Principles of Pseudo perpetual motion

[Scott Sieger]

HI Guys,

I have nothing to do ( home with the flue ) so I thought I'd post this and discuss the principles of PPM devices.

From what I understand the only way to achieve PPM is to generate a continuously changing event horizon ( Action horison )
This can be shown by example using solar temps and shade at the web page link below

PPM

Any one wanting to seriously discuss the principles I am suggesting or talk about some of their own is most welcome to do so.

 

[ram2048]

heck if you're going to use the sun for power, any solar cell will do...

not sure I'm reading the proposition correctly :O

 

[Scott Sieger]

Ram, the diagrams shown are only to help describe the principles behind pseudo perp.Motion...The sun is shown as a way of using a freely available energy to change the magnets attraction.
The diagram is just a way of showing the three principles that i think are essential to acheiving a ppm.

Another way of creating the magnetic differential for example is to alter the distance between the disc(s) and the cavity plates preferably without using inputed energy such as a magnetic seperator device of some sort that does the same job as the temperature.
Instead of showing a change in attraction I showed it as a change in temperature. So if you read the numbers and give them a magnetic atttraction value you will see what I mean.
Or maybe there is another way of acheiving a contiously changing action horizon?

 

[Antonio Lao]

I think strongly that magnetic field are in continuous motion. But the way to detect this motion is by placing an electric charge particle such as an electron in the field. This electron spiral around a magnetic force line. The stronger (denser) the force lines, the smaller the radius of spiral. But this motion is the motion of charge not the motion of magnetic poles (monopoles). My question is how do we detect the motion of magnetic poles. Do they move at all? Why can't we isolate them? Somehow the motion of magnetic poles is related to some sort of perpetual motion.

But it is also true that magnetic field can exist only if there is some charges moving (current density). But in "empty" space, there is no charge and no current yet there is electromagnetic field. Since there must be some sort of "charge" or "current" in vacuum in order for the EM field to exist, these "charge" and "current" must be some kind of properties of space itself. For purposes of distinction, we can call them "space charge" and "space current."

Regardless of its mass and size, The space charge always have the absolute value of 1/6. So a particle like an electron is composed of 7 (-1/6) and 1 (+1/6) space charge giving a net charge of -1. The photon is made up of 4 (-1/6) and 4 (+1/6) giving a net charge of zero. The up quark is 5 (+1/6) and 1 (-1/6) net of +2/3. The down quark is 3 (-1/6) and 1 (+1/6) net of -1/3. The families of fermions came about by their mass differences. This mass difference is made possible by the existence of energy level for the space charge. For example, the electron has a charge of -1 can exist in a variety of energy levels that give them different mass values. The higher masses of the electron are known as the muon and the tau.

 

[Scott Sieger]

Antonio,
I have for a long time now held the belief that a magnet is an object that fails to conform to the space it takes up thus it's field is actually space time distortion.

Just as an example of abstract application
If we imagne
The north pole of a magnet is "future space time" and the south pole is "Past space time"

The reason the south and north poles are attracted to each other is that when they get together the centre of time exists between the two attracted poles. The poles are both attracted to iron because the steel offers a centre of time to both poles.

The reason why using both poles in a PPM device fails is that the poles only seek one thing and that is the centre of time. Thus time and movement is conserved and they eventually become still.

Just talking a little sh*t here Ok...not too serious.

With PMM devices removing the need for poles is the first step. If you need to reverse poles you are on your way to a stationary mobile.

 

[ram2048]

i think the space distortion is a good idea to run with

take it a little more serious and see where you end up with it

i bet that can take you to some interesting hypothesis

 

[Scott Sieger]

the reason why we can't insulate magnetic fields properly is to do so we would have to mitigate a space time distortion...hard to do hey?

Bythe same token if we can learn how a magnet does this we would then know how to manipulate space time...and this has certain interesting ramifications I think

 

[Scott Sieger]

any ideas as to how to show a magnetis field as a space time distortion in a scientific way? Prove that it is a space time distortion?

Do magnetic fields bend light for example?

