3 ms·
> A superconductor is sort of a perpetual motion machine for electrons, isn't it? It may seem like it, but no. As this link [0] explains, "A prime example is t
by fmihaila 10y ago
> A superconductor is sort of a perpetual motion machine for electrons, isn't it?
It may seem like it, but no. As this link [0] explains, "A prime example is the superconductive metals, whose electrical resistance disappears completely at low temperature, usually somewhere around 20 K. Unfortunately, the energy required to maintain the low temperature exceeds the work that results from the superconductive flow."
[0] https://www.britannica.com/science/perpetual-motion https://www.britannica.com/science/perpetual-motion
- lutorm 10y agoYeah I didn't mean to imply you could get work out of it, just that it's a system with zero dissipation, so it would seem to be a perpetual machine "of the third kind" as referenced by the post above. (If you don't count the work required to maintain low temperature, of course, which I don't think you should since you could place the device way out in intergalactic space where it would attain a temperature near 2.7K without you having to do any work to maintain it.
- Dylan16807 10y agoIt's a misuse of the word 'machine' to use it on something incapable of performing any kind of work.