PDA

View Full Version : This reminded me of Raaaid.....read the article.



DHC2Pilot
04-28-2007, 12:09 AM
http://farshores.org/wm05moto.htm

Apparently some Russian inventor has built a perpetual motor out of magnets. (Of course he wants to GIVE it away to the Russian government, but they don't want it.)

Zeus-cat
04-28-2007, 07:18 AM
If you read part two of the article it says the guy is changing his name to raaaidovich.

raaaid
04-28-2007, 07:29 AM
wow thanks for the link

the fact you cant find the design on the net makes me think it works

i tried making thing with magnets and they are soooo complicated

but to ponder what would happen if you melted a magnet? wouldnt achieve perpetual motion?

WWSensei
04-28-2007, 07:34 AM
Yet another magnet scam that's only been tried by about 100 other people with very little knowledge of physics. Raaaid, you can't find the design because one doesn't exist. As for melting a magnet, no you wouldn't achieve perpetual motion for two reasons:

1) heat would alter the magnet
2) perpetual motion is in violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It can't be done. It's not an untested theory but a law.

MEGILE
04-28-2007, 07:42 AM
lollerskates.com

LEBillfish
04-28-2007, 07:52 AM
Perpetual motion has already been discovered...

http://www.backstreet.demon.co.uk/oddstuff/drinkingbirds/images/drinkingbird.gif

Time to do something really important like "STOP" the voices in my head. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

raaaid
04-28-2007, 09:56 AM
conservation of energy is a principle and as such an asumption through observation, theres no way to prove so it could be wrong

the pitagoric first assumed that everything could be expressed as number, hippasus discovered that square root of two was an inconmesurable number that cant be expressed in a cypher, he got murdered for this

so then they start measuring things with compass and start using geometry and they assumed 2 paralel lines never cut

another assumption that 24 centuries later would be proven wrong in the euclidean geometry

as revolutionary that the discoverer didnt dare to publish it so itd have to wait

so we should be taught principles are asumptions and as such can be wrong instead of being an unmovable rule as could be dont cut your beard

LStarosta
04-28-2007, 10:05 AM
I built this as a science project in the 6th grade.

I can see why this must be a revelation in the ex-Soviet Union, seeing as they finally got access to electricity.

heywooood
04-28-2007, 10:05 AM
what are two parallel lines?

there is no such possiblity.

you can draw two lines on a piece of paper and call that parallel - but they are not, nor will they ever be...not even hypothetically possible in this undulating, expanding universe.

nothing can be either perfectly straight or perfectly flat here...that needs to be understood.

the two lines would have to occupy exactly the same space in exactly the same moment - and that precludes the possibilty of there being two seperate and distinct parallel lines.

this is the same reality that prevents the existence of two or more parallel universes...everyone knows there are a miriad of universes, an overlaping and intertwining meshwork of realities intersecting at the major epochs and upheavals in 'time' but they are hardly parallel.

I thought you studied this stuff raaaaaid...I'm a little disappointed frankly..

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 11:44 AM
conservation of energy is a principle and as such an asumption through observation, theres no way to prove so it could be wrong

It's actually used as an axiom on which other theories are based. These other theories also match well with observation and so the challenge would go deeper.

There are some who suggest that at the quantum level the conservation of energy might appear not to hold due to zero point energy of a vacuum, although energy would still be being conserved in reality. It is suggested that any such 'borrowing' from the zero point energy would have to be on a very very short time scale before it had to be paid back although there are some that suggest that this might be sufficient to then start a cascade that could have formed the Big Bang.

Quantum effects can cause things we observe at the macro level - electronics depends on this - but whether a series of magnets and mechanical devices could be exploiting some quantum effect and be borrowing from zero point energy at such a rate that it would actually be detectable and long lasting is highly unlikely even if borrowing from the vacuum is even possible.

See the Casimir effect for details which relates zero point energy to electromagnetics.

WWSensei
04-28-2007, 11:51 AM
Occam's Razor

1) Did someone find a way to violate the laws of physics?

2) Someone is running a scam looking for investors to bilk money out of them for a phony perpetual motion machine?

