/sci/ - Science & Math

all the world has been trolled
pay for energy
derp at those who suggest you should not have to

Perpetual motion is possible.

The problem is energy comes from friction.

I don't get his method too technical for me.

Any summaries on that guy's idea how to do this?

That claim makes no sense.

He's basically saying that if there's no friction in an environment and force is acting on an object at certain times, the object will do work.

Well no shit. Good luck finding an environment with no friction though.

>>3018686
You should at least take a basic physics class before trying to troll.

>>3018602
Seriously, kids, don't use wikipedia.
It's not hard to get real information from real sources.

its been done

>>3018602 His assertation that perpetual motion is achievable has not been refuted.

It was refuted in 1841 when the law of conservation of energy was discovered.

>>3018713
from the iluminati perspective its hard to imagine how funny it is when you have an entire society trolled so completely that fight to defend the deception
it is the basis for a judtified sence of superiority

George Washington mentions the iluminati is this letter archived on an official government historical site
look at what he suggests they intend for the rest of us

>>3018718
You mean the real sources that Wikipedia links to as its sources?

>>3018687

What about a vacuum?

>>3018725
arbitrary declaration that this effect can not be achieved is not nearly the equivalent of a fully evidenced refutation
but it serves as such for those least in the societial observation put forth by Abraham Lincolin

“You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.”

>>3018802
>what about vacuum
>in the text: current of air
>air in vacuum
>false vacuum

you just destroyed the whole fucking universe with your dickery, happy now?

>>3018827
I don't know who that guy on the right is

>>3018773
I can't read george washington's shitty handwriting. It's hardly even cursive.
So what does the Illuminati supposedly have in store for us, given that I wasn't just trolled hard?

>>3018843
mastermind behind wikileaks

..Isn't such a system basically planets, that rotate for more or less an eternity?

>>3018843
>i've been under a rock for the last year

Finding a way to violate conservation of energy would basically be like finding a random glitch in the universe. There's nothing pointing to the idea of energy not being a constant, so there doesn't seem to be anywhere to even start looking.

The increase of entropy over time is probabilistic. Something with reverse entropy would, by definition, have more possible future states in which it is organised than possible future states in which it is not. Sounds unlikely, but at least it's a more reasonable goal than trying to pipe sub-unity systems tether in the hopes of achieving over-unity.

>>3018773
>mfw you don't understand the Illuminati in the context of 18th century history.

>>3018827
But if just know a little physics, the argument against perpetual motion is pretty clear.

First law of thermodynamics: energy is conserved.

Second law of thermodynamics: entropy increases in time. This means that not only can you not turn random, internal energy into a net external energy, but external energy is lost as internal energy over time.

In Airy's paper, he shows that a force, obeying a certain characteristic, may be able to produce perpetual motion. No such force exists, however, and we are left to conclude that perpetual motion is impossible.

>>3018882
*you just

>>3018718

> implying there are no sources on the bottom of the page

How stupid mustone be not to notice that?

>>3018854

Mastermind? you dont realize that everything he got was from one army private?
OMFG how in hell did one FUCKING PRIVATE get access to all this GODDAMNED information?

>>3018946

> doesn't know anything about wikileaks
> talks shit
> mfw

>>3018946

> implying everything he got was from one army private

Do you even know what wikileaks IS?

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

this man was no fraud

>>3018602
>His assertation that perpetual motion is achievable has not been refuted

Nor, have they been paid attention to. No one gives credibility to bullshit.

\thread

>>3018962
>>3019149

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/10/ron-paul-wikileaks-defense_n_795014.html

video of this information being presented before congress

can you claim to have more knowledge and responsibility to maintain accuracy than a member of congress?

>>3019194
professional troll is professional

pic related

>>3019242

Apparently so. You know why?

Because i looked at the fucking wikileaks page.

http://mirror.wikileaks.info/

lolz u so mad now.

>>3019260

>>3019194
you are out of hand dismissing the work of the man who established Greenwich at the location of the prime meridian

>>3019260
That shit was interesting till I got to the bottom.

