Big Troubles Brewing For The Theoretical Physics Smart-Set!!!

[cloud camper]

Yes, we have a Demon because nature is being selective as to which entitity it is adding energy to.

This is a 2nd law violation. By the 2nd law natural processes always progress to a state of more and more disorder. Here we are driving the process in the opposite direction, adding more and more velocity to the glider without supplying external power.

Acceleration does not occur with simple Pelton wheel dynamics.

[rlortie]

Grimer,

Most designs, in fact the greater majority of them have weights that move in and out. Using the "Keenie" as an example does not make it right. The "Keenie" does not run and only has a leverage value of one inch.

I get frequent letters from people who have discovered the "Keenie" on 'Peswiki', all have ideas for what they think it needs or how to augment it into a runner. To date the odds are still against it ever running.

You would gain a better foundation for your debate if you used something a little more viable.

Ralph

[jim_mich]

Here we are driving the process in the opposite direction, adding more and more velocity to the glider without supplying external power.

But there you are wrong. The up-draft wind is adding external power to lift the glider, just as wind adds rotational power to a wind mill. Think of the glider simply as the blade of a windmill. Thus it is not a Maxwell's Demon situation

[cloud camper]

It does not matter where the energy is coming from, as long as we, the observer are not providing it.

In the Maxwell's hypothetical box, if we found the box in such a state that the hot and cold molecules were already separated, we could then extract energy.

In our case with the gliders, this separation has already been performed for us. The pilot does provide the intelligence as to when and how this energy
is extracted, so in this sense we have an "engineered" demon but this is totally acceptable for our wheel.

The main idea is that we, the observer/operator are not providing the energy. Intelligence is OK, energy input is not.

JB's wheel was an engineered Demon as well.

[jim_mich]

Cloud Camper,

You are perverting the concept of perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is defined as continuous forceful motion without any tangible input of energy. In other words, PM is when perpetual forceful motion is produced continually inside a sealed shielded enclosure that blocks all forms input energy, including air motion, air pressure changes, any type of force, radiant energy of all types, etc. The only forces available inside the enclosure would be those which cannot be blocked or shielded, such as gravity, inertia, and momentum. Thus the wheel must be rotated either by gravity acting on out-of-balance weights. Or the wheel must be rotated simply by inertial and momentum forces caused the weights moving in and out.

[cloud camper]

No, sorry - I, like yourself, believe I have discovered a simple methodology with which to create rotational PE internal to the wheel.

I have simply substituted this mechanism for the wind sourced energy in the example. All other aspects are the same as with the instrumented and documented Demon.

It is basically a parametric oscillator with impacts. It is a fully switched (commutated) mechanism, just like our example. No CF (that's illegal!)

Commutation is necessary to create binary separation. Binary separation is necessary to maintain continuous overbalance.

Essentially a total bypass on the law of levers.

[eccentrically1]

The plane is flying in a circle. The updraft accelerates it each time! To the 45 mph updraft, the plane is tacking like a boat in a crosswind. So the apparent wind speed - from the perspective of the plane - is 400.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_w ... ing_speeds

"A vessel traveling at increasing speed relative to the prevailing wind will encounter the wind driving the sail at a decreasing angle and increasing velocity. Eventually, the increased drag and diminished degree of efficiency of a sail at extremely low angles will cause a loss of accelerating force. This constitutes the main limitation to the speed of wind-driven vessels and vehicles.
Windsurfers and certain types of boats are able to sail faster than the true wind. These include fast multihulls and some planing monohulls. Ice-sailors and land-sailors also usually fall into this category, because of their relatively low amount of drag or friction.

[ovyyus]

You are perverting the concept of perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is defined as continuous forceful motion without any tangible input of energy.

Did James Cox lie when he called his self-winding clock a true perpetual motion machine?

[cloud camper]

Nice one Ecc1 but this is not apparent wind speed.

This is actual ground speed as confirmed by a stationary laser speed detector.

Some sailing vessels may travel slightly faster than the true wind speed but not 10X faster.

Current record for this sport 446 mph.

[jim_mich]

Did James Cox lie when he called his self-winding clock a true perpetual motion machine?

Cox called his clock a "perpetual motion machine" simply because it was capable of operating perpetually. Most people think a "perpetual motion machine" as having no input of energy, which is the scientific definition of "perpetual motion machine".

So where does that put Bessler's wheel or any wheel we search for? Bessler claimed the weights of his wheel gained force from their motions. This would imply that the weights gained energy from inertia (the resistance to being moved) and momentum ( resistance to being stopped) and thus, according to Bessler, his wheel had no outside source of energy. Wagner assumed Bessler's wheel was gravity powered. In either case, Bessler's wheel was in a category of "perpetual motion machine" somewhere between the scientific definition where there is no source of energy and Cox's statement claiming a "perpetual motion machine" where there was a known physical energy source which could be blocked by placing Cox's clock inside a sealed container or sealed room.


The English language needs a range of words for a "perpetual motion machine", much like the American Eskimo has many words for different types of snow.

In the past I've suggested the term "Classical Perpetual Motion" for any Bessler type wheels, which would, we assume, be able to operate indefinitely within a totally sealed and shielded container or room.

Should such a wheel be labeled a "no tangible input perpetual motion machine" or maybe a A "No Tangible Input Wheel"?

[eccentrically1]

Try this one
http://www.sailnet.com/forums/learning- ... -wind.html

It's a combination of true wind and apparent wind. The ever-increasing parallelogram shape for the circling glider is just a different shape than for a linear sailboat.

[cloud camper]

Can't get to 10X without the Demon....

Perhaps we have lost the point however.

The original point was that slower moving masses can continue to add energy to a MUCH faster object. This is not disputable in this example.

The worst thing we can say here is that this is an extremely efficient mechanism.

What I would like to know is what other mechanisms can accomplish this?

I don't know of any.

[eccentrically1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackbird_(land_yacht)

There's a thread about this Fletcher started.

[Furcurequs]

Here is a link from the wikipedia page on dynamic soaring to a youtube video which I believe explains it all pretty well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVN-oF6tPLc

Dwayne

[ovyyus]

Cox called his clock a "perpetual motion machine"...

Not quite. Cox specifically called his clock a true perpetual motion machine. Bessler also specifically called his wheel a true perpetual motion machine.

A false perpetual motion machine might be one that is impossibly trying to get something for nothing, in the classical sense of the ages old attempts at gravity/inertia PM. Gravity and/or inertia PM have proven false to date.