Skip to main content
6 of 17
Shortened the length of question as much as possible, considering. It's apparent magnitude.

Is Work Done Equivalent to Energy?

I have deleted my entire question since it was apparently too complicated for anybody to even begin to understand. In order to make the question more clearly and better understood I have to give some background information first. Ok, so here we go.

Background Info : If 1 joule of energy is stored in a capacitor, or a battery, and then a load such as a motor is powered until it runs down completely then the motor has done 1 joule's worth of work, the work done is equivalent to the amount of energy that was stored in the capacitor, of course.

We can easily capture and recycle energy through the motors magnetic field when it collapses during it's power off phase in it's switching. It's just a simple motoring process. With me so far?

Energy can be recycled several times, thus enabling one to cause more work to be done than what it normally would if the energy is used just one time. By one time I am meaning that a motor drains it's power supply, and then that's it, death of the power supply, no more spinning motor.

The Question : If the energy is recycled through the motor's magnetic field collapsing, repeatedly, aka (The Kick Back Spike) and the motor reuses this energy and is able to do 200% more work, which it can and will do, and work is equivalent to energy, then would this increase the energy of the system to more than 100%?

The reason I ask the question is that it appears that the work done by the motor, which it multiplies, causes the energy of the system to be well over 100%, which I do understand as something that is impossible because of the conservation of energy law.

However because energy easily converts to work done, and work is multiplied, then why isn't the energy multiplied as well?