The argument for pepetual motion

[onepower]

The argument for pepetual motion

Perpetual- Lasting forever; never-ending, continuing or being so for an indefinitely long time.
Motion- The act or process of changing position or place.
Machine- A physical system of fixed and moving parts that performs a task.

The atom has fixed (Proton) and moving (Electron) parts.
An atom is in perpetual motion and it's parts cannot be created/destroyed or stop moving.
The atom also performs the task of being the building block of all physical things in the known universe.
By definition and for all intensive purposes the atom qualifies as a perpetual motion machine.

The problem seems to be that many choose to view things on a superficial level in a subjective manner.
They build a nano-machine made of a few atoms which performs a task and think it's the holy grail.
Where nature has been building machines from atoms into larger and more complex machines for billions of years.

It also helps to understand logic and reasoning to help spot obvious contradictions.
1)The conservation of Energy demands energy cannot be created/destroyed.
2)The conservation of Mass demands the atoms Proton/Electron cannot be created/destroyed.

If the energy and mass of the atom cannot be created/destroyed then it is by definition perpetual.
What do people think "cannot be created/destroyed" and "perpetual" mean?.
Which is where things get a little weird because anyone claiming "perpetual motion" is not real
obviously doesn't understand the conservation of energy and mass.

[stivep]

https://overunity.com/17735/kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion/msg579115/#msg579115
https://overunity.com/17735/kapanadze-and-other-fe-discussion/msg579169/#msg579169
Wesley

[onepower]

Stivep
In my opinion your cherry picking terms and theories however it doesn't actually matter.
Even if your claims were true it still doesn't change the fact that whether the parts of the atom are orbiting or oscillating particles or wave/wave fields it still represents the motion of something on some level. Key word... motion.

Unless of course your claiming that nothing is changing/moving but then you would have to explain what energy is and how it could translate in a static universe where nothing moves. In effect, it's a fools game and something has to change/move, be it a particles, fields or waves. Here's a clue, something cannot change (to cause to be different) without something moving. Which is why all forms of energy always relate to change and/or motion.

This is the real problem... from ChatGPT
Question:if the universe expands and contracts in cycles is this not perpetual?.

Answer:if the universe were to expand and contract in a cyclical manner, with successive periods of expansion and contraction, it would not necessarily be considered perpetual motion. Perpetual motion, refers to a machine or system that can operate indefinitely without the need for external energy input.

As we can see someone has hijacked the term "perpetual motion" to mean a perpetual energy machine instead of continuous motion. Even more absurd is that they tied the fake definition of perpetual motion to an external energy input. Apparently they don't understand how the English language works. Perpetual means continuing or being so for an indefinitely long time. Ergo, I must reject there nonsensical definition as being false and misleading.

In effect, the conservation of energy demands that if anything loses energy something else must gain energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed ie. converted into other forms. There can be no more or less energy which relates to the change/motion of something be it particles, fields, waves or anything else. If nothing can be created/destroyed then it must be perpetual.

AC

[onepower]

In effect, we can establish that everthing is in perpetual motion because the laws
of conservation demand all matter and energy be conserved. They cannot be
created or destroyed and must be conserved.

From this first principal we can then deduce that everything we know is the result
of energy transformations or conversions. Thus we should move past the primitive notion
of creating or producing energy and focus on transforming it.

Of course, first one should understand what energy is.

AC

[stivep]

In effect, we can establish that everthing is in perpetual motion because the laws
of conservation demand all matter and energy be conserved. They cannot be
created or destroyed and must be conserved.
From this first principal we can then deduce that everything we know is the result
of energy transformations or conversions. Thus we should move past the primitive notion
of creating or producing energy and focus on transforming it.
Of course, first one should understand what energy is.
AC

Nice challenge  Thank You onepower.

A consequence of the law of conservation of energy is that a perpetual motion machine of the first kind** cannot exist ;
that is to say, no system without an external energy supply
can deliver an unlimited amount of energy to its surroundings.

Conservation_of_energy
Here is classification related to **
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion

Closed system :

can exchange energy (as heat or work) but not matter, with its surroundings

Motion of a machine or system or process described as perpetual somewhere (= at some place)  in within a closed system .
is not the same as energy conservation of that closed system.(- thermodynamics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_system
_{And such open system allows work and energy exchange.}

Isolated system :
In physics chemistry the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant;

The universe
-is considered an isolated system because the energy of the universe is constant.
This matches with the definition of an isolated system, which is that energy is not exchanged with the surroundings, thus staying constant.
_{However for some sceptics it looks like the Universe boundaries are unspecified so is the presence of anything  outside of it, nor its any possible interactions}.
_{by that  we qualify  our Universe  based on our point of observation.}
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/281356/what-type-of-thermodynamic-system-is-the-universe

and please watch this video from Wikipedia :
you can make it bigger by clicking at  the square  icon on the right.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/transcoded/3/3a/Something_for_nothing_%281940%29.ogv/Something_for_nothing_%281940%29.ogv.240p.webm
Wesley