Mordred Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Insulting the people that are trying to show you basic physics will not help your case. Thus far this thread I count not less than four physicists on this thread of various fields tell you your wrong. I also agree this has nothing to do with perpetual motion/energy. For the same reasons provided by the others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Want to keep your mind, let rule alkohol you find excuse me, if you wanna keep your mind, lets rule alkohol, thats tight so you must be the most stupid physicist in the world and you should think about to sue your teachers , look here http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/energy/Lesson-1/Definition-and-Mathematics-of-Work or here https://www.google.de/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1BLWB_enDE566DE566&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=physical%20work%20in%20horizontal%20direction and now, please stop bothering the folks here You claimed that any physicist would support your idea, but that was wrong. Now you're calling professional physicists "stupid" because they don't support you? So far, everyone here has been very civil and helpful in trying to show you some knowledge. Please stop making this personal, and you'll see that people here are criticizing your idea, not you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 ! Moderator Note Anyone who's a physicist will support me unless they're dumb is not a valid way of rebutting valid criticism. Please address the scientific concerns raised by members with scientific reasoning of your own, or this will be closed. As well, do not insult other members here. This sort of behavior will find your account suspended.Do not respond to this within the thread. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 ask simply a physicist of your own choice, he or she will explain it to you ! you said "Sorry, I must be stupid" ok, I agree with this, and I repeat, ask a Physicist, if you want to become smarter !!! please bother me no more, until all of the criticals in this thread ask a real physicist, and I pay everybody 1. 000.000 $, if you find one real physicist, which is disputing this i think, you are right, but all physicists in this world will declaire you, that you are wrong. I am sure, you dont believe me, but try going over study, so ask only one physicist, and you will see .... Ask ANY physicist? so you must be the most stupid physicist in the world and you should think about to sue your teachers Or only a TRUE physicist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 you bored, the runing machine was presented succesfully for several times see here http://www.hwcv.net/%C3%BCber-uns/medien/ My German reading skills are not up to the task. One might wonder why such a breakthrough did not get wider coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HWW Posted May 13, 2015 Author Share Posted May 13, 2015 it doesnt make sense to contend about a Pm. the text says essentially that the uplift of floaters is in a relation to the surface. thats new, or can anybody proove, that this is already known, not to mention, that a floater rises in a capillary tube ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 it doesnt make sense to contend about a Pm. the text says essentially that the uplift of floaters is in a relation to the surface. thats new, or can anybody proove, that this is already known, not to mention, that a floater rises in a capillary tube ? If we didn't already know that the height of a floater changed with the raising and lowering of the surface level, we wouldn't have flush toilets. That's how they work. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HWW Posted May 13, 2015 Author Share Posted May 13, 2015 surface means surface tension Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Red arrows are not a substitute for actual experiment. Everything seems nice on paper, because you can overlook details. But there will be losses in the system; it will take work to move the pieces around that you have not accounted for. The only proof of perpetual motion is a working device. No outside energy sources. You can't just show one part of it. They read more like a curiosity. In newspapers of that year there is also quite a bit of criticism, including from a number of German blogs, but also from a German provider of certification services. The author has in a few cases threatened with lawsuits and in case of the certification service (TUEV) managed to get an injunction to prohibit them to state that there is no perpetuum mobile. I.e. it is more a human interest story rather than a science story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) If this were a science story then would we not approach it more rigourously? 1) Theoretical perpetual motion is required, not forbidden by the laws of mechanics. 2) The laws of Thermodynamics proscibe two types of perpetual motion machines or processes. The first proscription concerns the first law and I would hazard a guess that the problem here is the age old error of improperly defining the system boundary, leading to inappropriate conclusions. The second proscription concerns only cyclic processes or machines. This proscription does not apply to parts of a cycle. If I could obtain a proper description of what the OP is proposing I could comment further but I fail to see either a definite system boundary or a cyclic machine or process described in the material presented. Edited May 13, 2015 by studiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HWW Posted May 13, 2015 Author Share Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) @charon thats right, and no car in germany may drive, if the TÜV doesnt give an all right. and a high german court decided, that this is a Pm, even the mighty TÜV tried to disprove this by hook or by crook , because the TÜV had to pay the Court costs in this case. but the fellows herein, are much more clever than well educated german engineers. congratulations. Edited May 13, 2015 by HWW -5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 ! Moderator Note HWW, are you going to provide any science in answer to the critiques raised here, or can I close this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HWW Posted May 14, 2015 Author Share Posted May 14, 2015 i think its better to delete this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrP Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 Oh - don't delete it - it was funny, I laughed so hard the other night during our conversation. ;-) I had a great time. I haven't been very active here for a couple of years, but I do remember that we would quite often people pop up with ideas for a PM machine.. I am SURE that some of them were prankster seeing how long they can keep the conversation going round in circles. It could be quite good fun for a bit until it got annoying, then you could just leave the conversation and let someone else take over. I did wonder the other evening if you were joking or not when you continually defended the claims that several people easily poked holes in. My ex met a builder the other year and he was convinced he was going to make an engine out of magnets.. he explained his idea to me and I told him that it was a nice idea but it doesn't work (we've all tried it and it has been studied to death) - they both rounded on me saying that I needed to keep an open mind... I don't mind having an open mind, but some things we know for sure and they aren't going to change just because someone else tries the exact same thing. Open mind is good.... but not SO open that your brain actually falls right out. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 i think its better to delete this ? ! Moderator Note Couldn't agree more. Thread closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts