Perpetual motion/"free energy"

  • 301 Replies
  • 42270 Views
?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #210 on: September 22, 2008, 07:25:19 AM »
find some way of stealing energy from the zero-point vibration

Two things come to mind: Zero-Point Modules and Project Arcturus.

Where's Col. O'Neill when you need him? (Yes I want Col. O'Neill on the case, not the later General O'Neill.  Col. O'Neill/Gen Hammond were the ultimate tag team.)

As for those Atlantis jokers... well... O'Neill would have had that galaxy cleaned up in no time.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #211 on: September 22, 2008, 07:56:30 AM »
I don't understand this... How can perpetual motion not be applied to the universe? Nothing is applying external energy to it correct? It was the result of the big bang correct? There is no external energy source.

Hence... due to the laws of conservation... the Universe will continue to "move" in perpetual motion correct? If not... how does the law of conservation apply to the universe? With increasing space-time/distance... energy must be lost. What am I missing?

I am not arguing to argue... This is certainly something I am trying to understand better.
I'm arguing with you because you said this,

Perpetual motion itself is the definition of the law of conservation.

Perpetual motion violates the law of conservation of energy, because it doesn't conserve energy; why the hell would perpetual motion be the definition of it?

?

MrKappa

  • 448
  • Math abstracts reality... it does not create it...
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #212 on: September 22, 2008, 08:00:03 AM »
There is some interesting statistical information here, but this guy is way too crackpot-like in a few regards for my liking - he has his little catchphrase "The Big Bang is Bung" which he seems to like the sound of, and he provides no other evidence to support his claims about quasar redshifts.

There was nothing crackpot about him.

It's true that the apparent correlation he presents between redshift and separation is interesting, although there should be much more data available now on distant objects which should support his suggestions.

Here are two interesting references...


NGC 7603
http://quasars.org/ngc7603.htm

I have my own concerns about using redshift, although they are more GR-based and involve frame-dragging-like effects that appear to have been neglected in certain astrophysical calculations.

This frame dragging is very interesting... loop binding corrections as well... thank you... what do you mean by GR-based?

Models predicting this behaviour can be subject to problems such as 'black hole disease', however, where black holes produced in the previous Universe can survive the 'crunch' and pass into the new Universe.  This would quickly end up with a Universe made of nothing but supermassive black holes, which is not what we see today.

I don't understand why this would happen. What would cause the universe to end up dominated by black holes? This assumes that nothing escapes a black hole. I am currently under the impression that large jets of energy and matter are spit out at its poles.

?

MrKappa

  • 448
  • Math abstracts reality... it does not create it...
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #213 on: September 22, 2008, 08:04:28 AM »
Perpetual motion violates the law of conservation of energy, because it doesn't conserve energy; why the hell would perpetual motion be the definition of it?

Perpetual (continuing forever) - Nothing destroyed...

Laws of Conservation (continuing forever) - Nothing destroyed...

If nothing is destroyed then the energy is conserved and it continues forever.


*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #214 on: September 22, 2008, 08:08:20 AM »
Perpetual (continuing forever) - Energy gets created.

Laws of Conservation (continuing forever) - Energy doesn't get created.

If energy gets created, then the energy isn't conserved and thus total violation of the law.

?

MrKappa

  • 448
  • Math abstracts reality... it does not create it...
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #215 on: September 22, 2008, 08:14:15 AM »
Perpetual (continuing forever) - Energy gets created.

Laws of Conservation (continuing forever) - Energy doesn't get created.

If energy gets created, then the energy isn't conserved and thus total violation of the law.

Essentially...

The Big Bang is Perpetual while the Laws of Conservation would apply to a Steady State?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #216 on: September 22, 2008, 08:14:53 AM »
Essentially...

The Big Bang is Perpetual while the Laws of Conservation would apply to a Steady State?

Uh... do you understand Steady State theory?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

MrKappa

  • 448
  • Math abstracts reality... it does not create it...
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #217 on: September 22, 2008, 08:25:36 AM »
Uh... do you understand Steady State theory?

Actually... no I don't... that's probably why I added the question mark to the end of the sentence. I am not familiar enough with cosmology to know all the theories which are out there.

There must be a few million of em eh? I mean... we still don't understand gravity yet... kidding...

When I refer to a steady state I just mean a continual recycling of the Universe. Whether that includes the big bang or not... I really don't care.

