Perpetual motion machine

  • Thread starter Trilairian
  • Start date

Answers and Replies

  • #2
2,193
2
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?
 
  • #3
Tom Mattson
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,500
7
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.
 
  • #4
28
0
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?
 
  • #5
Tom Mattson
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,500
7
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.
 
  • #6
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,787
2,268
I didn't find Trilairian's statement ambiguous.

By stating where the energy ultimately comes from, he is clearly disqualilfying it as a PMM.
 
  • #7
Tom Mattson
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,500
7
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.
 
  • #9
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,787
2,268
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
Danger
Gold Member
9,607
245
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
6,265
1,277
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
Danger
Gold Member
9,607
245
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
Mk
1,984
3
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
Danger
Gold Member
9,607
245
Lapin Dormant said:
going on since time = 0 stopping at time = ∞ or who knows?
:uhh: :uhh: :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
Danger
Gold Member
9,607
245
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
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. ..
 
  • #19
Danger
Gold Member
9,607
245
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! :yuck: :tongue2: :tongue: :blushing: :surprised :biggrin:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
  • #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
6,265
1,277
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.
 
  • #24
502
1
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.
 

Related Threads on Perpetual motion machine

  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
748
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
10K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
646
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
Top