Perpetual Motion: If the Initial Force is Ignored, Possible?

Work can only occur when there is an energy transfer, and energy can only travel from a higher potential to a lower one, so that means that without a continuous supply of energy, the hypothetical machine will eventually stop working.

Hello DVader1000:

I know and understand the Law you post. But, it would be great to get something working (perhaps in a vacuum) with no apparent energy. Even for a short time of say an hour. I know this would not be perpetual motion. To get something move and I can't recall what it is called, but, it is an apparatus where a bulb is shaped just like a light bulb, and a little fan is inside and, made to spin by the rising of hot air. It may be a vacuum I am not sure on that but, it does seem to have no means of power.

I have also gone to the site which was listed on this thread, sorry I can't remember who left it, but there is some interesting things there as well. Have you checked it out?

Take care...............Thanks for the post............

Hi Babybear,

The device you're thinking of is called the Cooke's Radiometer. It works on the principle of solar thermal energy. The black painted sides of the fins absorb more heat energy from sunlight or other light source than the silvered sides. The heat radiated by the black painted sides then heat up the (low pressure) air within the bulb faster than the silvered sides. The unequal pressure caused by this then causes the vane to spin around. The device will continue to work as long as it's exposed to light. It will not work in the dark, so it still requires an external source of energy (in the form of light in this case) to function.

It is a very interesting toy to play with though. I still have mine that I bought, what, 30 years ago?

Yes, a very cool device:

http://www.sell.com/222JDH

I think I have one of these, deep.

I'm going to dig it out, hitch it up to a generator, and my energy needs will be solved.

Hello Bricky,

That's it! The advantage of having Encyclopedias, is that I can look through them until I find this which you have pictured. But, I need to know the inventor and the item, to start a search on-line! Used to have Encyclopedias, but gave them to someone.

I think it a great idea to connect it to a generator. Tell me when you have finished OK? I will then send you a 'white stick', as some intuition tells me the house will be pretty dim!

You are cruel, you show me the picture, but do not tell me what it is? ggggrrrwwwww.

Take care and thanks!

Hello Bricky,

Now I really do feel like an idiot..........Can you find one for me, or shall I look in the mirror? (Not a pretty site!)

How can I miss your link when there was so little text? But I did.

Thanks, I know what it is now.

Hello DVader1000:

Thank for the explanation. The site is pretty interesting!

I tried years ago to get one from a science Museum (I think), anyway, they wrote back and said they no longer sent them out by post or other shipping as they had too many break.

It just looks fascinating though..............

Take care...............

Hi Babybear,

You're welcome. you can get a radiometer from amazon.com at the following website: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=radiometer&x=10&y=19

I bought mine from a magic shop, so you might try them too.

Hello DVader1000:

thanks for the link. I am going there now............

As fast as a speeding bullet!..............Well, a bullet taped to a snail anyway.............See, I'm gone

In order to run forever with no energy input other than the initial start-up, there can be no energy dissipation by the machine. This can only occur in the complete absence of friction. Friction in this sense is not limited to two solid surfaces rubbing together, but it also refers to rubbing against (having to move) air out of its way. So for instance if you built a cart with frictionless wheels and tires, and you gave it a push to get it started, it would still eventually come to a stop because it would constantly dissipate energy pushing air out of its way as it moved along. Assuming of course, a level roadway.

Perhaps the most success we have had giving something an initial push and then watching it glide for a long distance is Pioneer 10 launched into space in the 1970s, which has been gliding for decades now and is outside our solar system. Will it glide forever? Most likely at some time it will be captured by the gravitational pull of a nearby star and pulled into an orbit. But even if that did not occur, it would eventually lose velocity because even the "vacuum" of space isn't empty - there is something like one atom per cc out there, and given enough time (theoretically) it would give up its motion to the many atoms it "pushed" out of its way. BTW, that exact phenomenon is happening to our home planet earth. The time it takes to revolve around the sun is slowly increasing, because the earth is slowing down due to frictional drag. You need the accuracy and stability of an atomic clock to measure the effect, but it is there.

Hello emc_c:

In order to run forever with no energy input other than the initial start-up.

I understand there is 'friction' even at the molecular scale, though that has more to do with the miniscule electrical forces, and, perhaps forces we have yet to discover?

I think it would be great if we could get something moving that would last hours and really amazine to get something go for a year. As I have said in other posts I realise perpetual motion is a no starter but, to get someing happening that may not actually be visible even, ..............it just interests me.

Thanks for the post.

Take care...........

Perpetual motion itself is not the problem (Just take a laser pointer, aim at the sky, fire a burst, and remember to not hit any celestial bodies). The question always boils down to whether there can be any use made of such motion. That is, can a perpetual motion device do any useful work? The answer, based solely on several hundred years of absolutely unanimous experimental data is no.

Perpetual motion devices come in two flavors:

The first kind ignores conservation of energy and gets more out than was put in. Typical machines include the ones that use gravity to pull an object down a slope with enough energy to do some work and then lift the object back up. Although there is no first principle written on a stone tablet and delivered by Willard Gibbs that guarantees conservation of energy, there are perhaps hundreds of millions of mechanical, electrical, thermal, etc devices in everyday use that demonstrate this principle. No rational person has ever seen this to not be true.

The second kind pulls energy out of the surroundings, perhaps a magnetic field, a gravitational field, or the latest - zero point energy. This does not violate conservation of energy. If you can manage to get heat to flow from a cold object to a warm object and the cold object gets colder as a result, that's OK so far as energy goes. The problem here is entropy, the measure of multiplicities (or disorder usually). We think that there is no reason to ever expect to see a pile of sawdust reassemble itself into a tree, or a sandy beach turn into a great stone cliff.

