perpetual motion

[allcanadian]

I thought you guys might like this article, it is by far the most common sense rationalization of how absurd the general arguement is against perpetual motion.
http://www.duschl-engineering.de/Fac...otion%2038.pdf

I like these paragraphs---

Quote:
“So far as anyone knows, there is no theoretical time limit to how long an unaided current could be sustained in a superconducting circuit. If you're thinking this appears to be a form of perpetual motion, you're correct! Contrary to popular belief, there is no law of physics prohibiting perpetual motion; rather, the prohibition stands against any machine or system generating more energy than it consumes…” 

Quote:
"Yet many scientists and engineers still seem to reason along lines similar to Planck’s statement. They erroneously assume that “perpetual motion” is against the laws of physics. They erroneously infer that a system in perpetual motion would continually do work without any energy inputâ€"when basic perpetual motion actually has nothing at all to do with a machine receiving extra energy or doing work. Instead, it has to do with a system placed in motion remaining perpetually in that state of motion unless and until acted upon by an external force that changes it." 

This gets to the very heart of the matter, the fact that many people have confused the context and terminology relating to perpetual motion. Physics states catagorically that everything is in perpetual motion--period, but this does not mean anything has gained energy in any way, the conservation of energy will continue to hold true as it should.
Regards
AC

[onthecuttingedge2005]

lets say that you go to an area of space that contains no additional matter or energy and you take out a top and spin it to 1 RPM, you would think that since the top is in an area of space that contains no detectable matter or energy would spin forever, but, your own presents will alter the Top's speed over time and by simply observing it you will influence the top's rotational velocity over time.

you might get something to spin a long time but in 'this' Universe filled with so much influence, nothing can spin forever.

Jerry

[allcanadian]

@onthecuttingedge2005
Quote:
"lets say that you go to an area of space that contains no additional matter or energy and you take out a top and spin it to 1 RPM, you would think that since the top is in an area of space that contains no detectable matter or energy would spin forever, but, your own presents will alter the Top's speed over time and by simply observing it you will influence the top's rotational velocity over time.
you might get something to spin a long time but in 'this' Universe filled with so much influence, nothing can spin forever."

You have made many assumptions which do not make very much sense to me, one is that there could be any area of space which contains neither matter nor energy. From the little we know of space we know for certain that all space is filled with radiations of various wave periods and this radiation is a form of energy. As far as "observable" status is concerned this only applies in quantum mechanics on the sub-atomic scale for reasons nobody understands and not to macroscale objects. The presence of matter, a person, will produce gravic effects pulling objects inward giving the illusion of attraction but this gravic force to my knowledge has zero effects on rotation of objects and may actually be responsible for the orbiting/rotating motions of planets through field interactions. Your last statement seems a little off as well, "nothing can spin forever"---how do you know you have not lived forever nor could you?. What we call "forever" is an abstract concept at best, the fact is nobody knows for certain--nobody. What we can do is use the physics we have and these state that a body in motion will remain in motion unless acted on by external forces, these external forces are just as likely to accelerate the top in some manner as they are to deccelerate it. What we can say with near absolute certainty is that the constituent parts that are the top will remain in motion because 1)E=mc^2, energy is matter in motion, ie. everything that is the top will be matter or energy for eternity (conservation of energy) and they will be in motion because 2) Motion is defined as a change in distance between two points or objects as such every part of the top must be moving relative to something else in the universe. I think it was Mark Twain who once said---“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Regards
AC

[scotty1]

Physicists Measure Elusive 'Persistent Current'

Ecnmag.com - October 14, 2009

New Haven, Conn. â€" Physicists at Yale University have made the first
definitive measurements of “persistent current,” a small but perpetual
electric current that flows naturally through tiny rings of metal wire
even without an external power source.

The team used nanoscale cantilevers, an entirely novel approach, to
indirectly measure the current through changes in the magnetic force it
produces as it flows through the ring. “They’re essentially little
floppy diving boards with the rings sitting on top,” said team leader
Jack Harris, associate professor of physics and applied physics at Yale.
The findings appear in the October 9 issue of Science.

The counterintuitive current is the result of a quantum mechanical
effect that influences how electrons travel through metals, and arises
from the same kind of motion that allows the electrons inside an atom to
orbit the nucleus forever. “These are ordinary, non-superconducting
metal rings, which we typically think of as resistors,” Harris said.
“Yet these currents will flow forever, even in the absence of an applied
voltage.”

Although persistent current was first theorized decades ago, it is so
faint and sensitive to its environment that physicists were unable to
accurately measure it until now. It is not possible to measure the
current with a traditional ammeter because it only flows within the tiny
metal rings, which are about the same size as the wires used on computer
chips.

Past experiments tried to indirectly measure persistent current via the
magnetic field it produces (any current passing through a metal wire
produces a magnetic field). They used extremely sensitive magnetometers
known as superconducting quantum interference devices, or SQUIDs, but
the results were inconsistent and even contradictory.

“SQUIDs had long been established as the tool used to measure extremely
weak magnetic fields. It was extremely optimistic for us to think that a
mechanical device could be more sensitive than a SQUID,” Harris said.

The team used the cantilevers to detect changes in the magnetic field
produced by the current as it changed direction in the aluminum rings.
This new experimental setup allowed the team to make measurements a full
order of magnitude more precise than any previous attempts. They also
measured the persistent current over a wider range of temperature, ring
size and magnetic field than ever before.

“These measurements could tell us something about how electrons behave
in metals,” Harris said, adding that the findings could lead to a better
understanding of how qubits, used in quantum computing, are affected by
their environment, as well as which metals could potentially be used as
superconductors.

Authors of the paper include Ania Bleszynski-Jayich, William Shanks,
Bruno Peaudecerf, Eran Ginossar, Leonid Glazman and Jack Harris (all of
Yale University) and Felix von Oppen (Freie Universität Berlin).

Cheers.
Scotty.
Sounds like Ed's PMH...

[scotty1]

"Past experiments tried to indirectly measure persistent current via the
magnetic field it produces (any current passing through a metal wire
produces a magnetic field)."

Ed wrote. "If perpetual motion holder's North pole prong is put East. South pole prong West, and then elevate the cross-bar's center up to the South pole vertically hanging magnet (that is, its lower end), then the magnet will swing South and when the cross-bar's center is elevated up to North pole vertically hanging magnet (lower end), then the magnet will swing North. (because of the right hand rule)

The cross-bar's ability to swing the North and South pole magnets off its center will remain as long as the cross-bar is not disturbed. It has little power but it could be made stronger by making bigger dimensions." Ed. L
----------------
The scientists couldn't detect a current via its field but Ed could...

BTW. If you want to try that, you will need a pure soft wrought iron for a PMH, and a laminated keeper.
True wrought iron is not easy to get now.
If a PMH was made as Ed said and a pure wrought iron was used then you might get a good result, but so far my results have been, well, not good enough to write about.
---------------
Scotty.