"QUANTUM SHOT" #724 Link - article by Simon Rose and Avi Abrams
Perpetual Futility, or Triumph of Imagination?
Perpetual motion is a term used to describe a machine that can operate indefinitely. It is also sometimes used to define a device that produces more energy than it uses, no matter how long it is able to operate. Most scientists and scholars agree that perpetual motion violates either the first or second law of thermodynamics or in fact breaks both of them. Some devices which don’t break these laws but get their energy from an obscure source have been called perpetual motion machines, but really aren’t.
In terms of the laws of physics, at least as we understand them in the early twenty first century, perpetual motion machines are impossibilities. However, a wide variety of machines, theories and devices have been developed and proposed over the years. Here’s a look at some of the more interesting ones here at Dark Roasted Blend.
(left: typical "perpetual" water wheel and pump, via; right: waterwheel clock via)
Bhaskara’s wheel dates from the mid-twelfth century and was invented in India by the mathematician Bhaskara. The wheel’s curved or tilted spokes were partially filled with mercury. Once the wheel started spinning, mercury flowed across the spoke and the wheel would continue spinning, for a while at least.
The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris houses the drawings of Villard de Honnecourt, which date from the middle of the thirteenth century. His sketches feature various lifting devices, a water-powered saw, examples of automata and a perpetual-motion machine, although it’s not clear if de Honnecourt designed any of these himself or was describing objects he’d seen on his travels around Europe:
Also in France, in 1269 Petrus Peregrinus de Maricourt devised one of the earliest perpetual motion machines making use of magnets. The toothed wheel passes close to a lodestone. The teeth are thus repelled by one pole then attracted by the other one, maintaining the motion (left image below):
Right image above: Mariano di Jacopo detto il Taccola was an Italian artist and engineer working in the early Renaissance. His technological writings are filled with drawings of proposals for machinery and devices. This wheel is from the early decades of fifteenth century. Here is another great image of perpetual wheel - click here.
Robert Fludd’s Water Screw from 1618 was designed for driving millstones. This was probably the first time someone had tried to show how a perpetual motion machine might be able to do something that was actually useful (left image below):
From later in the seventeenth century, we have this apparently self-flowing flask invented by Robert Boyle (top right image above). It looks as if it refills itself using siphon action, although a siphon’s input is usually higher than the output, so this doesn’t strictly fit the accepted perpetual motion criteria.
Also in the image above (bottom right) you can see Edward Leedskalnin's magnetic generator, part of his Perpetual Motion Holder research.
Right image above: A late 17th-century version of Fludd's perpetual motion machine grinding grain as shown in Böckler's Theatre of New Machines (Image courtesy of the University of Kentucky's Special Collections Library).
In Germany in the early eighteenth century, Johann Bessler built Orffyreus’s Wheel, that he claimed was self-moving. At the time, following a great number of tests and official inspections, it was thought to have been the genuine article. Apparently it could do heavy work and even ran for fifty four days in one test. Today, experts don’t consider the wheel to have been capable of perpetual motion, but even now, apart from the fact that the wheel was known to have used weights in some way, no one really agrees on what might have been the power source for Orffyreus’s Wheel:
A so-called generator invented in Philadelphia in 1812 by Charles Redheffer was supposed to be able to power other machinery. However, it was exposed as a fraud when it was discovered that the device was secretly connected to another machine in an adjoining room (left image)...Right image: Sir William Congreve designed this device, which was believed to be capable of perpetual motion, in 1827:
The Crookes Radiometer, also called the light mill, was invented in 1873 by chemist Sir William Crookes. The glass bulb contains a partial vacuum and vanes on the spindle. These spin when exposed to light, increasing in speed with the brightness of the light and scientists have long debated what causes the rotation:
James Cox invented a clock called Cox’s Timepiece in the 1760’s. Although heralded as a perpetual motion machine, the clock’s power source is actually derived from changes in the planet’s atmospheric pressure, using a mercury barometer. It works in much the same manner as other mechanical clocks, except that it doesn’t need winding. The first clocks powered by atmospheric fluctuations date from the early seventeenth century and one was owned by England’s King James I:
On the right is James Cox's famous Peacock Clock displayed in Hermitage Museum, Russia.
