turtlespeed 212 #76 October 27, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote >voyager wouldn't fit that concept , but most certainly is a man made >machine in perpetual motion ! Well, by that definition, so is a cruise ship. Or the turbines at Hoover Damn. Still not a perpetual motion machine. these are being propelled voyager is not , it will remain in motion with no further motive force perpetually ! Voyager is constantly under the influence of "motive force". It is called gravity. Voyagers path is constantly being altered by the ever changing influence of the gravitational forces of countless bodies. Voyager may be perpetually moving, but it's motion is determined almost entirely by outside forces. This is just the opposite of what a perpetual motion machine is required to do, which is to operate for an infinite amount of time without energy being added once the motion has started. http://heavens-above.com/solar-escape.asp?lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET Patiently waiting for Andy or Paul or Bill to come in with a copy and paste/ original thought comment.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #77 October 27, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote >voyager wouldn't fit that concept , but most certainly is a man made >machine in perpetual motion ! Well, by that definition, so is a cruise ship. Or the turbines at Hoover Damn. Still not a perpetual motion machine. these are being propelled voyager is not , it will remain in motion with no further motive force perpetually ! Voyager is constantly under the influence of "motive force". It is called gravity. Voyagers path is constantly being altered by the ever changing influence of the gravitational forces of countless bodies. Voyager may be perpetually moving, but it's motion is determined almost entirely by outside forces. This is just the opposite of what a perpetual motion machine is required to do, which is to operate for an infinite amount of time without energy being added once the motion has started. http://heavens-above.com/solar-escape.asp?lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET Patiently waiting for Andy or Paul or Bill to come in with a copy and paste/ original thought comment. Duhd..Talk about gravity.... I posted a link to where the spacecraft are at.... and YOU get all BUTT HURT over that... With that much mass in Texicus and OkieLaHoma gravity must REALLY be sucking everything downhill tonight Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #78 October 27, 2010 maybe it's semantics but voyager is a perpetual machine . it will continue to remain in motion whether or not it experiences any further motive force ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #79 October 27, 2010 >if it encounters drag constantly it will slow and eventually stop Correct! Just like that cruise ship. Same phenomena, just vastly different timescales. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #80 October 27, 2010 it will encounter negligible to no drag notwithstanding your claim of imperfect vacuum somewhere in the galaxy . as it encounters greater and greater empty outer space ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #81 October 27, 2010 >it will encounter negligible to no drag . . . Agreed. But even the smallest amounts of drag will eventually stop any vehicle, barring some further input of energy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #82 October 28, 2010 Quotemaybe it's semantics but voyager is a perpetual machine . it will continue to remain in motion whether or not it experiences any further motive force ! "Machines which comply with both laws of thermodynamics but access energy from obscure sources are sometimes referred to as perpetual motion machines, although they do not meet the standard criteria for the name." Wikipedia - Perpetual MotionMy reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #83 October 28, 2010 Quotemaybe it's semantics but voyager is a perpetual machine . it will continue to remain in motion whether or not it experiences any further motive force ! No, Voyager is a machine that is perpetually in motion relative to our frame of reference. It is, in all likelyhood, not moving at all relative to countless bodies both large and small throughout the universe. Far different from a perpetual motion machine.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #84 October 28, 2010 this reference to frame of reference is so true , and i really identify with and enjoy your comment ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #85 October 28, 2010 Suppose I ask you to close your eyes, then I put a top on the table in front of you and spin it as fast as I can, then I ask you to open your eyes and look at it for a couple seconds and then close your eyes again. Now... is it a perpetual motion machine? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #86 October 28, 2010 by "it" you could mean the table which was covered by frame of reference post. otherwise i'm inclined to consider your question rhetorical. anyone who has working knowledge of tops knows they don't spin perpetually . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #87 October 28, 2010 Indeed, it was rhetorical. It links back to my previous post cautioning not to confuse "for a really long time" with "forever". The concept of a perpetual motion machine is a pretty specific one. And while many of the probes and satellites we launch will be out there trucking along even after we (and quite possibly the human race) are gone, they simply don't qualify. In the meantime, they're a hell of a way to make a living. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
