Perpetual motion does exsist

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by questor

If they do not stop, would this not be perpetual motion?

IIRC, No. Electrons are not an isolated system. They do require energy to move, and that energy comes from elsewhere. The very idea of perpetual motion is that no energy inputs are required.

What you've done is equivalent to asking if the planets orbits around the sun are perpetual motion or if the suns motion around the galaxy is perpetual. They are not, and it does require the transformation of energy to make them move. That is an input to the system that defeats the misappropriation of the term perpetual.

[kanuck]

Someone did make a perpetual motion machine. or a ball that is just decreasing in speed so slowly it's impossible to see with the naked eye?

just look up perpetual motion on youtube and you'll see a ball rotating on rails.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by kanuck

Someone did make a perpetual motion machine. or a ball that is just decreasing in speed so slowly it's impossible to see with the naked eye?

If it's decreasing in speed, it is not perpetual. It will eventually stop due to friction, air resistance, etc.

[modest]

Originally Posted by kanuck

Someone did make a perpetual motion machine. or a ball that is just decreasing in speed so slowly it's impossible to see with the naked eye?

just look up perpetual motion on youtube and you'll see a ball rotating on rails.

kanuck, if you've read this thread you'll see the point made many times over that what you're saying ( like a clock pendulum) is not perpetual motion and certainly not a "perpetual motion machine". Such a machine would get useful energy perpetually, or from nothing. A "perpetual motion machine" violates the laws of thermodynamics and no one in the history of humanity has successfully made one - not even on youtube.

~modest

[kanuck]

I'm not making an argument, to be honest it was a rather useless post. I don't have enough posts yet to put up links for some reason. I was just wondering is the contraption I was speaking of was a perpetual motion machine, but I can't post the link....

[modest]

PM me the link so we can show why it isn't perpetual motion.

~modest

[modest]

YouTube - Perpetual Motion

Modification of a clock pendulum. Instead of moving hands on a clock face, he's moving a ball in a circle with magnets. Many parts here including the ball itself are subject to friction causing heat meaning this machine will not run perpetually (forever). *clocks have to be wound*

~modest

[kanuck]

I don't know much about thermodynamics, so this post may be useless, but what if this machine was somehow hooked up to use that little bit of heat production to aid in the continuous motion of the ball? would it still lose energy?

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by kanuck

I don't know much about thermodynamics, so this post may be useless, but what if this machine was somehow hooked up to use that little bit of heat production to aid in the continuous motion of the ball? would it still lose energy?

Yes. You can not use the lost heat with 100% efficiency, so the system would lose energy.

[modest]

Originally Posted by kanuck

I don't know much about thermodynamics, so this post may be useless, but what if this machine was somehow hooked up to use that little bit of heat production to aid in the continuous motion of the ball? would it still lose energy?

According to the second law of thermodynamics: "It is impossible to convert heat completely into work". So, the quick answer is that your proposition doesn't amount to perpetual motion. If there is any friction and no addition of useful energy from outside the system - then the apparatus will eventually stop.

~modest