Inegnuity v's Entropy 2 - Observations & Questions

[ME]

First thought: Energy went into spring-potential.
What if you wouldn't have stops on the spring?

[Fletcher]

Yes, it did go into the spring.

The stops (spring book ends) are able to move and the spring ends are attached to them. They are necessary because the spring can't sit there by itself i.e. the green mass etc can't physically interact with a spring unless it is thru another solid body. All solid objects have an elasticity factor of 1.0 (100%) else we lose energy in the collision to microscopic internal deformation forces, heat and sound etc.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi ME,

I like this, but although I use torque calculations, and force measurements for my wheel builds, I do not see how it would work for every scenario, given the number of energy sources there are.

Something I think about:
Perhaps one could consider energy as non-existing at all, only that it is easier to talk about what is required to change some desired momentum (like motion) at the cost of undesired momentum (like another motion, friction, heat, sound).
So that's why energy can't be created or destroyed, as it only 'fictitiously appears' when something goes from one kind of momentum to another?

Marchello E.

Edit, removed. + you would have to rewrite known physics.

[ME]

Without the spring, Mass.1 should still go 0.6m/s but is stopped, mass.2 should go 1.6m/s but is 2.

Perhaps we need a (small) table of measurements, with variable m1, m2, v1? Only then it's possible to see a pattern.

But for I agree, we can presume that in WM2D the Momentum is converted to(or used as) Kinetic energy, stored as potential spring-energy, and released as kinetic energy... at least there's not more momentum, that's a relief.

It's always possible you've found a bug in WM2D.
Collisions on a curved polygon is another bug.
(note to self: if a design doesn't work, blame the program)

[ME]

Trevor Lyn Whatford, on a very small scale of those sources one goes to the field of quantummechanics and orbitalmechanics, for how to store potential: basically a form of movement.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi ME,

I am aware everything is in a state of motion, and I do like your idea very much.

But, like my above edit,

you would have to rewrite known physics.

The other way to look at it is, "Motion is Energy" and everything is on the move.

Edit, one of my views is, "Energy cannot be created or destroyed", but it can be used and maybe even needed to move forward in time.

[Fletcher]

Thanks .. actually you can draw up a table quite easily.

Whatever the KE of mass 1 is (the green mass) this will be stored as PE in the spring and then given to mass 2 which dictates how fast it moves. Springs store KE and not momentum. N.B assuming a perfect spring here.

mass 1 ...................................................................... mass 2

kg .... v start ...... mv ....... KE ..... v after .. Spring PE ... kg ..... v start ... v after ..... mv ...... KE

4 ......... 1 ........... 4 .......... 2 .......... 0 ........... 2 ........... 1 .......... 0 .......... 2 .......... 2 ......... 2
4 ......... 2 ........... 8 .......... 8 .......... 0 ........... 8 ........... 1 .......... 0 .......... 4 .......... 4 ......... 8
4 ......... 3 ........... 12 ........ 18 ......... 0 ...........18........... 1 .......... 0 .......... 6 .......... 6 .........18
4 ......... 4 ........... 16 ........ 32 ......... 0 ...........32........... 1 .......... 0 .......... 8 .......... 8 .........32

Yeah, I know about curved polygons - there is no bug here.

[Tarsier79]

I think in real world, the losses in the spring and catch mechanisms would be so great, it would not give a conclusive answer. A real world build even closely resembling the results in your sim would be very interesting to see though.

[Fletcher]

Yes, that's true. But for the purposes of these thought experiments I'm assuming a perfect spring.


..........................


So now we have seen that it is theoretically possible to transfer FULL Kinetic Energy in collisions such as these, but we have to use a spring analogue in between. And we still lose half our local momentum in sim world (not in real world, it went to earth).


What would happen if we could FULLY transfer Momentum ? The green mass would need to come to a complete stop (zero velocity) and give all its mv to the yellow mass.


