment.

I am new to this board also, but I have direct interest in physics and I'm only little way into it, but I've got a conceptual answer to take with a grain of salt.

I think perpetual motionists make the basic fallacy that non-determinists make, in that non-determinists believe they can stand outside of the physical laws, and get a system to perform perfect equilibrium without ourselves or the environment affecting the system, or the system affecting us. Too many states of matter and energy pervade and interact throughout incomprehensibly small and large dimensions to create this isolated phenomenon. Everything may pervade everything in a sense (as long as it doesn't exist in the same time in place, which guarantees interaction).

I think we assume perpetual motion because we intuitively understand the idea of entirety of existence or singularity. I say we are the perpetual machine. That's why we exist.

As far as getting more energy to exit from an identified system that exists, that seems fairly obvious to indicate and understand as impossible. Energy comes out in units that always in a relative state sense have always existed rather than being created from a void.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

As I said the greatest drawback of dualism is its natural tendency to reduce things; in dualism there is no chance to have a complex quantity except by introducing it as a patch, both in its magnitude and its phase. In dualism we do not have the chance to have a radical duality behind the equal sign as with complex numbers, then you must try by all means to deny or minimize the wave nature of reality.
On the other hand that universal law of gravitation is not so universal after all as we already know; in the planet Mercury we certainly will have a different law. In fact, that law is associated with a solution to a differential equation that is an ellipse in case of normal planets, i.e., different as that one mentioned. And even at galactic greatest distance it will not be valid either.
In biology and philosophy, if we can talk about meanstream philosophy with the north american philosopher Ken Wilber, dualism is really transcended, because of the tendendy mentioned above to reduce everything.
From my own point of view, philosophically, I believe reality is complex not simple, but then we must have a triadic symbolism that mathematically is represented by complex numbers to take that complexity to a minimum. In this case what I offer is that dualism is transcended and included mathematically: you can have both, (+/-), a binary logic, but complementarity too.

Regards
EP

The dualism that I'm working on is that of two quantities such that the product is equal to the difference such that

ab=a-b

where

b=\frac{a}{1+a}

and

a=\frac{b}{1-b}

If we look at the law of universal gravitation given by

F=G \frac{m_1 m_2}{R^2}

m1 and m2 are duals such that

m_1 m_2 = m_1 - m_2

where m1 >> m2

m1 and m2 are equal iff both vanish.

Likewise, this can be applied to Coulomb's law of static electricity.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

Hi juju, thank you, I know there must be a way to explain that magnetic moment of the neutron, by means of quarks whose rules must agree with what is observed in the chemistry of nuclear interactions, but my main point is that the electron has an inherent magnetic field and it cannot be decomposed, it is a self-consistent entity.
Regards
EP

Hi EP,

According to the standard model, the neutron's magnetic moment is generated by the magnetic moments of its constituent quarks which are charged.

There are also additional aspects that may come into play, such as virtual particles within the neutron, and motion of the constituent quarks.

juju

 

[Antonio Lao]

If we can apply dualism in the square of energy (there really are two kinds of energy: the potential and the kinetic), then

H^{+}=E^2 this is a general form of kinetic energy.

H^{-}= - E^2 this is a general form of potential energy.

then the square root of the general potential energy is a pure imaginary number.

\sqrt{H^{-}} = Ei

H+ and H- is possible if and only if the infinitesimal forces and metrics are orthogonal.

If kinetic and potential energy are absolutely dual then

E_K E_P= E_K - E_P

And the RHS expression can be defined as a Lagrangian.

 

[Antonio Lao]

But if we insist on solving E then Ek=E and EP=Ei give

EEi=E-Ei

there are two solutions (-1+i) and (-1-i), which show that energy is a complex number.

Written in exponentials, the solutions are

E= \sqrt{2} e^{i\theta}

E= \sqrt{2} e^{-i\theta}

where the phase angle is 45 degrees.

 

[Epsilon Pi]

I am sorry, Antonio, but I really cannot follow you in your path.
Regards
EP

If we can apply dualism in the square of energy (there really are two kinds of energy: the potential and the kinetic), then

H^{+}=E^2 this is a general form of kinetic energy.

H^{-}= - E^2 this is a general form of potential energy.

then the square root of the general potential energy is a pure imaginary number.

\sqrt{H^{-}} = Ei

H+ and H- is possible if and only if the infinitesimal forces and metrics are orthogonal.

If kinetic and potential energy are absolutely dual then

E_K E_P= E_K - E_P

And the RHS expression can be defined as a Lagrangian.

 

[juju]

my main point is that the electron has an inherent magnetic field and it cannot be decomposed, it is a self-consistent entity.

Hi EP,

I guess the question here is this.

Are the mass, charge, magnetic moment, and spin of the electron independent properties, or do they depend on each other in some way, or do they depend on even deeper as yet unknown properties?

juju

 

[Arsonade]

Pmm

I think peoples biggest problem is the ability to think on a scale other then their physical form. Now we see things working on a big and small scale what can we do to create something similar that will work on a scale we can tangibly see and use?

ok lol first of all, this is the physics fourum lol, most people her think on the physical realm, i won't go into explaining my ideas because i have homework I am procrastinating on but i will link you to my post, you may find it interesting.
my post

take a look

Adam

P.S if anyone would want to reply to my post, that's good, but could u e-mail me tellin me? its AdamChess4@aol.com

 

[Vern]

Ok; let me guess.

We take an electric motor, connect it to an electrical generator, connect the output of the generator to a step-up voltage transformer with a low voltage tap connected to the motor. The low voltage tap is designed to be the correct voltage for the motor. Then we take the high voltage output of the step-up transformer and power the world with it.

This one comes from folks who learn a little something about voltage transformers but don't understand how power works. It is very common; there's even a patent on it; it doesn't work, of course.

Vern