How do you define PMM ..

[LustInBlack]

Well, I'm curious as to how people look at the problem.

Basicly, in my case, I can see one problem that need to be solved :

- Trading Speed for Torque with a Lever.

I believe that if this problem or physical "law" is bypassed by an ingenious
mechanism, we have perpetual motion .

[KAS]

I don't believe a PPM as any issues with Newton's law of Thermodynamics.
It is true that energy cannot be created or destroyed. But a PPM is not creating free energy, it is merely recycling the energy of gravity.
However, Newtons 3rd law is a problem and one that I am sure that can only be overcome by tapping into uncharted territory.
If an action has an equal and opposite reaction then this reaction can (IMO) only be overcome by leverage combined with assistance from forces in the twilight zone.

And it's this area that we are all blindly marching into.

Kas

[ken_behrendt]

My current definition of a PMM (which I assume you are using to mean "perpetual motion machine" and not "permanent magnet motor") is one in which the energy associated with the rest masses of its internal parts is slowly converted into the energy that the device outputs to its environment to perform "useful" work.


ken

[murilo]

It's impossible, for me, find any power device or work principle that will not be involved in *transformin* of any potential and 'break' it by decomposition.
In 'our' PMM - wich you know - I see geometric means to transform reserved gravity potential in kinetics and variable physic/spacial forms.
Wheels may use this same principle.
Not very stupid and not a big deal, since gravity IS something and offers free refil. Regs. M.

[ovyyus]

... a machine that outputs continuous work with no apparent input energy source.

[Jon J Hutton]

I don't think you have to put in more energy than you use....merly put back what was taken out....

[Michael]

Any machine that creates energy; the standard idea of what perpetual motion is. Energy is not matter B.T.W.; it is difference.

[jim_mich]

My definition of "Perpetual Motion Machine" is a device that harnesses an unseen yet abundant energy source such as gravity or ether (zero point) energy so as to do useful work until the machine wears out.

If well constructed and protected it would run longer than the Earth is habitable.

[PIMAN]

R-o-l-a-i-d-s

[Oxygon]

I agree with you "LustInBlack"...

Everyday some new amazing gadget/tool comes out

And its just a matter of putting two and two... together.

I am still trying to develope this ingeniously simple solution myself...

[Paul]

My definition of "Perpetual Motion Machine" is.....a dream; a hypothetical not realizeable machine :-) I hope that in future someone can contradict me.

Paul

[rlortie]

Paul,

Jules Verne stated that if man could write about it, man would eventualy build it. Some time in the near future, you will be contradicted.

Ralph

[ken_behrendt]

Ralph...

H. G. Wells wrote about a time machine that could take a passenger backward and forward in time. Unfortunately, one of the consequences of Einsteinian Relativity Theory is that backward time travel is impossible. An effect can never precede its cause. Eliminating the possibility of backward time travel also immediately eliminates all of the various "paradoxes" that it gives rise to.


ken

[Madmax]

Ken,

You already can make travel in time backward, but this travel would be "read only".
Let's make the supposition that you can make a distance of hundred of light years in one seconde. You stop, take a very big telescope and you can see the people on Earth 100 year ago. But you are too far to make any changes. :)

Personally I wish I were back in time in june 1815 and tell Napoleon: be careful of Marshal Blucher. Unfortunately it's impossible. :(

But back to the main matter: I suppose that PMM machine is a very simple mechanism that makes extrapolation of the cause and the result. Example: it's obvious that any weight must go down to make work. But what is happening if you have this work stored before going down the weight?

I stops, sorry... I just want to make it first :)

[ken_behrendt]

Madmax wrote:

Let's make the supposition that you can make a distance of hundred of light years in one seconde. You stop, take a very big telescope and you can see the people on Earth 100 year ago. But you are too far to make any changes.

But you have not really gone "back" in time...you have merely obtained information that was 100 years old.

Example: it's obvious that any weight must go down to make work. But what is happening if you have this work stored before going down the weight?

You intend to store the energy released by a dropping weight before the weight drops? Sounds like you want to get effect before cause...that's impossible!


ken