To do that we need to put a mechanical Black Box mechanism in between the masses.


Now we see that the system Momentum is conserved in sim world BUT the local system KE increases from 2 J's to 8 J's.


That is, with the addition of a mechanical black box solution ALL Momentum can be transferred to the second stationary mass but Energy is not Conserved, it INCREASES.


Does such a mechanical solution exist and what conditions would it need to satisfy to operate as required ?

[ME]

The other way to look at it is, "Motion is Energy" and everything is on the move.
Edit, one of my views is, "Energy cannot be created or destroyed", but it can be used and maybe even needed to move forward in time.

Interesting... This leads to Fletchers question:
Do things have energy because they move (shown when motion collides),
or do things move because of energy (without energy it ceases to exist?),
or both vice-versa.

Fletcher, as I'm already at quantum-philosophy. Things tend to take the shortest cut possible. Like: shortest path of light through glass or a gravitational field, electrons falling back to the lowest energy-state, or simply said: things tend to do what makes the biggest chaos and the least useful stuff. So I vote: there's no such 2D-mechanism possible which end-result is a gain in energy (and thus eventually a gain in momentum, etc..)

add
For the given values: E=2, m=1, p=4 one can try to calculate the velocity
[1] v=2*E/p -->1m/s
[2] v=sqrt(2E/m) --> 2m/s
[3] v=p/m --> 4m/s

option 1: E=0.5, p=1 (too little of both)
option 2: E=2, p=2 (Energy conserved, p halved)
option 3: E=8, p=4 (gain in Energy and momentum)

I think the maximum one could get is option2.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi ME,

Your Quote,

So I vote: there's no such 2D-mechanism possible which end-result is a gain in energy (and thus eventually a gain in momentum, etc..)

.

I am not so sure. It may have already been done, and that why we are here.

[ME]

True. Until proven, nothing is sure; that leaves hypotheses.
My current one is that we know things start to get interesting beyond 2 things -like chaotic movement, 3-body problem, 3 dimensions, 3 forms of energy- I look at 3 dimensions for trying to loop-hole wheel rotation in 2-D, inertia for trying to loop-hole the PE-KE balance... Eventually it should balance out into some form of equilibrium. (Basically I know nothing, and still testing some prime-mover stuff)

The last proposed Fletcher-Spring could be made to explode because there's no reason one could build a cascade of such mechanisms... Even an atom-bomb has finite stored potential. (so perhaps it's my fear that made the conclusion such thing couldn't work?)

We'll know in a couple of days, weeks, years...

Marchello E.

[Fletcher]

IF full momentum could be transferred between a massive ball colliding with a lesser stationary ball with the use of some mechanical device other than a spring then we would have an automatic increase in KE.

In the example I have given the system Joules increases from 2 J's to 8 J's. That is a 4 fold increase in KE.

If KE can be increased to 4 times the input energy then it can also be converted to GPE. That is, the second ball could gain height which for this 1kg mass would be 0.785 meters (at 'g' = 9.81 m/s^2).

AND it would prove that Conservation of Linear Momentum was more fundamental than CoE in the real world.

The device has to be arranged in such a way that the 'earthing factor' doesn't come into it, and so we do not lose 1/2 our momentum. That would be a clever Prime Mover indeed.

[eccentrically1]

What is the black box mechanism in the sim? Like a spring, except it doesn't need a ground either ,like the two masses in the examples?

[Fletcher]

It's just black box thinking to identify a problem and an opportunity. It represents some unknown mechanism.

But if it were possible it would have to negate the 'grounding effect' that a spring experiences. In sim world we lose 1/2 our mv when a spring is engaged (so it appears that the sim is ruled by CoE). That's because the spring is 'earthed' at various times in its compression and release. So 1/2 the mv goes to ground.

This would happen in real world also. Except we don't actually lose 1/2 the momentum as the sim does. The earth absorbs it and moves to the left and all momentum is conserved.