Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
A perpetual motion machine of the third kind is defined as one that completely eliminates friction and other dissipative forces, to maintain motion forever due to its mass inertia ( Third in this case refers solely to the position in the above classification scheme, not the third law of thermodynamics). It is impossible to make such a machine, [20] [21] as dissipation can never be completely eliminated in a mechanical system, no matter how close a system gets to this ideal (see examples in the Low Friction section). The machine should not have any "rubbing" parts: Any moving part must not touch other parts. This is because of friction that would be created between the two. This friction will ultimately cause the machine to lose its energy to heat. Making the surfaces smooth is not enough, as there is no perfectly smooth object. Heat will always be generated when two parts rub on each other (and that generation of heat is energy transference i.e, the motion machine losing energy). Munk, W.; Wunsch, C (1998). "Abyssal recipes II: energetics of tidal and wind mixing". Deep-Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers. 45 (12): 1977. Bibcode: 1998DSRI...45.1977M. doi: 10.1016/S0967-0637(98)00070-3. The first law of thermodynamics is the law of conservation of energy. It states that energy is always conserved. It means that energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Instead, it simply changes from one form to another. To keep a machine moving, the energy applied should stay with the machine without any losses. Because of this fact alone, it is impossible to build perpetual motion machines. Harmor, Greg; Derek Abbott (2005). "The Feynman-Smoluchowski ratchet". Parrondo's Paradox Research Group. School of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Univ. of Adelaide. Archived from the original on 2009-10-11 . Retrieved 2010-01-15.
The filing of a patent application is a clerical task, and the USPTO will not refuse filings for perpetual motion machines; the application will be filed and then most probably rejected by the patent examiner, after he has done a formal examination. [31] Even if a patent is granted, it does not mean that the invention actually works, it just means that the examiner believes that it works, or was unable to figure out why it would not work. [31]Grossman, Lisa (18 January 2012). "Death-defying time crystal could outlast the universe". New Scientist. Archived from the original on 2017-02-02. Wong, Kau-Fui Vincent (2000). Thermodynamics for Engineers. CRC Press. p.154. ISBN 978-0-84-930232-9. WOapplication 2008037004,Kwok, James,"An energy storage device and method of use",published 2008-04-03 A device powered by radioactive decay from an isotope with a relatively long half-life; such a device could plausibly operate for hundreds or thousands of years. The machine must be operated inside a vacuum (no air): The reason for this has to do with the reason listed in number one. Operating the machine anywhere will cause the machine to lose energy due to the friction between the moving parts and air. Although the energy lost due to air friction is very small, remember, we are talking about perpetual motion machines here, if there is a loss mechanism, eventually, the machine will still lose its energy and run down (even if it takes a long, long time).
Thus, machines that extract energy from finite sources will not operate indefinitely, because they are driven by the energy stored in the source, which will eventually be exhausted. A common example is devices powered by ocean currents, whose energy is ultimately derived from the Sun, which itself will eventually burn out. Tesla, N. (2018). The Problem of Increasing Human Energy: with Special References to the Harnessing of the Sun's Energy. Charles River Editors. ISBN 978-1-5080-1717-2 . Retrieved 2 April 2020. Roy, Bimalendu Narayan (2002). Fundamentals of Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics. John Wiley & Sons. p.58. Bibcode: 2002fcst.book.....N. ISBN 978-0470843130.A Crookes radiometer consists of a partial vacuum glass container with a lightweight propeller moved by (light-induced) temperature gradients. Cowen, Ron (27 February 2012). " "Time Crystals" Could Be a Legitimate Form of Perpetual Motion". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 2017-02-02. See also, for more examples of refused patent applications at the United Kingdom Patent Office ( UK-IPO), UK-IPO gets tougher on perpetual motion, IPKat, 12 June 2008. Consulted on June 12, 2008. a b Pressman, David (2008). Nolo (ed.). Patent It Yourself (13, illustrated, reviseded.). Nolo. p.99. ISBN 978-1-4133-0854-9. Brownian ratchet: In this thought experiment, one imagines a paddle wheel connected to a ratchet. Brownian motion would cause surrounding gas molecules to strike the paddles, but the ratchet would only allow it to turn in one direction. A more thorough analysis showed that when a physical ratchet was considered at this molecular scale, Brownian motion would also affect the ratchet and cause it to randomly fail resulting in no net gain. Thus, the device would not violate the laws of thermodynamics.
Proposals for such inoperable machines have become so common that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has made an official policy of refusing to grant patents for perpetual motion machines without a working model. The USPTO Manual of Patent Examining Practice states: Processes or articles alleged to operate in a manner which is clearly contrary to well-established physical laws, such as perpetual motion machines, are regarded as not having industrial application. [32] Here are the issues I encountered: The first was the marbles not releasing. This was fixed by adjusting the counter weight (moving it out) to provide more force. However, if you move it out too much, you will get too much force which will allow 2 marbles to fall out. I added the spring pin later which seemed to help. No pun intended but it really is a balancing act to fine tune this machine.Weisberg, J. M.; Nice, D. J.; Taylor, J. H. (2010). "Timing Measurements of the Relativistic Binary Pulsar PSR B1913+16". Astrophysical Journal. 722 (2): 1030–1034. arXiv: 1011.0718. Bibcode: 2010ApJ...722.1030W. doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1030. S2CID 118573183.
Epistemic impossibility" describes things which absolutely cannot occur within our current formulation of the physical laws. This interpretation of the word "impossible" is what is intended in discussions of the impossibility of perpetual motion in a closed system. [22]For the sake of argument, let's just say that somehow, we are able to build a perpetual motion machine. Will we be able to get energy from it? Yes, but only up to the energy that is used as an input to start the movement. A perpetual motion machine in real life will just be an energy storage. We must remember that the energy cannot be created; it always has to come from something. If this is released from rest, which way would it tip? According to the See-Saw Balance machine, it would tip to the left since the ball is pushing on the support and the support pushes on the left side. Nice idea, but wrong. Let me draw that same support with the forces acting on it. If you held the board steady, that support would be at rest and not rotating, so the net force and the net torque on the board must be zero. This probably is the diagram a perpetual motion person would draw: As a perpetual motion machine can only be defined in a finite isolated system with discrete parameters, and since true isolated systems do not exist (among other things, due to quantum uncertainty and Tarski's/ Gödel's theorems), "perpetual motion" in the context of this article is better defined as a "perpetual motion machine" because a machine is a "A device that directs and controls energy, often in the form of movement or electricity, to produce a certain effect [37]" whereas "motion" is simply movement (think Brownian Motion). Distinctions aside, on the macro scale, there are concepts and technical drafts that propose "perpetual motion", but on closer analysis it is revealed that they actually "consume" some sort of natural resource or latent energy, such as the phase changes of water or other fluids or small natural temperature gradients, or simply cannot sustain indefinite operation. In general, extracting work from these devices is impossible.
Great Deal 
New Comment