| |
|
|
|
 |
Posted 2009-11-06, 03:33 PM
in reply to D3V's post starting "Based on not being able to prove a..."
|
|
|
|
|
Based on not being able to prove a negative.
|
You can't bend, fabricate, or in any other way bastardize the laws of the universe based on rather simplistic word games.
Quote:
|
You are relying too much on the definition of what thermodynamics says cannot be done.
|
Right. I have a tendency to side with sound science.
Quote:
|
You do not have to achieve 100% efficiency to have a machine that could possibly outlive our entire human race.
|
You're conflating two unrelated ideas. Are we talking about a perpetual motion machine or a machine that can outlive the human race? They are not the same.
Quote:
|
This hypothetical machine would also not have to be friction-free given that more energy is created than being put in.
|
This is impossible.
Quote:
|
It would only need to create enough efficiency to create more energy than is put in, not to become 100% effective and efficient.
|
You're asking it to be more than 100% efficient. You can't create energy. Again, this is impossible.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|