Gravity, when the feeling's gone and you can't go on, it's gravity

[KimB]

RudeCurve, let me just say that your blatant misunderstanding of the most basic of physics concepts is unfortunate and disturbing. If you had learned your high-school physics well, you should be able to see why your statements are just flat wrong. The energy in the system here is coming from the motor.

And _xxx_, pcchen is 100% correct here.

 

[Rolf N]

Yes when looking at the past....question is can you look into the future?

No you can't!

 

[_xxx_]

pcchen: well then, think the word "universal" away from my sentence above and we're fine.

 

[3dilettante]

Um...a magnet is NOT a spring! A magnet is analogous to a dense piece of matter that exerts forces on other objects. All matter have an attractive force. The higher the density of the matter the stronger the attractive force. With magnets whether you pull them apart or not they are ALWAYS exerting an attraction/repulsion force on another magnet. A spring is just a piece of metal that resists compression/expansion due to its mechanical material strength and shape.

Would you care to speculate on what interactions define the material properties and maintain the shape of the spring?

The guy's job isn't to satisfay the naysayers. He's taking his time to fully try to understand and apply his invention. Things don't get invented and made into a product by one person in a few years.

He could have started selling the electricity generated by the invention rather quickly. Apparently he hasn't collected enough in his bucket to take it down to the electricity shop.

 

[Mintmaster]

pcchen: well then, think the word "universal" away from my sentence above and we're fine.

No, you're still not understanding it. Kepler didn't discover the laws of gravity. His laws identify patterns with the motions of various planets, refining the work of Copernicus.

If I had a friend throw a rock and noticed that it had a parabolic motion, I am not explaining anything. I'm just noticing a pattern in my observations. Newton formulated his laws of gravitation and mechanics, co-invented/discovered calculus, and with that showed why his laws lead to the motions that Kepler observed.

I don't know if Kepler said that a force of attraction is what caused the motion, but I'm sure lots of people made qualitative conjectures like that. None of them quantifed anything about this force.

 

[London Geezer]

I don't understand the animosity of the thread, and the 'different opinions' on what gravity and fundamental forces are, when one can very easily click and read.

 

[Mintmaster]

With magnets whether you pull them apart or not they are ALWAYS exerting an attraction/repulsion force on another magnet.

How does this not apply to two objects connected by a spring?

What are you still doing in this thread, anyway? We're talking about gravity, the guy hasn't proven a thing, and you don't understand physics at all.

 

[Mize]

I'm just pissed (US version) that I've gone through two loaves of bread and three black cats and still can't get Davros' perpetual motion machine working.

 

[London Geezer]

I'm just pissed (US version) that I've gone through two loaves of bread and three black cats and still can't get Davros' perpetual motion machine working.

You didn't stick arrows to the cat's paws?? Amateur.

 

[nutball]

I'm just pissed (US version) that I've gone through two loaves of bread and three black cats and still can't get Davros' perpetual motion machine working.

Have you tried applying the butter to the cat rather than the toast?

 

[3dilettante]

The patent I'm filing for a perpetual motion machine involves attaching a generator to a web forum thread about a perpetual motion machine, which will go back and forth without end.

 

[London Geezer]

The patent I'm filing for a perpetual motion machine involves attaching a generator to a web forum thread about a perpetual motion machine, which will go back and forth without end.

Seriously though, if all the energy spent by all of us posting on this forum alone could be harnessed, the world would be a different place.

 

[Rolf N]

In Soviet Russia, perpetual motion device invents you.

 

[3dilettante]

That would explain why I don't exist in Soviet Russia.

 

[Lonbjerg]

The patent I'm filing for a perpetual motion machine involves attaching a generator to a web forum thread about a perpetual motion machine, which will go back and forth without end.

You want to patent "RudeCurve"?

 

[Mize]

I love this thread.
Now it's off to the store for arrows!

 

[RudeCurve]

RudeCurve, let me just say that your blatant misunderstanding of the most basic of physics concepts is unfortunate and disturbing. If you had learned your high-school physics well, you should be able to see why your statements are just flat wrong. The energy in the system here is coming from the motor.

And _xxx_, pcchen is 100% correct here.

LMAO...no the energy is coming from the wall socket.

Would you care to speculate on what interactions define the material properties and maintain the shape of the spring?

The difference between the spring and magnets is the fact the magnets have a very strong magnetic field. This field travels through air and can be used to attract or repell another magnet.

Springs can't apply any force to other objects without physical contact.

How does this not apply to two objects connected by a spring?

What are you still doing in this thread, anyway? We're talking about gravity, the guy hasn't proven a thing, and you don't understand physics at all.

Objects connected by a string don't put any forces on the string or each other unless you involve gravity and align the objects in line with the direction of the gravitational pull. In other words any force is generated by gravity.

Magnets don't need gravity, they create their own pull forces. This is not difficult to understand.

Using two permanent magnets you can cause the magnet to levitate and overcome gravity almost indefinitely.

 

[KimB]

LMAO...no the energy is coming from the wall socket.

To which I could simply say that it's coming from the power plant.

In other words, this statement of yours isn't any more accurate than mine.

The fact remains that by adding a generator to the system, you can do nothing but reduce its acceleration or slow it down.

The difference between the spring and magnets is the fact the magnets have a very strong magnetic field. This field travels through air and can be used to attract or repell another magnet.

Springs can't apply any force to other objects without physical contact.

This isn't a distinction that makes any sort of real difference.

 

[RudeCurve]

To which I could simply say that it's coming from the power plant.

In other words, this statement of yours isn't any more accurate than mine.

The fact remains that by adding a generator to the system, you can do nothing but reduce its acceleration or slow it down.

Well the guy's invention obviously does the opposite with the use of HV coils and since you can't explain why all you can do is say it's impossible and hope that you're right.

I doubt you even understand how his invention works...

This isn't a distinction that makes any sort of real difference.

Well then lets see you lift an object with a spring without physically touching said object with said spring...

Do you know the experiment with two balls, one spinning with 20000+ rpm and one steady, then you kick them up a bit and let them both fall freely? The spinning one will go higher and fall faster, quite visibly. Nothing in our current science can explain that. You can do it yourself, use a drill or a router to rotate the spinning ball.

Tthere is currently a e-motor doing 50000+ rpm which is specified "weight: 1kg; 0.1 kg when running". If it had the appropriate air flow through the middle, you might as well see it lift off eventually Same case as above, noone knows why except that its obvious that spin has something to do with gravity.

So I'd strongly assume that neither the classic theory nor the space-time warping nails it, we're still missing something there.

Chalnoth knows why...just ask him.

 

[Mintmaster]

Objects connected by a string don't put any forces on the string or each other unless you involve gravity and align the objects in line with the direction of the gravitational pull.

-I (and you) said spring, not string
-You can pretension a spring and limit the movement of the connected objects so that it always applies a force
-The force that a spring applies has nothing to do with gravity. It's proportional to the displacement from the natural length, and always in line with the spring.

Magnets don't need gravity, they create their own pull forces. This is not difficult to understand.

Using two permanent magnets you can cause the magnet to levitate and overcome gravity almost indefinitely.

What's your point? You can't do work with it. The maximum energy that you can extract from repelling magnets in some starting configuration is the amount of energy that it took for you to put them in that position in the first place. This can be mathematically proven.