StrangerPilgrim Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Hello, www.squidoo.com/pinwheelgenerator . Thanks -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Your idea is dashed upon the rocks that comprise the laws of thermodynamics. It won't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 I know Swansont already made this point, I just like the clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy0UBpagsu8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted May 10, 2011 Share Posted May 10, 2011 Hello, www.squidoo.com/pinwheelgenerator . Thanks I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Do you have a working model of your machine? If not, you'll have to build one in order to convince the "scientific types" like Swansont and John C. (and, perhaps, a few others). The up side for you, of course, is that once you build one such machine you'll never have to worry about paying an electric bill again. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerPilgrim Posted May 12, 2011 Author Share Posted May 12, 2011 The idol worship of the laws of thermodynamics is unjustified. These laws have been found to be circumventable. It is unfortunate that so many are conditioned into thinking they are eternal truths. Such are those who attend flat earth society meetings, that argue heavier than air craft cannot fly, cannot fly above storms, cannot surpass the speed of sound. Between blood-lettings for health swansont (probable first year student) should actually study this design, or stay in the disproved past. The future will go on without you. Present scientists have always been the greatest hinderance to future science. Your idea is dashed upon the rocks that comprise the laws of thermodynamics. It won't work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMcC Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 As csmyth3025 says - build one and demonstrate its properties. I am very sceptical. I guess I am one of the "few others!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I repeat my question: Have you built a working model of your pinwheel generator? Chris 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 The idol worship of the laws of thermodynamics is unjustified. These laws have been found to be circumventable. It is unfortunate that so many are conditioned into thinking they are eternal truths. Such are those who attend flat earth society meetings, that argue heavier than air craft cannot fly, cannot fly above storms, cannot surpass the speed of sound. Between blood-lettings for health swansont (probable first year student) should actually study this design, or stay in the disproved past. The future will go on without you. Present scientists have always been the greatest hinderance to future science. You are long on words but short on evidence. It's put up or shut up time — I join with the others who ask if you've built this thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyman Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 (edited) The idol worship of the laws of thermodynamics is unjustified. These laws have been found to be circumventable. You can try to circumvent scientific arguments all you want, but that won't make your perpetual motion machine any more feasible. In physics, a conservation law states that a particular measurable property of an isolated physical system does not change as the system evolves. One particularly important physical result concerning conservation laws is Noether's Theorem, which states that there is a one-to-one correspondence between conservation laws and differentiable symmetries of physical systems. For example, the conservation of energy follows from the time-invariance of physical systems, and the fact that physical systems behave the same regardless of how they are oriented in space gives rise to the conservation of angular momentum. A partial listing of conservation laws that are said to be exact laws, or more precisely have never been shown to be violated: Conservation of mass-energy Conservation of linear momentum Conservation of angular momentum Conservation of electric charge Conservation of color charge Conservation of weak isospin Conservation of probability density CPT symmetry (combining charge, parity and time conjugation) Lorentz symmetry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_law The conservation laws are particularly robust from a mathematical perspective. Noether's theorem, which was proven mathematically in 1915, states that any conservation law can be derived from a corresponding continuous symmetry of the action of a physical system. This means that if the laws of physics (not simply the current understanding of them, but the actual laws, which may still be undiscovered) and the various physical constants remain invariant over time — if the laws of the universe are fixed — then the conservation laws must hold. