That is what “an object in motion stays in motion” means. Do you think current models of our universe contradict “an object in motion stays in motion”?
(Unless acted on by an external force, of course)
There’s also the related law of conservation of momentum. If momentum is conserved, then there will always be some momentum, perpetually. If there’s perpetual momentum, there must also be perpetual motion.
It’s possible that we’re meaning something different by perpetual motion. I mean something like this:
In the most literal sense of “perpetual” and “motion”, current physics understanding is indeed that motion is perpetual in the universe.
You might mean something like this:
Harvestable permanent sources of energy.
So the most literal meaning of perpetual motion is consistent with known physics, but harvestable energy from perpetual motion machines is not consistent with known physics.
Which model of the universe has no end?
Does heat death not include cessation of motion?
Cyclic models do not go on forever.
To which model do you refer as perpetual?
Just the normal one. Newtonian and relativity both have this non stop motion
It includes the cessation of interacting matter (I have an intuition to say, the cessation of friction). It doesn’t mean nothing is moving, it means nothing interesting is happening.
Imagine a universe where particle a and particle b are moving perpetually away from each other, and these are the only two particles. That’s heat death.
…but are they the same particle?