My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as many 
other things like food, petrol, etc.

    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.

     Later...


        ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>  My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as many 
> other things like food, petrol, etc.
> 
>     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.
> 
>      Later...

*rawr* Brains...  *shamble shamble*

-- 
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

"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.

Post a reply to this message

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....

>     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 :)

Sam

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
> My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as many
> other things like food, petrol, etc.
>
>     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.

hey, come to Brazil!  No wars, just poverty and corrupt rulers.  Oh, and
constant price soaring... :)

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>  My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as many 
> other things like food, petrol, etc.
> 
>     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.
> 
>      Later...
> 
> 
>         ~Steve~

So, prices are going up.  Things are more expensive than they used to 
be.  How is that any different from any other time in history?

Admittedly the cost of energy is going up quite dramatically, but one 
could argue that's because we've been living lifestyles that aren't 
sustainable.  At least not until we get some better alternative energy 
sources.

But I'll tell you what.  We're working on our emergency supply right 
now, and have more than a month's worth of water, and something like two 
months' worth of food.  If you'd like to stop by after the apocalypse, 
we'll be glad to share with you - as long as you don't kill me for my 
corned beef :)

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> If you'd like to stop by after the apocalypse, 
> we'll be glad to share with you - as long as you don't kill me for my 
> corned beef :)

Oh great. Now I have that damned some about SPAM in my head! >_<

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Chambers" <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote in message 
news:47e38476$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>>  My electricity and gas prices have soared bigtime recently, as well as 
>> many other things like food, petrol, etc.
>>
>>     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.
>>
>>      Later...
>>
>>
>>         ~Steve~
>
> So, prices are going up.  Things are more expensive than they used to be. 
> How is that any different from any other time in history?

     Well, I see it from a different point of view. Not insulting your 
intelligence, but you do know that oil is running out? You do know that when 
it does and transport comes to a standstill, the world will stop? When this 
will happen, I don't know. I also see it from a business sense being in the 
trade that I'm in. Our standard gold over here is a 9ct alloy, and 9ct gold 
is now at 18ct gold prices, and that ain't good because for the first time 
in nearly 25 years, it's threatening my job. I'm not worried about that 
though because I think I have enough nouse to get through it. But we'll see.


>
> Admittedly the cost of energy is going up quite dramatically, but one 
> could argue that's because we've been living lifestyles that aren't 
> sustainable.  At least not until we get some better alternative energy 
> sources.

   The world as we know it now has some of the best scientific and 
engineering brains ever, so they should have had the answer by now, but they 
haven't. Yes, there are green cars and green idea's being developed, but for 
the life of me, I can't see car owners trading in, can you? Imagine this: 
When your government *tells* you that you *have* to trade in your car, (or, 
if you didn't want one of their measly matchboxes on wheels, and they offer 
you 250 bucks for your 18,000 buck car as compensation because you *have* 
to), how will you feel about that? I can see a time that this will happen in 
some way because they will not only need the metal in your car, they will 
also need the OIL from your car. Why? To support the war machine. You can 
bet all your hard-earned wonga that fighter planes, tanks, and ships will 
need that oil. Why the war machine? Because I see that things are going to 
get very nasty in the near future, and I think the signs are there right 
now. The thing is, I think this world actually needs WWIII to clear up the 
grand old mess it's got itself into. Oh yes, it's a mess alright. A serious 
mess. It's a mess that needs sorting out. Over-population, greed, 
corruption, are all things that have been around for ages, but we still 
don't learn do we. The bickering that's going to happen between certain 
countries is what will probably start it off, and once it starts, there will 
be no 'good' ending to it.

 Of course, the other scenario is why bother with that hassle at all? Just 
destroy all countries in one foul swoop and Bob's yer Uncle, the world is 
your oyster.

 There are probably quite a few Rasta's smiling right now.



>
> But I'll tell you what.  We're working on our emergency supply right now, 
> and have more than a month's worth of water, and something like two 
> months' worth of food.  If you'd like to stop by after the apocalypse, 
> we'll be glad to share with you - as long as you don't kill me for my 
> corned beef :)

 I wouldn't kill you, but if I had to, I would. That's what it's going to be 
like one day. But, where you are, if it happens, I'll certainly consider the 
invitation. Just make sure those corned beef sandwiches have pickle too, 
that's all.  :)

       ~Steve~


>
> -- 
> ...Ben Chambers
> www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

By the way, I think I have the greenest solution to produce a car, but it's 
too late really.

  Laugh if you like, I don't mind, but the solution is clockwork cars.

   Oh, I see that it's been discussed here: 
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060828110406AApPSJA&show=7

   Some good points there, but really, they're missing the point.

   No factory that produces the car would have the user winding it up 
themselves - impossible.

   No, in fact, you wouldn't need to wind it up at all, which also means 
that there would be no 'winding' stations. (And no petrol stations too of 
course).

   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.

