The Physics of Perpetual Motion - Hamiltonian v Lagrangian.

Last edited Sun Dec 15, 2024, 11:21 AM - Edit history (16)

This is not a discussion about real perpetual motion as that is impossible. If you cannot do it, then it is impossible. I am well aware and please, let's not waste time getting into a debate about that.

This post is about the math that you would need to have to prove that you could have device or a magic spell that could last perpetually. At the current time, I don't have or know of any device that can last perpetually, well, any man made device as photons seem like they may make a good run for perpetuity. LOL

Now, as we all know, the biggest hurdle to this notion... possible or not... is that it clearly violates a pretty substantial law. The conservation of energy means you cannot get more out of something than you put into it... well, that's also a law of thermodynamics and probably in just about every discipline you can imagine... even finance probably has that saying... even those fucking idiots might get this idea...LOL

So... this post is not about designing a system that can skirt those laws... how on Earth could anyone be smart enough to not only do that but to somehow prove that concept when the idea that it is impossible is so entrenched that the mere discussion of it brings instant ire and criticism. Not only would I not deem to present such a concept, I am skeptical that anyone would actually understand the math that I would need to use to describe such a miracle.

So that is the purpose of this post. I am not saying perpetual motion is possible or impossible. To me, I don't see how you stop a galaxy from spinning or even a rock from moving straight in space without some outside force or manipulation of systemic energy (AKA ROCKET FUEL!!! Whoo-hoo) but I get it... that isn't perpetual motion... the universe itself cannot last forever. That would violate Noether... How can a universe expand perpetually? Right? Impossible!!!

So we do know that at some point this whole shebang has to slow down and just fizzle out. Now, no one has explained how and clearly this is moving into faith territory.... and I guess, is it really relevant? Let's say the Universe just ends somehow in 50 billion years... just red shifts out of existence... or whatever your solution to that perpetual paradox is... 50 billion years and it's all over... Damn, that was a good run, Right?

Question, does it really matter? I mean, 50 Billion years is slightly longer than even my ego can last and I thought that was not only omnipotent but omnipresent!!! LOL. So not only is perpetual motion sort of biologically impossible to verify, it does seem a little irrelevant.

So let's jump into Cybersecurity for just a second. I'm not trying to undermine your faith that someone can just figure out how to instantly factor a composite regardless of size. That of course would also be impossible because let's face it... you... YOU... can't imagine how that can be possible so it must be impossible. Get that math? Since you don't have the equation to instantly factor a massive prime and just destroy RSA security like $10 pussy in TJ... there is no possible way anyone can. See how that works? Since YOU can't, no one can, it's impossible. You... YOU have proven it impossible. Since you can not... no one can. You. Since YOU cannot... get it... you are the crucial part of that equation.

For something to be impossible then... the classical definition... If YOU cannot do it... it is impossible for anyone to do. Correct? That is math, that is Python... correct? So if I can do it with math or with Python... like print(f'Hello {asshole}')... and I insert your name... oh... cool, done... LOL. But, if I can do Hello World, that is the proof of concept of any operating system. That stretches back to Bell when he called up Dr. Watson the first time and asked, "Is this Joe Momma?" and hung up.

So again... please do not think this is an advocation for nonsense. I swear I meant to get to math. So here it is... It does seem that a lot of people come up with a great deal of inventions that seem to break these very basic laws. A recent encounter with StackExchange proved that these situations are so pervasive, that they are just overwhelmed and disgusted with the ignorance of the body politic. See... when you know physics... when you KNOW everything about physics... when after you have spent time studying it and paid for a degree... now, 'YOU KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT PHYSICS'... that is the only way to know anything about Physics by the way... your ideas are "Not Physics" until you pay for them to be physics... facts aren't FREE DEADBEATS!!!... PAY UP!!! Sheesh!

