Perpetual Energy

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In answer to your questions:

The machine is based on a widely-accepted scientific principle. Unfortuanatly, I cannot tell you what scientific principle it is, because it would tell you the basics of how the machine works.

Oh, but of course...... Yawn

I havn't actually built the machine yet, because I need funding.

/Start Scam Alert

The machine itself will cost less than £500 to make, but then you've got the cost of flying to America to qualify for the $1,000,000. I am not looking for investors though.

Why not? For a machine that would be worth trillions of dollars, you shouldn't have any problems finding suckers...err..I mean "investors".

I have looked at the plans over and over for the last 6 months, and within the next month plan to show the plans to some trusted people to analyse, and tell me what they think.

I am using my remote viewing powers to look at your plans right now. They won't work.

Someone said something about a patent. I don't plan on getting one of these because there is no point. There is no point spending thousands on world-wide patents, just so that everyone knows how the machine works.

Yeah, good idea. Look what happened to Intel after they foolishly patented their microprocessor.

Someone also asked why I would need the $1,000,000 when my machine could make "trillions". The answer: I'm going to need some money to develop the machine, and maybe build a Perpetual Power station.

Ummm...so you plan on winning the challenge before you build the machine?

I don't want to plan to far ahead though, because even though I can't see any problems with the machine, other people might do, so we shall see...

Yes we shall.....

 

[Psiload]

If perpetual-thinker's grasp of physics is on par with his grasp of physiology and pharmacology, I don't think we should consider putting our internal combustion engines into museums just yet.

"How about injecting people that have the AIDS virus with vinegar? The vinegar would kill the virus and therefore cure the person."

http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23344

I wonder if perpetual-drinker's machine runs on vinegar?

 

[Starrman]

It would violate the Law of Conservation of Energy, and I think the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, but I can explain how it works scientificly.

Does BillyHoyt still have that logic prize thingy. He can scientificaly explain why his invention is not scientific.

On another note, I just solved the problem of getting spaceships off the planet and into orbit. It may violate the law of gravity, but I drew a picture of myself flying off into space when I cancel out gravity so it must work.

 

[baldrick]

Hi, Just a quick note to say that I'm changing my name, I think "perpetual-thinker" makes me sound a bit like a snob.

I was looking at some Perpetual Energy websites, and someone has already thought of the same idea as me and they said it will work, but there would be engineering difficulties, so I've had to make some minor alterations to my machine.

Keep you updated


P.S. Suggestions for a new name would be greatly appreciated

 

[arcticpenguin]

P.S. Suggestions for a new name would be greatly appreciated

When those suggestions come, please remember that you asked for it!

 

[baldrick]

I have, but I don't care. Got a bit angry with Central Crutiniser when he said "get back to your usual silly thread", but your right - Maybe I am taking this too seriously. That's one of the reason's i'm changing my name - it sounds too serious.

Thanks

 

[Psiload]

Hi, Just a quick note to say that I'm changing my name, I think "perpetual-thinker" makes me sound a bit like a snob.

I was looking at some Perpetual Energy websites, and someone has already thought of the same idea as me and they said it will work, but there would be engineering difficulties, so I've had to make some minor alterations to my machine.

Keep you updated


P.S. Suggestions for a new name would be greatly appreciated

Any chance you'd like to share the address for the website(s) on which it was that you ran across your "competition"?

Name suggestion: Joe Newman Jr.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Keep you updated

Oh, puh-leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez do. I fear my life will not be complete if you don't.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Suggestion for new name: Watchmemum.

Hans

 

[hgc]

...

I was looking at some Perpetual Energy websites, and someone has already thought of the same idea as me and they said it will work, but there would be engineering difficulties, so I've had to make some minor alterations to my machine.

...

Soon you will also be claiming "engineering difficulties." But alas, I suspect the problem is not engineering; it's that what you're trying to engineer is not possible. You have basic science difficulties.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

Afterwards, why don't you build us a time machine?

 

[baldrick]

Afterwards, why don't you build us a time machine?

I am trying to reconstruct the deLorean from "Back to the Future", but I can't get hold of any plutonium. Don't 'spose you've got some you could lend me?

 

[baldrick]

Soon you will also be claiming "engineering difficulties." But alas, I suspect the problem is not engineering; it's that what you're trying to engineer is not possible. You have basic science difficulties.

The thing that you seem to overlook is that science is evolving constantly. Every time someone finds a new discovery, then the laws of physics are changed. For example Einstein overthrew Galileo's theory of space-time, and created laws equasions such as e=mc2, which are now widely accepted (although I hear that some scientists are questioning e=mc2)

 

[MRC_Hans]

The thing that you seem to overlook is that science is evolving constantly. Every time someone finds a new discovery, then the laws of physics are changed. For example Einstein overthrew Galileo's theory of space-time, and created laws equasions such as e=mc2, which are now widely accepted (although I hear that some scientists are questioning e=mc2)

Uhh, yes. The laws of physics have been amended and modified in the past, and will in the future, as new knowledge is gathered. However, the laws of thermodynamics currently still stand, solid as ever. And according to them, perpetual motion is impossible.

Sorry.

Hans

 

[no one in particular]

For example Einstein overthrew Galileo's theory of space-time, and created laws equasions such as e=mc2, which are now widely accepted (although I hear that some scientists are questioning e=mc2)

I forget, what was “Galileo's theory of space-time” about? Didn’t it have something to do with an apple?

 

[baldrick]

Uhh, yes. The laws of physics have been amended and modified in the past, and will in the future, as new knowledge is gathered. However, the laws of thermodynamics currently still stand, solid as ever. And according to them, perpetual motion is impossible.

Sorry.

Hans

Everything has a shelf life. Scientific laws are no different.

P.s. I've changed my name (as I am sure you will see)

 

[Crossbow]

The thing that you seem to overlook is that science is evolving constantly. Every time someone finds a new discovery, then the laws of physics are changed. For example Einstein overthrew Galileo's theory of space-time, and created laws equasions such as e=mc2, which are now widely accepted (although I hear that some scientists are questioning e=mc2)

Oh gosh, here I go again.

First, Galileo did not really have any theories about space-time. He was pretty sure the universe was much bigger than most had previously thought, but that was about it. There simply was not enough data nor the technology to develop the advanced ideas on cosmology we have today.

Second, there e=mc^2 equation did exist prior to Einstein's work on Relativity, but it was in the form of m=e/c^2. What Einstein did was show how matter and energy were different manifestations of the same thing.

 

[Brown]

The laws of physics have been amended and modified in the past, and will in the future, as new knowledge is gathered. However, the laws of thermodynamics currently still stand, solid as ever. And according to them, perpetual motion is impossible.

Besides, if indeed "[t]he machine is based on a widely-accepted scientific principle," it would not require any new thinking about the law of physics.

 

[jimlintott]

I like the name change. This man obviously has a cunning plan.

 

[hgc]

The thing that you seem to overlook is that science is evolving constantly. Every time someone finds a new discovery, then the laws of physics are changed. For example Einstein overthrew Galileo's theory of space-time, and created laws equasions such as e=mc2, which are now widely accepted (although I hear that some scientists are questioning e=mc2)

Every time? Let's not jump into our hyperbole-mobile and fly off the handle.

Anyway, new data, which may cause us to alter current paradigms, is always welcome. Like for instance, build a working PPM, and you will be rewarded with new laws of thermodynamics. Until then, the current ones, around since well before Einstein (not that it matters), comport with all observed reality with amazing reliability.