Poll related to: "Big Troubles Brewing For The Theoretical Physics Smart-set"

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Jim,

I guess ignorance is bliss. Some people just don't know how ignorant they really are. If you expect to make a perpetual motion wheel, you first need to learn natures laws.

At least we agree in part!

With respect Trevor

[justsomeone]

Jim, Is CF considered a conservative force?

[justsomeone]

Jim, If it is, does that make you ignorant for searching a PM wheel powered by CF?

[ovyyus]

...it is only a unfounded assumption that it [gravity] is a conservative force...

Unfounded assumption? Trevor, statements like this show how little you regard or grasp the long history and enormous effort put into understanding the physics of this subject. It boggles my mind how some people can claim that a thing is wrong without any indication that they understand the argument.

I had a short conversation with a shop keeper the other day about the patch of warm weather we've been having of late. He claimed that global warming is a crock of shit and that scientists are either stupid or they're trying to secure scare tactic grants funding. I asked what his expertise was in the field given his strong conviction on the matter. He said he didn't have any, but god was in charge, not man. Like talking to the Taliban. Duh.

[jim_mich]

Jim, Is CF considered a conservative force?

I discussed this very subject two years ago. See this post.

Item number 1: There is no such thing as "Conservation of CF/CP"
Do a Google search for "conservation of centrifugal force" and you will get about three hits. Centrifugal force is NOT conservative.

Conservation of Momentum is one of the most basic of Newton's Laws. Any object in motion continues in motion. Any object at rest continues at rest. Objects only change velocity and/or direction when forces are applied to the object. We see this in everything around us.

Conservation of Angular Momentum is a subset of number 2. But angular momentum involves rotation, which is an unusual situation. Thus conservation of AM requires some specific rules for calculating conservation, else the numbers don't compute to produce conservation.

For instance, a spinning ice-skater extends and retract his/her arms causing acceleration and deceleration of rotational speed. We only get conservation of momentum if we use radius of gyration calculations. Anyone that has attempted to build a PM wheel soon comes to understand that moving weights in and out on a wheel produces acceleration and deceleration of the wheel and the weights.

Jim, If it is, does that make you ignorant for searching a PM wheel powered by CF?

Since CF is not conservative, why would you think I'm ignorant? I admit, I'm an ignorant brain surgeon, for I know almost nothing about brain surgery.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

...it is only a unfounded assumption that it [gravity] is a conservative force...

Unfounded assumption? Trevor, statements like this show how little you regard or grasp the long history and enormous effort put into understanding the physics of this subject. It boggles my mind how some people can claim that a thing is wrong without any indication that they understand the argument.

I had a short conversation with a shop keeper the other day about the patch of warm weather we've been having of late. He claimed that global warming is a crock of shit and that scientists are either stupid or they're trying to secure scare tactic grants funding. I asked what his expertise was in the field given his strong conviction on the matter. He said he didn't have any, but god was in charge, not man. Like talking to the Taliban. Duh.

Hi Ovyyus,
That history is just a split second in the time scale, billons of year of perpetual motion was gone before, and Gravity is still moving the universe! If you ask me about global warming I would say it is a to smaller time scale to make a informed judgement.

It is funny how they can gage planets mass by the gravitational pull and its orbit, if there is billons years of pull then there is billons of year of work done, and the constant work done to keep in check the Central fugal force that try to make the plants fly off out of orbit.

I have not seen any sign of a conservative force in my experiments, I have only seen bad use of geometry, wherein the way the forces are distributed within the wheel have made the wheel come to a stand still! By the same token it will be the way the forces are distributed within the wheel that will make it rotate.

Please feel free to provide me with some of the empirical experimental evidence that prove gravity is a conservative force, to give me a chance to evaluate the Theory because I have looked and have not seen any, only assumptions.

With Respect Trevor

Edit, spelling!

[ovyyus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum

In a closed system (one that does not exchange any matter with the outside and is not acted on by outside forces) the total momentum is constant. This fact, known as the law of conservation of momentum, is implied by Newton's laws of motion...

[ovyyus]

if there is billons years of pull then there is billons of year of work done...

That is an unfounded assumption because you do not understand the standard definition of force and work. How can you argue against something you don't understand?

[jim_mich]

You can lead an ignorant to knowledge, but you cannot force him understand.

[justsomeone]

Thank you Jim. How many scientists know CF is not conservative ?

[jim_mich]

Thank you Jim. How many scientists know CF is not conservative ?

Probably all the intelligent ones that give the subject any honest thought.

[eccentrically1]

Has anyone noticed every post devolves into the same discussion?

[jim_mich]

And your point is ??

[ovyyus]

Devolving back to the fundamentals might be needed :D

[eccentrically1]

Everyone thinks they are right and everyone else is wrong.
The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
The fundamentals aren't needed here!