[rollei_list] Re: OT - Patent No. 6,362,718 B1 (was: Cost of LF ...)
- From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:47:22 -0400
On Friday, April 22, 2005, at 01:25 PM, David Seifert wrote:
> Ardeshir,
>
> What, exactly, do you mean by the term "perpetual motion"? The classic
> defintion is something that is capable of moving against gravity
> indefinitely with no apparent influx of energy.
>
> Let us use, as an analogy, planetary motion. The moon orbiting the
> earth, for example. According to your assertion, this would be an
> example of perpetual motion. The moon is actually falling toward the
> earth due to gravitational forces but it's speed is high enough to
> keep it balanced in orbit. Gravity is NOT perptual motion.
>
> An electron "orbiting" a nucleus is a quantum mechanical effect which
> by definition has nothing to do with nor is it affected by gravity.
> Therefore it is not perptual motion according to the classical
> defintion.
>
> David
I agree with that, David. I was not talking about gravity as such, nor
about the classical definition of "perpetual motion".
What I was talking about is MAGNETISM. There is no such thing as an
elementary particle possessing PURE magnetism, is there - the way there
are elementary particles, such as electrons, possessing a PURE
electrical charge, a charge which does NOT change whether the particle
moves or not. The way we understand magnetism to manifest itself - and
correct me if I am wrong - is due to the MOTION of charged elementary
particles, mostly electrons (more accurately, due to the ACCELERATION
of charged elementary particles, mostly electrons). The very fact that
permanent magnets exist, therefore, proves that charged elementary
particles (i.e., electrons) within the magnet are permanently in MOTION!
Not only that, but there is no way to STOP the motion of electrons in
each atom, and thereby remove the magnetic field. The ONLY way we know
of to "remove" a magnetic field is to CANCEL OUT the various magnetic
fields produced by the electrons in an object, by orienting the fields
in random directions: but not by STOPPING the electrons in an object.
No matter HOW much force is brought to bear on electrons, one cannot
bring them to a complete STOP. Indeed one cannot even appreciably slow
them down.
This, then, is either totally against Newton's First Law, or else there
must be a FORCE keeping the electrons in motion despite all attempts to
bring them to a stop, or even to slow them down!
A (good) permanent magnet is NOT demagnetised no matter how many times
it is stuck on to the fridge and removed therefrom and then stuck on
back again: so that means that the charges (i.e., electrons) in it are
being kept perpetually IN MOTION, and which KEEP on moving despite all
attempts to bring them to a stop. The motion then must exist, and is
perpetuated despite all attempts to eliminate it, with the help of a
force which many scientists do not yet recognise as having any
existence (although some scientists, like Puthoff, Rueda and Haisch, do
recognise it: they, and others, call it the "Zero Point Force" or ZPF),
or else the motion exists, and is perpetuated, in CONTRAVENTION to
Newton's First Law. Take your pick.
But either way, one should be able to make USE of this perpetual motion
of electrons, which makes a permanent magnet a PERMANENT magnet, to
generate electricity in the macro world. This is exactly what Patent
No. 6,362,718 B1 does.
Cheers.
Other related posts:
