"The Impossibility of Perpetual Motion Machines"

[Art]

Hi Art,

instead to get an upwind, generated from the sun, we can generate a

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downburst

Downburst.

The interesting part is, as more you extract as more you get.
All Engines are working from warm to cold.
But who is stopping us to generate cold, when we extract energy ?
We generate the difference.

Thanks Georg - that's interesting . Didn't know about that .

An interesting aspect of Bessler's work I figure was his last construction project which cost him his life ie the Windmill that appears to have been planned with the rotating blades similar to a Savonious mill discussed by John Collins in his book (An Ancient Mystery Solved) .

I think its very possible that Besslers prime mover was in some way reliant on the mass of the air in our atmosphere .

Some of my experiments lead me to believe that our relationship with the mass of the air around us (a mixture of gases and water vapour) is quite complicated and is in no way explained by our current textbook explanations .

Lots of food for thought in the atmosphere ! : )

[Art]

Thermo dynamics , --- Heat Dynamics .

The theory that postulates energy is heat and that heat is motion and that you can create it or not depending on whether the motion allows it or not.

The theory that states lack of motion is absolute zero .

- Accept that at zero degrees Kelvin things are observed to be still moving .

But thats allright . According to Wickipedia "The fundamental particles of nature have minimum vibrational motion, retaining only quantum mechanical, zero-point energy-induced particle motion."

And that makes sense (to me anyway because it confirms my belief that 'force of habit' is inherent in the Universe) and if you put yourself on the line with one absolute and the evidence shows that the Universe doesn't obey the Law then it needs to be explained .


- But now it appears that while I was busy doing other things somebody started 5 years ago changing the explaination .

Apparently "We have created the first negative absolute temperature state for moving particles," said researcher Simon Braun at the University of Munich in Germany." (2012/2013)

I'm not yet sure whether I will believe that or not because I'm not quite clear whether it supports or attempts to negate my theory of 'Force of Habit Perpetual Motion' .

I was pretty sure up until just recently that I had fairly well resolved 'up and down' in my PM Force of Habit Theory with 'hot and cold' of Thermodynamics but now after seeing this new Thermodynamic news Im not so sure .

From the article in the link below --Quote

"As one might expect, objects with negative temperatures behave in very odd ways. For instance, energy typically flows from objects with a higher positive temperature to ones with a lower positive temperature — that is, hotter objects heat up cooler objects, and colder objects cool down hotter ones, until they reach a common temperature. However, energy will always flow from objects with negative temperature to ones with positive temperatures. In this sense, objects with negative temperatures are always hotter than ones with positive temperatures."


https://www.livescience.com/25959-atoms ... -zero.html


I'm not exactly sure yet but I suspect that these 'thermodynamicists' are starting to eye our PM territory with their theories -

Quote "Negative temperatures could be used to create heat engines — engines that convert heat energy to mechanical work, such as combustion engines — that are more than 100-percent efficient, something seemingly impossible. Such engines would essentially not only absorb energy from hotter substances, but also colder ones. As such, the work the engine performed could be larger than the energy taken from the hotter substance alone."

Hmmm .

And " As such, negative temperatures might have interesting parallels with dark energy that may help scientists understand this enigma.
Negative temperatures could also shed light on exotic states of matter, generating systems that normally might not be stable without them. "A better understanding of temperature could lead to new things we haven't even thought of yet," Schneider said. "When you study the basics very thoroughly, you never know where it may end."

Yep , - thats the nice thing about theory - you never know where it will end ! : )

Doesn't all of this just mean that absolute zero is not absolute zero? All they did was make something colder than everything else measured. They need to take the temp down until all motion ceases, otherwise it isn't absolute zero. Absolute zero is like the speed of light. Theoretically, we just can't get there, and if we think we have, then it's not absolute zero. Negative temps are on every scale: Fahrenheit, Celsius, and, apparently, now Kelvin. Right now, imo, they should be attempting to use their data to recalculate the scale for which all motion ceases at zero.

Hi Silvertiger ,

" They need to take the temp down until all motion ceases, otherwise it isn't absolute zero" - - -

- - Yes exactly ! and that brings the question up of whether it is possible or not .

Movement of one particle in reference to another is what we normally think of as the defining movement which we are measuring as temperature ? .

So is it right to say that gas particles ('free' molecules) have a higher temperature (ie higher energy) than say salt particles (crystalline 'tethered' molecules) ?

If it is , then it makes you wonder why does heat energy not move from gas to liquid to solid spontaneously ? Why is there not a heat gradient observed if material in these three forms are linked together ?

Heat capacity IIRC is the 'volume' of heat a material can absorb , and it is different for every material , but the actual 'energy temperature (aka as the kinetic energy of the molecules) ' must be the same otherwise there should be a heat flow between solid , liquid and gas if the theory is 100% correct .

[ovyyus]

...

[Sam Peppiatt]

Like the old black woman said: "Two tears in a bucket, mother fuck it!"

[kastir]

Bessler might have thought it was perpetual motion, but it wasn't. Bessler did not understand the science behind what he had created, he just understood the effect and created his wheel around that.
An American Theoretical Physicist built a 'perpetual wheel' in 2002 but he explains where the energy was coming from. The kinetic energy of rotation of the world!!. See the following.
http://mb-soft.com/public2/earthrot.html

[ovyyus]

An American Theoretical Physicist built a 'perpetual wheel' in 2002...