>>3019284
looks like someone edited that last paragraph on there to 'hijack' the significance of the rest of the info

>>3018849

http://international.loc.gov/ammem/gwhtml/gwhome.html
http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mgw2&fileName=gwpage021.db&recNum=181
http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field(DOCID+@lit(gw360346))

you have most assuredly not been trolled

>>3019265
you have not responded to the mateiral in the video
you have only posted a link to a mirror-site

what is it, specificaly, that i am supposed to find there?
i am asking you to specificaly show that the source for their release (that got them in trouble) was not as is stated in the video of the congressional house floor; a single army private.

>>3019494

A whole lot of documents that were NOT brought to wikileaks by Mannings.

You claimed Mannings was the only contributor to wikileaks. My link proves you wrong.

>>3018882
About the first law:
Exactly, "energy" is always the same (BY FUCKING DEFINITION), it's an abstract mathematical device used to ease the calculations about the interactions of physical bodies.
The second law is irrelevant.
As the first law states, "energy" remains the same, it's all a matter of defining useful energy against useless energy (that's the center of the second principle).
The true meaning of the principle is that you cannot control the position and velocity of ll the matter in the universe (for example, if there's only you and another guy in space and you want him to travel in a direction at a certain speed, you'll have to push him, but you will stat moving too, in the opposite direction).
So yeah, entropy is all a matter of defining useful vs. useless "energy", and reminding us we can't control everything. A good life lesson, which also raises the question, does free will exist? No, by definition it does not, then how can we define useful from useless? we're just part of it.

About perpetual motion:
What do you guys intend with perpetual motion? I can't be arsed to look up the definition.
If you mean something moving forever, we all know that is possible, all matter in the universe is moving forever.
If you mean something moving AND transferring energy to something else forever, that is also possible, but the amount of energy transferred will act like a negative exponential, tending to 0 over time (never reaching it though).
If you mean something that "creates energy out of nothing", well that is, BY DEFINITION OF ENERGY, impossible. If we ever found something that behaves like that we should just make a correction to the definition of the energy related to that body.

That's it for today. I don't want to blow you guys minds with too much Truth. Bye.

Just start things spinning in a superfluid and it will keep spinning as long as the superfluid exists

>>3019790
pretty cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z6UJbwxBZI&t=0m54s

>>3019773
>>3019773
The Truth

>>3019773

Energy is a geometric quantity, not a mathematical definition.

>>3019901

not

>>3019773
>"energy" is always the same (BY FUCKING DEFINITION)
Not true. Any force field F such that <span class="math">\nabla \times \vec{F} = \vec{0}[/spoiler] wouldn't conserve energy.

>>3018602
>A spring based on both the present and past
Forces always act on the present. The mass and velocity distribution can affect this, but it can never -actually- be in the past. This shows the flaw in such an approximation.

>>3020326

this

I know this is stupid but when a magnet passes over a coil of wires it generates electricity right, but where does the electricity come from? Does the magnet loose momentum/speed as it moves across the coil wires?

For instance, could you take a magnet, seal it in a vacuum chamber with 100% vacuum, and then use another magnet outside the chamber to levitate the one inside. If that magnet in the vacuum chamber had any rational spin at all it'll spin forever. Now what happens when you put a coil of copper wires next to the vacuum chamber? It'll produce electricity, but will the levitating magnet in the vacuum continue to spin for ever and ever?

>>3020407

The magnetic force will get weaker every time you do that because of Lenz's law.

>>3020420
Ok so the magnet will loose magnetism over time. How much electricity would a small magnet generate before it was completely demagnetized?

For instance, would a magnet the size of a finger yield more power than a triple A battery? Assuming it was easy to achieve 100% vacuum would this be more feasible than conventional alkaline batteries?

>>3020452

no idea, sorry.

>>3020452
the magnet doesn't loose its magnetism.
its slows down because the current induced in the wire will generate a magnetic field opposite to the magnets field.

>>3020483

Magnetize a needle or something.

Use this to induce currents.

It will lose its magnetic abilities pretty quickly.