>> >> 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.
would it help if the two sides of each vane were made of different materials? Harry