John Joseph Merlin worked with James Cox on "perpetual motion machine". This is a replica of Merlin's 1776 Band Clock, made by Trevor Beatson of Calgary, Canada, which won a gold medal from the National Association of Watch and Clock Collectors:
Atmos is a well known brand of mechanical clock first produced in Switzerland by Jean-Leon Reutter in 1928. Like Cox’s timepiece, the clocks are powered by environmental changes and don’t need to be wound manually, often running continuously for years:
Here we have the Reidar Finsrud perpetual motion machine, in which a collection of magnets are employed to attract a steel ball. Apparently, it hasn’t been determined just how this thing can actually work, since the only energy sources are the magnets. In theory, it might be able to run for years or decades and could be an excellent source of electricity, who knows? -
Several ‘free energy’ machines are supposed to have been developed by engineer John Bedini. However, these devices have not been officially investigated by independent scientists. This site has some schematics available as a "gift to the people":
This is the N1 Homopolar Generator, which is supposedly capable of ‘taking power from the cosmic energy field which always surrounds us’. Not sure how that process actually works, but that would certainly make it a candidate for a perpetual motion device, wouldn’t it? (left image below):
Right image above: in the 1980’s, Joseph Newman’s Machine was claimed to produce more power than it needed to operate, one of the qualities usually bundled together with perpetual motion. Apparently, Newman’s machine could charge any batteries it was attached to and work for longer than it would have been able to if only using battery power. However, since it does actually need energy to create additional energy, it isn’t strictly a perpetual motion machine.
The Searl Effect Generator is described as ‘an open system energy-converting machine that uses a drop in temperature in the surrounding air and the device to convert ambient energy to electricity’. Not sure if it actually works, but it looks pretty interesting:
"The Searl Effect was discovered by John Roy Robert Searl in 1946. The Searl Effect is based on magnetic waveforms that generates a continual motion of magnetized rollers around magnetized rings. Energy conversion while operating involves processing of random quantum fluctuations and kinetic energy within the atomic lattice into coherent currents of electron pairs formed between two-dimensional boundaries of different type materials." (source)
In Canada, Perepiteia is a perpetual motion device proposed by Thane Heins, making use of electromagnetic force. Tests showed that motors connected to the machine increased their speed and created energy more efficiently, although scientific opinion is still sharply divided about the validity of the project (there is also another one in Ireland):
China is also building "impossible space drive" (also known as Roger Shawyer’s ‘electromagnetic relativity drive’). It is basically a thruster which uses no fuel except an electricity supply (more info):
The Perendev Motor also runs on magnetic force or magnet repulsion. Working models have actually been constructed, admittedly with mixed results, but the theory is considered to be worth pursuing and research continues:
The idea of perpetual motion and the urge to build the devices capable of overcoming the Second Law of Thermodynamics are very much alive today: it is perhaps quintessential visionary exercise, as much doomed as it is gloriously divine.
"Ouroboros Perpetual Motion Machine", by Austrian artist Otto Rapp, currently residing in Lethbridge, Alberta:
The "syphon" attributed to Robert Boyle couldn't be a syphon. Syphons work because the output is lower than the input, allowing the conversion of potential energy to kinetic.
I believe it was an attempt to use the fact that the weight of fluid in the wide part of the funnel is larger than in the thinner part, so (as the theory went) the fluid would be pushed round the loop.
Of course, this is nonsense, since the height of the fluid will equalise between the two arms.
A few years back, reading a 'Wired' mag in the bookstore, there was an article about some older guy who said he could make such a machine, and was experimenting on something that looked like a big ferris wheel, anyone know about that or what happened to it? Guessing it failed or he died since it has not become news, cheers
I'm the first to applaud a non-conformist building design, but lots of concepts these days seem to be all about being outlandish with zero regard to practical usability; much of the organic craze looks suspiciously like "just because we finally can build like that (and want to be as different as possible for the sake of being as different as possible)".
