Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-17-2019 11:43 AM
45 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,911 Year: 8,947/19,786 Month: 1,369/2,119 Week: 129/576 Day: 30/99 Hour: 6/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56
7
89
...
14Next
Author Topic:   Electro-mechanical engines of Perpetual Motion and Natural Selection
Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 92 of 202 (53654)
09-03-2003 8:37 AM


Forum Guidelines Advisory
Note to all:

This thread's purpose is not to make fun of someone who believes in perpetual motion machines. Please cease these types of posts.

Please only post messages that address Alan Cresswell's ideas about perpetual motion. If you are seeking flaws, seek them in his ideas, not in his person.

Note to Alan Cresswell:

It appears to me that your ideas about perpetual motion are secondary to your desire to mix it up on a discussion board. If your next several posts do not confine themselves strictly to discussion of your ideas then your posting privileges will be suspended. If this should occur then they can be reinstated by sending email to Admin pledging to follow the Forum Guidelines and administrator requests in the future.

------------------

--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 9:24 AM Admin has not yet responded
 Message 108 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 11:54 AM Admin has not yet responded

    
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 202 (53800)
09-04-2003 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Alan Cresswell
09-03-2003 5:20 AM


Mr.Cresswell (of the P.M.M. fame) Could you please show me your work concerning time dilation and perhaps while your at it explain the effect of gravitation upon light in the vicinity of a solar mass?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-03-2003 5:20 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

  
Alan Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 202 (53832)
09-04-2003 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Admin
09-03-2003 8:37 AM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
I have never had a desire to mix it with Forum boppers. Quite the contrary, Forum boppers prefer to mix it with me.

Fourty years back I was apalled that the 'Carnot Efficiency' spelled an end to human endeavour and the introduction of magic entropy guaranteed that the universe was equally incapable of intelligent behaviour.

I vowed one day to address these beliefs by applying 'COMMON SENSE'.

It is 15 years since I busted the naive concept of Thermodynamic Law by defining events in Diagram 2 of the website.

I was so appalled at the zeroid level of this particular forum that I decided to completely rewrite the site. The result is that I only get a clumsy hoof and dance act around vital issues.

Draw your own conclusions from the posted comments. Is it possdible to run and hide simultaneously ? Here it seems to be the NORM for a day.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Admin, posted 09-03-2003 8:37 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Percy, posted 09-04-2003 10:04 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 96 by helena, posted 09-04-2003 10:21 AM Alan Cresswell has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18481
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 95 of 202 (53841)
09-04-2003 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 9:24 AM


Getting Back On Topic
Alan Cresswell writes:

Draw your own conclusions from the posted comments. Is it possdible to run and hide simultaneously ? Here it seems to be the NORM for a day.

If you're waiting for replies, I think the ball might be in your court. You haven't replied to these recent messages:

Message 85
Message 93

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 9:24 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

    
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4008 days)
Posts: 80
Joined: 03-27-2008


Message 96 of 202 (53843)
09-04-2003 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 9:24 AM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
Dear Mr. Cresswell,

I have posted on your thread (message 80). I would still like to hear your stance on some of the points stated then:
Concerning especially (c) of message 80, I would appreciate if you could comment on (i) in which respect entropy is magic, (ii) how do you disprove the validity of the postulate of statistical physics (please name a single experimentally accessible example which contradicts it): I'm possibly repeating myself in saying that the "laws of thermodynamics" can be derived (using quite basic mathematics) from a single postulate. All you have to do is prove it wrong...
Also I would like you to clarify, if your machines are just perpetually running, or if you claim that they would produce energy in the process.
best regards

[Changed "message 80" to be a url. --Admin]

[This message has been edited by Admin, 09-04-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 9:24 AM Alan Cresswell has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 4:09 PM helena has responded

    
Alan Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 202 (53882)
09-04-2003 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by helena
09-04-2003 10:21 AM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
Diagram 1 proves that the thermodynamic laws are wrong. If they were true it would be quite impossible to draw this diagram. This is why the forum refuses to discuss the implications. It is sad.

[This message has been edited by Alan Cresswell, 09-04-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by helena, posted 09-04-2003 10:21 AM helena has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Percy, posted 09-04-2003 4:34 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 99 by Zhimbo, posted 09-04-2003 5:14 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 100 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 6:04 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 103 by helena, posted 09-05-2003 4:16 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18481
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 98 of 202 (53884)
09-04-2003 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 4:09 PM


I'm Convinced!
Hi Alan,

Since you aren't interested in money yourself, do you mind if I take your designs and apply for the US patents? And if I sent you my snailmail address, could you send me a working model?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 4:09 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

    
Zhimbo
Member (Idle past 4175 days)
Posts: 571
From: New Hampshire, USA
Joined: 07-28-2001


Message 99 of 202 (53888)
09-04-2003 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 4:09 PM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
While I generally avoid discussions with yet another in the endless stream of perpetual motion [advocates], I must admit I'm quite fond of this new mode of argument:

"Proof by Drawing".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 4:09 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

  
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 202 (53897)
09-04-2003 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 4:09 PM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
quote:
Diagram 1 proves that the thermodynamic laws are wrong. If they were true it would be quite impossible to draw this diagram.
Of course it would be possible to draw the figure. The question is, would the diagram make sense? I've yet to see anything in that figure, or the text that seems to be associated with it that is anything other than nonsense. So, for example, we have:
The diagram shows an iron transformer that has an unlaminated core. Contrary to popular belief, laminations do not directly improve the efficiency of transformer windings. They largely, but never completely, suppress eddy current heat generation within the iron core
Well, d'oh. The intention of a transformer is to convert an input voltage to a different output voltage with minimal energy loss in transmission as possible - eddy currents create heat and hence reduce transmission efficiency.
Applying the Conservation of Energy (First law of Thermodynamics):
VI in = VI out + Eddy Current heat to cooling oil
You have an equation that is complete nonsense - unless you've somehow expressed voltages as heat or heat as a voltage. This is another example of your apparent total inability to use conventional definitions of terms.

