THE PERPETUAL MOTION TRACTATUS:
An Investigation Into Loopholes
by Nathan Coppedge
back to PM Main
I've decided to revise my tractatus to show a more readable development of
principles, not via contingency, such as the view that experiments connote laws, but
rather to demonstrate the key reasoning involved specifically in proving perpetual
The older defense, involving laws, can be seen here.
Notice that the new format is more organized and concise.
1. Perpetual motion seems tricky.
2. Many designs have been tempting.
3. There is little evidence in about 2000 years that any has succeeded.
4. Perpetual motion, if it is to exist now, must be a work of genius.
SECOND QUADRA: Critique
1. No single idea is a substitute for perpetual motion machines.
2. Conventional machines use too much fuel. How do they exist in the first place?
3. A conventional machine is not self-running.
4. A conventional machine does not define the word "machine."
1. Individual principles can be tested, and succeed independently.
2. If a combination of principles is requisite, this may explain the difficulty.
3. If we are to believe in machines, we must, by definition, believe in PMMs.
4. To find a PMM, we must simply design a "machine."
1. We begin with a mechanical epiphany
2. It is a puzzle of infinity
3. The answer is to make the puzzle work!
4. It need only do work when it moves upwards! So the downwards is always greater.
"Novis Mundis Est Et Eternum!"
A NEW ADDITION:
THE FOUR RECIPROCALS OF PERPETUAL MOTION
--> It generates energy through motion
-->It creates motion, so it creates energy
-->It is a finite proportion
-->But it's scale is indefinite
-->The (lever) is acting at greater or less than level
-->But the mobile weight doesn't need to go to a higher level
-->If it is linear
-->It may be circular
BROWSE DIAGRAMS OR VIEW THE THEORY OR CONCEPT PAGES
PERPETUAL MOTION DIAGRAMS
RETURN TO N. COPPEDGE'S MAIN PERPETUAL MOTION PAGE
To offer criticism, commentary, or observations to the inventor, please e-mail