    Now, I initially thought that these two springs would be side-by-side, 
but thinking about it more, that would probably cause some significant 
steering imbalance. So, you would have a car version that is both front and 
rear wheel drive. You would have two spring units at the front, (one on each 
front wheel), that both work simultaneously, and the same for the rear 
wheels. The same method applies as above, but the front two swap with the 
back two and so forth. This would eliminate steering imbalance

     Yes, the units would still need lubricating, but the car wouldn't need 
petrol, and it wouldn't burn oil.

      ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

St. a écrit :
>   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...

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

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

"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...
> St. a écrit :
>>   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

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> a écrit dans le message de 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.

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

"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...
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> a écrit dans le message de 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.
>
> 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 
to run it though), but back then it would have cost something like £25,000 
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

"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in message 
news:47e3d75f@news.povray.org...
>
> "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

 Oh! That's a good anology Gail! No, of course that couldn't happen, and I 
can see no way around it to make it happen other than making use of other 
materials to do it. For example, (and this is off the top of my head): Steam 
from said hot water soaks a towel above it. Towel gets heavy and falls onto 
lever, switching gas on under cold water pan to heat it up

  But there are those other outside influences again. I see the problem now.

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:42:53 +0200, "Gail Shaw"
<initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:

>
>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?
>

Maxwell's demon could :)

>Similar thing, just with heat, instead of springs

Doesn't that mean the universe will suffer when Entropy increases?
Thus proving the end of society as St first pointed out. 
You've just proved his point. And if he was right about that then
maybe the Perpetual Motion Machine is possible after all!
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Btw, literally just found this - the author is either psychic, or he knows 
what he's taliking about. Note the date. It's a good read.

     http://www.usagold.com/contests/june2004.html


       ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message
news:qlm7u3lr5ovt1v54g35cfjkirjikv4soks@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:42:53 +0200, "Gail Shaw"
> <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
>
> >
> >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?
> >
>
> Maxwell's demon could :)

Maxwell's demon ignores the 2nd law of thermodynamics. That was the whole
point. It also assumes that it can find individual molecules, which may be
difficult with the quantum effects that small.

> >Similar thing, just with heat, instead of springs
>
> Doesn't that mean the universe will suffer when Entropy increases?

Sure. It's not a new observation. The 2nd law of Thermodynamics predics the
heat death of the universe. Entropy increases to the point where all systems
are at their least ordered and no energy can ever be extracted from any
system. The entire universe is at a steady temerature and no more change is
possible. Basically, the universe winds down.

> You've just proved his point. And if he was right about that then
> maybe the Perpetual Motion Machine is possible after all!

The second statement does not follow the first. And physics is very bad at
prediciting aspects of society. Will leave that to any sociaologists.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:31:03 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>Btw, literally just found this - the author is either psychic, or he knows 
>what he's taliking about. Note the date. It's a good read.
>
>     http://www.usagold.com/contests/june2004.html
>
>

That sounds like it was written for the Gaia movement, the SF post
disaster stories, from the sixties onwards. Have you read anything by
John Brunner?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:46:34 +0200, "Gail Shaw"
<initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:

>
>The second statement does not follow the first. And physics is very bad at
>prediciting aspects of society. Will leave that to any sociaologists.
>

I know this I was reducing to the absurd for the sake of humour. 

I must remember to sprinkle a few more smilies about.  
I must remember to sprinkle a few more smilies about.  
I must remember to sprinkle a few more smilies about.  
I must remember to sprinkle a few more smilies about.  
...

Oh! And if Maxwell's demon wants to ignore the 2nd law well that's up
to him or her, whatever  :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:fip7u3ddgu8fb2j9ff40lr7jp5uis9idhq@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:31:03 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>
>>Btw, literally just found this - the author is either psychic, or he knows
>>what he's taliking about. Note the date. It's a good read.
>>
>>     http://www.usagold.com/contests/june2004.html
>>
>>
>
> That sounds like it was written for the Gaia movement, the SF post
> disaster stories, from the sixties onwards. Have you read anything by
> John Brunner?

     No, but the name rings a bell. Is that the kind of writing he was/is 
good at?

      Presently, I've just started reading "The Vang: The Military Form" by 
Christopher Rowley. Seems to be good so far.

      ~Steve~


> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> What you have there is a perpetual motion machine. Physically impossible

Not necessarily. But highly improbable at the macroscopic level.

Apparently there are some quantum effects ("zero energy point") that 
could actually maybe be used for this sort of thing. I didn't believe it 
until a theoretical physicist told me yeah, maybe you could, because 
thermodynamics doesn't apply to virtual particles.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> 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)

Actually, they both occur all the time everywhere. :-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:57:44 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>     No, but the name rings a bell. Is that the kind of writing he was/is 
>good at?
>

Actually no, he wrote about the oil and natural sources not quite
running out. As in "Stand on Zanzibar" 1968 is about over population,
The Jagged Orbit (1969), The Sheep Look Up (1972) and The Shockwave
Rider (1975). His most well known ones. He died in Glasgow in 1995 at
a World Science Fiction Convention. 

