The molecules in wood are super big organic (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, etc) molecules that can't really "flow" around each other in a liquid.

If you got them hot enough to flow like that, the molecules would rip itself apart - either burn (in the presence of oxygen) or sublimate into gas.

Force = mass times acceleration squared. If you double your speed, you need x4 the force.

Looks like you're right, in fact it shows closer to a power of 0.33 than 1, and far from 2. Neither document goes into the physics involved.

Power is not linear with velocity. It's the cube of velocity.

[removed]

[deleted]

Plowing through the dirt at 5MPH takes considerably less effort than plowing through the atmosphere at 70MPH.

[removed]

[removed]

The Tsar Bomba was also more of a pissing contest winner than anything. The Soviets wanted to have a bigger bomb than the US so they built something completely impractical. It was way too heavy and they had to drop its power so the pilot actually had a chance of escaping the blast after he dropped it.

Hurricanes, for instance, are estimated (by U.S. NOAA) to release energy roughly equivalent to a 10 megaton nuke going off. EVERY 20 MINUTES. FOR DAYS AND DAYS.

37 trillion cells, 100 billion connections in the brain, a body that's never been the same once, second to second in its existence, systems between them all, coordinating the systems, detecting error because it's not a system, adjusting, a changing world around you, learning, understanding, adapting... It's a miracle we can do anything other than lay on our backs and breathe. I think its pretty stunning we can do what we do.

It's also all pointed towards value added activity and using resources well so it only records novel experiences and keeps memories that will help later - usually ones connected to emotion so you do or don't do things that have social impact or make you feel good or might cause harm.

The nuclear weapons that the US and Russia would use in a nuclear exchange are not 100s or 1000s of times the size of the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombs so the premise of this question is off to begin with. More are 20-50 times bigger.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.thescipub.com/pdf/ajabssp.2010.247.255.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjLocOc8rT9AhWXlIkEHfzuBN4QFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3A1t4DfoJgCQDmG8Etdlju

So I read the paper, and saw it did assert that. But here's another paper (that looks more researched) that has draft force compared to speed, and there's definitely not a squared relation there although it does show an increase on draft force compared to speed it appears more linear.

[removed]

There actually is a device that many people have used, which uses a perpetual motion machine as a very important part. Many MRI or NMR machines contain a powerful electromagnet built with superconducting wires. Once you get the current in the wires running, and the magnetic field built up, you disconnect the power source and the current keeps going, forever. (Or until you shut it down for maintenance, or there's a quench failure.)

https://radiopaedia.org/articles/magnets-types

The Chicxulub crater is 110 miles (180 kilometers) across. That’s hardly the entire Gulf of Mexico.

Motion itself is caused by a form of energy(kinetic energy). So extracting energy from the system would just cause it to slow down.

The reason you can't gather an infinite or "close to infinite" amount of power from a machine, is because to do so, would require the machine to create energy from nothing, causing it to not slow down as energy is extracted from it. But that is not possible as it breaks the laws of energy conservation (energy is neither created nor destroyed).

Engine?

To add to this, cancer treatment and some chemotherapeutics are a form of let’s just kill everything and hope that your body will survive while the cancer dies.

The more a cancer progresses the more ethical it is to put a patient in more danger with treatments and side effects because they are more at risk of death. You wouldn’t give a healthy person these medicines but you could throw the kitchen sink at someone at death’s door.

You have it right on the nail for the OP. There is no appeal in a "near perpetual" motion machine because the whole appeal is the perpetual and thus free energy potential of the machine.

To put it into financial terms like another comment did. A perpetual motion machine is like a 100% guaranteed return of some value on every investment, it's great because regardless of how much you put in you're eventually going to make more than that. A "near perpetual" motion machine on the other hand is like a really really small loss guaranteed on every investment (or even better a net positive of $0 value on every investment) which while obviously better than a big loss is still trivially easy to understand as non-valuable / of no real interest to much of anyone.

Windmills and water dams

In order of your questions:

• Your body essentially eats them. Muscle fibers require a ton of resources to maintain, and your body is evolved for efficient use of scarce resources. If you don’t use them, your body gets rid of them.

• While it happens pretty quickly, a week or so after working out, provided you’ve been eating and sleeping, you won’t be noticeably weaker. A good rule of thumb is after about 2 weeks of not doing a lift, drop the weight by 10%.

• See the first bullet for the next two questions.

• Barring unusual circumstances, it’s easier to regain muscle than it was to get it in the first place.

Edit: To elaborate a bit on that first bullet, one pound of muscle takes, conservatively, about 140-150 calories per day to maintain. while that may not sound like a lot, in the environment our species evolved in, even 10 pounds of muscles is a good half of what you could expect to scavenge. For comparison, a pound of fat takes about 40-50 calories per day. To give you a sense of what that entails, I'm 6'4 at about 205lb, in the 85th-95th percentile by most strength metrics, though nowhere close to anyone who does it professionally. My base metabolic rate - that is, the amount I'd need to maintain weight in a coma, is well over 2,000 calories. To gain weight at a reasonable pace, with a caloric surplus of ~200-300 calories/day, I need to eat around 3200 calories per day. That is an insane amount of food for a species that evolved in subsistence conditions (that many people still live under), and something that takes serious effort (and money) to maintain in a healthy way.

TLDR muscle is crazy expensive, energy-wise.

It’s really about the gear ratios. Plenty of very good tractors run on gas engines. The diesel torque thing is a bit of a misnomer

[deleted]