I just have a feeling that if you cut a mobius strip. Infinity ends... or so to say right? Perhaps I watched to many re-runs of back to the future... time paradoxes and such...

I mean... the only other option would be to fall back on some sort of grand creator waving his magic hands and within six days creating the universe...

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #218 on: September 22, 2008, 08:33:51 AM »
Actually... no I don't... that's probably why I added the question mark to the end of the sentence. I am not familiar enough with cosmology to know all the theories which are out there.

There must be a few million of em eh? I mean... we still don't understand gravity yet... kidding...

When I refer to a steady state I just mean a continual recycling of the Universe. Whether that includes the big bang or not... I really don't care.

I just have a feeling that if you cut a mobius strip. Infinity ends... or so to say right? Perhaps I watched to many re-runs of back to the future... time paradoxes and such...

I mean... the only other option would be to fall back on some sort of grand creator waving his magic hands and within six days creating the universe...

Steady State theory says that as the Universe expands, matter is constantly being created in the space between galaxies to keep the average distance between galaxies the same. This is one of the many reasons why it is widely regarded as bullshit.

The Big Bang theory really doesn't violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, because nobody even pretends to understand what went on at the instant that the Universe began; we can only model it from about 10-34 seconds after the Big Bang, I think. So there isn't a model that suggests the energy came from nowhere, only that we don't know where it came from. The most plausible idea I've heard is that when the Universe was small enough, quantum effects dominated its development, and due to the uncertainties involved in quantum mechanics the idea of there being an instant at which the Universe began loses all meaning.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #219 on: September 22, 2008, 09:25:47 AM »
There was nothing crackpot about him.

Sorry, I've spoken to quite a few people with 'alternative' theories at conferences and so on and tragically he does share some characteristics with some of the more stubborn and determined ones.  By 'alternative' here I mean, of course, 'pet' - his approach instantly set alarm bells ringing which sadly coloured his presentation, to my mind.

Here are two interesting references...

I have no doubt that there are serious issues with objectivity in scientific research - politics and 'orthodoxism' are two cancers that need to be removed.  However, data is always available to those who request it - you might not get exactly what you would like, but you can usually dig interesting facts out of other observations which have already been made.  I didn't like the style of this video since it was very pop-culturey and presented in a bit of a dramatic way which, while it makes it inclusive to people without a lot of background knowledge, can make it a bit dumbed-down.  I certainly take the point that it is trying to make, however, and agree there are problems in research.  Peer review is a LOT better than the alternatives, however.

NGC 7603
http://quasars.org/ngc7603.htm

This is a nice picture, but does nothing to discredit the hypothesis that it could just be a line of sight co-incidence (there are a lot of objects out there, so this will happen frequently) - there would need to be more evidence that the objects were linked and that we weren't looking at two distant objects behind two nearer objects (the light-bridged galaxies at lower redshift).

This frame dragging is very interesting... loop binding corrections as well... thank you... what do you mean by GR-based?

This is where I start to get a bit uncomfortable, since the paper I'm basing this on seems to imply that you can make local measurements of the absolute gravitational potential that you are in, which violates the principle that gravitation is a local theory (that is, locally all space looks the same).  I personally don't have a huge problem with the idea of there being some way of you telling what the local gravitational field is (the gravitational equivalent of an altimeter with respect to some 'true' zero-gravitation field), although it would mean that the strong equivalence principle was wrong.

The paper in question was written partially to address the next generation of GPS satellites and signals sent to and from the ISS, to account for GR effects such as frame dragging on timing signals and so on.  The paper shows that there are effects that manifest as you transmit from a rotating body to an orbiting body high above... but the effects don't go away if you set the two altitudes to be the same (ie - in a lab, on a tabletop).  This kind of lab-based GR experiment is becoming more popular but is still hated by general relativists.  In turn, I think the majority of the GR community is disturbingly closed-minded and indoctrinated, but that's another story.

This is the paper in question

...and has also been published in Phys. Rev. D, although I don't have the reference to hand. I believe the interesting effect enters at order (1/c3), if you're interested.

I don't understand why this would happen. What would cause the universe to end up dominated by black holes? This assumes that nothing escapes a black hole. I am currently under the impression that large jets of energy and matter are spit out at its poles.

