Was it so hard to just click "edit" instead of "reply"? Three posts in a row is NOT needed.
Quoted different posts did not want to confuse. Would you prefer I just put each one below the next in one post? I can manage that if you wish.
Upon reviewing some dictionaries I can concede that the commonly accepted definition of "fuel" is a form of matter that is converted to another form in order to extract energy...typicaly through combustion, but also can be applied to radioactive decay (like in a nuclear power plant). But this doesn't change my perspective in this discussion...it simply means that I'm using a term incorrectly.
I don't think anyone can reasonably define "perpetual motion" the way you've suggested above...not if you use the word "perpetual" correctly. What you're calling perpetual motion, the rest of the world calls renewabe resources.
After re-reading an reconsidering your earler posts I still say you are incorrect. A geothermal plant does not produce more energy than it consumes, nor do wind farms or the solar panels on the roof of your house. All of these things have energy inputs that are greater than their yield. Energy and mass are conserved.
Your system is so far from energy unity its not even funny...current photovoltaics operate somewhere in the range of 10% or less efficiency...the last actual panel specs I looked at when considering purchasing an array was about 4% efficient, I may be generous in my sugestion of 10% energy conversion on a commercially available pv array. You're only looking at your electric meter and since you generate more power than you use, you're calling it perpetual motion...but its not. Want proof? Easy enough. Go up on your roof on a suny day and lay your hand right on the middle of one of your solar panels. If you're converting 100% of the sunlight hitting those panels to electricity then they will be cool to the touch...but if they're not converting all that solar radiation they'll be hot.
Yes nuclear conversion is also a fuel type, fussion, fission, radioactive decay all change mass and yield energy in the process as well as combustion as well as non-combustion chemical reactions that release energy (i.e. exothermic reactions). Thanks for your correction.
Total applied heat energy to a geothermal plant is greater than energy output, that is correct, else they would not work. However, amount of energy you supply as heat is far less than energy output, the earth provides the majority of the heat energy. You just tap that heat energy and and provide a way it can apply to the plant's energy output. Greater energy output than what you apply i.e. Over Unity. It can be perpetual so long as the earth's core is a usable heat source. Pump water down, pump up hot water or get steam pressured up to surface and whala greater energy out put from turbine than pumping energy applied. Energy output = EO Total Energy Applied = EA Energy Supplied by You = ES Energy Supplied by Earth's Heat = EE
EO/EA=energy conversion efficiency and EA=EE+ES and EO/ES=unity efficiency unity efficiency greater than 1 is over unity. Energy conversion efficiency will never be greater than 1 (100%) unity efficiency can be less than or equal to or greater than 1. Total applied energy is what you supply and what earth supplies. When the energy sources are differentiated under unity - unity - over unity becomes clear. When they are not differentiated misunderstandings can occur like the one you made thinking that over unity is EO>EA Not so! That can never be but you can get more energy out than you apply and that is clear by identifying each energy input source. Taking what energy you apply in relation to the energy output which is the correct way to do it to determine over unity. This always identifies over unity energy outputs as comming from an energy source applied by the environment meaning they come from some energy source and are not free energy (comming from nothing). Nothing comes from Nothing, multiply by zero and you get zero, divide with zero as the numerator and you get zero as the denominator zero still would be zero for the answer. Nothing comes from Nothing. Only when you have energy coming from the environment can you achieve over unity energy outputs. Only when you have over unity energy outputs can you achieve perpetual motion that yields work. The first law of motion deals with perpetual motion when no work is achieved (net zero application of force).
A last note to your recent comment even if the panels converted 100% sunlight to electrical energy they would still be hot unless the resistance to electrical transfer was zero (0) resistance would heat them up due to electrical friction and that would reduce efficiency of the output to less than 100%. The correct statement would be they would have to convert 100% of the sunlight to electrical energy and have a resistance of 0 otherwise they will feel warm if not hot or very hot to the touch.
I love it, lots to debate I'm goning to have fun. So where to start? I guess at the top and work down sounds good enough.
Perpetual motion always loses to entropy in the end (if not something more mundane first).
Perpetual motion is impossible. 'Free energy' generation is impossible. Buy a solar panel and deal with it.
Where have we claimed that it is impossible? We simply claimed that free energy is impossible. Examples including zero point energy. We also have said perpetual motion is impossible. Both of these things involve keeping/obtaining energy from a closed system.
I really don't see what you are trying to say other than I have solar power, it is free.
That is irrelevant to the discussion.
You say free energy is impossible, I say it is not free energy, it comes from a source, but since you still say free energy I say the energy I get from sun light is free and demonstrate that it is free to me and yields me money to boot. You also say perpetual motion is impossible and define perpetual as keeping energy in a closed system. I say the First Law of Motion contradicts that. you say perpetual motion is obtaining energy from a closed system, I say you can get perpetual motion when you have a system that is able to gain energy from the surroundings, the system can be closed its just not an isolated system.
To illistrate further, solar arrays are not perpetual motion of themselves. You have to have a mechanisim doing work using the energy from them at least to make a perpetual system. This can only be when the solar array connected to the work output device using the energy from the array is exposed to sunlight 24/7/365.25. Then it would be perpetual until the the solar array or the work output device or both failed (broke, ceased to function) or until the sun burns out. If not exposed to the sun constantly then a battery system is also needed. The it would be perpetual until the solar array or the work output device or the battery or a combination of them failed or unitl the sun burned out. But by itself it is over unity in its energy output, but the energy output is less than the total amount of solar energy that falls upon the array. Over unity by the fact that the energy output is greater than the energy that I apply to the solar array. In fact I apply zero energy to the solar array beyond the energy that was used to manufacture it (I did not manufacture it but still energy was applied), ship it (I did not transport it from factory to house but energy was applied) and instal it (I did not install it but energy was applied). The energy that applies to it now is applied by the sun, I just use an installed method of capturing a portion of that energy and convert it into something I can use (electricity). As long as that works and the sun shines I get usable energy output. The device output if not already surpassed the total energy input from manufacture to installation will at some point surpass that level of energy input.
Check your local areas to see what funding sources are available to you to get an array for FREE. I am not saying every state has a program like that but many do and those that do not most likely have tax incentives to help and so does the federal government.
Raist reply #87 after this posting I can not quote by click looks like.
I started talking about perpetual motion and over unity energy outputs. I used the solar array as an example (known observation). OK. I intend to get back to discussing perpetual motion and over unity energy outputs. It all ties in, trust me. ( I know I know the two most feared words in the english language when used in conjunction with each other "trust" and "me").