[CraigD]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Have you ever noticed that the sun comes up and the sun goes down while the moon goes around the earth. The stars and galaxies are also in motion. This is convincing evidence of perpetual motion or motion that never stops.

This is not the usual meaning of the phrase “perpetual motion”.

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Albert Einstein wrote a book called time warp I have never read it, but, a time warp, suggests that motion are different speeds while overall motion is constant.

I believe I’ve seen complete bibliographies of all the writings of Einstein, none of which mention a book called time warp.

Please provide a link or reference backing up you claim.

Perhaps you’re thinking of Kip Thorne’s book “Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy”? Or Richard O’Brian’s song “Time Warp”?

Originally Posted by ryan2006

I said the universe went through a wormhole and my model of the universe is eternal

Please back up your claim with links or references

Originally Posted by ryan2006

O.K. Here it goes! A magnetic spherical ball that has an outer thickness and it hollow on the inside. Two options from there. One, a magnetic liquid solution inside the hollow set into orbit around the earth. Second option, magnetic balls inside the hollow. Conductors run through the outer shell. so that as it orbits it is creating electromagnetic energy.

Have you ever actually put small magnets of any shape, suspended or not suspended in a liquid, inside a large hollow magnet of any shape?

I suggest you do. I believe you’d observe something that would surprise you.

[ryan2006]

O.k. then light isn't constant than right, I'm merely pointing out that light is a constant and that light is always in motion. Are you saying that everything is going to come to a stop, even light? Cause if you are then in the bible it stays that the stars will fall from the sky so you would be agreeing with the bible I think? As far as a new thread I don't think it is necessary. Unless you would like me to talk about God as the creator of past, present, and future. No one still could answer if light is constant then how would motion end where there would be no future.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

O.k. then light isn't constant than right, I'm merely pointing out that light is a constant and that light is always in motion. Are you saying that everything is going to come to a stop, even light? Cause if you are then in the bible it stays that the stars will fall from the sky so you would be agreeing with the bible I think? As far as a new thread I don't think it is necessary. Unless you would like me to talk about God as the creator of past, present, and future. No one still could answer if light is constant then how would motion end where there would be no future.

Light is not a single entity, it is composed of many separate waves and photons any one of which can and will stop when it hits anything. If you want to talk about god you need to take this to the theology forum, you can talk about god all you want there and talking about god or the lack there of doesn't bother me in the least.

[ryan2006]

O.K I'll refrain from talking about God here, but then I will have to take the position that energy can not be created nor destroyed which doesn't bother me because I can argue from both perspectives at least when I am free to speak my mind I feel better about it.

Anyway, according to the scientific perspective motion is still constant. And you say it runs into things and stop. Untrue, it merely bends around something. Further explain what you mean by all light coming to a complete stop and give a very long explanation without quoting me because I would be really interested to see exactly where you get your information and why you go against the laws of Sir Isacc Newton and Albert Einstein.

[Overdog]

It depends on which way the Universe will end. There are a number of theory's as to how the universe might end, but the answer right now is we don't really know.

Ultimate fate of the universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Scientists and engineers accept the possibility that the current understanding of the laws of physics may be incomplete or incorrect; a perpetual motion device may not be impossible, but overwhelming evidence would be required to justify rewriting the laws of physics: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Perpetual motion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is your extraordinary evidence?

[Mercedes Benzene]

**Moved to Strange Claims Forums**

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Anyway, according to the scientific perspective motion is still constant. And you say it runs into things and stop. Untrue, it merely bends around something. Further explain what you mean by all light coming to a complete stop and give a very long explanation without quoting me because I would be really interested to see exactly where you get your information and why you go against the laws of Sir Isacc Newton and Albert Einstein.

It's actually Newton's 1st law, "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it." that you're referring to but it is because this law is true that the motion of everything stops eventually. If a body traveling through interstellar space never encountered any dust or other matter, any gravity or any other external forces then Newton's law of motion says that body will remain in motion. The fact is that nothing can move for eternity through the universe without encountering other matter or the resulting forces of other matter and it is this external force that eventually halts a body in motion.

