Ed wrote:Preoccupied, haven't you fallen off the edge of the Earth yet?
You're always some percentage of right in your mind, but apparently never willing or able to do the experiments needed to overturn the facts that have been established over centuries of experimentation, then you should ask yourself the same question Jim did in this thread.
Why bother posting?
I didn't see you there Ed.
Ed, I plan to put on my big boy pants and try earning karma on lesswrong, something that I think would be difficult. They have higher standards there. Why bother posting here? Yall are silly, except for that one Asian dude - he's cool - whoever he is, I can't remember...
Ed, Your overconfidence is your weakness.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Mark Twain
I made some stuff with pulleys. Although, I think they were successful because it worked as intended, they were not testing perpetual motion. The hypothetical swastika wheel would test perpetual motion, in that it would try to make weights use gravity repeatedly by converting the gravity into other motion or motion without external force that would apply force to the lever on the swastika. I was working with scale shield stuff recently but I took most of my pennies back to the bank because of technical difficulties. I couldn't get the pennies to stay together, they would slide out of place. Scale shields are harder to make than they look. When I was working with scale shields year 2003 I remember it being a lot easier than now. Maybe I'm losing my mind. I did have several concussions after all, I just might not be as talented.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." - Mark Twain
Unless you are using the hydrostatic pressure of the down-leg I have no idea what a swastika wheel does for you. If it is just weights on the end you may as well just use a cross, COM doesn’t care that there is air there.
PS. Just realised you are talking about your latest drawing.
Ralph, gravity fields store work done by energy source separating masses, in form of pe. When masses are released and rejoin together, work done earlier by energy source is converted by fields to ke.
What about the work done? work done is work done on orbiting planets how do you poor the energy back, at no point in the cycle is the planet back at the same point of time and space, so work done is work done, and new work is required to start the new cycle, in short when does gravity stop doing work on any part of the cycle.
Gravity doesn't do any work on orbiting planets either. Direction of gravity force is perpendicular to angular velocity of planet. For definition of work, force must be in same direction of motion. Work was done by source that originally set planet in motion in straight line. Gravity only seems to be source.
In torque and rotation, two forces act on body and cancel each other, and net effect on body is torque, or rotation. In orbiting planet, gravity is one force and planet's inertia is other. Neither force is doing work. Even though planet never returns to same point in space each year.
Apparently a thermocouple needs an existing temperature gradient, though. That's like a heat engine needing heat reservoirs at different temperatures.
So, the thermocouple is the engine, not the demon.
The hypothetical demon would sort the fast moving molecules from the slow moving molecules to actually create the temperature difference, the temperature gradient, where there wasn't one before, and so that a heat engine could then make use of it.
Dwayne
I don't believe in conspiracies!
I prefer working alone.
Furcurequs, Maxwells demon is a sorter, it extracts energy from an average temperature, which in a way, a thermocouple is also capable of. I believe the electrons are being produced by a chemical reaction sort of the reverse of electrolysis, and the thermocouple will eventually wear out. (I could be wrong).
It is possible Besslers wheel ran on some sort of battery/chemical reaction. It would run forever untill the components "wore out".
Ralph, gravity fields store work done by energy source separating masses, in form of pe. When masses are released and rejoin together, work done earlier by energy source is converted by fields to ke.
What about the work done? work done is work done on orbiting planets how do you poor the energy back, at no point in the cycle is the planet back at the same point of time and space, so work done is work done, and new work is required to start the new cycle, in short when does gravity stop doing work on any part of the cycle.
Gravity doesn't do any work on orbiting planets either. Direction of gravity force is perpendicular to angular velocity of planet. For definition of work, force must be in same direction of motion. Work was done by source that originally set planet in motion in straight line. Gravity only seems to be source.
In torque and rotation, two forces act on body and cancel each other, and net effect on body is torque, or rotation. In orbiting planet, gravity is one force and planet's inertia is other. Neither force is doing work. Even though planet never returns to same point in space each year.
Hi Dunes,
was it not Newton who said something like this, "a mass in motion will continue in a straight line path unless acted upon by another force". So I must assume that to sustain orbiting Mass requires a constant action, if not the orbiting path will revert back to a straight line path. So what did Newton mean by action? IMO work done is actions taken, and doing work is action in process, wherein inaction would be a straight line path.
It depends on your view, can the acceleration and deceleration of a mass with inertia and change its direction be defined as work, are there forces applied to keep a planet in orbit, if so is the application of force on a moving body doing work on that body. Just because two forces are equal and opposite does not mean that both forces are not applied, the tides show us that there is definite and constant applied forces (a pull) in the Earth and Moon relationship and work has and is being done in that relationship. If pulling forces can accelerate and decelerate mass in motion then the said forces will produce torque, when all forces and vectors are accounted for.
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
Furcurequs wrote:Apparently a thermocouple needs an existing temperature gradient, though. That's like a heat engine needing heat reservoirs at different temperatures.
So, the thermocouple is the engine, not the demon.
The hypothetical demon would sort the fast moving molecules from the slow moving molecules to actually create the temperature difference, the temperature gradient, where there wasn't one before, and so that a heat engine could then make use of it.
A thermocouple (thermostat) is happy with any ambient temperature and does not require a gradient. it can be looked upon as the engine, the hypothetical demon sorts electrons not molecules which are accelerated more in one alloy than the other, aka conductivity. Electron flow causes heat to build in low inductance side causing expansion.
That's just my opinion! I am not worthy of quoting.
Tarsier79 wrote:Furcurequs, Maxwells demon is a sorter, it extracts energy from an average temperature, which in a way, a thermocouple is also capable of. I believe the electrons are being produced by a chemical reaction sort of the reverse of electrolysis, and the thermocouple will eventually wear out. (I could be wrong).
It is possible Besslers wheel ran on some sort of battery/chemical reaction. It would run forever untill the components "wore out".
A Vortex Tube is a sort of Maxwell's Demon I should think.
It has no moving aparts & produces hot & separate cold streams [different energy], from a pressurised air supply etc - it's not OU or COP>1 though AFAIK, but interesting none the same.