metalslug 31 #88 October 28, 2010 Quote Suppose I ask you to close your eyes, then I put a top on the table in front of you and spin it as fast as I can, then I ask you to open your eyes and look at it for a couple seconds and then close your eyes again. Now... is it a perpetual motion machine? Well, if the top belonged to Dominic Cobb.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #89 October 28, 2010 Quote No, Voyager is a machine that is perpetually in motion relative to our frame of reference. It is, in all likelyhood, not moving at all relative to countless bodies both large and small throughout the universe. Far different from a perpetual motion machine. Now we have to argue the definition of "perpetually". It implies, like "forever" doesn't it? In that sense, nah....Voyager is not now, nor will ever be, in "perpetual motion. As an aside, if it hasn't been pointed out as yet, we do get good examples of "perpetual motion" from lips....from some people who talk a lot. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #90 October 28, 2010 Quote Quote No, Voyager is a machine that is perpetually in motion relative to our frame of reference. It is, in all likelyhood, not moving at all relative to countless bodies both large and small throughout the universe. Far different from a perpetual motion machine. Now we have to argue the definition of "perpetually". It implies, like "forever" doesn't it? In that sense, nah....Voyager is not now, nor will ever be, in "perpetual motion. As an aside, if it hasn't been pointed out as yet, we do get good examples of "perpetual motion" from lips....from some people who talk a lot. Perpetual Motion- A motion consisting of moving the mouse pointer over to the "Post Reply" button in order to try to make sure you have the last word in every thread.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #91 October 28, 2010 QuoteSuppose I ask you to close your eyes, then I put a top on the table in front of you and spin it as fast as I can, then I ask you to open your eyes and look at it for a couple seconds and then close your eyes again. Now... is it a perpetual motion machine? suppose we put a cat in a box (maybe) on the table and spin it - then we drop the table off a building - does the hypothetical cat land on its feet forever? for that matter, does the feet really exist until the box bursts open? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #92 October 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteSuppose I ask you to close your eyes, then I put a top on the table in front of you and spin it as fast as I can, then I ask you to open your eyes and look at it for a couple seconds and then close your eyes again. Now... is it a perpetual motion machine? suppose we put a cat in a box (maybe) on the table and spin it - then we drop the table off a building - does the hypothetical cat land on its feet forever? for that matter, does the feet really exist until the box bursts open? I like the cut of your jib. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,150 #93 October 28, 2010 Quote does the hypothetical cat land on its feet forever? for that matter, does the feet really exist until the box bursts open? Quote I like the cut of your jib. I'm sorry; there was a grammatical error in the post you referenced. That renders it completely invalid, and your quoting it means that you admire error (dammit -- where did that asshole-pedant icon go) Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #94 October 28, 2010 we need a gravity mod icon ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #95 October 28, 2010 QuoteI'm sorry; there was a grammatical error in the post you referenced. That renders it completely invalid- That renders it completely invalid? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #96 October 28, 2010 Quote suppose we put a cat in a box (maybe) on the table and spin it - then we drop the table off a building - does the hypothetical cat land on its feet forever? Not if it is Shroedinger's Cat. Then it lands on its feet and does not land on its feet."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #97 October 28, 2010 QuoteQuote suppose we put a cat in a box (maybe) on the table and spin it - then we drop the table off a building - does the hypothetical cat land on its feet forever? Not if it is Shroedinger's Cat. Then it lands on its feet and does not land on its feet. Ockham's Cat was influenced just by being watched.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #98 October 28, 2010 yes , but not just that ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #99 October 28, 2010 >Ockham's Cat was influenced just by being watched. Occam's cat really didn't care if he was watched or not. But unlike most cats, he was only as big as he needed to be - and no bigger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skipbelt 0 #100 October 28, 2010 Quote>Ockham's Cat was influenced just by being watched.Occam's cat really didn't care if he was watched or not. But unlike most cats, he was only as big as he needed to be - and no bigger.your litterbox is half full ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
