"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3be80$2@news.povray.org...
>

> > Oh well, it could be worse.
>
>    :oO  60%! I didn't know that. That's bad news.  :o/

Well, currently SA has about the cheapest electricity in the world, so isn't
as bad as it sounds. The regular blackouts are far more of a problem.
From what I hear, if they do hike the price that much, our electricity will
be around the same price as in Canada.

Post a reply to this message

"Gilles Tran" <gil### [at] agroparistechfr> wrote in message 
news:47e3c3cf$1@news.povray.org...

> 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).

Yes, I've just done a little reading about PMM's and thermodynamics was 
mentioned quite a lot. I don't know, I can see that yes, there would be a 
problem with heat, but what about other materials? I know that PTFE is one 
of the slipperiest plastics out there, but then of course, you wouldn't have 
the strength.

  By the way, I think I remember on an old Tomorrows World program (late 
70's?) that an oil-less car engine had been produced, (still needed petrol 

per unit. I wonder what happened to that?

    ~Steve~



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

Post a reply to this message

"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in message 
news:47e3d167@news.povray.org...
>
> "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)

  Yes, to me as a non-scientific person, I'm thinking that this is, and 
should be, achievable/possible, but alas, something that *seems* so simple, 
is clearly not the case.

    Back to the PoV drawing board, methinks. Good little debate.

      ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:14:52 +0200, "Gail Shaw"
<initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:

>
>"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
>

He is pulling your leg :)
Unless St thinks that the world is flat (and if it is, where are you
then?) then he is seeing how long it would take for you to cotton on. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:33:28 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>  Yes, to me as a non-scientific person, I'm thinking that this is, and 
>should be, achievable/possible, but alas, something that *seems* so simple, 
>is clearly not the case.

Opps! Scratch the last post to Gail. :)
Sorry!

"Oh! Dear" he said. (Falling off the edge of the world.)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3d54d@news.povray.org...
>
>   Yes, to me as a non-scientific person, I'm thinking that this is, and
> should be, achievable/possible, but alas, something that *seems* so
simple,
> is clearly not the case.

Think of it this way. If you have 2 pans of water, same volume, one's just
above freezing point (0C) and one at boiling point (100C). Can you use the
pan of boiling water to bring the second pan up to boiling point?

Similar thing, just with heat, instead of springs

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:47e3d2fb@news.povray.org...

>
> Yes, I've just done a little reading about PMM's and thermodynamics was
> mentioned quite a lot. I don't know, I can see that yes, there would be a
> problem with heat, but what about other materials? I know that PTFE is one
> of the slipperiest plastics out there, but then of course, you wouldn't
have
> the strength.

Heat's just the loss of energy from the system. Even if you have a
frictionless material, you cannot create energy. Say we have found a
frictionless material (or one with such low friction it's barely noticable)

Say a fully wound spring as an amount of energy in it (X joules). You use
that to increase the speed of a vehicle, (using Y joules where X<Y), then
all you have left to rewind the second spring is the left over (X-Y)

Energy can never be created or destroyed. It can only be converted from one
form to another - 1st law of thermodynamics

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:cfl7u3ddjcitaopimgbhnju19r8if09sdl@4ax.com...


> He is pulling your leg :)
> Unless St thinks that the world is flat (and if it is, where are you
> then?) then he is seeing how long it would take for you to cotton on.

    It ISN'T flat??  :oO

     ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
news:ail7u31509e72bpk92pq7v3d7jtnepes5l@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:33:28 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
> >
> >  Yes, to me as a non-scientific person, I'm thinking that this is, and
> >should be, achievable/possible, but alas, something that *seems* so
simple,
> >is clearly not the case.
>
> Opps! Scratch the last post to Gail. :)
> Sorry!
>
> "Oh! Dear" he said. (Falling off the edge of the world.)

Don't worry, it's nice under here. *g*

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:44:53 +0200, "Gail Shaw"
<initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message

>> "Oh! Dear" he said. (Falling off the edge of the world.)
>
>Don't worry, it's nice under here. *g*
>
Yes, but I got dizzy with the blood rushing to my head :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message