Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Electro-mechanical engines of Perpetual Motion and Natural Selection
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5844 days)
Posts: 80
Joined: 03-27-2008


Message 80 of 202 (53499)
09-02-2003 11:35 AM


A few general remarks
As there seems to be some very general confusion, I'll try to make 1 or 2 points..
(a) Attributing the idea of relativity to Einstein alone is not correct. His achievement (at least for special relativity) was taking the existing mathematical ideas and unifying the concepts (there are still Lorentz transformations around named for the person who first brought them up). On a related note, Einstein did not get his Nobel prize for the theory of relativity ....
(b) Postulating a medium (ether or whatever) that electromagnetic waves need to propagate, borders on the absurd. I recommend reading about the Michelson-Morley experiments (which - I think - predate the theory of relativity by some time)...
(c) All theories in physics also this theory need to invoke some postulates. Postulates in this context being statements that can not (yet) be proven THEORETICALLY (mathematically), but can only be inferred from the fact that experimental observations fit with theoretical predictions derived from the postulates... The laws of thermodynamics are NOT such postulates, but can be derived from a SINGLE postulate, which states that "in equilibrium all accessible microstates of an enclosed system are occupied with the same probability". You just have to find a system in which this is not fulfilled, otherwise the laws derived from this stand...
(d) (I don't know if this has been stated) Perpetual motion machines are no problem for statistical physics (and for thermodynamics by inference), machines that run perpetually and produce energy in the process are, however, in violation of the laws of thermodynamics...
best regards

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Dr Cresswell, posted 09-02-2003 1:54 PM helena has not replied

  
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5844 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 replied

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

  
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5844 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 message 80 as well as in 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 replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024