Anyway, my grand prize always goes to those "we'll need to build it using adamantium, but we'll surely have it by then" loonies. If it really works like that, I can has my teleport gates and warp drive now please (oh, and don't forget my flying car and robot servant)...?
Also, on a related note, it might not be quite such a good idea to quote Tesla in this day and age when he kinda seems to be remembered more for the lunacy of some of his ideas than the genius of those that he actually got right, especially those concerning "wireless power"...
Thank you Max, good comment; I want my teleport gates now too. But I am really excited by the idea of combining the skyscraper and the airship. Not practical? Maybe. But this was the dream of SF writers since the 1920s.
Goodness...all the naysayers need to relax and learn how to DREAM! Who knows...maybe we're heading into an age that will allow such marvelous things to actually happen!
While these are all great feats of engineering, personally I prefer architecture that is softer on the eye. Traveling to places that have old-world architecture is more my scene.
Nikola Tesla, much like Albert Eisntein, gave up when he realised that the world [or close associates] did with his ideas. We have no way of knowing whether his 'crazier' concepts would actually work - bearing in mind that no-one else managing to make them work is *not* evidence that they wouldn't.
As for the advanced materials required, there's this lovely stuff called graphine that could be ideal, if ways can be found to produce it cost effectively.
I admire creativity but in design terms prefer simple classical architecture, up to five floors, just nice and roomy with some quality local artisanship, accordant to the environment
I'd think the Floating structures would be possible if you could build them large enough (volume increases faster than surface area as you scale up, so you can use more of the surface areas of big baloons than small ones), I guess the difficulty with them is preventing a catastrophic failure.
The rest look more reasonable, although there might not be a lot of usable space in the lower levels.
And yeah, it's the inside of the building that really matters. A pretty outside is nice but there's not much point in building these if nobody's going to enjoy being inside them.
Yeah, this organic style literally makes me nauseous. It makes me think of the vital organs dripping out of some giant body in the sky. Horrid.
The straight edges and regular angles of midcentury modern designs give me a feeling of confidence and comfort, and make me think of a steady hand, working diligently with discipline to construct a rational environment.
Hi, the building in the image top right below this caption "The flowing shapes of this skyscraper remind us of the work of late Jan Kaplicky..." is actually the Selfridge's building, part of the Bullring complex in Birmingham, England. I walk past id daily! if you Google the images for Birmingham Selfridge's you'll see a few more interesting views of this modern architectural marvel.
The map projection is imposing, but distance is relative. I live in the Netherlands (on the map somewhere in Canada), which you can travel from north to south in about 3 hours. But when I travel in a plane for about 2 to 3 hours, I can be in a different country and even in another continent with a totally different culture if I want to. Holidays are real fun this way.
The part of the sculpture with the cat is from Tom Otterness "The Real World", Battery Park, New York. I don´t know it myself, but I know the "Überfrau" from him in my hometown very well and recognized the style. Three googles further and I found it on his website tomostudio.com.
Just watched on youtube american girls converted to islaam. And foto of muslim women with sewing machine on the head... Its like metaphor for me. Headless tool. So sad.
So how does it work? Does it detect the point where the line crosses over onto the clock face and sound an alarm at the appropriate time?
With such a small clock with only four numbers on it seems like it could be quite hard to get it accurate, I could easily imagine it being half an hour out.
I'm pretty sure that's Mad Professor, aka Neil Joseph Stephen Fraser, not Herbie Hancock. The album cover that is from is: http://www.ebreggae.com/Reggae/CD/563/Mad-Professor-Dub-Me-Crazy-5-Who-Knows-Secret-Of-The-Master-Tape.html
Cab-over in Europe is largely because of length-economics: there's regulations concerning total truck length so by moving the engine under the cab you can have more load-space.