Just looking at a strong magnet gives no indication of light distortion ( poss. to small to see maybe)

 

[ram2048]

well gravity bending light you need something as powerful as a black hole.

so you'd probably need a big freaking magnet.

earth sized like creating aurora borealis... mebbe

 

[Antonio Lao]

The magnetic force is given by $F_B = q v \times B$ where $q$ is the electric charge, $v$ is the velocity of the charge, $B$ is the magnetic field.

The magnetic force increases if the amount of charge increases, or the velocity of charge increases, or the magnetic field increases. There does not exist in nature a charge as big as a marble. The unit of electric charge is $1.6 \times 10^{-19}$ coulomb. The maximum speed is the speed of light in vacuum, a very big magnet is required for high magnetic field. Although a magnetic force is $10^{34}$ stronger than gravity, it would still need a big magnet to lift an object the size of a house unless a way is found to increase the magnetic flux density at the local region of the house and another thing the house must have a net electric charge or ferromagnetic.

 

[Scott Sieger]

magnets are used to attract or distract cathode rays yes? Thinking CRT or even a TV...( I don't know the basic principles here but maybe you do?)

 

[ram2048]

nah, they attract or repel electrons which make light by hitting the phosphor capsules inside the screen

there's an emitter and a magnetic director then the electons fly out in a "scan" pattern to hit the screen.

would be interesting to make the biggest most efficient most powerful electromagnet ever and then put things in front of it to see how they're affected.

 

[Antonio Lao]

any ideas as to how to show a magnetis field as a space time distortion in a scientific way?

A brief account of how I do this in the following:

Assumptions: An electric force exists, $F_E$. A magnetic force exists, $F_B$. A unit of electric charge exists, $q$. The complete electromagnetic force is given by Lorentz force:

$$F_L = qE + qv \times B$$

But the gravity force is proportional to the difference of electric and magnetic force by:

$$F_G = k(F_E - F_B) = k(qE - qv \times B) = kq(E - v \times B)$$

and

the square energy quantum given by

$$E^2 = \psi_E \times F_E \cdot \psi_B \times F_B$$

expanding by Lagrange's identity gives a term factor as $( \psi_E \cdot \psi_B ) (F_E \cdot F_B )$ where $\psi_E \cdot \psi_B$ indicates the spacetime distortion relating to the spacetime interval and curvature.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I don't get the term "pseudo perpetual motion". How do you define it? Are you simply talking about something that looks like it is running with no imput of energy?


About magnetic fields:

Magnetic fields are made of electric fields. Every electron radiates an electric field. You can imagine the electric field as invisible hairs that radiate out from the electron, from all parts of it equally out in all directions. The length of all the "hairs" of any electron is from the electron to infinity. The electric lines of force (the hairs) always try to maintain an equal distance from all other electric lines of force. They can never touch or cross. When you accelerate an electron, a wave of energy travels down the electric lines of force. That wave is electromagnetic energy. The wave has different energy depending on how sharply the electron was accelerated, starting with radio waves, through visible light, up to gamma rays. This is why there can be electromagnetic energy in space with no electrons. The electric lines from electrons are attracted to protons. Most electric lines radiating from most electrons are not flailing around loose in space, but are tied up by their attraction to protons.

The analogy to lines or hairs only goes so far, though. In some situations it can almost be taken literally. In others the lines are better taken conceptually as representing the direction in which the influence of the electron will act.

 

[Scott Sieger]

I don't get the term "pseudo perpetual motion". How do you define it? Are you simply talking about something that looks like it is running with no imput of energy?

I guess it is all about the extreme uses of the word "perpetual"
The only entity that comes close to being perpetual and even that has been doubted is the universe itself.

I suppoose the best way to put is in terms of energy cost.

If I built a device that ran without cost to me other than by the construction of such then I would consider it as a pseudo perpetual device.An example of a device that would produce output without input of energy can be seen at this link if you are ineterested.
http://www.paygency.com/Magnadrive1.htm

Whilst this application of forces generates the Ideal PPM and whilst it has not actually been built and tested it is deemed to fail because the forces would equalise each other and the mobile will become still. ( yet to be proven )

I drew this up about 2 years ago as a classic PPM device. To demonstrate some fundamental principles which is the subject of this thread. There is a solution to it's design, but I haven't worked out how to apply it yet.

