Perpetual Motion And Movement Engineering Essay

The term perpetual motion exactly refers to the movement that goes forever. However the term usually refers to any device that

Always produces more energy than it consumes that ultimately results in a net output of energy for indefinite time. The law of conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, according to this law there could not be any such kind of machine in existence.

The most commonly contemplated type of perpetual motion machine is a mechanical system which sustains motion indefinitely, regardless of losing energy to friction and air resistance. A second type of impossible "perpetual motion machine" is one which does not violate conservation of energy, but produces work by spontaneously extracting heat from its surroundings, thereby cooling them down, and converting the heat energy into mechanical work. Such machines are prohibited by the second law of thermodynamics.

BASIC PRINCIPLE OF PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE

The perpetual motion machine violates both first law of thermodynamics and second law of thermodynamics. The first law of thermodynamics is essentially a statement of conservation of energy while the second law has so many different kinds of definitions, and can be described in many ways. The most common definition of second law is "heat always flows from hot body to colder body". "No heat engine can be more efficient than a Carnot heat engine"

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

Machines which are claimed not to violate either of the two laws of thermodynamics but rather to generate energy from unconventional sources are sometimes referred to as perpetual motion machines. By way of example, it is possible to design a clock or other low-power machine, such as Cox's timepiece, which runs on the differences in barometric pressure or temperature between night and day. Such a machine has a source of energy, albeit one from which it is impractical to produce power in quantity.

CLASSIFICATION OF PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE

PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE OF FIRST ORDER

PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE OF SECOND ORDER

PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE OF THIRD ORDER

PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE OF SECOND ORDER

Impossible machines.

Our second kind is of machines that challenge logic; like the drawings of Maurice Escher, where water runs perpetually downhill, but in a closed cycle. In fact, Escher did make one drawing of a waterwheel run perpetually in such a flow (See Figure ). Another impossible machine has weights of magnitude "9" on one side which become of weight "6" on the other when the weights turn upside-down

It is a machine which spontaneously converts thermal energy into mechanical work. When the thermal energy is equivalent to the work done, this does not violate the law of conservation of energy. However it does violate the more subtle second law of thermodynamics. This type of machine is different from real heat engines (such as car engines), which always involve a transfer of heat from a hotter reservoir to a colder one, the latter being warmed up in the process. In a perpetual motion machine of the second kind there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is not possible, according to the second law of thermodynamics. In relevance, for example, an automobile engine is not a perpetual motion machine because it works on the basis of the temperature difference between the fuel burning in the cylinder and the cooler environment outside. In order so that it functions, some of the chemical energy released as heat when the fuel burns must not be converted to work, but must be exhausted to the cooler reservoir of the environment by the exhaust gas and the radiator. As explained by statistical mechanics, there are far more states in which heat distribution is close to thermodynamic equilibrium than states in which heat is concentrated in small regions, so temperatures will tend to even out over time, reducing the amount of free energy available for conversion to mechanical energy.

Why is Perpetual Motion considered to be Impossible?

The idea of perpetual motion sounds so clear-cut. An electric car powered by perpetual motion could recharge its own batteries forever, or a perpetual motion clock could without human intervention rewind itself for years. But there is a reason why perpetual motion machines remain in the area of dream; it's the Laws of Thermodynamics. Some inventions may appear to run by perpetual motion, but they usually rely on a hidden source of external energy.

Both the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics keep our perpetual motion car in the garage. According to one portion of the First Law, energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed to different forms. The batteries which power an electric car only contain a fixed amount of energy. Most of this energy goes into propelling the electric motor, but some is inevitably lost through friction and the recreation of momentum after a stop. Our perpetual motion car's recharger would have to create even more energy in order to keep the batteries at full capacity. No such power generator exists, nor can one be built if the Laws of Thermodynamics are true.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics also prevents perpetual motion machines from becoming reality. Part of the Second Law states that heat energy inevitably seeks out cold areas, eventually creating a neutral temperature state called entropy. This means our proposed perpetual motion car will eventually conk out from a lack of usable heat energy. The motor casing gets hot during work, and some of that heat energy would be dissipated into the air, not back into the battery system. Since external factors such as gravity and friction would be constantly pulling on the machine, eventually all of the usable energy would be lost.

Perpetual motion machines would only be possible if a substance could be found that generated more energy than it used. Some inventors hoped that radioactive materials would prove to be useful as perpetual motion engines, but their energy is still considered finite. Magnets have also been used to power would-be perpetual motion machines, but their continued operation often requires some external energy source. Gravity is usually considered a force hostile to the cause of perpetual motion, but some inventors use gravity to their advantage when creating theoretical perpetual motion machines.

Because scientific laws and theories generally deem perpetual motion impossible, patent offices are extremely reluctant to grant patents for such machines. Proposed perpetual motion machines are the only devices which require a working model at the time of patent application. To date, no inventor has successfully submitted a working model of a true perpetual motion machine

MACHINES THAT WORKS ON PERPETUAL MOTION

Motionless Electromagnetic Generator, a device that supposedly taps vacuum energy.

Perepiteia, a device that claims to utilize back EMF.

Stanley Meyer's water fuel cell

Motionless Electromagnetic Generator

An electromagnetic generator without moving parts includes a permanent magnet and a magnetic Core including first and second magnetic paths. A first input coil and a first output coil extend around Portions of the first magnetic path, while a second input coil and a second output coil extend around Portions of the second magnetic path. The input coils are alternatively pulsed to provide induced Current pulses in the output coils. Driving electrical current through each of the input coils reduces a Level of flux from the permanent magnet within the magnet path around which the input coil extends. In an alternative embodiment of an electromagnetic generator, the magnetic core includes annular Spaced-apart plates, with posts and permanent magnets extending in an alternating fashion between the plates. An output coil extends around each of these posts. Input coils extending around portions of the plates are pulsed to cause the induction of current within the output coils.

WATER FUEL CELL

The water fuel cell is a purported perpetual motion machine invented by American Stanley Allen Meyer (August 24, 1940 - March 21, 1998). He claimed that an automobile retrofitted with the device could use water as fuel as a substitute of gasoline. The fuel cell supposedly split water into its component elements, hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen was then burned to generate energy, a process that reconstituted the water molecules. According to Meyer, the device required less energy to perform electrolysis than the minimum energy requirement predicted or measured by conventional science. If the device worked as specified, it would violate both the first and second laws of thermodynamics, allowing operation as a perpetual motion machine. Meyer's claims about his "Water Fuel Cell" and the car that it powered were found to be fraudulent by an Ohio court in

1996.

Throughout his patents and marketing material, Meyer uses the terms "fuel cell" or "water fuel cell" to refer to the portion of his device in which electricity is passed through water to produce hydrogen and oxygen. Meyer's use of the term in this sense is different towards its usual meaning in science and engineering, in which such cells are typically called "electrolytic cells". Furthermore, the term fuel cell is generally reserved for cells which produce electricity from a chemical redox reaction, whereas Meyer's fuel cell consumed electricity, as shown in his patents and in the circuit pictured on the left. Meyer describes in a 1990 patent the use of a "water fuel cell assembly'" and portrays some images of his "fuel cell water capacitor". According to the patent, in this case "... the term 'fuel cell' refers to a single unit of the invention comprising a water capacitor cell ... that produces the fuel gas in accordance with the method of the invention.

REFRENCES

US Patent # 6, 362, 718, Motionless Electromagnetic Generator Patrick, et al.

(March 26, 2002)