Ectropy and Maxwell's Demon.

[Bill_Mothershead]

People have been talking about Maxwell's Demon for a long, long time.
Various electronic components can "capture" ambient heat somewhat
like the demon. (Heat causes some electrons to "overexcite" themselves
and leave their atom = "ionization" which then becomes a current
subject to various bias effects that make up a diode.)

Google on "heat diode" and you come up with way too many
real world components/applications and science articles
including this one:

http://www.scientificcomputing.com/news ... VmRjTcTSSo


This is real stuff, guys. You can buy real hardware right now.
In some ways it kind of makes the hard-and-fast "laws" of
thermodynamics seem like they are not quite up to date.

[eccentrically1]

There are new things invented every day; just none that prove macroscopic mechanical free energy. All the hard laws follow from reality.

[jim_mich]

You cannot deny that two weights moving within a rotating wheel have more energy that is usable within the wheel than two weights riding without moving within the rotating wheel. This is what is meant by increased ectropy.

If CF caused the two weight to move, then it increased the ectropy within the wheel. The total momentum of the system is not changed, just as the total momentum of a spinning ice skater is not changed.

Harness the increased ectropy of the moving weights. Then use the harnessed energy to rotate the wheel. Swap the roles of the two weights. Repeat the cycle perpetually.

[cloud camper]

Yes, this is exactly how JB used falling and rising weights to power his wheel.

But we have been told endlessly what morons and fools we must be to consider falling and rising weights.

So this is a non starter for you. Go back to CF.

[eccentrically1]

No I don't. But the weight in there is part of the wheel system. The system ectropy doesn't increase because of internal motion. The best, ideal, system would run itself forever (while completely isolated from the rest of the entire universe!). It wouldn't create energy from motion, overcome friction loss, and certainly not run something else (overunity). If total momentum doesn't change, then neither can ectropy. Do you see anything anywhere that conserves momentum and not energy? The hard laws follow from reality; and they are a three legged stool. Take one away, and the other two don't hold up the stool. We don't make them up. Your ectropy-motion engine-wheel is to me as (?) everyone else's gravity wheel is to you.

[cloud camper]

"Your ectropy-motion engine-wheel is to me as (?) everyone else's gravity wheel is to you."

Absolutely right ECC. This individual has apparently experienced some sort
of magical epiphany whereby it is now
OK to have falling and rising weights.

If it's JM's idea it is "enlightened thinking".

If anyone else considers it, they are uneducated idiots.

This pathetic individual needs to concentrate on what he's good at - terrorizing poor Murilo every chance he gets!

[ovyyus]

Terrorizing??? That's not true or fair. Jim has given time and effort over the years analysing Murilo's idea and has done his best to help Murilo understand why his design is unworkable. Murilo responds angrily to any criticism of his idea (unless it comes from his bro Trevor). It's not Jim's fault that he's right.

Yes, this is exactly how JB used falling and rising weights to power his wheel.

Pathetic is relative.

[murilo]

Cloud said:

If it's JM's idea it is "enlightened thinking".

If anyone else considers it, they are uneducated idiots.

This pathetic individual needs to concentrate on what he's good at - terrorizing poor Murilo every chance he gets!

I agree with above but with some notes:
- they are absolutely pathetic indeed and you waste you time to tell them this!
- I have still a lot to be terrified and poor... fortunately! 8}...

'They' are the good guys and the rest of us will just swim with the down flush.

A new green to your score, cloud! 8)
Best!

[cloud camper]

Well, I'm just fed up with JM's holier than thou Ugly American attitude.

Jim knows his own CF ideas are total crap being obvious 1st law violations yet he thinks he has the right to slam Murilo and others.

Sure, Jim tries to be "helpful" but only to show you your ideas won't work. How many times have we heard "Don't blame me, I'm only the messenger" as if he has the inside scoop on all physical processes. As far as I can tell, he has never studied Physics.

Now he has apparently discovered the Euler Force, and acts like no one ever thought of using it before.

Instead of spending years typing his hundreds of rants and tirades against anyone contemplating falling and rising weights, he could have spent the time building proof of concepts that could validate his ideas.

But until someone has a proven runner, his ideas are no better than anyone elses including Murilo's.

What a pathetic flake!

[pequaide]

You can replace the complex mass of the skater with the simple mass distribution of the cylinder and spheres.

The cylinder and spheres will also show that no muscle is needed to extend a mass to an outer radius.

The cylinder will stop and all the motion will be contained in the spheres.

The extended mass (spheres) will also come back in and restore the original motion.

There are formulas alright; but there is no pretending that both or all formulas represent conserved quantities, one or the other of these two formulas is not a conserved quantity; mv or 1/2mv².

Eccentrically says: There are new things invented every day; just none that prove macroscopic mechanical free energy.

Take a light mass rim and place a one kilogram point masses at 3 o'clock and 9 o'clock. Wrap the rim with a string and place it upright on dry ice. Slide the rim on the dry ice until it reaches a velocity of one meter per second. The rim is not rotating so the input energy is 1/2*2kg*1m/sec*1m/sec = 1 joule. Tie the end of the string to a wall; and the rim will force itself into a roll. One fourth turn later the top mass has a velocity of 2 m/sec and an energy of 1/2*1*2*2 = 2 joules. The center of mass proceeds at the same velocity; and momentum is conserved. The proof is not in the showing it is in the seeing.

I view Jim as being very well-mannered; but he does say things that are true. Sometimes truth hurts. You don't have to agree; but there is no need to attach each other.

[eccentrically1]

And that proves free energy? I thought the proof was in the pudding.

[ovyyus]

But until someone has a proven runner, his ideas are no better than anyone elses including Murilo's.

True. With the exception that some ideas (such as Murilo's) remain obviously unworkable and nothing is learned. Ignoring that fact results in perpetual error loops.

[jim_mich]

Does an engineer know if his bridge will stay standing or fall into the river before he builds it?

[cloud camper]

Jim's ideas are obviously unworkable. Just ask Emmy.

Don't get mad at me. I'm only the messenger!

[jim_mich]

I've never posted my CF wheel concept, so how do you know it is unworkable?