Are perpetual motion machines possible?

[Grimer]

I though this one was amusing. :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b8ZsFszE8I

[Fcdriver]

Much of this thinking process came about before the invention of the bicycle. Something simple like a kids swing or a kids seesaw, is useless unless taught, or learning. With Simple knowledge, either a swing or a seesaw could power a wheel, with neither prime mover making a full circular movement. It is true one simple machine will never be perpetual motion, but a combination of simple machines can be perpetual. The right combination of simple machines does produce power perpetually. You would think that articles like this, would make it easier to get a patent, but finding a mechanical engineer patent attorney, instead of a electrical engineer patent attorney , not as easy.

[rlortie]

Fcdriver,

finding a mechanical engineer patent attorney, instead of a electrical engineer patent attorney , not as easy.

Quit looking for a patent attorney's and search the PTO registry for Patent agents. Agents that are retained by companies related in the mechanical know how you seek.

I found three within 50 miles of my doorstep.

Ralph

[Fcdriver]

As a licensed real estate agent, I clearly understand fiduciary responsibility, and clearly know the difference. Hiring a lawyer is client privilege, vs a agent with fiduciary responsibility to a client but also to their employer. DPOR does not cover Patent agents, I really don't know what code of ethics they follow, do you?

http://www.beemlaw.com/video-gallery/pa ... qg_va88KK0

[Tarsier79]

Grimer, I found the video annoying. I did not however see anything she said untrue.

FC, first you need something patentable.

You cannot make a perpetual motion machine from a number of simple machines, because none of the machines show a gain, and none peiced together show a gain. Your idea of mechanical advantage, and how it works is flawed.

[WaltzCee]

. . .

[Grimer]

...
You cannot make a perpetual motion machine from a number of simple machines, because none of the machines show a gain, and none pieced together show a gain.
...

That is where you are mistaken, Tarsier.

This aspect show up well in Analysis of Variance where the combination of factors A and B gives not only A + B but also the interaction term AB.
For three factors you have A+B+C+AB+AC+BC+ABC and so on.

One can have a situation where pill combination A, B, C, AB, AC, and BC are all harmless but interaction ABC is the one that kills - you or brings an airliner crashing to earth.

This is why it is impossible to guarantee that complex computer programs are free from bugs. The number of interactions are too many to exhaustively test.

That irritating woman seems completely unaware of this kind of thing.

[Grimer]

Much of this thinking process came about before the invention of the bicycle. Something simple like a kids swing or a kids seesaw, is useless unless taught, or learning. With simple knowledge, either a swing or a seesaw could power a wheel, with neither prime mover making a full circular movement. It is true one simple machine will never be perpetual motion, but a combination of simple machines can be perpetual. The right combination of simple machines does produce power perpetually. You would think that articles like this, would make it easier to get a patent, but finding a mechanical engineer patent attorney, instead of a electrical engineer patent attorney , not as easy.

Absolutely.

[WaltzCee]

I though this one was amusing. :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b8ZsFszE8I

We're equally amused.

She's cute. You got to give her that. She's no Barbie. For her, math's not hard. She gets it. She can integrate. She can differentiate. She's a regular Einstein.

I wish I could procure a government grant to investigate her every tattoo.

Meanwhile back in the real world, there's Bessler.

Johann did not make all the noise he made for no reason. He had something to say. Some propose he didn't even know what he had to say.

I want to go there. Come with me if you will.

There is a particular like minded one to this anti-barbie. His name is Greg Bernhardt. He is perhaps the most arrogant soul I've ever seen.



This is the most overbearing soul I've ever met in my life.

[Tarsier79]

Frank, Once again your proof is no proof.

If you have a mechanical advantage of 3, one of 2 and another of 5, it deosn't matter how you multiply them together, you can only get a maximum of 30. In a configuration giving yuo a mechanical advantage of 30, you will also lose distance at a rate of 30x. Funny how maths works. eo;)

[WaltzCee]

. . .

[Fcdriver]

Frank, Once again your proof is no proof.

If you have a mechanical advantage of 3, one of 2 and another of 5, it deosn't matter how you multiply them together, you can only get a maximum of 30. In a configuration giving yuo a mechanical advantage of 30, you will also lose distance at a rate of 30x. Funny how maths works. eo;)

Then it would be impossible to push a 3000 lbs car off the side of the road, it would be impossible for a kid to swing on a swing, they could only be pushed. Little things like a car jack would not work, if my method is wrong , all ,would not work.

I guess a four stroke internal combustion engine, should not work, because of the distance of travel?

[Fcdriver]

In using math, on how my method works, lift is done per one rotation, broken down into 1/4, which means a 48 inch wheel of 150 inches of circumference means 37.68 per. Dividing by six arms means each power stroke happens every 25.12 turn of the wheel, eight arms means a power stroke happens every 18.84 turn of the wheel, 12 arms means a power stroke happens every 12.56 inches of the wheel, etc. the over lap of power strokes means a extreme amount of power! This means the height loss you speak of is covered by the number of arms!

[ME]

I think what Tarsier means is that a car can't push itself, or a swing can't swing itself, or a carjack on a swing can't push a car off the side of the road - at least as far as most of us know.
It still needs input, energy, fuel or dinner.

[Fcdriver]

Math and or the laws of levers or motion, define/qualify my method, non disqualify it!