if you want to switch this into a random conversation that broadly says that theoroies at the fringes of science are incorrect then youre going to get no arguments and certainly none from me.

However, the reason the people in this thread corrected things/you was because you included the law of thermodynamics in with those fringe science/theories.  It was that people were talking about.

If you fancy pointing the conversation somewhere else now thats cool.  However it wasnt the wider conversation people were correcting.  It was stating that the laws of thermodynamics might change for macroscopic systems for the possibility of perpetual motion machines (the title of the thread).  It was this that caused people to step in and try and explain why theyre not theories.

It seems this point is being backpeddled a little now.  I guess perpetual motion machines are useful for a SF writer so if it works for you, go for it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6283374.stm

Anyone here actually believe this thing failed because the lights in the theatre were too bright?  The demonstration now has to be postponed indefinitely and can only be run in his lab?  Im sorry - I may not be the god of science that Serious referred to but why didnt they just turn off the lights and run it?  Too difficult?  Too complicated a solution?  No, they didnt do it because the thing only works in his lab.  Funny, that sounds remarkably like the cold fusion reactor that produced neutrons only in the guys lab.  Amazingly that stopped working too when they turned off the neutron generator in the room next door...

if you want to switch this into a random conversation that broadly says that theoroies at the fringes of science are incorrect then youre going to get no arguments and certainly none from me.

However, the reason the people in this thread corrected things/you was because you included the law of thermodynamics in with those fringe science/theories.  It was that people were talking about.

If you fancy pointing the conversation somewhere else now thats cool.  However it wasnt the wider conversation people were correcting.  It was stating that the laws of thermodynamics might change for macroscopic systems for the possibility of perpetual motion machines (the title of the thread).  It was this that caused people to step in and try and explain why theyre not theories.

Put enough energy into a black hole and it is possible that the law of thermodynamics might reverse, entropy going backwards. That in itself does not necessarily break the law, just changes the conditions locally. For that matter the universe might cycle through a series of big crunches and then big bangs Again entropy would appear to go backwards for the whole uinverse.

It seems this point is being backpeddled a little now.  I guess perpetual motion machines are useful for a SF writer so if it works for you, go for it.

Quote

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6283374.stm

Anyone here actually believe this thing failed because the lights in the theatre were too bright?  The demonstration now has to be postponed indefinitely and can only be run in his lab?  Im sorry - I may not be the god of science that Serious referred to but why didnt they just turn off the lights and run it?  Too difficult?  Too complicated a solution?  No, they didnt do it because the thing only works in his lab.  Funny, that sounds remarkably like the cold fusion reactor that produced neutrons only in the guys lab.  Amazingly that stopped working too when they turned off the neutron generator in the room next door...

A fairly obvious solution, they could have used low energy lights too. Or dimmed those present. I suspect they have run into another issue, like it doesnt work. Only time will tell.

Put enough energy into a black hole and it is possible that the law of thermodynamics might reverse, entropy going backwards. That in itself does not necessarily break the law, just changes the conditions locally. For that matter the universe might cycle through a series of big crunches and then big bangs Again entropy would appear to go backwards for the whole uinverse.

I believe it was me that pointed out that at extreme conditions the system may fail.  Theres no reason to think it will - just we dont know.  The point is that this does not happen at the macroscopic level and will not happen.  In anything youre able to touch or build the law of thermodynamics will hold.

Theres very few things in science I would bet on but the macroscopic  laws of thermodynamics on the planet earth are one - I literally would bet my life and every wordly possession I have on them being right and never being disproved.  I literally mean forever and I mean they will remain unchanged on the macroscopic scale, they dont even have to be shown totally wrong for me to lose the bet.  Im that certain of it.  This isnt a question of belief.  Its a consequence of measuring and proving the statement.  Its a bit like someone taking the bet that 1+1=2.  People might try and get fancy and show that it doesnt but thats another bet I would take.  The law of thermodynamics is the same, it;s just the concept is a bit tricker than 1+1 if you dont use them all the time.

I wouldnt take the same bet at the event horizon of a black hole (it probably does actually hold true even there but I simply dont know) but in any machine we can make, touch or build that doesnt involve pushing the universe into another state by generating immensely distorted conditions then Ill take it.  You wont get that bet from many people on many other things.


edit: lol - I see I now have a 4 star rating Serious, how mature lol

Quote from: Serious

Put enough energy into a black hole and it is possible that the law of thermodynamics might reverse, entropy going backwards. That in itself does not necessarily break the law, just changes the conditions locally. For that matter the universe might cycle through a series of big crunches and then big bangs Again entropy would appear to go backwards for the whole uinverse.

Irrelevent.  The device isnt being operated during a big crunch, and Im pretty sure its not near a saturated black hole either.  Ergo, it violates the laws of thermodynamics and again youre missing the point.

Im not on about this ****ing device, stop making ****ing assenine assumptions. As I said the item posted in the first post isnt going to work, not as a perpetual motion machine. It cant create energy, it might mine it from an unknown source, but I doubt that. OTOH the universe does work, and can be regarded as a form of perpetual motion machine, at least if the theories are right.

Quote from: Serious

Put enough energy into a black hole and it is possible that the law of thermodynamics might reverse, entropy going backwards. That in itself does not necessarily break the law, just changes the conditions locally. For that matter the universe might cycle through a series of big crunches and then big bangs Again entropy would appear to go backwards for the whole uinverse.

I believe it was me that pointed out that at extreme conditions the system may fail.  Theres no reason to think it will - just we dont know.  The point is that this does not happen at the macroscopic level and will not happen.  In anything youre able to touch or build the law of thermodynamics will hold.

I would totally agree with that.

Theres very few things in science I would bet on but the macroscopic  laws of thermodynamics on the planet earth are one - I literally would bet my life and every wordly possession I have on them being right and never being disproved.  I literally mean forever and I mean they will remain unchanged on the macroscopic scale, they dont even have to be shown totally wrong for me to lose the bet.  Im that certain of it.  This isnt a question of belief.  Its a consequence of measuring and proving the statement.  Its a bit like someone taking the bet that 1+1=2.  People might try and get fancy and show that it doesnt but thats another bet I would take.  The law of thermodynamics is the same, it;s just the concept is a bit tricker than 1+1 if you dont use them all the time.

Its hardly a bet when you are virtually guaranteed that it will not happen in your lifetime.

I wouldnt take the same bet at the event horizon of a black hole (it probably does actually hold true even there but I simply dont know) but in any machine we can make, touch or build that doesnt involve pushing the universe into another state by generating immensely distorted conditions then Ill take it.  You wont get that bet from many people on many other things.

Black holes are very tricky. Particle pairs form on the outside, one is a positron, the other its negative counterpart. The negative one falls in and has a meeting with a positron. The positron sails away and meets with a nice neutron, they pair, get themselves an electron. You now have a nice new hydrogen atom. Eventually all of the matter inside the black hole will be recycled, although it will take a very long time.

edit: lol - I see I now have a 4 star rating Serious, how mature lol

Not me, unless it takes the couple of posts I rated on this page extremely seriously, oops sorry it was me

Stuffed you back up again, you deserve the five stars

Seems someone keeps on marking mine as one star, not that I care.
Whoever is doing it is wasting their time :mutley:

cakes are great.

if you dont look at it is it actually a cake?

if you dont look at it is it actually a cake?

If you did not see it comming, did you really get hit ?