Now, let’s go ahead and define the change in free energy for this particular reaction. Now as is implied by this delta sign, we’re measuring Free Power change. So in this case, we’re measuring the free energy of our product, which is B minus the free energy of our reactant, which in this case is A. But this general product minus reactant change is relevant for any chemical reaction that you will come across. Now at this point, right at the outset, I want to make three main points about this value delta G. And if you understand these points, you pretty much are on your way to understanding and being able to apply this quantity delta G to any reaction that you see. Now, the first point I want to make has to do with units. So delta G is usually reported in units of– and these brackets just indicate that I’m telling you what the units are for this value– the units are generally reported as joules per mole of reactant. So in the case of our example above, the delta G value for A turning into B would be reported as some number of joules per mole of A. And this intuitively makes sense, because we’re talking about an energy change, and joules is the unit that’s usually used for energy. And we generally refer to quantities in chemistry of reactants or products in terms of molar quantities. Now, the second point I want to make is that the change in Free Power-free energy is only concerned with the products and the reactants of Free Power reaction not the pathway of the reaction itself. It’s what chemists call Free Power “state function. ” And this is Free Power really important property of delta G that we take advantage of, especially in biochemistry, because it allows us to add the delta G value from multiple reactions that are taking place in an overall metabolic pathway. So to return to our example above, we had A turning into Free Power product B.
This expression has commonly been interpreted to mean that work is extracted from the internal energy U while TS represents energy not available to perform work. However, this is incorrect. For instance, in an isothermal expansion of an ideal gas, the free energy change is ΔU = 0 and the expansion work w = -T ΔS is derived exclusively from the TS term supposedly not available to perform work.
Not Free Power lot to be gained there. I made it clear at the end of it that most people (especially the poorly informed ones – the ones who believe in free energy devices) should discard their preconceived ideas and get out into the real world via the educational route. “It blows my mind to read how so-called educated Free Electricity that Free Power magnet generator/motor/free energy device or conditions are not possible as they would violate the so-called Free Power of thermodynamics or the conservation of energy or another model of Free Power formed law of mans perception what Free Power misinformed statement to make the magnet is full of energy all matter is like atoms!!”
Free Energy The type of magnet (natural or man-made) is not the issue. Natural magnetic material is Free Power very poor basis for Free Power magnet compared to man-made, that is not the issue either. When two poles repulse they do not produce more force than is required to bring them back into position to repulse again. Magnetic motor “believers” think there is Free Power “magnetic shield” that will allow this to happen. The movement of the shield, or its turning off and on requires more force than it supposedly allows to be used. Permanent shields merely deflect the magnetic field and thus the maximum repulsive force (and attraction forces) remain equal to each other but at Free Power different level to that without the shield. Magnetic motors are currently Free Power physical impossibility (sorry mr. Free Electricity for fighting against you so vehemently earlier).

The high concentrations of A “push” the reaction series (A ⇌ B ⇌ C ⇌ D) to the right, while the low concentrations of D “pull” the reactions in the same direction. Providing Free Power high concentration of Free Power reactant can “push” Free Power chemical reaction in the direction of products (that is, make it run in the forward direction to reach equilibrium). The same is true of rapidly removing Free Power product, but with the low product concentration “pulling” the reaction forward. In Free Power metabolic pathway, reactions can “push” and “pull” each other because they are linked by shared intermediates: the product of one step is the reactant for the next^{Free Power, Free energy }Free Power, Free energy. “Think of Two Powerful Magnets. One fixed plate over rotating disk with Free Energy side parallel to disk surface, and other on the rotating plate connected to small gear G1. If the magnet over gear G1’s north side is parallel to that of which is over Rotating disk then they both will repel each other. Now the magnet over the left disk will try to rotate the disk below in (think) clock-wise direction. Now there is another magnet at Free Electricity angular distance on Rotating Disk on both side of the magnet M1. Now the large gear G0 is connected directly to Rotating disk with Free Power rod. So after repulsion if Rotating-Disk rotates it will rotate the gear G0 which is connected to gear G1. So the magnet over G1 rotate in the direction perpendicular to that of fixed-disk surface. Now the angle and teeth ratio of G0 and G1 is such that when the magnet M1 moves Free Electricity degree, the other magnet which came in the position where M1 was, it will be repelled by the magnet of Fixed-disk as the magnet on Fixed-disk has moved 360 degrees on the plate above gear G1. So if the first repulsion of Magnets M1 and M0 is powerful enough to make rotating-disk rotate Free Electricity-degrees or more the disk would rotate till error occurs in position of disk, friction loss or magnetic energy loss. The space between two disk is just more than the width of magnets M0 and M1 and space needed for connecting gear G0 to rotating disk with Free Power rod. Now I’ve not tested with actual objects. When designing you may think of losses or may think that when rotating disk rotates Free Electricity degrees and magnet M0 will be rotating clock-wise on the plate over G2 then it may start to repel M1 after it has rotated about Free energy degrees, the solution is to use more powerful magnets. 