So I am suggesting that PPM devices can range from self contained closed systems with energy output (the ideal) to open systems, such as tidal and solar which are really almost as good ( ideal )

 

[ram2048]

i don't think that one would work

it would have to be a frictionless interior. with any friction (or say a turbine to extract energy) the system would soon come to a rest state where the downward force of gravity equals the side pulling force against the wall at a certain angle, creating equilibrium and stopping the machine.

 

[zoobyshoe]

You may have seen a "Crookes glass". It's a glass bulb with the air evacuated. Inside is a rotor with four vanes. The vanes are painted silver on on side and black on the other.
As long as it is in a reasonably warm room the rotor turns non stop. It looks like perpetual motion but one side of each vane gets hotter than the other because it is painted black. The little bit of air left in the bulb is continually being heated when it touches the black side of the vanes and pushes against them, moving the rotor.

Buy one of these. 5 or 6 dollars. It will run for the rest of your life at no cost to you.

 

[Scott Sieger]

But can you see just how close it comes to functioning.

The inner cylinder will find a point that I would call a teeter point eventually and would sit there reacting to any external forces by wobbling a little.

In other words the device is too stable and too symetrical. Another actvity has to be taking place simultaneously to provoke constant rolling.

 

[Scott Sieger]

You may have seen a "Crookes glass". It's a glass bulb with the air evacuated. Inside is a rotor with four vanes. The vanes are painted silver on on side and black on the other.

Can't say that I have but it sounds plausable.

 

[Scott Sieger]

this reminds me og that old chinese device that employs a few candles that set up an updraft turning a propeller

But crookes glass uses ambient temp so it woudl fall into a different category.

What would physics call this device ( crooles glass)...a perpetum mobile?

 

[ram2048]

well the problem with the crooke's is that it does require external force to turn.

without light it doesn't turn at all :(

 

[zoobyshoe]

What would physics call this device ( crooles glass)...a perpetum mobile?

Just falls into the category of a heat engine.

There are no authentic perpetual motion machines. Everything runs on some kind of energy. There are several, like the Crookes glass, that run off heat from the atmosphere. The bobbing bird is another one. It runs off atmospheric heat. It's a very clever device.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Scott,

Sorry. The device is called "Crookes' radiometer, not "Crookes' glass".

Here's a link:

Crookes radiometer - encyclopedia article about Crookes radiometer. Free access, no registration needed. What does Crookes radiometer mean? What is Crookes radiometer? Provided by the Free Online Encyclopedia.
Address:http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Crookes+radiometer

It explains there how it operates. The common notion it operates on light is apparently a misconception. In order for it to work the bulb can only be partially evacuated. When it is very highly evacuated it no longer works. This is proof that light is not what is moving the vanes. The air molecules near the black side of the vanes are always more exited than those at any other location in the system and exert the greatest force on the vanes, causing it to move.

To work, it requires a constant imput of thermal energy, heat, which it picks up from the ambient infrared in its environment. Putting it in a strong light will make it speed up considerably, not becase the light is pushing the vanes, but because the light is delivering more thermal energy to the vanes. This is absorbed by the black side and reflected by the silver side.

-Zooby

 

[Scott Sieger]

THanks Zoobie, what would you call the device, " a thermal motor"?

 

[zoobyshoe]

THanks Zoobie, what would you call the device, " a thermal motor"?

Hmmm. Sort of. I think it is completely safe to call it a "heat engine". The exact, specific classification, I'm not sure about.

"Motor" is generally reserved for prime movers that operate from electricity. However, people sometimes loosly refer to their car engines as "motors".

Maybe, "ambient heat engine" is the most specific.

 

[Scott Sieger]

and if this heat engine started to work at temperatures say 10 Below the lowest ambient what would it be then? In other words if the engine kept right on going becasue temperatures didn't go low enoughfor it to stop. It would still be a heat engine for sure but it is now in another category.

So we design a heat engine that starts to operate at -30 degreesC...and we have a pseudo perpetual mobile I guess.

 

[russ_watters]

and if this heat engine started to work at temperatures say 10 Below the lowest ambient what would it be then? In other words if the engine kept right on going becasue temperatures didn't go low enoughfor it to stop. It would still be a heat engine for sure but it is now in another category.