I'm going to go with option 2.

tigertalon
04-28-2007, 12:29 PM
Why is there so many attempts to build perpetuum mobile using magnets, while just a few are trying other methods (gravity, heat,...)? Because electro-magnetism is something many people know **** about. Everyone who ever read Maxwell equations and tried to understand them (let alone use them in equations) must know something like described in that article is a complete nonsense. Maxwell equations are a law, not assumption.

EURO_Snoopy
04-28-2007, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Perpetual motion has already been discovered...

http://www.backstreet.demon.co.uk/oddstuff/drinkingbirds/images/drinkingbird.gif

Time to do something really important like "STOP" the voices in my head. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Ah! the old Schrodinger ducking stool paradox, will the bird still be drinking if you turn the monitor off?

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 01:40 PM
Maxwell's equations are a very elegant way to model electromagnetism that appear to match experimental results. They also make a lot of internal sense. Whether they are 'true' is another matter.

A law of nature can be undermined by any observation that is show not to match it. As Popper said a law that states all swans are white can be a good theory up until the point a black swan is discovered. A theory must be able to be invalidated to be a valid theory.

Physics also uses models and laws which are known to not be completely correct but are useful in modeling some aspects of reality. Newton's laws of motion fit this - they are contradicted by quantum mechanics and relativity on some scales, but are still useful if you are modelling trains travelling at 50mph or something.

So something -could- come along and indicate that Maxwell's equations are in some way incomplete. But is hasn't happened yet, and if they are incomplete it is likely to be in the margins in the way Newton's laws of motion fail at the margins of the very tiny or the very large or fast. Since these perpetual motion machines seem to not be at these margins (they use very straightforward arrangements of macro level components) it is unlikely that Maxwell's equations do not apply and are either deliberately misleading or are a result of an error on the part of the creators in understanding the equations.

As a corollary, part of the problem is understanding some of these laws is not easy in the way they are formulated. E.g. quantum mechanics becomes much more straightforward using operator theory, or general relativity using tensor calculus.

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 01:42 PM
Ah! the old Schrodinger ducking stool paradox, will the bird still be drinking if you turn the monitor off?

There's a controversial new interpretation which implies that the answer to the old question "Does a falling tree make a sound if there is noone in the forest if noone is there to hear it" is "What forest?"

M_Gunz
04-28-2007, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by raaaid:
so then they start measuring things with compass and start using geometry and they assumed 2 paralel lines never cut

another assumption that 24 centuries later would be proven wrong in the euclidean geometry


In Euclidean geometry? Not in non-Euclidean geometry?

I'd like to see this one.

Next you'll tell me that scientists have proven bees can't fly!

Waldo.Pepper
04-28-2007, 04:24 PM
Flying machine powered by insect wings.

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/13s.jpg

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/223d.jpg

From here -

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/greb.htm

Aaron_GT
04-28-2007, 05:45 PM
And there was me thinking insects flew using wings.

x6BL_Brando
04-28-2007, 06:50 PM
So I can climb trees by just sitting on a barrel of monkeys? Wonderful! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B

M2morris
04-30-2007, 04:53 PM
I would like to use this thread to ask a question or two because I am too skeert to start a thread topic on it because you all might think I'm a nut case or something.
Hey I heard That! and it would be too OT.
But my son and I were talking once about how fast the astronauts are traveling in Earth orbit, which is commonly known to be 17,500mph, but then I got to thinking of how fast the Earth itself is traveling in it's orbit around the sun. I did some math using my knowl-lej; 93Million x 2 x 3.14 for a rough 584,040,000 miles of circumference, devide that by 365 for 1,600,109 miles roughly traveled in a day, devide that by 24 for MPH; 66,671 MPH
So the astronauts are not only orbiting at 17,500mph but they are also traveling at about 66,671 mph(along with all of us) But my questions are: how fast does the solar syestem go as it swirls within the galaxy, and how fast does the galaxy move in it's place in an expanding universe.?
It could be, uh, pretty dang fast I would say.

x6BL_Brando
04-30-2007, 06:06 PM
how fast does the solar system go as it swirls within the galaxy, and how fast does the galaxy move in it's place in an expanding universe.?
It could be, uh, pretty dang fast I would say.

.....posing the obvious question, will it go on for ever? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Without a regular supply of insect wings we could all be doomed....

Doomed I tell ye ... all doo-oo-oomed!