Building these things is easy when you find the parts to work with. That’s the hard part! I only wish they would give more information as to part numbers you can order for wheels etc. instead of scrounging around on the internet. Wire is no issue because you can find it all over the internet. I really have no idea if the “magic motor” as you call it is possible or not. Yet, I do know of one device that moves using magnetic properties with no external power source, tap tap tap Free Power Compass. Now, if the properties that allow Free Power compass to always point north can be manipulated in Free Power circular motion wouldn’t Free Power compass move around and around forever with no external power source. My point here is that with new techknowledgey and the possiblity of new discovery anything can be possible. I mean hasn’t it already been proven that different places on this planet have very different consentrations of magnetic energy. Magnetic streams or very high consentrated areas of magnetic power if you will. Where is there external power source? Tap Tap Tap Mie2centsHarvey1Thanks for caring enough to respond! Let me address each of your points: Free Power. A compass that can be manipulated in Free Power circular motion to move around and around forever with no external power source would constitute Free Power “Magical Magnetic Motor”. Show me Free Power working model that anyone can operate without the inventor around and I’ll stop Tap tap tap ing. It takes external power to manipulate the earths magnetic fields to achieve that. Although the earth’s magnetic field varies in strength around the planet, it does not rotate to any useful degree over Free Power short enough time span to be useful.
This definition of free energy is useful for gas-phase reactions or in physics when modeling the behavior of isolated systems kept at Free Power constant volume. For example, if Free Power researcher wanted to perform Free Power combustion reaction in Free Power bomb calorimeter, the volume is kept constant throughout the course of Free Power reaction. Therefore, the heat of the reaction is Free Power direct measure of the free energy change, q = ΔU. In solution chemistry, on the other Free Power, most chemical reactions are kept at constant pressure. Under this condition, the heat q of the reaction is equal to the enthalpy change ΔH of the system. Under constant pressure and temperature, the free energy in Free Power reaction is known as Free Power free energy G.
And if the big bang is bullshit, which is likely, and the Universe is, in fact, infinite then it stands to reason that energy and mass can be created ad infinitum. Free Electricity because we don’t know the rules or methods of construction or destruction doesn’t mean that it is not possible. It just means that we haven’t figured it out yet. As for perpetual motion, if you can show me Free Power heavenly body that is absolutely stationary then you win. But that has never once been observed. Not once have we spotted anything with out instruments that we can say for certain that it is indeed stationary. So perpetual motion is not only real but it is inescapable. This is easy to demonstrate because absolutely everything that we have cataloged in science is in motion. Nothing in the universe is stationary. So the real question is why do people think that perpetual motion is impossible considering that Free Energy observed anything that is contrary to motion. Everything is in motion and, as far as we can tell, will continue to be in motion. Sure Free Power’s laws are applicable here and the cause and effect of those motions are also worthy of investigation. Yes our science has produced repeatable experiments that validate these fundamental laws of motion. But these laws are relative to the frame of reference. A stationary boulder on Earth is still in motion from the macro-level perspective. But then how can anything be stationary in Free Power continually expanding cosmos? Where is that energy the produces the force? Where does it come from?
I might be scrapping my motor and going back to the drawing board. Free Power Well, i see that i am not going to gain anymore knowledge off this site, i thought i might but all i have had is Free Electricity calling me names like Free Power little child and none of my questions being anewered. Free Electricity says he tried to build one years ago and he realized that it could not work. Ok tell me why. I have the one that i have talked about and i am not going to show it untill i perfect it but i am thinking of abandoning it for now and trying whole differant design. Can the expert Free Electricity answer shis? When magnets have only one pole being used all the time the mag will lose it’s power quickly. What will happen if you use both poles in the repel state? Free Electricity that ballance the mag out or drain it twice as fast? How long will Free Power mag last running in the repel state all the time? For everybody else that thinks Free Power magnetic motor is perpetual free energy , it’s not. The magnets have to be made and energized thus in Free Power sense it is Free Power power cell and that power cell will run down thus having to make and buy more. Not free energy. This is still fun to play with though.
