"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3ac88@news.povray.org...

> As the second spring is driving you forward, it re-winds the
> first spring, so this would work in such a way that they would forever be
> swapping over and eliminating any hands on winding up.

What you have there is a perpetual motion machine. Physically impossible
(See laws of thermodynamics) though a lot of people have claimed to create
them over the years.

In any system, the amount of energy is constant. It is theoretically
possible (if there's no friction present) to have 2 springs winding and
rewinding themselves, but you would no be able to extract energy from the
system. Add in friction and, even if the system is completely isolated, it
will wind down (no pun intended) eventually as friction converts the stored
energy into heat

Post a reply to this message

"Vincent Le Chevalier" <gal### [at] libertyALLsurfSPAMfr> wrote in 
message news:47e3b123$1@news.povray.org...

>>   Laugh if you like, I don't mind, but the solution is clockwork cars.
>>
>>    The factory produces a clockwork 'engine' with two pre-wound springs 
>> in the car. You go buy it, and drive it off the forecourt. As you drive 
>> it, only one spring drives the car, and when that spring winds down 
>> enough not to work effectively, the other one kicks in to continue the 
>> journey. Here's the good bit: As the second spring is driving you 
>> forward, it re-winds the first spring, so this would work in such a way 
>> that they would forever be swapping over and eliminating any hands on 
>> winding up.
>>
>
> But this cannot work... When spring 1 is wound down completely, you have 
> only the energy of one fully wound up spring left. If you use it to 
> totally wind up spring 1 again, then you cannot use it to move the car. So 
> sooner or later, you'll have to wind the car up again, to re-inject energy 
> that has been lost while moving. The fact that there is one or two or n 
> springs does not change anything...

  Well, ok, but what if the back springs were just rewound by the drive of 
forward motion (and not from the front two springs) anyway?

>
> So we're back to waiting for the Apocalypse again :-)

       And 'waiting' is the key word there.  ;)

       ~Steve~



>
> -- 
> Vincent

Post a reply to this message

"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in message 
news:47e3b7d6@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3ac88@news.povray.org...
>
>> As the second spring is driving you forward, it re-winds the
>> first spring, so this would work in such a way that they would forever be
>> swapping over and eliminating any hands on winding up.
>
> What you have there is a perpetual motion machine. Physically impossible
> (See laws of thermodynamics) though a lot of people have claimed to create
> them over the years.
>
> In any system, the amount of energy is constant. It is theoretically
> possible (if there's no friction present) to have 2 springs winding and
> rewinding themselves, but you would no be able to extract energy from the
> system. Add in friction and, even if the system is completely isolated, it
> will wind down (no pun intended) eventually as friction converts the 
> stored
> energy into heat

      Ah well, that would explain why it hasn't been done yet, but I still 
think that with our great engineering brains, it 'might' be possible. 
Besides, it would never happen because look at all the jobs that would be 
lost. Still, it's nice to imagine. :)

   ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"stbenge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message 
news:47e2ef50@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>>  My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as 
>> many other things like food, petrol, etc.
>
> Our electricity here in the mountains is produced from hydrokinetics, so 
> no problems there (apart from the occasional grid fault). Gas on the other 
> hand, just keeps getting more expensive. I'd love to just take a jaunt 
> into town and get what I need, but alas, doing so costs $5-$8 round trip 
> :/ I sorely need a book from the library....

    Nothing online?


>
>>     I think I said this here a few years ago, but something is not going 
>> to be good soon. Tighten your seatbelts, and enjoy the ride.
>>
>>     If I ever meet any PoVers through the smoke and rubble, don't kill 
>> me, ok? I'm on your side.
>
> Kill you, I'd probably hire you to make a wedding ring from mined platinum 
> or something :)

     Well, if that was the case Sam, I would be truly honoured to make your 
ring/s. :)

        ~Steve~


>
> Sam

Post a reply to this message

"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in message 
news:47e2c86b@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e2bcab$1@news.povray.org...
>> My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as
> many
>> other things like food, petrol, etc.
>
> Yup. Petrol's up over 1 Rand/litre so far this year, and now the 
> electricity
> company wants to raise prices by 60%. This is while they're cutting off
> power to areas 2-3 times a week.
>
> Oh well, it could be worse.

   :oO  60%! I didn't know that. That's bad news.  :o/

    ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Cook" <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote in message 
news:47e2bf8c@news.povray.org...


> *rawr* Brains...  *shamble shamble*

    LOL!  :)

   ~Steve~





>
> -- 
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.digitalartsuk.com
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
> N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
> PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
> D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:59:09 +0100, Vincent Le Chevalier
<gal### [at] libertyALLsurfSPAMfr> wrote:

>But this cannot work...

What you probably don't know is that where St lives, is a large supply
of magic mushrooms. That and it is near where Merlin laid his head
down. 
So all is possible. :)
Even perpetual motion. 
Crongrats St you are the one hundred and first this year :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

47e3be7f$1@news.povray.org...

>      Ah well, that would explain why it hasn't been done yet, but I still 
> think that with our great engineering brains, it 'might' be possible.

As Gail said, not without breaking the laws of thermodynamics as we 
understand them, so it would require a little more than engineering brains.

However, this never stopped people to create "perpetual" motion engines that 
were always eventually proved to be either hoaxes/scams, or genuine but not 
working, or working but not actually perpetual (i.e. requiring an external 
energy source to work).

G.


-- 
*****************************
http://www.oyonale.com
*****************************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3be7e$1@news.povray.org...
>

>   Well, ok, but what if the back springs were just rewound by the drive of
> forward motion (and not from the front two springs) anyway?

You'd still get less energy (a lot less) back into the spring. Basically

Energy from unwinding spring = energy converted into forward motion + energy
stored back in spring + energy converted to heat.
(or in physics terms)
Energy added to system = Delta (kinetic energy) + Delta(potential energy) +
heat

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3be7f$1@news.povray.org...
>
>       Ah well, that would explain why it hasn't been done yet, but I still
> think that with our great engineering brains, it 'might' be possible.

It's not a failing of engineering. It's a limitation of the laws of physics.
It's no more possible than travelling faster than light or creating matter
out of thin air. In fact, it's less possible than both of those (which
theoretically do occur under strange circumstances)

Post a reply to this message