(with apologies to John Laurie)

B

raaaid
05-01-2007, 06:37 AM
the answer to that question may lie in precession

the solar system must me spinning around the black hole in the center of the galaxy because otherwise it would drop into the hole

so the answer would be 24000 years for the solar system tu complete a turn around the center of the galaxy

but for this to be true all stars of our galaxy should take the same 24000 years or otherwise the apparent position of stars would change and theres no record for such change

the next question would be does this black hole rotate around something still bigger, and does this bigger mass rotate around something still bigger?

btw this is just my oppinion according to science precesion is due to gravity of sun and moon

but if theres a black hole in the center of our galaxy as most people agrees the only way for the stars to not fall into it would be rotate around it and that could be a valid explanation of the rotation of the zodiac every 24000 years

something that backs up this theory is the fact that precesion and earths rotation have opposite sense because theres no gyroscope in which precession and rotation have opposite sense, this is extreamly odd

raaaid
05-01-2007, 07:42 AM
i dont know the position of science of weather the stars are moving or not it would be nice if someone knew

but based on the last 5000 years stellar charts all stars keep their position fixed which must have led science to conclude the stars hardly move and theres no such black hole in the center of our milky way or otherwise the closest stars to it would rotate faster than the farthest stars varying their relative position in the sky

the mayans said the source of everithing even time came from hunab ku which they represented as an spiral and nowadays we would call a black hole(how the hell did they know galaxies make spirals)

taking into account the maya calendar was far more precise than the one we use now( the gregorian) besides so many correction through the years i wouldnt be surprise they were right and us wrong

its also interesting that the maya ended their long count calendar in a winter solstice coinciding exactly with the winter solstice because i doubt we could say when is the winter solstice with a 5000 years prevision as the maya did

im looking forward for this end of the maya calendar on 2012, some say nothing will happen some something really bad, others like osmanagich discoverer of the bosnian pyramids say it will be the day humanity will be enlightened

btw i love how official science is ridiculing themselves saying this is not man made but natural formations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pm_s1_8.jpg

(form the wikipedia bosnian pyramids)

Whirlin_merlin
05-01-2007, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by raaaid:
wow thanks for the link

the fact you cant find the design on the net makes me think it works

i tried making thing with magnets and they are soooo complicated

but to ponder what would happen if you melted a magnet? wouldnt achieve perpetual motion?

If you melt a magnet the domains will 'jumble' up it will no longer be a magnet. Even strong heating will 'kill' a magnet as will hitting it very hard with a hammer.

P.S If you thinking that the Earth's core is molten and that's a magenet, well no it isn't a magnet but it's motion produces a magnetic field. These are not the same thing.

Whilst I disagree with your notion that a lack of plans on the net means the thing works, I think we both share the conviction that magnets are cool.

Dance
05-01-2007, 08:04 AM
2012 eh? That might fit the fears over when they start using the new Large Hadron Collider.

We could have our very own blackhole http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/universe/vote/

WWSensei
05-01-2007, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
Flying machine powered by insect wings.

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/13s.jpg

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/223d.jpg

From here -

http://www.keelynet.com/greb/greb.htm

Interesting pic of someone hopping on a board. Looks similar to the scam artists who claim to "levitate" through meditation. They show lots of still pictures claiming to show levitation only when they are filmed it's clear they are just hopping around.

WWSensei
05-01-2007, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by raaaid:
i dont know the position of science of weather the stars are moving or not it would be nice if someone knew

but based on the last 5000 years stellar charts all stars keep their position fixed which must have led science to conclude the stars hardly move and theres no such black hole in the center of our milky way or otherwise the closest stars to it would rotate faster than the farthest stars varying their relative position in the sky

the mayans said the source of everithing even time came from hunab ku which they represented as an spiral and nowadays we would call a black hole(how the hell did they know galaxies make spirals)

taking into account the maya calendar was far more precise than the one we use now( the gregorian) besides so many correction through the years i wouldnt be surprise they were right and us wrong

its also interesting that the maya ended their long count calendar in a winter solstice coinciding exactly with the winter solstice because i doubt we could say when is the winter solstice with a 5000 years prevision as the maya did

im looking forward for this end of the maya calendar on 2012, some say nothing will happen some something really bad, others like osmanagich discoverer of the bosnian pyramids say it will be the day humanity will be enlightened

btw i love how official science is ridiculing themselves saying this is not man made but natural formations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Pm_s1_8.jpg

(form the wikipedia bosnian pyramids)

As for the Mayan calendar being "more precise" well, that's a critique more of the Gregorian calendar being based on people or religious events rather than stellar events as the Mayans did. The Mayans were neither alone nor unique in doing so.

