Science Daily: Physicists Measure Elusive 'Persistent Current' That Flows Forever.
ScienceDaily (Oct. 12, 2009) — Physicists at Yale University have made the first definitive measurements of “persistent current,” a small but perpetual electric current that flows naturally through tiny rings of metal wire even without an external power source.
The team used nanoscale cantilevers, an entirely novel approach, to indirectly measure the current through changes in the magnetic force it produces as it flows through the ring. “They’re essentially little floppy diving boards with the rings sitting on top,” said team leader Jack Harris, associate professor of physics and applied physics at Yale. The findings appear in the October 9 issue of Science.
The counterintuitive current is the result of a quantum mechanical effect that influences how electrons travel through metals, and arises from the same kind of motion that allows the electrons inside an atom to orbit the nucleus forever. “These are ordinary, non-superconducting metal rings, which we typically think of as resistors,” Harris said. “Yet these currents will flow forever, even in the absence of an applied voltage.”
Although persistent current was first theorized decades ago, it is so faint and sensitive to its environment that physicists were unable to accurately measure it until now.
-759725.jpg){kind=link}
11 comments:
Well, it's close to being perpetual, kind of like a gravitational orbit.
...or an electron orbital.
Actually, it looks like the size of the loops is small enough that their resistance drops to zero.
No resistance = superconduction, or free electron flow.
But perpetual motion? Hardly.
OIM,
Look up the difference between ‘persistent’ and “perpetual’ motion. Looks like you have charged up again to push your irrational logic.
A nano cantilever beam will respond to any electron that happens to go by, and that will appear like current – basically a flow of electrons. Atoms in metal by very definition, do not “own” the outer electrons and they are free to flow, move around, and movement could be initiated at random, and if the crystal structure is inducive for an apparent flow, it will onset, especially in a ring. Many old-timers used to call this as a source of “noise” in a signal.
KV,
"Look up the difference between ‘persistent’ and “perpetual’ motion. Looks like you have charged up again to push your irrational logic."
The article (which you obviously didn't read) says it's both persistent and perpetual. Their words not mine.
Do you know what forever means?
I suggest you contact Yale University and tell them what irrational idiots they are for observing and experimenting and drawing conclusions that contradict 17th century creationist physics.
OIM,
It is Science Daily that used "perpetual", not Yale guys. Here it is:
ScienceDaily (Oct. 12, 2009) — Physicists at Yale University have made the first definitive measurements of “persistent current,” a small but perpetual electric current that flows naturally through tiny rings of metal wire even without an external power source.
There no additional use of "perpetual" in the Science Daily article.
You decided to title it as: "Scientists Rediscover Pepetual Motion".
There was never a perpetual motion machine, and there was nothing to "rediscover". I believe the burdon is on you to cite the "original" discovery of the perpetual motion.
Scidaily made an error, and you are exploiting it, and spreading bs.
It does not say that they isolated the metal from the earth's electro-magnetic field?
Was this what they were reading?
Consider Ed Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder.
I suspect that is why OilIsMastery uses the word "rediscover".
If the demonstration apparatus highlighted in the, above, link has validity, it suggests there might, indeed, be South magnetic monopoles and North magnetic monopoles, as Leedskalnin explained, and if such is the case, then perhaps, anti-gravity can be achieved.
(Which would conclusively prove that General Relativity is false.)
Quantum_Flux:
You like to tinker with backyard experimental apparatus, you should think of duplicating the device.
Quote from the link: "To prove the experiment I wired the coils (when the device is in a perpetuating state, the coils can be manipulated in any way and even taken off) to a light bulb and broke the circulating current, demonstrating to the professor the amount of light that would flash in the bulb.
I then set the current in motion again and left it in his office for a week. The professor agreed that the same amount of light came out as did the week prior.
He unfortunately didn't agree it to be perpetual motion, yet didn't quite put a finger on what it was. He did briefly describe Maxwell's theories and insist the answer is somewhat complicated."
Isn't that what they all say when the demonstration goes against their desired results, "it's complicated," or some words to that effect.
Let me suggest something. In leedskalnin's pepetual motion holder, the light would of necessity expend some energy, so, it would appear that some energy is being introduced into the apparatus's system, it is not closed completely.
But think about this: A D.C. generator sends out assumed direct electron current, right?
But how does the generator sustain the number of electrons coming out of the generator?
Think about it, there are a finite number of "electrons" in the copper while that is run by the magnetics, right?
The copper has a discreet number of electrons in its outer orbits that are available to be "sent down the wire" as direct electron current, but have you ever heard of a D.C. generator running out of electrons?
Didn't think so.
So where is it getting its additional electrons?
Perhaps, it isn't getting additional electrons, perhaps, it is getting additional magnetic energy from somewhere else, but where else?
Could it be the generator creates a deficit of magnetic monopoles in the copper winding, which then scavages or draws from the environment somewhere.
Anybody got any answers that falsify this hypothesis?
Oops, failed to remember that a D.C. generator has a circuit that flows back to the generator so it doesn't exhaust itself. My bad, back to the dawing board as they say.
Post a Comment