State of Innovation

Patents and Innovation Economics

UN to Spend Trillions Trying to Create a Perpetual Motion Machine

Perhaps the UN didn’t get the message, however you would expect with all those brilliant climate scientists they would have – you can’t build a perpetual motion machine.  According to Fox News the UN has put out a report on how it is going to create a “sustainable” economy by spending trillions of your dollars.  A sustainable economy is one in which resources are infinitely reusable and there is no adverse byproducts.  It appears that the brilliant or perhaps mad scientists at the UN didn’t take thermodynamics, or they missed the lecture on entropy.  Entropy explains why you cannot build a perpetual motion machine.  It explains that every process results at least in waste heat, which means any process that uses energy cannot be 100% efficient and the economy uses energy.  For more information see Sustainability isn’t Sustainable.  The UN should quit tilting at windmills and perhaps the US should quit sustaining the UN.

PS: The UN also did not seem to get the memo from Japan’s Space program that Industrialized countries are net carbon sequesters.  The Third World owes us carbon reparations.

April 22, 2012 - Posted by | -Economics, Innovation | , , , , ,


  1. That is an interesting concept, namely, viewing the whole of civilization as a thermodynamically constrained “machine” and then asking if anywhere in the Universe there is a machine that is “sustainable” to infinity and beyond.

    On the other hand, the notion of worrying about sustainability through the next 50 years and the possibility that our machine might already be in “overshoot” mode, that might be worth straining a few brain cells on.

    Hopefully, the answer won’t come back as, “It’s already too late”.

    Comment by step back | April 24, 2012 | Reply

  2. Stepback,

    Haven’t we been over this territory before. The UN and company should quit selling snake oil. There is no such thing a sustainability. If they don’t want us to take them literally, then they should define their terms. If we are talking about a crisis in the next 50 years then fossil fuels will easily suffice. Most importantly, Humans NEVER HAVE A LACK OF RESOURCES we have a lack of invention. 100 years ago 95% of population had to worry about enough resources to get through the next year or starve and the value of a titanium, natural gas, and silicon wafers was nil. Because of invention, the value of all these resources is significant and the 95% of the world’s population does not have to worry that their resources will run out within year.

    Comment by dbhalling | April 24, 2012 | Reply

  3. I think where we get lost or what we’re not considering is how we’re defining “MACHINE.” I will readily admit to an idea I have on how we can produce non stop, continues movement of an object; started “By the tap of a finger tip.” The energy put in is nothing compared to the energy produced by the object in motion. My research goes back to, started in 1968 and the discovery of how to produce non stop motion of an object was found in the year of 2012 , September; 44 years. The idea of “Thermodynamics” has been solved. Its properties do exist, however, the remedy on how to discard/remove/be free of the effects of “Thermodynamics have been solved, answered . . . and yes, I have a prototype!

    Comment by Derrick | June 2, 2014 | Reply

  4. Derrick, you don’t understand physics.

    Comment by dbhalling | June 2, 2014 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,934 other followers

%d bloggers like this: