Is this possible according to the laws of physics, and if I did manage to do it, would it be a worthwhile...?

Question

Is this possible according to the laws of physics, and if I did manage to do it, would it be a worthwhile invention, with potential?

Ok, so we have a little machine completely enclosed in a box, and the whole thing is on wheels. This machine has no external moving parts and does not need to interact with anything outside its enclosure to operate. This vehicle(since it's on wheels) can also propel itself about as fast as a turtle.

Is this possible, and is it something useful?

Ps There could be moving parts inside, but this machine does not rely on electromagnetic forces or anything from outside its enclosure.

pps No I didn't mean free energy, I meant it is only enclosed in a box when it is moving, but you can refuel it whenever you like.

Edit: Just in case you are confused, yes, it is supposed to move by violating newton's third law(That's the whole point of the question).

Answer 1

Is it possible?, sort of, in two words: "stick slip"
Does it violate the laws of physics? not if you are relying on the difference between static and dynamic friction (and therefore are interacting with the outside, though perhaps not in an obvious way) on the other hand if you think you have invented some sort of space drive, it is probably violating some accepted principal of physics.
Is it useful? perhaps as a novelty, but moving as fast as a turtle has limited usefulness (unless you are a turtle)

By the way, this has been done before, some didn't even use wheels, just place the box on a table and it moves. One good test for a device like this is to hang it like a pendulum and see if it can maintan a dispalcement from vertical.

Answer 2

Your confusing several principles here. First the fact that the box is on wheels does not mean that it moves forward unless it is acted upon by an external force. This external force could be the "machine" which you don't state what it does, or it could simply be pushed. However, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The object would not stay in motion due to the forces acted upon it by friction. In addition it goes against the laws of thermodynamics that a machine would have the capacity to generate energy without having a supply of energy, as in energy is neither created or destroyed.

Answer 3

Sounds more efficient if you had developed more of a hamster in a ball type machine. If you're not providing power to the wheels or axles, sounds like you're using kinetic force. A ball would simplify most designs and be easier to change direction.

It might work well for moving along the ocean floor or in space, but I'm sure it's not anything a NASA scientist hasn't already worked out yet. I can't imagine any household role it could fill that isn't already exploited.

Answer 4

What planet are you on man? You made absolutely no sense. Try reading what you wrote and try again:

You have a machine in a box that moves around? Great! What the F does it do? Can it bring me a drink at turtle speed?

Answer 5

It is NOT violating the Third Law: If you put it on a "frictionless" surface, it simply can't move however fast you rotate the machine. And there is no element of novelty here buddy, you walk by the same principle...read your books well.

Answer 6

Does it go 'zip' when it moves
'Pop when it stops
and 'whirr' when it stands still?

Doug

Answer 7

uh, useful for what? More info needed please? And if used in industry , for what?