You then say that this nonsense "simplifies" to

ZERO = I2R Eddy current heat = conceivably EVERYTHING = -Mc2 fission
which also makes no sense. Where the fuck does fission come into this?

I think the reason this forum (or indeed any other - I've noticed that you seem to have posted your ideas on several other forums, presumably with similar responses) doesn't discuss the implications is simple. The so-called logic you've used is so flawed that the implications are simply non-existant.

Alan


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 4:09 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by sidelined, posted 09-04-2003 9:13 PM Dr Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 104 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 4:54 AM Dr Cresswell has not yet responded

  
sidelined
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 202 (53925)
09-04-2003 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Dr Cresswell
09-04-2003 6:04 PM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
Well I for one think this thread has pretty much gone its course and since my lifetime is not infinite I shall waste no more typing time.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 6:04 PM Dr Cresswell has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 102 of 202 (53928)
09-04-2003 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Alan Cresswell
09-03-2003 5:25 AM


quote:
The prospect of the world championship 'cutting and pasting' title is not intellectually stimulating to me. Help yourselves to it. Please do.

However, John's point remains.

Cutting and pasting is one of the very most basic of tasks to perform on a computer.

You admit that it is a mysterious puzzle to you, along with using the reply button at the bottom of the post.

Despite this lack of basic computer skills, you would ask us to believe that you are an actual physics genius.

Can you see how we might chuckle a bit at this?

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-04-2003]

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 09-04-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-03-2003 5:25 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

    
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4008 days)
Posts: 80
Joined: 03-27-2008


Message 103 of 202 (53978)
09-05-2003 4:16 AM
Reply to: Message 97 by Alan Cresswell
09-04-2003 4:09 PM


Re: Forum Guidelines Advisory
quote:
Diagram 1 proves that the thermodynamic laws are wrong. If they were true it would be quite impossible to draw this diagram. This is why the forum refuses to discuss the implications. It is sad.


Again, accepting the danger of repeating myself (and being in violation of certain guidelines):
In www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=11&t=43&p=6>message 80 as well as in www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=11&t=43&p=7>message 96 I have asked you to clear up several issues, necessary to my understanding, before one can seriously discuss the topic in full:
(a) Are the machines you are proposing perpetually moving or are they creating energy in the process?
(b) How is entropy a magic quantity? (S=kb.ln(Omega) does not sound extremely magical to me.)
(c) How do the examples proposed by you prove the only SINGLE postulate of statistical physics wrong?

As for diagram 1, which you claim proves the thermodynamic laws wrong:
I am a bit confused about your argumentation. Are you claiming that VIin=VIout for any transformer?

best regards


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 4:09 PM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

    
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 202 (53981)
09-05-2003 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Dr Cresswell
09-04-2003 6:04 PM


Sorry, having just reread what I posted last night I realised I made a mistake.
quote:
Applying the Conservation of Energy (First law of Thermodynamics):
VI in = VI out + Eddy Current heat to cooling oil

You have an equation that is complete nonsense - unless you've somehow expressed voltages as heat or heat as a voltage. This is another example of your apparent total inability to use conventional definitions of terms.
Of course, you're equating electrical power (VI) not voltage with heat ... which is, of course, the same heat=power problem you've expressed elsewhere on your site and this thread. If by "Eddy Current heat" you mean rate of transfer of heat to the cooling oil (integrated over a sufficient time period to allow equilibrium between the core and the oil) then, yes, this is OK except for your idiosyncratic use of the word "heat".

I stand by the rest of my post. I'd be particularly interested in how you get from the above to your "simplified" equation. Do you remember maths exams at school - always show your working out, you can get marks for what's correct there even if you make a mistake and end up with an incorrect answer, if you give just a wrong answer you score nothing.

Alan


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-04-2003 6:04 PM Dr Cresswell has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 5:49 AM Dr Cresswell has responded

  
Alan Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 202 (53986)
09-05-2003 5:49 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Dr Cresswell
09-05-2003 4:54 AM


The only electrical losses in a transformer circuit are I^2R copper losses. It therefore follows that eddy current heat is a FREE LUNCH gain. Elementary.

The reason why the iron core refuses to evaporate to eventual zero mass is an EQUAL AND OPPOSITE MC^2 FUSION event.

Plus and minus MC^2 is light that attends all mass and is the tool that maintains its equilibrium. A nuclear warhead can be made from a kilogram of chicken feathers if the witlessness of man could come up with a detonator.

A black hole is the up limit of this event. It bursts its poles and goes into a continuous fizzle. Round and round a galaxy and back to begin again. You are in there somewhere.

I believe 'quasars' are embryo galaxies and it is why they show a blue light 'growing' shift.

[This message has been edited by Alan Cresswell, 09-05-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 4:54 AM Dr Cresswell has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 09-05-2003 6:01 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded
 Message 107 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 7:04 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 106 of 202 (53988)
09-05-2003 6:01 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Alan Cresswell
09-05-2003 5:49 AM


I'm getting a "Brad McFall" vibe here, only without the Cantor. Could these two share the same outlook/state-of-mind?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Alan Cresswell, posted 09-05-2003 5:49 AM Alan Cresswell has not yet responded

  
Prev1
...
56
7
89
...
14Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019