Why should or shouldnt this work?

  • Thread starter intxi
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Work
In summary, scientists have been trying to manage perpetual motion for centuries, but it is impossible according to the laws of thermodynamics. However, someone has come up with a way to make the ball move without using energy. The ball would be ferrofluid and a neodimiun magnet would hold it in place. The ferrofluid would be less dense than the ball so it would float and once it reached a certain height it would fall due to gravity. The ball would then stay in that position because it would have a greater force than the ferrofluid.
  • #1
intxi
3
0
I know perpetual motion is something that scientists have been trying to manage nearly since the beggining of times. I know it is actually imposible to manage it under the (actual)laws of thermodynamics, but i have been thinking of something that apparently would work.

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/2219/99126full.jpg
The black ball, would be ferrofluid and the grey/blue thing bellow would be a neodimiun magnet, which would keep the ferrofluid in that position. The grey ball would be less dense than the ferrofluid so it would float (the white arrows) and once it arrives to the maximun height it would fall due to gravity (black arrows).

Well taking all this into account we may think that the ball may move for ever but that is actually imposible under the actual thermodinamics, so I would like to know why wouldn't this work or if i won´t have to pay for electricity again:D

PD:sorry for my bad english i´m not a native speaker and I am only 16 xD
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Why would it "fall due to gravity" at that point? What happens there that wasn't happening before? And once it has fallen, why should it then go back up? There is the same force of gravity on it on the way up that was on it on the way down.
 
  • #3
well, the ball would be less dense than ferrofluid, so it would float and consequently go up.
It will fall in that point because the inertia(i think its written like this) will throw the ball out of the ferrofluid and stopping the flotation, it will fall. This is what I think should happen but I´m not a physicist and that's why I ask you :D
 
  • #4
a greater force than the ferrofluid provides would be required to shove the sphere into the fluid at the bottom. Do you understand what I mean?
 
  • #5
Mm... so the higher the ball gets the more energy is required to shove the ball into the ferrofluid?(because the ferrofluid is higher too)
 
  • #6
Assuming that the ball is able to enter the fluid it will float to a point close to the tip of the second white arrow and there it will stay some of it still submerged and at a position such that its weight is balanced by the upthrust of the liquid..The main flaw in the design is that energy will be needed to push the ball out of the fluid.
 
  • #7
A ferrofluid is formed into that shape precisely because it has a magnetic field supporting it. It isn't behaving like a normal fluid and so you can't apply normal fluid mechanics to it (in this case, pressure and buoyancy). Applying inapplicable principles yields the contradiction you have found.
 

1. Why should this work?

This is a commonly asked question in the scientific community when proposing a new hypothesis or experiment. The answer depends on the specific scenario, but generally, there should be evidence or logical reasoning to support the idea. Scientific theories and laws are based on repeated observations and experiments, so if there is enough evidence to support the idea, it should work.

2. Why shouldn't this work?

Just as it is important to consider the reasons why something should work, it is also important to consider the reasons why it may not work. This question prompts scientists to identify potential flaws or limitations in their hypothesis or experiment. It also encourages critical thinking and helps to refine the idea to make it more robust.

3. What are the potential benefits of this working?

Many scientific experiments and research projects aim to solve real-world problems or improve our understanding of the natural world. This question prompts scientists to consider the potential positive outcomes of their work. It also helps to justify the time, effort, and resources that go into conducting scientific research.

4. What are the potential consequences if this doesn't work?

On the other hand, it is also important to consider the potential negative consequences if the hypothesis or experiment does not work. This question encourages scientists to think about the possible risks and limitations of their work and to take necessary precautions to minimize any potential harm.

5. How can we increase the likelihood of this working?

This question is crucial in the scientific process as it prompts scientists to think about ways to improve their experiment or hypothesis. It encourages collaboration and brainstorming to come up with solutions and increases the chances of a successful outcome. It also highlights the importance of trial and error in the scientific method.

Similar threads

  • Electrical Engineering
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top