Where is this perpetual wheel? More bogus nonsense?

[kastir]

Finally you get some information that has a scientific basis that does not defy the laws of physics, and it gets labeled 'bogus' without a reasonable argument as to why you believe it bogus.
Point is - Even if there was a video of the device operating would you still call it 'bogus' just as they did with Bessler, because they didn't understand the physics behind it

[kastir]

.

[Georg Künstler]

The earth has no rotational energy as descibed in the previous link.

This is because you have no reference point.
You, we move with the same speed in the space.

Only speed difference will show up energy.

[ME]

Georg, true.
Yet he describes the effect of a Foucault pendulum. It seems that at least the Soviets used that effect as some sort of reference.

The Soviet approach always involved a different approach related to gyroscopes, regarding that they try to maintain the alignment of the axle direction, but that approach then requires immense gear trains, on the order of a million to one speed increase, which necessarily always causes high component speeds and significant frictional losses. My approach is VERY different from that!

But indeed, what did he do...?

An American Theoretical Physicist built a 'perpetual wheel' in 2002...

Where is this perpetual wheel? More bogus nonsense?

Ovyyus, it's a 'concerned' inventor who claims to know what he's talking about.

I realize that you do NOT believe any of this! It sounds completely crazy and impossible! However, please realize that I was educated (very well) in Nuclear Physics at the University of Chicago, and I actually know what I am talking about!

See!
But...

I have no interest in teaching anyone else how to build a Bessler Wheel, so don't ask!

Bummer.

There really is NO "magical" device that could violate the Law of Conservation of Energy! Sorry! The people who think they have created "magical" things that create energy out of nothing, are simply wrong!

At least that's something....

The devices I discuss here do SEEM to be able to create energy, but that is somewhat of an illusion, the energy is actually just energy that had previously existed in a different form, in this case, rotational energy of the Earth.

Ehm ok, what is needed then?

Some calculations of the Euler Equations, combined with the comments above, is all that is involved in how and why something like Bessler's Wheel could and did work, along with being able to calculate how fast it would rotate. It ain't really that complicated!

Hmm..ok. It would be nice to see at least a corrected table with more precise numbers than the observed values (like this: [link]. Just to check our own calculated values..

I knew how to solve many such problems, but that was long ago and I seem to have forgotten much! Worse, it is commonly known that for the majority of practical cases, exact solutions to the Eigenvalue problem for distributed systems is not possible.

We all have the same problems! Bummer 2.

In this specific problem, many of the Eigenvalues happen to be very complex equations based on the Euler Equations, and there are a LOT of them. I have pretty much given up on my brain ever being again able to solve such problems mathematically.

Oh. Bummer 3

However, I really am convinced that if I should ever set up and solve the Euler differential equations (the Eigenvalue problem), I would have far better estimates for the "ideal" dimensions, and I might better know if my concept has potential or is garbage! I don't exactly see how a "team of experts" would advance the effort! All I see needed is a few hours of effort by someone who was REALLY good at math!

I only skimmed the text, and I currently I have no idea what he's talking about.
But give me some examples, and I'll see what I can do to instruct the computer to find trends.... I'm a patient guy. I often wait weeks or months for a result (which could even be worthless).

Another interesting thing keeps happening! Over a hundred different individuals have told me that I should start a "research project" by getting Grant money and then hiring a "team of experts" to do the development of this, and, surprisingly enough, they always tell me that THEY are the person to do this for me!

I extrapolate this to a "bummer 4".


I looked ... you're right, no wheel indeed.
And not perpetual either.
...Bummer.

[MrTim]

The (complicated) math behind Bessler's wheel involves quadrature (rather, the defeat of it. I've found one path toward that goal. ;-) Once discovered, it will open up a new (minor) field of mathematics. But I don't do complicated math, and let physical builds take all that into account, since I'd miss something or other. Computers would lie to me... ;-)

[kastir]

George,
Yes the earth has no reference point. That is the purpose of using gyroscopes. (They have been used for years in navigation since they hold a reference). Maybe you didn't understand the description of building a huge gyroscope on top of the world axis point and use that for the rotation of the earth to push against. As he mentioned the high gearing involved in turning this difference into fast rotational energy would have tremendous losses and therefore not workable. His concept of using 'gyroscopic precession' he explains quite well when describing the reason a child's gyroscope precesses around its pedistal - it converts a little downward force (gravitational) into instant rotational (precession). This is described mathematically by Eulers equations.
Incidentally he started his experimentation by working out how a child can make himself swing higher on a playground swing. He describes the method he used to make a model to do that, and where the energy comes from. Then he progressed to use gyroscopic precession.

[ovyyus]

http://mb-soft.com/public/dejavu.html

[Fcdriver]

Definition of oxymoron
: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (such as cruel kindness)
broadly : something (such as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements

[gita]

I appreciated the video however it unquestionably won't prevent me from structure and planning.
On the off chance that an unending movement machine works and is controlled by gravity, what " kind " would it be.