looks like you are correct.

 

This is basically a more elequent way of saying what i said.

You cannot create more energy than you expend performing the operation to create it. If you could use low power motors to create gobs of energy via a higly efficient generator, the entire worlds energy problems would be solved.

But unless the rules of our universe change, this isnt possible.

 

the other day i thought of another possible way to start a car. though its not exactly what you were talking about it may give some ideas.

now i'm not sure if it would actually work, it was just the thought

i have Louvers on my third gen and i though, what if in the middle sections i replaced that, or part of each row, with strips of those solar pads. i then run it to the passenger fender wheel well where its met by a battery relocation type kit.

in that well the generator or solar battery would rest.

if a person didnt want the louvers then they could apply a solar film which could almost act as a hatch tint. ( i checked they have flexible solar film)
though i do not know if its transparent

 

How much more food would we have to eat if we just walked or biked everywhere? Why not just work closer to home and stop driving except for fun? Put an end to the "daily driver" and drive as a hobby. remodel your way of life. if everyone did, it would also solve a lot of the world's energy problems because let me tell you, most of the energy consumed in this world is to shuttle our own lazy asses around.

 

did the OP go to high school? i LOL'd when i saw this thread...

 

ultimately we're gonna need lots of nuclear power plants (thorium or other fuel cycle for fissile, or fusion IF it ever happens), place induction loops in the travel lanes on every highway, and design electric cars (with power meters of course) and let the cars run on the electricity they gain from the induction loops while on-road. instead of paying for gas, the energy you used that month to drive would be included in your home electric bill. all the government's usage taxes will be tacked on also. but, can you say BORING CARS!

 

in my opinion perpetual motion has been achieved by nature, the atom produces motion through protons neutrons and electrons, it is self sustaining.

 

While this is true, there is no good way (yet) to take that energy without sustaining losses in the system, which throws out the perpetual portion.

Nothing will be able to perpetuate itself, unless you can eliminate all of the parasitic loss in the system, and since that is 99.99999999% impossible in the real world it wont happen

 

although this is true that you could not take energy from the system, that proposes a system which is greater than that of perpetual motion, one that could not only sustain it self but generate power in excess, this implies it could produce or manufacture power, but power cannot be produced, only transferred. so in this context the idea that an atom within itself requires no energy for movement of its electrons and gives off no excess is directly in line with the requirements for perpetual motion, it is completely self sustaining. but you are correct in that any machine can never sustain energy without transferring or losing energy to an unwanted medium.

 

Im in no way a physicist but hear me out, isn't it made possible for the movement of protons, nuetrons, and electrons, thus chemical reactions because the environment we live in above Absolute Zero? In which case the movement is made possible due the the energy from sources like the sun? And since the sun will eventually deplete, i dont think you could consider it perpetual motion.

Another thing along the same line of thinking is someone once asked me what i thought would happen if you took a fully charged battery hooked a power inverter to it, and then had a battery charger plugged into the inverter with the leads from the charger going back to the battery to charge it. would it be self sustaining? NO! because we all know that things like battery chargers and power inverters produce heat, and the production of heat prove the loss of energy from the system

 

so did GM send you a response?

 

Im not an expert either, but absolute zero would require you to remove all energy from an atom so teoretically you have disrupted perpetual motion by a transfer of energy, but in reference to the no sun theory I dont believe space is absolute zero, because if you were correct in that an atom ceases to exist without the sun then a space suttle would sustain damage on the side oposite the sun as it will recieve no heat. my question to you is, if you place an atom in absolute zero does it cease to exist?

 

and please forgive my spelling as i have consumed an amount of alcohol that my old english teacher would not approve of. maybe I should write to GM before the effects wear off, I've got this great Idea for a car that makes its own energy, I dont think anyone has suggested that yet.

 

lol good read

 

What about the Atmos clock?

 

No. You cannot get back more energy than you put in.

 

I think you will find this article of interest:

http://keelynet.com/energy/teslcar.htm

Check out the original article and commentary at the bottom of the page.

 

with a direct drive unit and a 1:1 rear end ratio a tire would have to travel a distance of approx. 4.4 feet to achieve 90 mph. Not familiar with older vehicles like an arrow but im assuming the stock axel does not have a 1:1 ratio. seems that a custom axel would have been a little extreme for this type of experiment, this testimony seems syspect to me, like someone did the math for a tires distance of travel, approx 4.4 maybe. then multiplied by 1800rpm, motor speed, but didnt account for drivetrain. just my take on this artical, that said tesla was a genius so...

 

Although, it is possible to greatly increase efficiency with properly designed devices, sending a letter to GM is not going to make it happen.

I have been doing a lot of research the last few days on alternative fuel / free fuel / high efficiency solutions, And... Oddly enough, They HAVE invented cars that run on straight water. No gasoline or other form of fuel whatsoever. But, sadly enough, the guy who did this, All of his work magically disappointed and he died of a O/D in a parking lot. Tesla invented free electricity, If you research on this, you will discover westinghouse, shut the door on him because.... There was no way to meter it. He also invented ways of transferring energy via something like a radio wave. He had a old electronic powered vehicle, with no on board energy source at all. It was powered via electric transferred via the air. I can't explain how it works, but, if you dig around on the internet, there is a lot of documentation.

Point being... The greatest obstacle to invention and technology, is, major cooperations. Lots of great inventions and technology over the years have just "disappeared."

Sorry for the wall of text..... haha.

 

If you study quantum physics, you will realize that the laws of physics, have many many holes in them. But, sadly , perpetual motion has not been invented yet. But, water powered cars have!

On the physics side, looking at it from a therotical standpoint, Water is actually a much better fuel then gasoline.

Using the e=mc2 thing.... Energy = mass * (velocity of light) ^ 2... So...
A fuel with a heavier mass, therotically has more energy.

Pure Water is 1000kg/cu.m
Gasoline is 737.22kg/cu.m

So, by following the physics here, water contains more potential energy then gasoline. But, in todays technologly, This involves breaking h20 into HHO.
This requires enough energy to break apart the bonds...... Which, usually ends up consuming more energy then its worth to make it pratical. Although, There was somebody who did a hellova job at it and made a awesome water powerd car that broke down the bond inside of the combustion chamber somehow...........