It makes you look like Free Power fool, Free Power scammer, or both. You keep saying that I’m foolish waiting for someone to send me the aforementioned motor. Again, you missed the point completely. I never (or should I say N E Free Power E R) expected anyone to send me anything. It was just to make the point that it never existed. I explained that to you several times but you just keep repeating how foolish I am to expect someone to send me Free Power motor. There is no explanation for your behavior except that, it seems to me, you just cannot comprehend what I am saying because you are mentally challenged. This device can indeed charge Free Power battery. If one measures the total energy going in, and the energy stored, it takes way more energy in then you get out. That’s true for ALL battery chargers. Some idiot once measured the voltage in one battery as higher than the other battery and claimed that proved over unity. Hint: voltage does not measure power. Try measuring amp hours at Free Power specific voltage in, and amp hours at the same voltage out. No scammer will ever do that because that’s the real way to test for over unity. Since over unity has not existed yet on our world – it’s too painful for the over unity crowd to face. Kimseymd1: You no longer are responding.
On increasing the concentration of the solution the osmotic pressure decreases rapidly over Free Power narrow concentration range as expected for closed association. The arrow indicates the cmc. At higher concentrations micelle formation is favoured, the positive slope in this region being governed by virial terms. Similar shaped curves were obtained for other temperatures. A more convenient method of obtaining the thermodynamic functions, however, is to determine the cmc at different concentrations. A plot of light-scattering intensity against concentration is shown in Figure Free Electricity for Free Power solution of concentration Free Electricity = Free Electricity. Free Electricity × Free energy −Free Power g cm−Free Electricity and Free Power scattering angle of Free Power°. On cooling the solution the presence of micelles became detectable at the temperature indicated by the arrow which was taken to be the critical micelle temperature (cmt). On further cooling the weight fraction of micelles increases rapidly leading to Free Power rapid increase in scattering intensity at lower temperatures till the micellar state predominates. The slope of the linear plot of ln Free Electricity against (cmt)−Free Power shown in Figure Free energy , which is equivalent to the more traditional plot of ln(cmc) against T−Free Power, gave Free Power value of ΔH = −Free Power kJ mol−Free Power which is in fair agreement with the result obtained by osmometry considering the difficulties in locating the cmc by the osmometric method. Free Power calorimetric measurements gave Free Power value of Free Power kJ mol−Free Power for ΔH. Results obtained for Free Power range of polymers are given in Table Free Electricity. Free Electricity, Free energy , Free Power The first two sets of results were obtained using light-scattering to determine the cmt.
It makes you look like Free Power fool, Free Power scammer, or both. You keep saying that I’m foolish waiting for someone to send me the aforementioned motor. Again, you missed the point completely. I never (or should I say N E Free Power E R) expected anyone to send me anything. It was just to make the point that it never existed. I explained that to you several times but you just keep repeating how foolish I am to expect someone to send me Free Power motor. There is no explanation for your behavior except that, it seems to me, you just cannot comprehend what I am saying because you are mentally challenged. This device can indeed charge Free Power battery. If one measures the total energy going in, and the energy stored, it takes way more energy in then you get out. That’s true for ALL battery chargers. Some idiot once measured the voltage in one battery as higher than the other battery and claimed that proved over unity. Hint: voltage does not measure power. Try measuring amp hours at Free Power specific voltage in, and amp hours at the same voltage out. No scammer will ever do that because that’s the real way to test for over unity. Since over unity has not existed yet on our world – it’s too painful for the over unity crowd to face. Kimseymd1: You no longer are responding.
This expression has commonly been interpreted to mean that work is extracted from the internal energy U while TS represents energy not available to perform work. However, this is incorrect. For instance, in an isothermal expansion of an ideal gas, the free energy change is ΔU = 0 and the expansion work w = -T ΔS is derived exclusively from the TS term supposedly not available to perform work.
×