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion_machine It is unfortunate that so many are conditioned into thinking they are eternal truths. IMHO it is unfortunate that so many are conditioned into thinking they can violate observed laws of nature. The law that entropy always increases, holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. — Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World (1927) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion_machine Edited May 13, 2011 by Spyman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerPilgrim Posted May 13, 2011 Author Share Posted May 13, 2011 If it is evidence you want I have given it to you in the form of the complete plans of the design itself, nothing missing. The first of the two things you should have noticed is that this mechanism has essentially two movements, both deadfall so no energy is required to set them in motion. The generation stage is the weight ball's deadfall down through the lower cylinder-no energy required. The second movement is the deadfall/spring assist of the 90 degree rotation, like an overweighted wheel-again no energy required, the 90 degree rotation is not engaging in the energy production, its just turning the machine. The energy production that is taking place with the wheel rotating and turning the generator is away and removed from the working of the machine, it is an addition to the machine that the machine does not need in order to operate. The energy being produced is not needed to run the machine therefore there is no entrophy, no taking away from the energy created that disallows there being enough left to reset the machine. Where is the entrophy? Is it in the taking away of the weight of the ball in its descent by the friction of the flluid movement and the working of the lining against the cylinder wall? So What, it is the net weight of the ball that is producing the fluid flow after all of this entrophy. The second thing you should have noticed is that this is a compound mechanism, two seperate machines in one body, each working independent of the other. The first runs its way, then, disappears from existence, the second appears and runs its way-then disappears. There is no need for any energy to be expended in order to reset either of the two mechanisms to their respective beginning points. The thermodynamic laws have nothing to hold on to when the machine ceases to exist half way through its motion. It is a discovery that you have missed, the existence of compound mechanisms. This one has two facets and produces a perpetual motion mechanism that produces enough motive power to turn a generator. What will future compound mechanisms be able to do with twenty facets? These are a new kind of mechanism showing us that we were living in a two dimensional view this whole time, a view governed by two dimensional laws. Now we can see these two dimensional machines/laws now represent only a micro-percentage of the now possible designable machines. We were in the dark, the compound mechanism light has come on but many wish to keep their eyes shut anyway. I correct myself, present day scientists have always represented the greatest hinderance to future scientific gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMcC Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 like an overweighted wheel-again . Many people over centuries have dreamed of using an overweighted wheel to obtain perpetual motion. Perhaps you would like to see this web page. http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/overbal.htm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewmon Posted May 13, 2011 Share Posted May 13, 2011 The idol worship of the laws of thermodynamics is unjustified. ... The future will go on without you. I'm willing to take that risk. As with a religion, what will happen to me if I don't believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 If it is evidence you want I have given it to you in the form of the complete plans of the design itself, nothing missing. Plans and drawing don't have to follow the laws of nature (see MC Escher for a simple proof of that). Physical objects do. That's why a thought experiment is not proof of an idea or a rebuttal of an actual experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 "The idol worship of the laws of thermodynamics is unjustified. These laws have been found to be circumventable." http://xkcd.com/285/ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerPilgrim Posted May 14, 2011 Author Share Posted May 14, 2011 There is actually a working overweighted wheel continuously moving in france, it doesnt produce extra usable energy though. Many people over centuries have dreamed of using an overweighted wheel to obtain perpetual motion. Perhaps you would like to see this web page. http://www.lhup.edu/...eum/overbal.htm To take the risk in not believing in god you must also not believe that the atoms are inert elements, that they each think and move on there own, because inert elements can only move if some force external to them moves them, and if it moves them into patterns and systems that are predictable and repeating it must know what it is doing, it must possess a consciousness. There must be a consciousness in the external force that is manipulating the inert atoms into repeating patterns and systems. There must be a thinking power controlling the atoms if they are behaving in this way. If you don't believe in the claims for this genertor, nothing will happen to you, but those in the future, if this generator turns out to be authentic, might live diminished lives for lack of free energy. The corporations might still control their energy and food supply. I'm willing to take that risk. As with a religion, what will happen to me if I don't believe? Do you not trust your own equations? Surely you have plugged the numbers in them by now. If you do not trust your own science it is then fashion you follow. Plans and drawing don't have to follow the laws of nature (see MC Escher for a simple proof of that). Physical objects do. That's why a thought experiment is not proof of an idea or a rebuttal of an actual experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 "There is actually a working overweighted wheel continuously moving in france" http://xkcd.com/285/ again. