Magnetic "Perpetual" motion machine

>>8178165
No it is by definition impossible

>>8178329
why ?

>>8178330
Why what?

>>8178330
Because you expend more energy alternating the electromagnets than you generate from the rotor

>>8178334
that doesn't explain why its impossible.

>>8178337
How is it not? You need more energy in than you can get out. Done, no perpetual motion

>>8178342
its not perpetual as in free energy out of nowhere. its as in a machine that makes use of a contraption with magnets that run with no other energy input.

>>8178165
By definition it is impossible because by definition perpetual motion machines are impossible, mainly due to friction. At any and every stage of any and every machine, an amount of energy, possibly small, possibly large, will be lost and converted to unusable waste heat.

>>8178345
Then no entropy exists and will ruin your shit.

>>8178337
Yes it does, something that needs more energy to run than it can produce is not perpetual.

once you put your "perpetual motion machine" in movement, it dissipates energy though friction, and there is no source of energy in your machine other than the manual starting push... so, it eventually will stop... is the same scenario as with a pendulum... ideally a pendulum could be a perpetual motion machine... but energy eventually dissipates thermally though friction with air and within moving parts.

>>8178334
What if we use permanent magnets?

>>8178345
There are three concepts here: over-unity (free energy), perpetual motion (exactly zero net energy loss), real life (some energy loss).

>>8178347 is the answer. Thermodynamics & entropy are key words to research and study more details. Entropy was in some sense discovered analyzing the maximal efficiency one could expect from a steam engine, to figure out at what point investing in more engineering innovation will fail to be worth the money spent.

>>8178345
So you just want a thing that spins forever? If you ignore friction you don't need magnets or anything fancy like that, any old mass will do.

Yes, but the machine will be using the energy of the magnets. If I know it well, the magnets needs an initial electric energy to acquire the magnetic property, so that energy doesn't disappear. I'm sorry for my ignorance.

>>8178165
If the universe wasn't expanding so everything stayed basically as close together as it is now, would it be a perpetual motion machine?
And for bonus points, is this a stupid question?

>>8180510
If the microstates that comprise a macrostate do not increase, then there's no way to measure a change in state. In other words, time would cease to exist and there would be no motion.

>>8180510
You're implying that perpetual motion is impossible due to the expansion of the universe? Yes, this is a stupid question.

File: magnets_c.jpg (17KB, 640x359px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 640x359px

>2016
>no magnetic perpetual machine
>mfw

>>8180517
Pls explain the last part of your explanation

>>8180517
Wow I don't understand much of this, but thank you for answering

>>8178334
The wheel would eventually just get stuck between a pair of magnets. Mainly due to friction.