Maimonides’ proofs in “The Guide to the Confused”

It will be difficult for me to elaborate since I have not studied the words of Maimonides well, in fact the purpose of my question was to know whether it is worth studying these proofs.
Anyway:
Maimonides' first proof is from the perpetual motion (if we accept the premises) of the wheels, he assumes that perpetual motion requires an eternal motive (if I understood correctly).
Today we know that motion needs a primary motive, and then it is conserved. As long as there is no force against it.
Thank you very much.

Today we know more than that, that there is no such thing as movement in an absolute sense. Movement in relation to what?
Maimonides operates within an Aristotelian framework of thought, I would not recommend studying these parts of his words (including in the Foundations of the Torah).

Question for Yoav: Why are you even studying Teacher of the Confused?
Why is this relevant to our day?
Teacher of the Confused just embarrasses me…