And there's less clutter because of safety regulations: less pointy bits mean less gruesome damage to pedestrians and cyclist when having an accident. Notice the smooth sticking-out bits on the corners, these are both for aero dynamics as well as extra impact absorption.
All this reflects that in Europe roads are a bit smaller, cities are tighter and there's more mixed road-use.
mm47 is right, it looks like a windmill blade (or possibly a set of three).
Also, that "ultimate mobile home" rig looks like it's pulling a horse trailer or some other kind of racing team trailer. It might very well have some living quarters on board, but every time I've ever seen that layout, it was for horses, motorcycles or dirt track racers. Does anyone know anything about that particular truck? I can see text on the trailer, but the glare from the chrome makes it impossible to read.
The placement of the "what is it, exactly" caption is why some articles on this site are confusing to read. I thought it was referring to the next photo. Either put the captions only above the photo or below it and keep it consistent.
The multiple windows on the side of the "mobile home" shows that it is indeed a horse trailer. The windows can be opened for horses standing next to each other.
Speaking of "improper" use of trucks, here you can find some photos and technical specifications of the trucks (also light trucks and cars) used for several (12) expeditions around the world by the the italian tv show "Overland: World Truck Expedition"
Amazing collection of turtles. Concerning the last one, the postcard. It is the "Tarasque" a mythical creature from South-East France. It was some sort of dragon-turtle. You'll find more details on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarasque
The Tarasque is an animal of folklore of Provence. Kind of six-legged turtle living in the sude of France. His feast at Tarascon, is part of UNESCO World Heritage
Dunno what's happened, but I'm having to read this with IE - something on the page crashes Firefox - tried it on three PCs and none of them like it. It gobbles a vast swathe of memory and doesn't actually manage anything.
foxfire on a mac here, runs good. this site is LOADED with ads & they status shows which one is taking too long to do its thing. I don't think it is this site per se, more likely the ad servers.
Just so you know DRB, that last GFI animation of Mutual Understanding Tennis - Men's finals was made by the lovely people over at b3ta.com by c_kick (http://www.b3ta.com/users/profile.php?id=38051)
I'm sure he'd appreciate a link back to the website or his profile!
the panda in the foreground is being prepared for release to the wild by the zoo staff in the background. they are wearing panda suits to avoid having the cub get accustomed to people. more pictures here:
10 Comments:
Part 1 I hope?
Correct; let us know tips and links for Part 2. We should be doing this indefinitely, until our perpetual motion engine gives up.
The "syphon" attributed to Robert Boyle couldn't be a syphon. Syphons work because the output is lower than the input, allowing the conversion of potential energy to kinetic.
I believe it was an attempt to use the fact that the weight of fluid in the wide part of the funnel is larger than in the thinner part, so (as the theory went) the fluid would be pushed round the loop.
Of course, this is nonsense, since the height of the fluid will equalise between the two arms.
Perpetual Motion Squad.It reminds me When Escher’s Waterfall Became A Reality On Video.
http://goo.gl/j8ZZh
to the author and everyone else please research the rodin coil and vortex mathmatics
a good starting place would be here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzfgq1zv8jg
The perpetual syphon would totally work as long as the output is small enough to prevent air back into the tube.
They missed the best one: the only one that actually works. It has been built and patented, but is not stable enough for commercial use.
http://www.cheniere.org/misc/astroboots.htm
I think this discussion will just go on and on...
A few years back, reading a 'Wired' mag in the bookstore, there was an article about some older guy who said he could make such a machine, and was experimenting on something that looked like a big ferris wheel, anyone know about that or what happened to it? Guessing it failed or he died since it has not become news, cheers
All of the motor-magnetism perpetual motion machines cooked up recently have one feature in common ... permanent magnets.
They usually generate "free" electricity by slowly degrading the magnetism in the permanent magnets by one means or another.
Power produced is always less than the power required to make the magnets that are expended.
Post a Comment
<< Home