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyman Posted May 14, 2011 Share Posted May 14, 2011 (edited) If it is evidence you want I have given it to you in the form of the complete plans of the design itself, nothing missing. This "evidence" in form of the complete plans of the design itself tells me it is NOT going to work. The first of the two things you should have noticed is, blah blah blah ... The first thing everyone should notice is that your machine can't break conservation laws since that is impossible. The second thing to notice is that your machine in a simplified version would look like a Seesaw, where the ball in the lower end is supposed to be enable to push up enough fluid to the other high side to make it will flip over. It might come as an surprise for you but gravity also acts on the fluid, making the movement stop when the ball and the fluid is in equilibrium with each other, which will be before the up side gets heavier than the low side. Forcing the ball to also use some of its potential energy to push down a spring will lower the amount of fluid even more. Conclusion, the down side is heavier from start and will therefore continue to stay heavier, the machine will simply not start to turn at all. Energy can not be created nor destroyed, only tranformed between different forms. The first runs its way, then, disappears from existence, the second appears and runs its way-then disappears. There is no need for any energy to be expended in order to reset either of the two mechanisms to their respective beginning points. The thermodynamic laws have nothing to hold on to when the machine ceases to exist half way through its motion. Wait, wait, WHAT? The machine is not only able to produce energy from nothing, is it also able to itself vanish into nothing during operation? I correct myself, present day scientists have always represented the greatest hinderance to future scientific gains. Are you really claiming that present day scientists are somehow preventing you from building this machine yourself? There is actually a working overweighted wheel continuously moving in france... Since we refused to belive your previous impossible claim, why you think we will take your word for this ridiculous one? Edited May 14, 2011 by Spyman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangerPilgrim Posted May 15, 2011 Author Share Posted May 15, 2011 Spyman, since you obviously are unable to grasp the simplicity of this mechanism this will be the last time I will communicate with you. The weight ball pushes the liquid to the top cylinder where now the ball depresses the push bar, compressing the spring as it unlocks the machine to allow for the 90 degree rotation to begin. Since both weight balls in the horizontal cylinders are near the axis they counter act eachother so now the right side cylinder's fluid adds weight to it's cylinder, where the empty left side cylinder does not. This weight, along with the energy in the spring overweights the 'seesaw' to where there are two ball weights pushing for the rotation against none pushing against, given the weight of the liquid equals the weight of the ball. A simple observation you seem unable to make, unless you are a person that for some reason needs to invent innacurate smears to detract attention away from the facts. A petro stooge possibly? This is too easy of a mechanism to not be able to understand naturally if you are an engineer of any degree. This is where you fail. This is why you have, for me, ceased to exist. Do your parents know you use their puter? This "evidence" in form of the complete plans of the design itself tells me it is NOT going to work. The first thing everyone should notice is that your machine can't break conservation laws since that is impossible. The second thing to notice is that your machine in a simplified version would look like a Seesaw, where the ball in the lower end is supposed to be enable to push up enough fluid to the other high side to make it will flip over. It might come as an surprise for you but gravity also acts on the fluid, making the movement stop when the ball and the fluid is in equilibrium with each other, which will be before the up side gets heavier than the low side. Forcing the ball to also use some of its potential energy to push down a spring will lower the amount of fluid even more. Conclusion, the down side is heavier from start and will therefore continue to stay heavier, the machine will simply not start to turn at all. Energy can not be created nor destroyed, only tranformed between different forms. Wait, wait, WHAT? The machine is not only able to produce energy from nothing, is it also able to itself vanish into nothing during operation? Are you really claiming that present day scientists are somehow preventing you from building this machine yourself? Since we refused to belive your previous impossible claim, why you think we will take your word for this ridiculous one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Spyman, since you obviously are unable to grasp the simplicity of this mechanism this will be the last time I will communicate with you. The weight ball pushes the liquid