Author Topic: Punch holes in this disproof:  (Read 2061 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 84
Punch holes in this disproof:
« on: February 12, 2010, 15:16:05 pm »
We often run into people that tell us that the Laws of Physics are correct and inviolate.
I, for one, would very much like to prove to such people that we, the human race are, are being bullshitted without making an idiot of myself.
My proof that we are being BSed goes like this:

According to the Laws of Physics:
Work = Force X Distance (W=FxS)
and
Energy is defined as: The ability to do work.

Therefore:
Hang an anvil from an electro magnet, energised by a battery, above your head.
Now cut the electrical energy (ability to do work) supply to the electromagnet.
Have no fear:
As the anvil is not moving through a distance the amount of work being done on the anvil,by the electromagnet, is zero.
Therefore no energy (ability to do work) is required by the electromagnet to keep the anvil hanging in mid air.
You'll be fine and make a fortune with your amazing floating anvil!


I expect huge discourses about the difference between kinetic and potential energy, but energy is energy in my opinion
Please let me know if there is some fundamental flaw in my ...er... logic?   :)

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2010, 17:57:47 pm »
The anvil would fall as soon as the power supply is switched off. I don't get your point.
When the magnet is turned on energy is supplied for the magnetic field, generating a force that lifts the anvil against the force of gravity. The resulting potential energy is only sustained as long as the magnetic force is equal to the gravitational force. And guess what you need for magnetic force -> energy.

Formula:
W = F * s where W is the energy, F the Force and s the distance. So we lift our anvil with the weight m onto the height s. The gravitational force is Fg = m * g which for the height h is an energy of W = Fg * h = m * g * h. Now clearly for the anvil not to fall down we need a Force equal or higher than Fg, which pulls in the opposite direction (upwards). Let's take a very simple cable with length l with current I through it, there's a magnetic field with density B, which is dependant on the current I. The Lorentz-force will be F = I * l * B(I).
Now the potential energy the anvil already has is irrelevant when it's in the air, yes. But to maintain the force you'll need (constant) electrical energy. m * g = l * I * B(I), you could use maxwell to calculate, anyway you will surely see that current needs energy.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 18:17:30 pm by haithar »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2010, 18:11:27 pm »
Dig a hole under the anvil  and you've increased its potential energy  8)

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 457
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2010, 18:18:41 pm »
It's only a matter of definition and choosing a coordinate system. Just like electrical potential. We had a discussion some weeks ago if -1000V to 1000V is equal to 0V to 2000V.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2010, 21:10:49 pm »
Energy is not the ability to do work, there is no definition of energy in either physics or thermodynamics.

Entropy determines the amount of work an amount of energy can do.

I have to go, but i'll be back to comment more.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2010, 21:24:27 pm »
QUOTE: "I looked for the definition of energy in 9 college thermodynamic text books, 3 college text books on heat transfer, and 3 college text books on physics. Only a few of the thermo books even discussed a definition for energy. Most just jumped right into thermo without so much as a nod in the direction of an energy definition. Work was discussed but not as a definition for energy"

http://www.ftexploring.com/energy/definition.html

I looked in my thermodynamics textbook too, and they say plain and simple "just because we couldn't come up with a definition of energy didn't stop us from using it"

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2010, 22:14:53 pm »
i can define energy in my own way.. energy is life (the urge for action)  simpley the displacement of opposites.. hot cold, day night, positive negative.. without displacement there is no motion.. no motion is no work.. displacements are relevent to each other according to there space relationship and total potential.. just because there is dissplacment in 2 objects doesnt  mean they will react in the form of motion though.. they can be bombarded with other potentials which can act as barriers to there release (such as a anvil siting on a table).... so what drives life on earth one might ask? simpley the sun  it is the resurecting force that allows actions to occur bringing  forth magnetism and life on earth.. human beings are merely the harmonious reactions reflecting the cosmos emotions (energy motions) we are like complex standing waves in my opinion.. everything is driven by the vital force of electric... even the sun has a source that drives it which i beleive is the universal sun (in the center of our gallaxy) and the universal sun has a force of a higher light and so on...

now i would like to cover an opinion with the events upcoming in 2012.. we are supposedly crossing the galactic center... which in simple terms means if you are in a air plane and are flying under a hurricane and decided to fly up into the storm and pop out on top of the hurricane you make the transition from being below to being on top... this is what is supposedly gonna happen  which i thing has already been occuring.. flying through a storm can bring much chaos (distortion)  but the truth is even a hurricane is polar.. it has a lighted side(the top) and a shadowed side (the bottom) lets hope we are going from the shadowed side into the light!!! for light is the force of god and light shines truth and clairty.. for the light to only get brighter will lead us out of tyranny to freedom. since i beleive human intellegence will increase due to this fact of moving into a higher light. (remember stan saying atoms have intelligence?). also it is inevitable if this holds tru that yes the world will go back into the dark in many years to come and just goes to show that cycles are relevent in every ascpect of life.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 84
Re: Punch holes in this disproof:
« Reply #7 on: February 15, 2010, 17:09:58 pm »
This is becoming clearer to me with a little more thought.
It all boils down to the difference between Potential and Kinetic energy.  :-[

I agree that the anvil has potential to do Work equal to the Force of gravity multiplied by the diStance that it could potentially fall.

It's when you apply your logic to the kenetic energy of the anvil that one makes the error I did.

Here is amother way of looking at it:

When the anvil is suspended in the air by the electromagnet it is not moving relative to the earth.
Therefore the Work done = the Force of gravity multiplied by zero.
Therefore zero work is being done by the electromagnet to hold the anvil in the air.
If zero work is being done
and energy IS the ability to do work. http://library.thinkquest.org/20331/physics/physics.html
then zero energy, in the form of electricity is needed to hold it there and it will simply float there to the amazement of everyone!

I still mantain that the laws of physics are a little vague.
The law W=FxS should be modified to:
W=Fx Potential diStance that the object could move, or is moving, due to said Force.

All I can do now is pat myself on the back for seeing the vagueness in the above law.
 :)