My Invention

[johnny874]

I think I need to clarify what I said in my previous post.  The attached picture (f2-slide) is taken from the second video (f2) when the pendulum bob has come to a stop at the top of its swing to the inside.  At this time, the main lever is also at its highest position.  Note the position of the pendulum lever relative to the main lever.  In the third video (f3) a cord has been added to link the pendulum bob to the main lever such that when I lift the lever to it's highest point, the pendulum bob is also at its highest point (as determined during the swing test in the second video (f2).  When I let the lever drop, the bob is raised, but not to the initial drop position.  In the video I manually show how high it still has to be lifted.  Open the third video and place it just above the pic so you can still see the pic.  You will see when I lift the lever to the top position, it resembles the arrangement of the levers in the picture.

By positioning the cord attachment point out further along the main lever, this will increase the amount of cord pulled and will lift the bob higher.  Of course the counter weight may have to be moved out further as well or made heavier to counter the increased torgue due to moving the attachment point out further.

  Rick,
You're gonna hate me for this but I'm thinking when the pendulum slows at the end of it's swing that it needs a little push upwards. This would mean when the counter weight is dropping that the pendulum would be lifted from underneath.
When the pendulum is changing directions it is basically weightless and that's why the counter weight drops regardless
which direction the pendulum swings in. If you want to keep trying this, you might start your own thread. After all, you're the one doing the building.   

                                                                                                                                   Jim

[johnny874]

  Rick,
tomorrow I'll post a capture of your video with how I think the pendulum's swing can be increased.

       Jim

[Magluvin]

Jimbo . You can't patent it unless you are rich . Been there . you have to have a patent attorney number one . Then you PAY for a Patent Search (TIme consuming) when and if it comes back clean or not is the question. THEN you pay for provisional patent application(Includes drawings sketches and summary) that give you 12 months from the date of filing but in your case non provisional application which is immediate and requires more money and Immediate CLAIMS plus PROOF and Detailed Drawings ,Explanations ,uses , and then if those criteria are met it depends on what KIND of device it is . this can be as little as 7000.00 but in likelihood 10000.00 Plus all the money you spend for patent searches and non provisional applications .PLUS Maintenance Fees and if you patent it in one country you must pay additional to protect it in other countries .be prepared to dish out 30,000.00 plus for a 9 to 20 year patent .Been there and it was a bad idea .It will give you a bad reputation and cast doubt . People thought i used their research to make money when there was originality involved and it was Cleared thru patent search however  I have Family to think about and they come first and i am not rich and considered in the poverty level of the US . .
Tis better for all to give it away unless you are Rich or find a Backer with money willing to throw it away .

Gadget

You cant patent free energy devices period.  The SAWS document was on the USTPO home page but I dont see it there now. The site seems different than I remember. It may be in one of the menu pages. Or, the warning is not shown anymore and people just walk into the lions den.     When I first read of it, it was on the home page as a notification to patent applicants.

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2010/05/399130.shtml

Im doing a search for the original link. I have it in my drive.

Open source is all we got Jimbony.  Its the only way to spread the word that FE exists to the world. And it must spread like wild fire if presented as open source. MrWayne understands this. Thats why he is trying to get replications(and paying people to do them) working, to show that his device is real and others can build it to prove it to themselves. 

Patenting is a bait for greed(of the patent applicant, and the gov) when it comes to FE devices. But patenting a fridge magnet or post-its is where the big money is, for the simplest ideas. ;] 



MaGs

[johnny874]

  MaGs,
MrWayne has a patent for a free energy device

[Magluvin]

From what I understand it is just a pat application filed or possibly a Provisional pat. Thats his business. If he has or does, it doesnt mean that the patent makes that claim. The patent(s) could be just bits and pieces of the whole, without claiming OU, yet protecting the bits and pieces that are required to build the whole. It is a common thing that some inventors do.

Im just giving fair warning. If Wayne does have, then why pay builders to replicate for 'validation'? And if he doesnt, what ever. Thats his business. I could care less about that and more about the knowledge he is 'giving'.  ;]  But some want more. All or nothing.  ?

Thats the difference between the wolves and the sheep. ;] 


MaGs