to the top cylinder where now the ball depresses the push bar, compressing the spring as it unlocks the machine to allow for the 90 degree rotation to begin. Since both weight balls in the horizontal cylinders are near the axis they counter act eachother so now the right side cylinder's fluid adds weight to it's cylinder, where the empty left side cylinder does not. This weight, along with the energy in the spring overweights the 'seesaw' to where there are two ball weights pushing for the rotation against none pushing against, given the weight of the liquid equals the weight of the ball. A simple observation you seem unable to make, unless you are a person that for some reason needs to invent innacurate smears to detract attention away from the facts. A petro stooge possibly? This is too easy of a mechanism to not be able to understand naturally if you are an engineer of any degree. This is where you fail. This is why you have, for me, ceased to exist. Do your parents know you use their puter? ! Moderator Note Posting speculations without evidence is against the rules, and repeated rules violations will lead to a suspension or banning. Personal attacks put you in the express lane. This had better stop … now. Do not derail this thread further by responding to this warning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississippichem Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 I tallied 91 on the Index: Crackpot Index Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spyman Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Spyman, since you obviously are unable to grasp the simplicity of this mechanism this will be the last time I will communicate with you. The weight ball pushes the liquid to the top cylinder where now the ball depresses the push bar, compressing the spring as it unlocks the machine to allow for the 90 degree rotation to begin. Since both weight balls in the horizontal cylinders are near the axis they counter act eachother so now the right side cylinder's fluid adds weight to it's cylinder, where the empty left side cylinder does not. This weight, along with the energy in the spring overweights the 'seesaw' to where there are two ball weights pushing for the rotation against none pushing against, given the weight of the liquid equals the weight of the ball. A simple observation you seem unable to make, unless you are a person that for some reason needs to invent innacurate smears to detract attention away from the facts. A petro stooge possibly? This is too easy of a mechanism to not be able to understand naturally if you are an engineer of any degree. This is where you fail. This is why you have, for me, ceased to exist. Do your parents know you use their puter? I think I am capable to understand how you think your machine could work, it is you who fail to realise that it is impossible to create energy. You don't understand that gravity is not going to help you unbalance the wheel in your favour, as I tried to explain for you. Since you obviously don't want to listen, I suggest that you yourself build your own machine instead of complaining how scientists ruin the world. (We are not going to spend time and money to build it for you, since we already know that it is not going to work.) I wish you good luck on your endeavor and hope you won't get to disappointed when it refuses to continuously turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 15, 2011 Share Posted May 15, 2011 Build it and prove us all wrong... I think you've probably forgotten friction though. You'll slowly loose energy out of the seesaw and it'll stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 "Spyman, since you obviously are unable to grasp the simplicity of this mechanism this will be the last time I will communicate with you" In my personal opinion this is good news. Stranger pilgrim, feel free to come back with a link to the youtube video if you get it to work. (I'm not holding my breath). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csmyth3025 Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 There is actually a working overweighted wheel continuously moving in france, it doesnt produce extra usable energy though... France is a pretty big place. Can you be a bit more specific about where, exactly, in France this device is located? Also, you must realize that if you build this machine you will not only become enormously rich, but you'll also be able to write up a big "I TOLD YOU SO!" post to all the skeptics in this forum. In addition to these two very satisfying outcomes, you'll also be described in the media as the smartest man of our time. These are temptations that I couldn't resist! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
md65536 Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 France is a pretty big place. Can you be a bit more specific about where, exactly, in France this device is located? This probably refers to the one built by Aldo Costa: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldo_Costa_(inventor) "However, as with other devices of this kind, the energy created by the unbalanced weights falling is merely equal to what's required to lift them to become unbalanced in the first place." Videos of it here: http://www.blueman.name/Des_Videos_Remarquables.php?NumVideo=2274#NAVIGATION Some explanation here: http://www.besslerwheel.com/wwwboard/messages/241.html "his wheel stalls" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now