Large amounts of energy are emitted from the accretion discs of black holes, not from the black holes themselves - it is true that you can extract work from the 'ergosphere' of a black hole, although again this does not constitute a large amount of energy emission.  The 'black hole disease' originates from the idea that in the Big Crunch event itself, a true singularity is averted due to magical, horrifically complex things that I have no idea about (and I suspect the authors of the idea took some artistic license with the nature of physics beyond the standard model in concluding this) and that and singularities created in the Universe before the collapse could pass through to the 'other side' of the crunch, having soaked up loads of energy in the fireball.  This leaves less and less available energy outside of the surviving black holes, eventually leading to a Universe composed entirely of slowly radiating black holes, endlessly expanding and collapsing.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #220 on: September 22, 2008, 09:55:29 AM »
I thought absolute Zero was impossible to achieve... Isn't everything in perpetual motion?

It's actually mostly due to the uncertainty principle. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #221 on: September 22, 2008, 09:56:21 AM »
I thought absolute Zero was impossible to achieve... Isn't everything in perpetual motion?

It's actually mostly due to the uncertainty principle. 

What does that have to do with anything?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #222 on: September 22, 2008, 10:01:42 AM »
I thought absolute Zero was impossible to achieve... Isn't everything in perpetual motion?

It's actually mostly due to the uncertainty principle. 

What does that have to do with anything?
I'm letting him know why absolute zero is impossible. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #223 on: September 22, 2008, 10:05:22 AM »
I'm letting him know why absolute zero is impossible. 

I don't think he asked you that. Moreover, I don't think anyone would trust an answer from you.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #224 on: September 22, 2008, 10:22:42 AM »
I'm letting him know why absolute zero is impossible. 

I don't think he asked you that. Moreover, I don't think anyone would trust an answer from you.

I could care less what they do. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #225 on: September 22, 2008, 10:23:48 AM »
I could care less what they do. 

Why provide irrelevant information, then? It only serves to derail the thread.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #226 on: September 22, 2008, 10:31:24 AM »
I could care less what they do. 

Why provide irrelevant information, then? It only serves to derail the thread.

It is relevant. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #227 on: September 22, 2008, 10:35:40 AM »
It is relevant. 

How is it relevant why absolute zero cannot be achieved, as long as it is known that it cannot, for the purposes of this discussion?
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #228 on: September 22, 2008, 10:38:06 AM »
It is relevant. 

How is it relevant why absolute zero cannot be achieved, as long as it is known that it cannot, for the purposes of this discussion?

Because the wrong information was posted. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #229 on: September 22, 2008, 10:39:46 AM »
Because the wrong information was posted. 

Where? ???
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #230 on: September 22, 2008, 10:44:06 AM »
Because the wrong information was posted. 

Where? ???


I thought absolute Zero was impossible to achieve... Isn't everything in perpetual motion?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #231 on: September 22, 2008, 10:46:37 AM »
Your information was not a correction to that. Ergo, irrelevant.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #232 on: September 22, 2008, 10:47:45 AM »
Your information was not a correction to that. Ergo, irrelevant.

It was the real reason why absolute zero is impossible to reach.  That is relevant. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #233 on: September 22, 2008, 10:50:32 AM »
It was the real reason why absolute zero is impossible to reach.  That is relevant. 

He wasn't stating that as the reason why absolute zero is impossible to reach.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #234 on: September 22, 2008, 01:17:14 PM »
It was the real reason why absolute zero is impossible to reach.  That is relevant. 

He wasn't stating that as the reason why absolute zero is impossible to reach.

He was asking if that was the reason. So answering the question is not relevant?   
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #235 on: September 22, 2008, 01:19:33 PM »
He was asking if that was the reason. So answering the question is not relevant?   

lrn2readingcomprehension
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #236 on: September 22, 2008, 01:25:11 PM »
He was asking if that was the reason. So answering the question is not relevant?   

lrn2readingcomprehension
No you are not. 

My post was relevant.  You have to accept that. 
« Last Edit: September 22, 2008, 01:29:46 PM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #237 on: September 22, 2008, 01:29:05 PM »
My post was relevant.  You have to except that. 

Except that what? ???
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 18803
  • Extra Racist
Re: Perpetual motion/"free energy"
« Reply #238 on: September 22, 2008, 01:30:26 PM »
My post was relevant.  You have to except that. 

Except that what? ???

Nothing as you already did by moving on. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Dead Kangaroo

  • FES' Anchor Roo
  • The Elder Ones
  • 4551
  • K800 Model 101.