The Laws of Perpetual Motion

[Stewart]

If I am wrong and there is actually more to the children and pillars than is found in the AP line "Children play among the pillars with loud heavy clubs." I would really like to know about it because this "story" wound my clock.

The children and pillars is just from the following couplet in chapter 46 of AP:

Die Kinder spielen auf den Säulgen
Mit lauter schweren Schniebe-Käulgen;

The children play on the small columns*
with purely** heavy marbles***;

* Säulgen [Säulchen] = small column or pillar
** lauter = clear/pure/meer .... or .... clearly/purely/nothing but/only/all .... or .... loud
*** Schniebe-Käulgen [Schniebe-Käulchen] = marbles (the children's toy/game)

Stewart

[Unbalanced]

The children play on the small column(s)*
* Säulgen [Säulchen] = small column or pillar

Thanks heaps for the clarification.

Is Saulgen plural or not, this would be significant or is it not clear cut?

Its great that you offer several choices for interpretation. How do you rank them, give one English meaning preference over another?

[Stewart]

Is Saulgen plural or not, this would be significant or is it not clear cut?

Actually now that you mention it I think it is plural. The only thing we've got to go on here is the article (den). We can't tell from the noun itself because of the diminutive ending -gen (modern: -chen). Without the diminutive ending you'd be able to tell from the ending of the noun: 'Säule' is singular, 'Säulen' is plural. So looking at the use of 'den' here with the word Säulgen/Säulchen, it's only used in the dative plural, so it's 'small columns'. I've edited my previous post to correct this.

Its great that you offer several choices for interpretation. How do you rank them, give one English meaning preference over another?

Sometimes it's obvious based on the context of the sentence, but when I give a list of options it's because I can't decide and it's difficult to rank them in any order, although some (for example in the case of the word 'lauter' above) are obviously just different words that have the same general meaning.

Stewart

[rasselas]

rlortie,

If you have been outside and are cold, and open the door to a warm house to enter... I feel a warm breeze of air strike my face.

That being said, you say "in a gradient, energy flows from positive to negative". As in a battery, or such. (even though the electron is arbitrarily labeled "negative").

Your point of view is that the cold air is MORE dense, and thus MORE capable of displacing LESS dense, hot air.

Yet we could look at it as, "the hot air is MORE vibratory, and has the ability to (through collisions) impart its energy into the rather inert, LESS vibratory, cold air."

Now air typically, when a door is opened, goes left-right, and not up-down... so how does density translate in that regards?

"Heat flows only downhill" is just a metaphor... we mean, it goes to a cold region, even if it has to rise upwards (or leftwards) to do so.

Yet my question isn't about heat... it's about energy "flowing from a positive to a negative". Would you care to elaborate with some examples. Also, why do you consider density to be positive? Or why anything at all to be negative? Thanks for considering this problem, and helping to correct my lack of understanding.

[justsomeone]

Finish or reword the following:

In order for an OOB wheel to work you must....

An OOB wheel will turn, even though it is not OOB 100% of the rotation, as long as.....

The RPM'S of your wheel will not exceed (_________) because.....

A falling weight on the descending side of the wheel....

A falling weight on the ascending side of the wheel.....

A load added to a CF powered gravity wheel....

A load added to an OOB powered gravity wheel....

A shift within the wheel must....

One weight lifting another during rotation is calculated....

A falling weight recovers (_______) upon impact.

[Unbalanced]

Hi Justsomeone,

Yours is the more practical approach perhaps. If we haven't a working wheel to help answer these questions we may have to draw from nature like planetary and atomic PM.

Though I do like nneba's law

Energy can not can not be created nor destroyed.

[Ealadha]

I have been thinking for a while now that one of the laws of perpetual motion could be something like "Where everything works opposite the way you think it should work". For example instead of putting energy in , energy comes out .

[rlortie]

rallalas,

Yet my question isn't about heat... it's about energy "flowing from a positive to a negative". Would you care to elaborate with some examples. Also, why do you consider density to be positive? Or why anything at all to be negative? Thanks for considering this problem, and helping to correct my lack of understanding.

I always attempt to answer any post addressed to me on this forum.

I often refer to positive and negative to define a gradient potential between like properties. Call it 'Blue collar' terminology if you wish as I do.

I agree that the term positive-negative is not always a correct term for many applications. I use it to define that positive will always seek to equalize gradient differential with lesser (negative)...

The only thing that I can think of off-hand that this does not apply to is the old 'Rock-scissor-paper game. Any OB wheel is measured in positive torque on it heavy side while the ascending is considered negative torque measurable with an inverse Prony brake.

Yet we could look at it as, "the hot air is MORE vibratory, and has the ability to (through collisions) impart its energy into the rather inert, LESS vibratory, cold air."

