Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Perpetual Motion Machine?

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Michael wrote:

> > > If there is nothing in contact with a perpetual motion machine then it's 
> > > easy to do as then you have nothing to stop whatever motion you put into 
> > > it to begin with.
>
> > Friction and gravity would stop it.  Even the rotation of the earth is 
> > slowing, and I have been told that the slowing is due to friction, but 
> > friction against what I do not know.
>
> Friction and gravity is interaction with outside forces.

You are suggesting that this device will exist outside of any 
gravitational field?  Friction is not merely outside of the device -- if 
the device has moving parts, there will be friction and friction will slow 
it until it stops moving.  Thus, it cannot move perpetually.


> Most people seem to want a machine that outputs more energy than is put 
> in. Is that not the part you always hear about?

That is what you hear, and that would be a perpetual motion machine, but 
you are talking about "free energy machines" which I was assuming can have 
energy input as long as that is free (as in beer) -- e.g., using the 
Earth's rotation or something like that.  It is impossible for a machine 
to put out more energy than it takes in unless the machine is slowly 
disappearing (using itself as fuel).

> > I will accept that the free energy machine is a more worthwhile project 
> > and also one that is much more likely to be achievable.
>
> Cool.

We agree on that then.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion