Charles M. Brown wrote: > Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring > biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on the > gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way where > it can rest against the sharp or even overhanging slope. If the pawl is > then lifted by Brownian motion and the ratchet wheel moves a little the > wrong way when the pawl is high, possible 50% of the time, than the > wheel will rotate the wrong way. If the ratchet wheel moves a little the > right way when the pawl is high, possible 50% of the time, then the > pawl will return to a low part of the gentle slope near the sharp slope. > If there are many pawls on one ratchet wheel than they do not have to be > biased by springs because the probability is high, and increases > exponentially with the number of pawls, that at least one pawl of a > similar position group will be in position to block counter rotation of > the ratchet wheel. This type of system should behave like a larger scale > mechanically rectified ratchet wheel at thermal power levels. > > I don't think Feynman tried hard enough to break the Second Law. > Fabricating a device that fails with inadequate design doesn't prove > that a better design won't work. > Classical treatment of Feynman's ratchet: > > http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/Groups/parrondo/ratchet.html > > Aloha, > > Charlie > >
First of all, the ratchet would have to be mounted on a stable solid surface for the purpose of collecting energy from gas molecules. Then collisions from *air* molecules would provide the energy.
I would tend to agree with your assertion about Feynman, but what do you expect. The man did not need a world of hurt. Anyone in mainstream physics was plummeted when even insinuating the 2nd law is flawed. One thing for certain, and is fairly well known in this area of physics, and that is ***You Don't Touch the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!!!*** Corporations and Universities are paranoid about reputation. They cannot afford or take the chance of supporting such a person. The odds of a physicist with Feynmans stature attempting to blow holes in the 2nd law are practically zero.
My 2 cents. :) Regards, Paul Lowrance