I can't remember the writers who I've read, that dealt with the oil
and water running out but I get the impression that they were mostly
West Coast American writers. 

>      Presently, I've just started reading "The Vang: The Military Form" by 
>Christopher Rowley. Seems to be good so far.

I can't say that I've read any of his. To tell the truth the name puts
me off :) I'm reading one of the "Monster Books" of SF. I've ran out
of books in the library. That is somewhere that is feeling the pinch.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:
>    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.

oh, a perpetual winding machine! ;)

Take your tea, St.  Even if the world comes to a halt, we still get a fully
working and well routed internet and this newsgroups for entertainment and tips
on where to get food.  Just be sure no one kills you for your PC. :P

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:47e3ee74@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> > 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)
>
> Actually, they both occur all the time everywhere. :-)

Has someone seen tacheons? I admit, I'm a bit behind on some of the lit.
Matter out of thin space happens, but since they're virtual particles that
disintegrate (and turn back into the photons that created them) in a
fraction of a nanosecond, it's not really a factor. Unless you have a black
hole nearby, that is. Or are you talking about zero-point energy?

I was trying to leave quantum out of this. Thermodynamics alone are bad
enough. :-)

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:47e3ee39@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> > What you have there is a perpetual motion machine. Physically impossible
>
> Not necessarily. But highly improbable at the macroscopic level.
>
> Apparently there are some quantum effects ("zero energy point") that
> could actually maybe be used for this sort of thing. I didn't believe it
> until a theoretical physicist told me yeah, maybe you could, because
> thermodynamics doesn't apply to virtual particles.

I've read some of the discussions. Thing with the virtual particles - how do
you make them real. Only way I know of is a black hole, and they don't make
good pets.

Post a reply to this message

I think nuclear batteries have a big potential,
electricity directly from nuclear decay. Sheets of
glowy plastic sandwiched with solar cells. They
already sell plastic strips that will glow for 12 years.

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
> news:47e3ee74@news.povray.org...
>> Gail Shaw wrote:
>>> 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)
>> Actually, they both occur all the time everywhere. :-)
> 
> Has someone seen tacheons? I admit, I'm a bit behind on some of the lit.

I don't recall. I remember there was evidence they thought were tachyons.

> Matter out of thin space happens, but since they're virtual particles that
> disintegrate (and turn back into the photons that created them) in a
> fraction of a nanosecond, it's not really a factor.

I was just being pendantic. :-) Light goes all different speeds, 
including faster and slower. It's only when you get past a couple 
wavelengths that you have enough alternatives that they start canceling 
out speeds other than "c".  And of course it's exactly "matter out of 
thin air" that are the exchange particles keeping you from blowing up 
into a haze of undifferentiated fundamental particles.

> Or are you talking about zero-point energy?

I'm not sure how it relates to zero point energy. I suspect there's some 
relationship between virtual particles and ZPE, but I'm not sure what it 
is. ZPE is caused by there having to be enough energy in a system to 
keep your fermions(?) from occupying the same space. I.e., you have to 
have enough energy in the system to satisfy the uncertainty principles. 
It's also what keeps liquid hydrogen from freezing. :-)

> I was trying to leave quantum out of this. Thermodynamics alone are bad
> enough. :-)

I was just being a wise-ass. ;-)

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> I've read some of the discussions. Thing with the virtual particles - how do
> you make them real. Only way I know of is a black hole, and they don't make
> good pets.

You take away all the virtual particles that would cancel out the ones 
you want.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect

I never knew until recently that it wasn't a microscopic effect, but 
hundreds of atoms in size and an atmosphere worth of pressure. Pretty cool.

And, apparently, there's no real reason to think thermodynamics applies 
to this energy.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:47e45774$1@news.povray.org...
>
> I was just being a wise-ass. ;-)

As usual. ;-)

Got some references for the light travelling faster and slower than c? It's
not something I've run into.

Post a reply to this message

"Gail Shaw" <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote in message 
news:47e3d1e5@news.povray.org...
>
> "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.
>

It's a pity solar panels are still so expensive...  :-(
And I don't think I'll be able to get my car to run on water soon enough 
:-P

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message

Gail Shaw wrote:
> Got some references for the light travelling faster and slower than c? It's
> not something I've run into.

Sure.

http://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Theory-Light-Matter/dp/0691024170/

It's apparently pretty normal stuff. It's what makes hard doing the 
actual math for quantum physics.  But over the course of a couple of 
wavelengths, the likelihood of light traveling at a different speed 
falls off to near zero. It's mostly something you see with exchange 
particles.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

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

I discovered it applies to whining too, not only energy. Or is whining a 
form of energy?

http://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/forum_thread.php?id=2540#19240

Post a reply to this message