Roll on the 20th June

[spinner]

While we wait... some levity

Perpetual Motion solved, and such a simple solution too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTAJp5KyRIY&NR=1

Damn... Where the hell is the energy coming from?
Well, i have a few of those devices, even with 9 sockets...  Imagine the power they can deliver...
Thanks!

[purepower]

While we wait... some levity

Perpetual Motion solved, and such a simple solution too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTAJp5KyRIY&NR=1

Too funny!

I wonder how many people are at home looking for a powerstrip right now...

-PurePower

[Mr. M]

To pull that meteor back off of earth and send it back on it's way would take as much energy as it lost on collision, just like pulling the steel ball off the magnet and rolling it again.

That's the bit I'm not interested in weirdly enough...

I'm not looking for a way to create a perpetual motion magnetic wheel or other device like that, I'm  looking to understand where energy comes from, where it ultimately goes to, how it changes state and how modern day science measures it all.

I'm not looking to poke holes in science... Just trying to poke knowledge in to my scientific holes (ooer).

Impact. Upon collision, it looses energy to heat, deformation, and vibration (sound), to name a few.

What I actually want to know is if the input energy in my scenario is measurable and quantifiable, all of the different types of output energy are measurable and quantifiable and the sum of the output energy is exactly equal to the input energy based entirely on the gathered data...

I know that I'm supposed to know that they are equal but I want to know how I can indisputably know that this is the case... Urgh, I'm either coming off as a complete village idiot here or I'm not explaining myself well... Maybe both.

I'm a coder by trade and, a little chest puff here, I know how to write in upwards of fifteen languages... I can also pick up new languages and see comparable functions, structure and syntax which allows me to learn new languages very quickly. 

When I write an algorithm I know the variable(s) passed in, what work is done and what variable(s) are returned. When I look at my scenario I don't know what goes in, what happens and what comes out as a result and I'm trying to improve my knowledge...  I understand a lot of what comes out like heat, deformation, sound and how these propagate in various media but I don't know everything by a long way and as it is generally accepted that the energy in is always equal to the energy out then it must be possible for me to get the information I want.

For example... If it is possible for someone to say "Energy In = Energy out" then it should be possible to express that perfectly in a far more complex manner and that information should be available somewhere in one easy to flick through document. Any scenario which is even remotely like mine, any at all providing it accounts for all inputs, all outputs and what happens during the conversion of the energy... Bah! *slap slap slap self*

I'm being an idiot actually... It happens.

I'll go read t'internet some more, I know what I want is available it's just not in the 'Idiots guide to reality'.

[kude]

That's the bit I'm not interested in weirdly enough...

I'm not looking for a way to create a perpetual motion magnetic wheel or other device like that, I'm  looking to understand where energy comes from, where it ultimately goes to, how it changes state and how modern day science measures it all.

I'm not looking to poke holes in science... Just trying to poke knowledge in to my scientific holes (ooer).

What I actually want to know is if the input energy in my scenario is measurable and quantifiable, all of the different types of output energy are measurable and quantifiable and the sum of the output energy is exactly equal to the input energy based entirely on the gathered data...

I know that I'm supposed to know that they are equal but I want to know how I can indisputably know that this is the case... Urgh, I'm either coming off as a complete village idiot here or I'm not explaining myself well... Maybe both.

I'm a coder by trade and, a little chest puff here, I know how to write in upwards of fifteen languages... I can also pick up new languages and see comparable functions, structure and syntax which allows me to learn new languages very quickly. 

When I write an algorithm I know the variable(s) passed in, what work is done and what variable(s) are returned. When I look at my scenario I don't know what goes in, what happens and what comes out as a result and I'm trying to improve my knowledge...  I understand a lot of what comes out like heat, deformation, sound and how these propagate in various media but I don't know everything by a long way and as it is generally accepted that the energy in is always equal to the energy out then it must be possible for me to get the information I want.

For example... If it is possible for someone to say "Energy In = Energy out" then it should be possible to express that perfectly in a far more complex manner and that information should be available somewhere in one easy to flick through document. Any scenario which is even remotely like mine, any at all providing it accounts for all inputs, all outputs and what happens during the conversion of the energy... Bah! *slap slap slap self*

I'm being an idiot actually... It happens.

I'll go read t'internet some more, I know what I want is available it's just not in the 'Idiots guide to reality'.

I thought energy was complicated but it's not. Go look at DC generators. Faraday and others found moving copper wire through a magnetic field cause the electrons inside the wire to move, energizing the wire. The motion of a water wheel can be trransferred to moving copper wire through a magnetic field which moves the electrons which now has the energy from the water wheel. So the energy from motion is converted into energy in the current in the wires. Pretty nifty. So motion can turned into heat, heat into motion, light into electricity or heat. electricity into light, etc.Given all the forces present on the surface of the earth, there are losses  that affect the the transfers of energy.

[kitefreak]

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one..?


@All

I've got a couple of questions which I want to ask and they aren't intended to trip anyone up or prove anything... I'm curious as to what the correct answers are according to people who do this kind of thing a lot.


First one

Assume I have two perfectly identical metal balls and two identical tables of exactly the same length, any length but let's say it's a few meters. I place the balls at the front of each table and push both of them with enough force to make them reach the very end of the table where they both stop. Given what I know and ignoring the 'chaos' factor both balls will do exactly the same thing.

I place a magnet a few inches from the start of the table which is offset from the path the ball will take enough so that the ball would just miss the magnet by a few millimeters and I perform the same test.  One ball does exactly the same as before and moves all the way to the end of the table but the other one gets caught in the field of the magnet, is attracted and stops.

The question I have is where did the energy in the ball which would have been expended by the ball reaching the end off the table actually go when the ball stops after being attracted to the magnet just after starting the run ?

Hi Mr. M.

I have no qualifications in, or in-depth knowledge of physics, so I'm no expert on this. But it would seem to me, from a purely common-sense angle and using ordinary language, that the energy you put into the ball when you pushed it was 'used up' resisting the attraction of the magnetic field until the field 'won the battle' and 'sucked it in'.  I mean it 'tried its best' to get past the field, giving it everything it had, but the magnet 'won the battle'. Where the magnet gets all the 'energy' to do this is totally beyond me!