And no, it isn't surprising the Mayans used the solstices--so did many other cultures around the world and yes, we can predict the winter solstice 5000 years from now. It's not that hard. FWIW, Stonehenge, built ~3500 years ago all the way across the world also was based on the solstices--and still doesn't a good job at nailing it.

As for 2012 my prediction is that not much will happen just like not much has happened when about a million other dates for the end of the world have come and gone without fanfare. Don't even have to go back far to see how eve modern people can buy into "The End Is Near" BS. Just look at all the hype and hysteria around Y2K when anyone with even a very base knowledge of computers could tell that things would, at most, be inconvenient, but that world wide disaster wasn't even possible much less very likely.

As for some magical date for humanity to be enlightened? Please, that's just fairy tale wishful thinking for people unable to accept the realities of the world we live in. Sorry Virginia, there is no Santa Claus, no knight in shining armor to save the day and no big boogie monster in the closet to eat us all.

It's just life doing what it has always done. You either deal with it and move on or make up pretend **** to avoid facing reality.

LEBillfish
05-01-2007, 08:59 AM
Actually, 2012 is the year I'll be made Empress of Earth......So it will be either very good or bad depending upon how much you like to kneel http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WWSpinDry
05-01-2007, 09:10 AM
http://www.theness.com

raaaid
05-01-2007, 09:21 AM
if is true that we are able to calculate winter solstice in 5000 years we should have measured precesions on years months and days

theres no precesion measurement in days for the simple reason that as it is said to depend on gravity of sun and moon it varies its speed all the time depending on planets and sun position

i bet theres not anywhere that says precesion lasts 24563 years 3 months 2 days and 2400 seconds and if it did it would be bull

"the exact rate and period of precession may not be computed, even for a single whole precession period."

from the wikipedia on precession yet the maya did so

WWSpinDry
05-01-2007, 09:39 AM
The Wikipedia isn't an acceptable source for anything. Still, I visited their article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession

That phrase you quote doesn't appear anywhere therein.

raaaid
05-01-2007, 09:57 AM
"Usually in literature one finds the duration of the procession given as 26000 years, being a rounding of the supposedly more accurate value of 25800 years. In reality the exact duration cannot be given, as the speed of the general precession is a value changing over time. This speed is currently 50.3 arcseconds per year which would mean 25765 years for one cycle to complete, but speeds of 50.25 arcseconds and 50.34 arcseconds, which would lead to the same rounded value of 50.3 arcseconds would result in 25791 and 25744 years, respectively. As such the rounded value of 25800 is understandable"

from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_year

so the error in our nasa measure of precession is 47 years for a complete cycle

so to place a winter solstice in 5000 years with our knowitall science there would be an error of 9 years

the maya got a precision of hours, maybe even more

btw you didnt find the quote because you searched gyro precession not earths i think, so now i give you the link as well as the quote

WWSpinDry
05-01-2007, 10:12 AM
Actually the proper equations are second-order, thus accounting for acceleration over time, and by limiting T to a span of a few centuries the calculations are very accurate. Over larger spans they're still quite reasonable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession_of_the_equinoxes#Values

But wherefrom did you get this idea that Mayans have centuries' worth of precession calculated to within hours? A preliminary Googling turned up mainly nutjob horoscope stuff.

Crash_Moses
05-01-2007, 11:03 AM
For some reason I'm reminded of the lyrics of one of the songs in Monty Python's Meaning of Life...

