Centripetal Force Yealds Over Unity

[MoRo]

  Hope you don't mind if I disagree with you on this point;
"The greater the force, the shorter the time, and the shorter also the space to be traversed"
The reason being is that the slower something moves, the more force it can impart. Also, the greater the distance it travels between 2 points gives it a greater potential.
An example of this last part is if point A is 9.8 meters above point B. Either way, via the straight line or if travelling with a radius of 9.8 meters, they are considered to have identical velocities at point B minus resistence.
How ever, with aradius of 9.8 meters, the velocity of m*9.8m/s/s/9.8*3.14 is greater tha work = mass times distance travelled.
By increasing the radii, the amount of work that can be performed increases exponentially. As such, the greater the radius of a weights downward path,the greatness in the amount of work it can perform increases like wise.

                                                                                                                                  Jim

It seams to be a common mistake that people make, to say "work = mass times distance travelled", but this simply is not accurate.

Work = The average applied Force over a given period of Time.

A given quantity of mass will accelerate or deccelerate at a certain rate over the Time of applied Force and then forever maintain that state so long as there is no other outside force or resistance. This also applies to gyrational and centrifugal activity.

[johnny874]

It seams to be a common mistake that people make, to say "work = mass times distance travelled", but this simply is not accurate.

Work = The average applied Force over a given period of Time.

A given quantity of mass will accelerate or deccelerate at a certain rate over the Time of applied Force and then forever maintain that state so long as there is no other outside force or resistance. This also applies to gyrational and centrifugal activity.

   MoRo,
One thing scientists agree on is that if a 1kg weight drops 9.8 meters regardless of it's path will have the same velocity at the bottom of it's drop.
If one weight circles as in a wheel, then it will take more time to arrive at the same destination at the same speed all things being equal.
The difference is torque. A weight taking a longer path generates more torque which can be converted into force or work.
One example my father gave me a long, long time ago was a weight dropping 1 meter can only lift another weight 1 meter. In a wheel, this is all that is required. A simple wheel of 4 weights might work. What would be missing is this understanding, the path downward would need to be longer to generate extra potential. This would mean that speed or velocity would not be as important as someone would think in a basic design.
It might have the opposite effect and reduce the efficiency of converting potential into work or spin of the wheel. This is because the amount of time a weight is over balanced would be reduced because of the wheel rotating. Einstein's equal and opposing effect. The faster a wheel spins, the less over balance it has.
                                                                            Jim

[MoRo]

   MoRo,
One thing scientists agree on is that if a 1kg weight drops 9.8 meters regardless of it's path will have the same velocity at the bottom of it's drop.
If one weight circles as in a wheel, then it will take more time to arrive at the same destination at the same speed all things being equal.
The difference is torque. A weight taking a longer path generates more torque which can be converted into force or work.
One example my father gave me a long, long time ago was a weight dropping 1 meter can only lift another weight 1 meter. In a wheel, this is all that is required. A simple wheel of 4 weights might work. What would be missing is this understanding, the path downward would need to be longer to generate extra potential. This would mean that speed or velocity would not be as important as someone would think in a basic design.
It might have the opposite effect and reduce the efficiency of converting potential into work or spin of the wheel. This is because the amount of time a weight is over balanced would be reduced because of the wheel rotating. Einstein's equal and opposing effect. The faster a wheel spins, the less over balance it has.
                                                                            Jim

I do not dispute you on the above points... But the point you may not be considering, AND what you should have asked your father, is this...


How high can a 1kg mass be lifted by another 1kg mass dropped from 9.8 meters if that 1kg mass was already traveling at 9.8 meters/sec at the time you drop it?


See... that's the point... once the mass on my bicycle wheel has been accelerated, then, at the top of each cycle, the “drop” already has a certain start speed. Think of it as a state or level of energy. It is only this energy level that needs to be maintain against losses.  I don't have to start from a zero energy state each drop. The curved path of the wheel conserves the energy and swings it back 180° each half cycle. The bicycle jumps up and down because of centripetal forces generated by the speed of curvature of the orbiting mass.

[AlanA]

@ MORO
Sorry, it was not my intention to insult or to be unpolite.
Althought I was a little bit confused because I get no anwer from you (energy for turing a bike with 9.3 miles/hour is 50 watts).
What I meant with "curtain the own claims" is not you work generall but the very theoretical discussion about it. My suggestion: To show facts: input versus output. This spares all theoretical discussions.
But thanks for you interesting demonstration: There is no other idea like this.

[johnny874]

I do not dispute you on the above points... But the point you may not be considering, AND what you should have asked your father, is this...


How high can a 1kg mass be lifted by another 1kg mass dropped from 9.8 meters if that 1kg mass was already traveling at 9.8 meters/sec at the time you drop it?


See... that's the point... once the mass on my bicycle wheel has been accelerated, then, at the top of each cycle, the “drop” already has a certain start speed. Think of it as a state or level of energy. It is only this energy level that needs to be maintain against losses.  I don't have to start from a zero energy state each drop. The curved path of the wheel conserves the energy and swings it back 180° each half cycle. The bicycle jumps up and down because of centripetal forces generated by the speed of curvature of the orbiting mass.

  MoRo,
I think the attached diagram will help you to understand my perspective. One thing I thought of is that Bessler said to make 3 weights fly as one and then go lightly. The reason i mention this is the daigram is a form of basic algebra, -A + A = 0. No extra force and no extra resitence.
By considering this, if a weight is 10 inches from center at it's inner position, then it's movement from 45 degrees before top center has as much resistence as force is generated by it's opposing motion.
Like wise, when a weight moves to it's over balanced postion, it's movement down has the opposing effect when it passes bottom center. This allows for a space centered at the level of the axle (if the devicxe is stopped every 90 degrees of rotation to allow the weights to shift) where one weight will be lifted the same as the opposing weight drops.
What this basic design allows for is that if the over balanced weight is 2 times further from the center, it will have twice the potential during it's period of over balance. Outside of this period, the motion and potential of the weights would average out having no extra force or resistence. If springs were used or if the wheel rotated slowly, then it might work without stopping every 90 degrees.
I guess in it's simplest form, this design allows for the wheel to accelerate even if the drop and lift are the same for all weights.
  Hope you like   

                                                                                                                               Jim
                                       
forgot the diagram   
modified the diagram by adding 2 X's, they show the beginning and end point of the weight's over balanced position in the -B and B sections.