In thinking about perpetual motion, I wonder if the word should even exist.
Think about it. Something like perpetual motions suggests that energy can be created and should be (ideally) harnessed; efficiencies and the nuances involved are entirely separate but should not be ignored. Do I believe it's possible? Of course. Is there a need for it? Not really. Would it solve any problem? Doesn't seem like it. This is a case of, "doing something for the case of doing something."
Then, why, centuries ago, was such a word created and defined only to have no real purpose? If perpetual motion can never be achieved on Earth, why "waste" our collective times?
This is probably like asking why a hacker likes to hack, why someone likes to play games, play with cups and toothpicks or anything else. There is an interest in it because one can have an unalienable interest in it.
On the other hand, such a device would be spectacular because it would create usable energy on-demand. In a previous diary entry, I'm sure I wrote that I'd attempt it but do so using geomagnetism while supplemented by Sunlight. Er...I may be changing my mind.
It's not really because I make solar systems...it's because when I look at what I've done, it mimics the behavior. Perhaps it was done subconsciously since I've been aware of it for many years but it wasn't my intention. The reason I believe the answer is the Sun is because:
If perpetual energy could exist, it must exist with consideration of non-planetary visible and invisible, tangible and intangible energy. We are to believe that harnessable energy can exist in such a fashion but we are inclined to believe that a complex series of mechanical or otherwise criteria are required for this [output] to exist; alternatively, it must operate within the constraints and adverse behavior that these opposing energy patterns exist and work in tandem in some minimal and realistic fashion.
To that end, we characteristically defy elemental energy, notably Wind on Earth, to achieve such a goal, when in fact the reverse must be true for it to exist - but this doesn't mean it can't defy each on their own grounds; it is likely required. What's more, however the designer of such a system accomplishes that goal, they must remember one consistent factor; that, on Earth and among heavenly bodies [or our galaxy] that each more likely than not requires the existence of the Sun. The unknown behavior and energy patterns of the Star are likely to create direct causal effects of a perpetual energy system; if the Sun doesn't exist, neither does perpetual energy.
There are, perhaps, reasons against perpetual energy and I discovered that firsthand while working with the 12 Volt Solar Kit and Project Pinwheel. So, what's the problem?
Electronics will most likely have a much shorter lifespan.
Well, I expected as much. It's experiencing it that's weird. Think about it; if our solar systems are able to constantly power electronics, they will cause them to generate a lot of heat energy. Such was exactly the case while charging mobile phones while talking one evening - they will be at full power while charging while you're talking. So of course, they began to get abnormally hot but had no effect on the solar systems they were tested on. This, however, would presume the user misuses or abuses their electronics to drastically shorten their lifespan. I'm not talking about appliances such as refrigerators designed to stay on all the time, only those things that weren't.
Though, it leaves me in a strange situation where if I want to continue designing such systems, they may be too powerful. It's quite the irony since no one uses solar because of the perceived lack of power.
It'll be interesting to see what happens. If you don't believe such an on-demand energy system can exist, it certainly can. It's more of a matter of, "do we want it to?"