As for "all light" you must consider that all light is comprised of individual photons and each comes to rest as it encounters matter. Even a photon striking a mirror comes to rest and another is emitted in its place.

In short, no one thing remains in motion for eternity, perpetually, because everything encounters external forces. Some things may seem perpetual on the scale of our lifetime but on the time scale of the Universe it just isn't so.

[ryan2006]

Yes, motion won't change if acted on by another force, but are you considering that everything is in motion. My interpretation of Sir Isaac Newton had in mind objects not large bodies such as the universe. Scientific evidence is needed to make this claim extroadinary not a "strange claim" I was reprimanded two point for not backing up my claim with evidence. Now you say that light stops. No it doesn't. It bent around the sun when gravity proved to bend light, it refracts and it bounces off object, but it is always moving. Where do you get your information? I got mine from school both k-12 and college of which I spent 3 and 1/2 years. No, I am no expert and I realize that you folks don't like when someone comes along and tells you something different. My simple evidence has been that light speed is constant at 186,000 m/sec2 and light motion is a constant speed which means that perpetual motion exists. However, if the future can not be explained then is it perpetual if the future can not be proved to exist? My explanation; does a tree in a forest make a sound if their is no one around to here it. Well, plenty of stars have exploded light years away from us. The light won't reach planet earth until light years later so the stars we see now were born light years ago. We weren't their to see the explosion but we are now. I am a thinker, first of all I need to come up with a hypothesis to reach some kind of investigation to see wether or not it is true. So, now that I am working on a workable hypothesis I just need to investigate a little more perhaps a lifetime. If I am creating a new law here don't brush this thread off as "strange claims" because it is science I went to a religious college that studied science so please forgive me if I include God in my work.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ryan2006

Yes, motion won't change if acted on by another force, but are you considering that everything is in motion. My interpretation of Sir Isaac Newton had in mind objects not large bodies such as the universe. Scientific evidence is needed to make this claim extroadinary not a "strange claim" I was reprimanded two point for not backing up my claim with evidence. Now you say that light stops. No it doesn't. It bent around the sun when gravity proved to bend light, it refracts and it bounces off object, but it is always moving. Where do you get your information? I got mine from school both k-12 and college of which I spent 3 and 1/2 years. No, I am no expert and I realize that you folks don't like when someone comes along and tells you something different. My simple evidence has been that light speed is constant at 186,000 m/sec2 and light motion is a constant speed which means that perpetual motion exists. However, if the future can not be explained then is it perpetual if the future can not be proved to exist? My explanation; does a tree in a forest make a sound if their is no one around to here it. Well, plenty of stars have exploded light years away from us. The light won't reach planet earth until light years later so the stars we see now were born light years ago. We weren't their to see the explosion but we are now. I am a thinker, first of all I need to come up with a hypothesis to reach some kind of investigation to see wether or not it is true. So, now that I am working on a workable hypothesis I just need to investigate a little more perhaps a lifetime. If I am creating a new law here don't brush this thread off as "strange claims" because it is science I went to a religious college that studied science so please forgive me if I include God in my work.

Well then, that explains why your scientific expertise exceeds everyone else here. I bow to the inevitable and concede defeat.

[ryan2006]

Oh please, Mr. Moontanman! I merely think about things. Just like everyone else I am trying to come up with something new. In this case it is a hypothesis. I feel since what I am writing is being copyrighted however that all I have to do is word it differently when I take it to the copyright office in some book. However, I felt like I wanted to share. Like and kid in class everyone wants to share and that is how I look at the world. Now, my hypothesis may or may not be a valid one. It mean there synthesis of two hypothesis'. First Newton Gravity with Newtonian physics and then Einstein came along and proved otherwise. Now don't bow yourself although I know you were kidding just try and work on disproving my hypothesis and don't throw this in the trash can.