At the quantum level, perpetual motion of the second kind might occur, but we don't expect much out of this in the macro world. For example, zero point energy density has been estimated to require something (if my memory serves me) like a cube 4 km on a side to contain 1 Joule. Try running a power plant of that!

Superconductors do show almost eternal currents and might seem to satisfy the requirement (until you consider the need to keep them cold and away from fields, etc).

Hello TVP45:

The second kind pulls energy out of the surroundings, perhaps a magnetic field, a gravitational field, or the latest - zero point energy.

I like your points. I was thinking more along the lines of the 'second' flavour.

I know true perpetual motion is not possible. Even on a molecular scale. But, I have a Pendulum Clock. I was thinking if you had a counter weight above' perhaps' and two springs arranged so the swinging bottom weight of the pendulum would just get enough energy to return the pendulum to the other spring and, so continue the motion.

I visited the site mention by another whose name escapes me, (sorry to them), and there was a star shaped thing arranged to fold it's blades at one point in its ration on a spindle. It is a pity there is no moving image of it. It would be clever even if it could work for several minutes. Have you seen it?

Take care and any more thoughts are very welcome.

There have been many attempts over the century's to do this. Take a look at a few here:

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm

Hi, BB,

There is one point that has not been mentioned so far - Entropy.

All ordered systems, like this Perpetual Motion machine has to fight entropy. That is why, even with super-conductivity, the cryogenics of which are quiet plentiful in the near vacuum of space, the machine must, eventually, succumb to the law of randomness or chaos, i.e. entropy.

Hope you're Okay,

/Ari (Orpheuse)

Hello Ari,

I hope you are fine?

I had not though to much about entropy. But, even 'energy' derived from another body, say two magnets, will lose energy each time they transfer energy. To some degree that is heat energy to reach equilibrium. But I had not thought about that.

I was just thinking of a human lifetime. If an 'engine' maybe with no moving parts could get that initial 'push', then discounting friction (I know you can't) and any air pressure, it would have been nice to get something working with no apparent input?

I know they will end up entropic, but, somethings are kind of like 'perpetual' at a molecular scale. It just depends on the substance as to how fast entropy has an effect?

I was explaining valences to a Family member, and in doing so I was amazed at the 'strength' of atoms. There is an awful lot of energy there, which is why the atom bomb is so destructive, even though maybe a fraction of the atoms actually 'explode'? I know that strength is at unbelievable short distance but, there is an awful of atoms out there to interact!

Thanks for the post. Your last question.........................no I am not.

I am just keeping going, becoming entropic I guess. I have done work on here but, find it hard to think sometimes. I know you know....................And I will answer the second half of your letter when I can, sorry Ari.

Take care yourself...................

Loosely speaking, there are all sorts of examples of "perpetual motion": solar system, electrons spinning around a nucleus, or even extremely precise low-friction flywheels, etc. etc. When we say perpetual motion "machine" however, we suggest that there is some intent beyond "using" the machine to tell time (by counting revolutions). As soon as we try to extract any useful energy from such a machine, then the part you are ignoring (the initial push) is, of course, the critical part: the energy you get out will be less than the energy you put in, (or in a fictional "perfect" world -- in other words a world in which planets, for example, kept moving at the same speed, and in which entropy did not apply) would equal the amount you put in.

There are all sorts of interesting possibilities for making devices that effectively run forever without any readily apparent source of energy. For instance many of us have made crystal radios: stick a wire in the air, and get mechanical work out: it is easy to imagine hooking a crankshaft to the diaphragm of a crystal radio earphone and using the resulting circular motion to power a tiny fan... enough antennas and you could power a larger fan. Here, the source of energy is quite apparent to anyone who thinks about such things, but it could "seem" free.

Foucault pendulums are a good example of of a machine that appears to be perpetual motion. Tides are an obvious and powerful one. Solar cells are a good example of of a device we could call perpetual motion -- and we can actually get useful work out (but of course, we are simply burning the fuel a long way away).

So no, there is nothing that keeps going on its own even if we ignore the initial push, and if we actually want to make use of such a device, then the initial push is what we are using. If we simply want to observe, to tell time, then the earth's rotation is hard to beat: In fact, it makes me want to sing... Sunrise, sunset...

Hello Ken,

I like the way you write.

Perhaps I should have said "almost perpetual"?

You make it seem almost possible and then 'splat', you hit with truth! I mention in another post about the clock pendulum that could have springs to give it that little extra bounce on each swing.

If the 'machine', device, apparatus, whatever can supply its own energy just enough to keep going. I no it is not possible, and the reason I mention 'that push' is, that people say perpetual motion is not possible because you need to put that shove in to get it moving? Really appreciate your post Ken.

Thank you...........

Hi, BB,

How are you doing, little buddy?

It occurred to me, at 04:00 this morning, that if we live in an oscillating Universe, that would be a Perpetual Motion Machine, wouldn't it?

What do you think?

I hope all is a little better - do not make decisions regarding Occult issues using mundane principles - call me first!

/Ari (Orpheuse)

Hello Orpheuse:

With some of the more outrageous ideas about the planets, I can't see how they can ever get definitive answers. I feel it is all sometimes just 'made to fit' and any finer detail is left by the wayside, and sometimes those little bits that go to male the whole are found. What it is in my eyes, and I am talking of just the more outlandish ideas now. They are studied over and judges and measured by way and devices man himself has made.............Need I say more.............

I am felling a little better thank you my friend. I could get now email for two or maybe three days, and I am not answering it in order, so I have just found this after deleting a lot of the previous emails.

Take care............