Perpetual Motion and Earnshaw's Theorem

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thread Starter

studiot

Joined Nov 9, 2007
4,998
I am posting this in feedback rather than a more restricted forum so that members such as WBahn may comment if they wish.

The rules on restricted topic are

6. Restricted topics. The following topics are regularly raised however are considered "off-topic" at all times and will result in Your thread being closed without question:

•Any kind of over-unity devices and systems
•Automotive modifications
•Devices designed to electrocute or shock another person
•LEDs to mains
•Phone jammers
•Rail guns and high-energy projectile devices
•Transformer-less power supplies
Now we quite rightly want to exclude devices contrary to the known laws of Physics.
However the term 'perpetual motion' is not excluded excluded in Physics.

It is a specific requirement of Earnshaw's Theorem.
It is also a requirement of Newton's First Law.

What are against the laws of Physics are devices which contravene the First or Second Laws of Thermodynamics and are correctly known as by the full titles as 'perpetual motion devices of the first or second kind' respectively.

It would seem to me to be perverse for a website, that prides itself on its technical correctness and has a stated aim of teaching Physics to students, to create rules that support the opposite, the more particularly since Earnshaw's theorem is an electrical theorem.

Since I don't believe that is the intention, we should observe caution in the way genuine attempts to subvert Physics are handled.
 

Alec_t

Joined Sep 17, 2013
15,117
... but the Forum Rules don't specify 'perpetual motion'. They specify 'over-unity devices and systems'. Isn't a Newtonian system an 'equal-unity' system? ;)
 

Thread Starter

studiot

Joined Nov 9, 2007
4,998
but the Forum Rules don't specify 'perpetual motion'. They specify 'over-unity devices and systems'. Isn't a Newtonian system an 'equal-unity' system?
Which is why I wish to bring the matter to the attention of the members, and to suggest care in using the term 'perpetual motion'.
 
Last edited:

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
Guilty.

I misused that term just today...or was that yesterday?
Fortunately, I consider correcting myself later to be sufficient to qualify as, "technical correctness". :D
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
32,823
I don't see anything about "perpetual motion" in the section of the ToS that you quoted. Is it elsewhere?

That aside, I understand your point and sympathize. What change would you recommend to the ToS?

Keep in mind that it is one thing to be technically rigorous and exact, but that something like the ToS also has to be comprehensible (I hope that's the right word) to the people it applies to. Many of the people that post about some overunity device have never heard of the laws of thermodynamics and so if the ToS stated that posting about 'perpetual motion devices of the first or second kind' was off limits then lot's of people would just claim that they thought theirs was some other kind. Or it the rules said that posting about devices that contravene the laws of thermodynamics was prohibited then many would claim (probably honestly) that they had no idea that their device contravened them or, in a lot of cases, insist that THEIR device doesn't contravene them (and if you'll just invest in their project they'll be able to prove it to you, if the government would only stop preventing them).

I think the ToS language needs to be kept pretty simple. But perhaps it could point to a page where the details are laid out at some length.

EDITS: Fix typos and grammar.
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
32,823
Which is why I wish to bring the matter to the attention of the members, and to suggest care in using the term 'perpetual motion'.
Beyond mentioning it every time you see "perpetual motion" used incorrectly (and that determination needs to be context sensitive), I don't see anyway to affect how members use any term. I certainly don't see any change to the ToS having any effect on it.
 

Glenn Holland

Joined Dec 26, 2014
703
Restricted topics.
The following topics are regularly raised however are considered "off-topic" at all times and will result in Your thread being closed without question:
•Any kind of over-unity devices and systems
•Automotive modifications
•Devices designed to electrocute or shock another person
•LEDs to mains
•Phone jammers
•Rail guns and high-energy projectile devices
•Transformer-less power supplies

Has the moderator considered adding this one to the list?
Earthquake Prediction :p
 

ScottWang

Joined Aug 23, 2012
7,501
Restricted topics.
The following topics are regularly raised however are considered "off-topic" at all times and will result in Your thread being closed without question:
•Any kind of over-unity devices and systems
•Automotive modifications
•Devices designed to electrocute or shock another person
•LEDs to mains
•Phone jammers
•Rail guns and high-energy projectile devices
•Transformer-less power supplies

Has the moderator considered adding this one to the list?
Earthquake Prediction :p
Earthquake Prediction?
Is this a joke?
Even the water can be see the Earthquake happening.
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,798
Since this is drifting badly off topic, I am closing this thread. If the OP wishes me to reopen it again he has but to ask.

Geology is indeed a science, though an imperfect one. If you wish to pick this subject up elsewhere do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top