So we design a heat engine that starts to operate at -30 degreesC...and we have a pseudo perpetual mobile I guess.

The heat has to go somewhere to be useable. What you are describing is not unlike geothermal power: hot steam is vented to the cold air and a power turbine sits in between and harnesses that thermal energy.

 

[zoobyshoe]

and if this heat engine started to work at temperatures say 10 Below the lowest ambient what would it be then?

Any environment in which you put it is its ambient environment. I don't see any way of separating it from an environment such that you could say it starts to work below ambient temperature.

In other words if the engine kept right on going becasue temperatures didn't go low enough for it to stop. It would still be a heat engine for sure but it is now in another category.

Not really. Still a heat engine.

So we design a heat engine that starts to operate at -30 degreesC...and we have a pseudo perpetual mobile I guess.

Any temperature above absolute zero is a situation where you have heat. If I recall correctly, it is not believed to be possible for anything to actually get down to absolute zero.

A heat engine is one that runs by virtue of a temperature difference between one thing and another. In the Crookes' radiometer that difference is between the black and silver sides of the vanes. It will stop running when the exited molecules on the black side aren't energetic enough to overcome the friction of the rotor bearings. The temperature difference between the black and silver sides will always exist at any temp above absolute zero. There will come a point, though, where the friction gets in the way.

 

[zoobyshoe]

well the problem with the crooke's is that it does require external force to turn.

Newton got this all figured out and stated it pretty clearly in his 3 laws of motion. Things just never start moving without the application of an external force. The good news is, once you get them into motion they won't stop, unless something exerts a force to stop them.

This is why there can't be any "free" energy. There are a lot of things in Nature that are in motion and won't stop by themselves, but if we dip into their motion to use some of their energy, then there is less energy in that natural thing than there was before we got hold of it. The energy is still in existence, but it is somewhere else now, in some other form. That other form is almost always one we don't have a convenient way of utilizing. The energy we use to drive down the road, for instance, heats up the tires and the road. We don't have a convenient way to recover that heat, just like we don't have a convenient way to recover energy from the breeze created by the car as it moves, even though we had to expend energy to push through the air.

 

[Antonio Lao]

The energy that cannot be recovered is called "entropy."

$$S = k ln \Omega$$

where $S$ is entropy, $k$ is Boltzmann's constant, and $\Omega$ is the number of states of a system which is the same as the probability of the system having a particular arrangement.

The change in entropy is given by

$$\Delta S = \frac{Q}{T}$$

where $Q$ is the heat energy, and $T$ is the temperature.

 

[jdavel]

Antonio Lao said, 'But it is also true that magnetic field can exist only if there is some charges moving (current density). But in "empty" space, there is no charge and no current yet there is electromagnetic field. Since there must be some sort of "charge" or "current" in vacuum in order for the EM field to exist, these "charge" and "current" must be some kind of properties of space itself. For purposes of distinction, we can call them "space charge" and "space current." '

Nonsense! The laws of classical electricity and magnetism don't require there to be charges or currents wherever there is a field. That's the whole idea of the field; it exists in space even where there is no charge. The EM laws just say that if there is a field somewhere, there must be charges somewhere.

 

[Antonio Lao]

The laws of classical electricity and magnetism don't require there to be charges or currents wherever there is a field.

The object of modern nonclassical quantum field theory (QFT) is to quantize the field. This is done. QFT gives us the quantum of each fundamental force as the photon, W, Z, gluon, and graviton. The W's particles are the only ones with electric charge. This is a mystery.

One way to get around this is by proposing the existence of "space charge" and its movement is called "space current." Further, these new ideas can also give plausible explanation concerning the origin of mass which can then clarify the concept of Higgs boson and make a connection to the graviton. These ideas can also explain the concept of dark matter and dak energy and locate the site of the long lost antigravity force.

 

[zoobyshoe]

The laws of classical electricity and magnetism don't require there to be charges or currents wherever there is a field. That's the whole idea of the field; it exists in space even where there is no charge. The EM laws just say that if there is a field somewhere, there must be charges somewhere.

I think this explanation is clear, accurate, and useful.