How do I explain to this coworker that perpetual motion doesn't work and breaks the rules of thermodynamics?

How do I explain to this coworker that perpetual motion doesn't work and breaks the rules of thermodynamics?

He showed me this video as a proof..
youtube.com/watch?v=OzOhM4HsIeg

I'm legitimately frustrated..

Attached: WaterScrewPerpetualMotion.png (535x692, 577K)

Trying to teach someone critical thinking from scratch when they're already an adult is generally not something you're going to have much success with, user.

If he is the kind of person that believes this crap then trying to explain to him why it doesn't work is a waste of time. Avoid the subject, 90% chance he will move on to some other retarded shit within the week.

Bob Lazar came to mind

Your friend is right and you're a complete brainlet. Perpetual motion is not only possible but common on the quantum level. You're just old fashioned and think in macroscopic terms. Try opening your mind with some LSD

Perpetual Motion isn't even about thermodynamics.
Its that fact that in any system there will be a bleed of energy because conversion is hard.
So there can't be a pereputal machine because it also generates light/heat/metal fatigue alongside whatever the machine do.

What does he think is the reason these machines are not used as an infinite power supply?
Is it the jews/CIA niggers/liberals/communists?

thats not perpetual motion in the video. The man had to introduce energy from outside the system to get it started.

something like a water wheel might not technically be perpetual motion, but it practically will be

what you described indeed is thermo

Exactly this. Its just a huge-ass flywheel with a ton of inertia. It will eventually slow down.

>because it also generates light/heat/metal fatigue alongside whatever the machine do.
>isn't about thermodynamics
Brainlets should refrain from posting.

yeah you see this stuff all the time. the only way you can come close to perpetual motion is with frictionless motors and gears which in its self doesn't make any sense.

>2 bare wires, just plugs it into an outlet
Isn't that enough proof already?

This
> Perpetual motion
Is not possible on the Quantum level. Violation of energy conservation for a certain time is, though. That's described by a uncertainty relation between energy and time and has nothing to do with perpetual motion
He is kind of right, though. The laws of thermodynamics are empirical. That is, since nobody ever observed perpetual motion, it is not possible. To conclude from the laws of thermodynamics that a given apparatus isn't a perpetual mobile would be a cyclical conclusion. On the other hand by describing the microscopical world via statistical mechanics, one can reproduce the laws of thermodynamics in the Limit of many particles without empirical assumptions.

>Invent perpetual motion generator
>Begin creating new energy from nothing
>Introduce more and more energy into a closed system where energy is never destroyed it only moves around until everything is saturated

Cool.

Based and boltzmann'd

>not possible on the Quantum level
Bit early to say that. Quantum mechanics is a very new field, we don't have the tools to observe most of the particles yet and some particles don't exist in abundance close to us so we can only guess what they do. There is no way Newtonian laws are going to hold up.

AYO HOL UP
SO U BE SAYIN
WE SUM FINNA
HIPPIES N SHEEEIT?

i've heard lecturers at uni say that quantum mechanics is well understood and that cutting edge research is into other things like dark matter, that is, no groundbreaking discoveries are expected from the quantum field

Thermodynamics don't even exist if there's a small number of particles involved, reversion of entropy is not unlikely with a measurable number of particles.

You're probably constantly acting like an insufferable know-it-all and he's fucking trolling you. What an autist.

How can thermodynamics exist when atoms don't exist?

This right here; there are plenty of countries that would be willing to use perpetual motion if it existed. Or does he think China likes being dependent on middle eastern oil, that the US Navy could easily cut off in case of war?

Attached: imrs.jpg (584x368, 29K)