So for the ridiculous idea of perpetual motion to exist... you would have to account for the energy and momentum that you put into the system. So out in space... F = ma. Well... that's everywhere but well... that's not the real formula anyway but since YOU don't know any other formula... then that is the ONLY formula that can exist. Correct? Since F = ma works for you. It is perfectly correct in every perspective... I get that. I do. Well, of course not in Black Holes!!! I know that... fuck... cut me some slack!!!

So in space... if I put an m and an a together and apply it to some system... the system + F = ma = inf motion in x vector = perpetual motion in x direction = constant joules accounting for all interactions = equal energy conserved, correct? Unless system + past_F = outside force aka... planet? Correct? Correct. Also, when system_received gets an +F, system_transmit gets a -F.

However, this +F and -F are just expressed in the two separate systems as directions of movement now... not magic. This is not Energy and Dark Energy... well... LOL, actually it is but that's not this discussion either. LOL. So this equation is a fact and well... yes... technically perpetual but... that is a natural phenomena that can be derived from the Lagrangian.

The Lagrangian? What the fuck is that?

Oh, You... Right... So the Lagrangian is just a progression of the values over time. So you start with 0 and then you work the numbers through time and well, the numbers adjust through time. So you push the object away... you thrust it and the Lagrangians are all the values of that thrust. So not just the impact on the object but the impact on you as well, as you have the equal and opposite reaction. What a Lagrangian does is model the momentum of the system... at any time period. So if I push something in space... at any point, once all the momentum is transferred between the two objects... that is thrust... but at any point after that, that past F event will have always expressed momentum that is equal to mass times its acceleration_initial + acceleration_additional. It's not still doing that... that happened and now you're moving... see? You got F'ed and now look at you! LOL

I add that caveat onto the the F = ma + (any additional or subtraction of a), as that allows for friction which is a different equation all together... I think, I've no idea. I do know that that is what a Lagrangian shows you as it progresses through time. We know the mass doesn't normally change and so the only things that can are the F and the a. We also see that those are linearly proportional... which proves you CANNOT get more out of something than you put into it. See... proof that if you put 1000 pennies into a bucket, you cannot get more than 1000 pennies... or joules... out of a system.

Joules?

Joules.

Ok? What does that have to do with anything?

Well, that's what a Lagrangian describes... the energy that was put into the system, ensuring that we get no more or no less out of the system. If I put 100 joules into a system then that 100 joules will be expressed as either 100j of energy or 100j of momentum. No matter what happens... those 100 joules are inviolate and each permutation needs to be accounted for... and to do that... you use the Lagrangian.

Um... you know that's not true, right?

What's not true? Which part?

The Lagrangian does not express the total energy in the system. It expresses the joules in the system.

And how is that not the total energy in the system?

Well... have you ever heard of a Hamiltonian?

Yes... of course, I'm writing this nonsense... So?

Well, the Hamiltonian is the process that expresses the total energy in the system, not the Lagrangian. The Hamiltonian accounts for not just the linear momentum but also any angular momentum.

So what, angular momentum has no effect on linear momentum... that's why only Schrodinger uses the Hamiltonian... that system isn't all that useful as the information it gives you is wrong. A Hamiltonian can suggest that more energy is in a system than it actually has so you have to do the Lagrangian and take the Lagrangian... understand?

No... I really don't.

Ok... take Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion. My baby, as all of you know... I am not advocating for that and this is not about that but... if you do the Lagrangians on the Railguns in Space experiment, you get 1 answer and if you do the Hamiltonians, you get another. That's all I will say about that and you can do them yourself if you know how and confirm that... this is not about that...

So if there was a way for perpetual motion to exist... and again... I am not arguing that it does. The only way to prove that it can would be to use both the Hamiltonian and the Lagrangian as the Hamiltonian shows any angular momentum in the system and we know... for a cost, we can convert that angular momentum to linear momentum and add to our Lagrangian. This addition would seem to violate the law of Conservation of Energy and Momentum but when you account for Noether, you see that at each stage, all energies are conserved.

What isn't taken into account and what should is the instantaneous translation of a Hamiltonian into a Lagrangian... right? No one does that. That to me is a shame as I really like figure skaters. Think of that... do the Lagrangian and the Hamiltonian on a figure skater some time...