Or we could say that the less vibratory activity of the cold air is impeding the vibratory acceleration in the hot air through collision.

An old parlor trick is to fill two like containers with equal amounts of water, one with warm and the other at normal tap temperature. Put them in the freezer and see which one freezes first! The experiment may surprise you.

Ralph

[jim_mich]

An old parlor trick is to fill two like containers with equal amounts of water, one with warm and the other at normal tap temperature. Put them in the freezer and see which one freezes first! The experiment may surprise you.

Ralph, this is a well known urban myth. The old-time refrigerators had a freezer compartment wrapped by the cooling coils. The ice-cube trays sat directly on the coils, which were usually covered with a thick coating of frost. Cold trays placed in the freezer would melt some of the frost, but were still sitting on top of frost, which is a somewhat good insulator. The warm trays would melt clear through the frost and come directly in contact with the metal cooling coils, thus providing an excellent conducting path for the removal of heat from the water in the tray. Thus the warmer tray would freeze faster, because of being in direct contact with the metal cooling coils.

With the advent of frost-free refrigerators having cooling coils not in the freezer compartment and with the shelves often made of plastic, the ice-cube tray with the colder water will freeze faster, as one might expect.

[rlortie]

In order for an OOB wheel to work you must....keep it in an OOB state.

An OOB wheel will turn, even though it is not OOB 100% of the rotation, as long as.....it has the Ke and inertia build to do so.

The RPM'S of your wheel will not exceed (_________) because.....of the physical properties of its design limiting Cf in relation to Cp restraint.

A falling weight on the descending side of the wheel....is useleless unless it attached to the wheel.

A falling weight on the ascending side of the wheel..... is useless with the exception that its weight is not creating negative torque.

A load added to a CF powered gravity wheel.... will likely slow it down, it enough weight or requested force is demanded it will eventually become static and considered balanced. That is if a Cf powered wheel was possible, I do not believe that a Cf driven mechanism it is possible. Cf is a 'tangent' force and does not apply force at a right angle to the axis.

A load added to an OOB powered gravity wheel....will create a term called 'work'

A shift within the wheel must....keep the highest percentage of mass/leverage on the descending side

One weight lifting another during rotation is calculated.... by knowing the leverage ratio and any gradient differential in the weights.

A falling weight recovers (______) upon impact. Impact where an with what?

[nneba]

A theory on the pm law,

P.M. in itself revolves around a prime mover;
the prime mover is going to be the equivilant of one degree of rotation, nothing more. The finest of detail will have to be observed in order to harness the one degree, that one degree is all it should take to reset the motion.
Is this an obvious statement or is there any argument?

After all, greed is an evil root.

nneba

[jim_mich]

Effects, or Laws, that need to be understood in order understand how a CF driven wheel works:

1. The Gravity Effect
2. The Eötvös Effect
3. The Paired Centrifugal Force Effect *
4. The Leveraged CF Effect *
5. The Superior Force Effect
6. The Balanced Wheel Effect *
7. The Gravesande Effect
8. The Momentum Effect
9. The Kinetic Energy Effect
10. The Cascade Effect
11. The Maxwell's Demon Effect
12. The Ectropy Effect
13. The Two and Two Effect
14. The Reversal Effect
15. The Limited Swing Effect *

[FunWithGravity2]

Wholly CF's JIM,

If your gonna cover all that in your "claims" then thats gonna be one heck of a patent. I see now why the process is taking so long. When you said you want to make sure cover the principle as well as mechanism you just don't mess around.

Remember they charge for extra pages.

Meant in jest,
good luck

Dave

[Unbalanced]

Amazing thoughts one and all.

I love the myth busting Jim, Always had my suspicions where that particular one was involved.

We're getting places here.

I would add but I had an epiphany this afternoon, believe it was the spirit of Johann himself talking to me. I've been laughing all afternoon and walking on a cloud. Heading for the shop and will share my findings within the week come what may.

[Bill_Mothershead]

About hot water freezing faster...

Ralph, this is a well known urban myth.

I am not so quick to dismiss it as a myth.
Google on "mpemba effect" and you get about 10,000 hits,
with many of them actual experiments suggesting that
under SOME conditions it actually does happen.

The easiest part to understand has to do with the fact that
REALLY hot water has much of the dissolved gasses
removed from the water, which effects the freezing point.

My google search yielded a really entertaining video of a man
with two cups of water. One had just been boiled (still hot).
He went outside where it was -15F (really cold).
He then tossed the contents of each glass up into the air.
The hot water instantly turned into snow. Impressive.
The cold water just fell to the ground as water.

Just for fun, see the short video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOVZV6DxaRs