Whenever life get you down, Mrs. Brown
And things seem hard or tough
And people are stupid, obnoxious or daft
And you feel that you've had quite enu-hu-hu-huuuuff

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
And revolving at 900 miles an hour
That's orbiting at 19 miles a second, so it's reckoned
A sun that is the source of all our power
The sun and you and me, and all the stars that we can see
Are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral arm, at 40,000 miles an hour
Of the galaxy we call the Milky Way

Our galaxy itself contains 100 billion stars
It's 100,000 light-years side-to-side
It bulges in the middle, 16,000 light-years thick
But out by us it's just 3000 light-years wide
We're 30,000 light-years from galactic central point
We go round every 200 million years
And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions
In this amazing and expanding universe

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whiz
As fast as it can go, at the speed of light you know
Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure
How amazingly unlikely is your birth
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
Because there's bugger all down here on Earth

jannaspookie
05-01-2007, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
I built this as a science project in the 6th grade.

I can see why this must be a revelation in the ex-Soviet Union, seeing as they finally got access to electricity.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

raaaid
05-01-2007, 12:56 PM
never mind my calculations were wrong

with a mistake in precession of 50 years for a whole cycle the error in calculating the winter solstice in 5000 years the error would be around 0.1 days

WWSpinDry
05-01-2007, 01:18 PM
Appreciate the correction, raaaid. Given that, on the Mayan side of the equation the "end date" actually falling in the Winter Solstice of 2012 isn't a given. When I said the Wikipedia isn't a valid source document? It is interesting to read, I'll grant that, and one of the things one should always do when reading an article is click on the "discussion" tab to see what's been going on behind the scenes. Many, if not most, articles end up the result of controversy, and the final form can change at any time. In the Mayan calender's case, to accept the 2012 end date first you have to accept the research that fixed its START date so the dates could be correlated to the Gregorian calendar. That's by no means a given; not everyone in the literature accepts that fixing. Even if you grant the start date is fixed properly, there's not a single date; it's estimated to be one of three possible days. Thus, even if you grant the research that mapped the Mayan dating to the Gregorian, the so-called end date could happen anywhere between the 21st and 23rd of December.

The correlation of the "end date" to an actual Solstice on the Gregorian calendar is, then, very suspect and most probably a coincidence. It's no more significant than the date 2012, itself, which is just an arbitrary number based on an event that may never have happened and, even if it did, no one can actually place accurately in history. That's my take after a superficial amount of reading (mostly of the bickering that went on during the posting of Wikipedia articles), at least.

Rattler68
05-01-2007, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by raaaid:
conservation of energy is a principle and as such an asumption through observation, theres no way to prove so it could be wrong

Scientific laws are accepted as such until they are disproved. They are not called scientific principles.

raaaid
05-01-2007, 03:20 PM
now i think its imposible to calculate 5000 years from now vernal solstice with an error in measuring precesion of 50 years ove 26000 years but maya did so implying they had a much more precise measurement of precession than us of maybe even hours, heres so someone may correct me:

the basic unit of time is a day which is defined as the time transcurred between two passes over our zenith of the sun at 12:00 or noon, this is ancient

in the 20th century atomic clocks were synchronized with this astronomical event

well if we were to determine the position of the sun 26000 years from now wed make an unsolvable mistake of 50 years, that means a mistake of 0.19% measuring time or what is the same the position of the sun, if we make a mistake in the position of the sun of 50 years over 26000 means we make a mistake on measuring time because time is determine by two sucesive passes of the sun over our zenith, and this mistake is 0.19%

so then we would take a day of our cool atomic clock, measure 5000 years and say in this moment will be winter solstice

pity that our atomic clock could be .019% offset between noon and noon because precession could go faster or slower than now making succesive noons go faster or slower

that would be a mistake of 2 minutes dayly, how much could be that mistake over a period of 1000 years taking into account that is perfectly posible that precession goes .19% faster in just 4000 years

to put it more simple if we were to determine the postion of the sun in 26000 years we would make a mistake of 50 years, just a mistake of 6months would mean that what we preddicted as winter solstice would actually be summer solstice now imagine 50 years mistake or what is the same 9 years mistake over 5000

of course it can be just a coincidence the end of the maya long count calendar coinciding with the winter solstice but i dont belive in coincidences and if it is not maya had a precision measuring precesion way far better than ours

AKA_TAGERT
05-01-2007, 04:23 PM
My puppy has a cold nose and likes root beer.

MrMojok
05-01-2007, 04:23 PM
But how does he smell?

AKA_TAGERT
05-01-2007, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by MrMojok:
But how does he smell? Like a dog