Try this...
You spin the figure skater up... the Lagrangian doesn't show you shit...well, it does but it's only the joules that went into spinning and until the skater stops spinning... well same joules... but not the same E.

What?

What what?

You said not the same energy but the same joules, that's an oxymoron, Moron.

Oh... right... sorry. So do the Hamiltonian and stop the skater instantly. Here's the scenario. Start the skater spinning at some mass and rads/sec at their given r and then adjust r. Test r equals limit pos and limit neg... what you will see is the total energy that the linear momentum has... which is 0 and the total momentum that the angular has as a function of its radius. Adjust the radius, adjust the angular momentum... easy. What's crucial is the joules that the skater has is the exact same no matter how fast they're spinning... slow or impossibly fast... irrelevant... same joules.

What is variable is the instantaneous energy needed to abruptly stop the expressed energy. The skater cannot add joules into their own closed system... they can only reconfigure that expression. The F=ma is no longer viable... so now we have rotation_energy = (mass * (rad/second)squared) / radius which is F = (m * a2)/r

Same equation, only the straight line momentum is now a great circle... or a geodesic? I forget the term... anyway... the F= ma just adjusts... it doesn't go away and it also means that the real F = ma equation has an r in it... or the derivative wouldn't work...

How do you do a Hamiltonian on that?

Shit... I have no idea... I use AI and just say... Do the Hamiltonian on that... LOL

That can't work... AI doesn't know how to do math.

Shit, you're right. Well, I could just pencil and paper it. It's not hard really and all the equations are there for you so... have at it.

But how would that prove perpetual motion?

Oh, shit, sorry. Again, we are not proving or even talking about that...the only way for that to possibly exist... that is my argument and I am not arguing for or against it. I am arguing that to prove to me that one of your energy or propulsion devices actually work, I would have to see the Hamiltonian and not the Lagrangian. That is my point and the only point...

It is also only my belief... the only way I would ever agree that something could run perpetually is if they accounted for all the energy in the system and that is only a Hamiltonian. That is the point of this post...

So you're not going to tell me how to do it?

Well, I did... I told you to ask AI and well, have it double and triple check and after a while, you'll understand the Hamiltonian and the Lagrangian and actually see what they do... it's kind of cool.

Thank you for reading...

Um... you're welcome?

Not you, idiot.

Oh, sorry...LOL

Comments on the Hamiltonian and Lagrangians will be responded to... any claims of perpetual motion would need to be expressed as a Hamiltonian so I guess if you have that idea... post the math... but otherwise... this is a chat about those math functions only. Any references to perpetual motion or any ideas that run contrary to popular opinion can be expressed...you aren't being shunned... it's just to talk to me about it requires the Hamiltonian... no Hamiltonian... I don't believe you.


This is a chat that has a real description of a Hamiltonian and a Lagrangian. It describes what they are and how to use them. This description you read is how I use them. My descriptions are not remotely formal descriptions and are probably dead wrong. In this chat I did explain the relationship I see and well, as usual, AI agreed that I might have a point. Surprise! LOL

https://chatgpt.com/share/675dcb27-0b74-800b-9bb6-ec666200f9d7
----

To Reiterate. This post is intended to discuss the perceived discrepancy between the Hamiltonian and the Lagrangian. When you look at those two, side by side, they are different when you have systems that include rotations because the Hamiltonian includes the angular momentum and so the numbers can be wildly off from what the initial joules would suggest.

IF... IF... IF perpetual has a mathematical proof, the only place I... ME personally would accept that is if you showed the Hamiltonian as I know whatever scheme you have for perpetual motion cannot be a Lagrangian. If you show me a Lagrangian, I will just think you're an idiot. Sorry.

----

Also... I do understand that you can't possibly use this idea to beat the Bitcoin hash. That too is impossible for you and as a hash is not physics, impossible for me too... The paradox comes if Python disagrees... LOL