 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / November 2010Why this perpetual motion won't work?
Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? Connect in a loop a resistor, a diode and a capacitor. Thermal fluctuations in the resistor would be "chosen" in one direction by the diode and would charge the capacitor whose energy we would be able to use to do a work. What is my error? > Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > What is my error? Your design fails to include the heat reservoir from which the resistor draws heat. The resistor would have to absorb heat in order to maintain its output of the necessary thermal fluctuations. The work obtained from the capacitor could not suffice to restore this heat. > > Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > obtained from the capacitor could not suffice to restore this > heat. My construction does not suggest to specifically heat the resistor. Why the temperature of the environment is not enough? > My construction does not suggest to specifically heat the resistor. > > Why the temperature of the environment is not enough? You asked about your error. Your error is that the heat source is not included in your design. Therefore, you will fool yourself into believing that you have achieved some sort of perpetual motion when all you are doing is taking heat from a source (the environment or any other source) of which you are not aware. > > My construction does not suggest to specifically heat the resistor. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > all you are doing is taking heat from a source (the environment > or any other source) of which you are not aware. My question: Why fluctuations caused by the temperature of the environment are not enough? Nobody answered my question. >My question: Why fluctuations caused by the temperature of the >environment are not enough? If it depends on the variation of the temperature of the environment, it may work but it's not a perpetual motion machine. -- Richard >> > My construction does not suggest to specifically heat the resistor. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Nobody answered my question. Then be glad and send your thanks to Nobody. w. > My question: Why fluctuations caused by the temperature of the > environment are not enough? > Nobody answered my question. Direct answers do not stimulate learning and thought. Scientists cannot petition God for the answer to the secrets of the universe. They must discover the answer for themselves. What you have proposed is a *solar powered* device. I have a solar powered calculator sitting on my desktop. It doesn't need batteries. It doesn't need gasoline, propane, or other fuels. But it operates continuously whenever I need to use it. It doesn't even need to be cranked or wound. Is this perpetual motion? Maybe the marketing experts should advertise it as such. > > My question: Why fluctuations caused by the temperature of the > > environment are not enough? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Is this perpetual motion? Maybe the marketing experts should > advertise it as such. no free lunch > > My question: Why fluctuations caused by the temperature of the > > environment are not enough? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Is this perpetual motion? Maybe the marketing experts should > advertise it as such. You said it first Charges its battery on solar power. I have solar on my shed roof and it charges my tracter battery I like mocking bird best. Its fun to watch TreBert > > > My construction does not suggest to specifically heat the resistor. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Nobody answered my question. I specialize my question: Why this won't work when the temperature of all parts of the scheme is the same? > On Oct 23, 12:14 am, Victor Diego <passag...@live.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Nobody answered my question. I specialize my question: Why this won't work when the temperature of all parts of the scheme is the same? =========================================== Because you have your head up your arse where you can only see your own sh.t. Start swallowing it so that goes around the system indefinitely and keeps you alive. > Why this won't work when the temperature of all parts of the scheme is > the same? Will it work or won't it work? Don't know, but it's not perpetual motion. Have a look at Maxwell's demon. > > Why this won't work when the temperature of all parts of the scheme is > > the same? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Have a look at Maxwell's demon. I've heard about Maxwell's demon. But I don't understand the exact reason why a simple diode won't work as a Maxwell's demon. I know it won't work by the second law of thermodynamics, but don't see the exact reason it does not work in this particular case. <But I don't understand the exact reason why a simple diode won't work >as a Maxwell's demon. <I know it won't work by the second law of thermodynamics, but don't <see the exact reason it does not work in this particular case. Diodes require a forward bias to turn them on. 0.6 volt for silicon , 0.2 volts for germanium. background temperature fluctuations in any resistor cannot come close to these values, no current will flow. > Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > What is my error? Likely in sleeping through high school science is the base error. Where is the energy source to get "Thermal fluctuations in the resistor"?  SignatureJim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. because you didn't feed Maxwell's Demon in your circuit; the "fluctuations" cause capacitative & inductive back-reactions etc. etc. &c. thus: sorry; http://21stcenturysciencetech.com -- all kinds of contrarian & historical science research! thus: FEMA is under the authority of the "Federal Reserve Board," which was modeled by "Colonel" House and Woody Wilson on the Federal Reserve Board, of England. thus: why is it called "fossilized fuelsTM?..." exactly; it's a God-am tradename. thus: all I can say is, a) a reading of Youing's 2PX should clear-up the whole "problem" of Newton's fake & useless theory of photons that are massless and momentumless & again, useless; b) give electrons a chance for "electromagnetism," before resorting to an aethertheoreticalapproach, tee-hee! thus: is it clear that clockworks have angular momenta, as well as "atoms" with angular momenta, that are all limited by the speed of light -- not its velocity? http://everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf thus: some folk neglect to give the "real one," which is 1.0000..., or "an infinite representation." the sole ambiguity of "nines" in "The Decimals" was created and explained by Simon Stevin in the 15th cce, and thence widely adopted in commerce, but you can get around it -- sort-of -- by using base-one, which cannot have this ambiguity (nor decimal places .-) thus: in projective geometry, there are two essential things: a) a "perspectivity" and a "projectivity," one of which is just a series of the other ... I always forget that, but it's "just linear algebra." --les ducs d'oil sont Beyondeesh PetroleumeeshTM! http://tarpley.net --Light, A History, incl. Descartesian silliness "proving" Snell's law!... http://wlym.com > Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > What is my error? You don't need the capacitor. If a diode were capable of rectifying thermal noise into a current, you could use that current directly to power a circuit. This is an electronic implementation of the "Brownian Ratchet" idea. This machine will not produce work unless the diode and the resistor are kept at different temperatures, and in the process the circuit will transfer energy from the resistor's environment to the diode's as long as the resistor is warmer than the diode. Remember that the diode has thermal noise in proportion to its temperature, just like the resistor does. When the temperature at the diode is the same as the temperature at the resistor, the noise at the diode cancels out the noise from the resistor, on average. Once the temperature difference reaches zero, no more work will be done and no current will flow. In order to maintain the temperature difference between the diode and the resistor, energy must be added to the system. Thus, it is not a perpetual motion machine, but a heat engine. Some links: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet#Why_it_fails - http://elmer.unibas.ch/bm/index.html (Java applet simulating a ratchet) -o (You may want to explore the reasons that Peltier-Seebeck devices can't be used to extract work from ambient heat.) Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> wrote in news:74eb4931-493e-4e30-a72c- 4e4b62206b20@d17g2000yqm.googlegroups.com: > Why this perpetual motion machine of the second kind won't work? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > What is my error? http://numericana.com/answer/demon.htm#diode http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet > Victor Porton<porton@narod.ru> wrote in news:74eb4931-493e-4e30-a72c- > 4e4b62206b20@d17g2000yqm.googlegroups.com: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet There are a couple of devices/ways you can get extremely small currents out of...however they are not perpetual motion machines as you are talking about....and example is a crystal set...which is powered by radio waves that are all around you....a crystal set is similar to your resistor diode idea....with headphones being the resistor.... look up "crystal radio set" on google and you can find all sorts of simple and complicated circuits....and explanations of how they work.. hope helps...have fun...sno SignatureCorrect Scientific Terminology: Hypothesis - a guess as to why or how something occurs Theory - a hypothesis that has been checked by enough experiments to be generally assumed to be true. Law - a hypothesis that has been checked by enough experiments in enough different ways that it is assumed to be truer then a theory. Note: nothing is proven in science, things are assumed to be true. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.