Big try at gravity wheel

[conradelektro]

I am sure that most people have no problem to understand, that any real "gravity OU machine" must have an "up stroke" which needs less energy than the "down stroke" will provide.

The problem is to conclusively prove by experiment (and not so importantly also by theory) that this is really possible.

Neither the Robeval balance ( compound lever, http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/roberval.htm ) nor any lever system can provide that, as far as we know today. This is a well founded argument. But there might be some contraption which can do it, and the inventor of such a contraption must provide conclusive proof (best by providing measurements and by letting other people do measurements).

And as I have stated over and over again, the inventor has to prove that he has such a system, nobody has to and possibly can prove that such a system does not exist.

To make it very clear: we need "proof of existence", the "non existence" can never be proven. An easy to understand example: in order to prove that a flying horse is possible, you have to show a flying horse and you must allow people to test the flying horse. Nobody can ever prove that a flying horse is not possible. There are many good arguments against a flying horse, but may be someone will figure out how to breed or clone one.

So, we can not discuss the strange machine without being given details and most importantly we need conclusive measurements.

And I see great problems with measurements. It seems to be obvious that the strange machine needs a motor. Lets say the motor puts in 10 Kilowatt. It will be very difficult first to establish the exact energy input (because we have a big amount of energy put in) and then it will be even more difficult to establish energy output, because it should be an even bigger amount of energy. Expensive measurement methods will be necessary to measure electrical energy and most importantly torque in the Kilowatt accurately.

I really can not understand where Red_Sunset sees some proof that the machine is working. Did Red_Sunset talk with the inventor? Has Red_Sunset received any measurement results? Also the patents do not provide proof. And specially the nice drawings do not provide proof. The only proof we have is that a lot of money is spent.

Greetings, Conrad

[Red_Sunset]

I really can not understand where Red_Sunset sees some proof that the machine is working. Did Red_Sunset talk with the inventor? Has Red_Sunset received any measurement results? Also the patents do not provide proof. And specially the nice drawings do not provide proof. The only proof we have is that a lot of money is spent.
Greetings, Conrad

Lets not go on the path of being the 'Jury'.  The inventor is building a machine and says it is going to do xyz. The inventor is not looking for your approval, nor your acknowledgement that his invention is working, neither did he come to the "overunity.com", someone found the info on the internet and posted it here, with the question., Hey look at this, what is this guy building.

What you can do in turn, if you have the interest is look at it and see if you see anything interesting from which you can learn. The inventor made Hi definition pictures available to get a real close look.

It it your choice what to do with them

PS: No motor is needed to start. Also the output drive shaft can only turn in one direction for it to work.
The system can be proven with simple math and physics to work. It can also be build with simple metal parts.  Read my previous post with comprehension and it will become clear. The mechanism to alter up/down stroke is simple and the only difficult part.

Red_Sunset

[tim123]

It can also be build with simple metal parts.  Read my previous post with comprehension and it will become clear. The mechanism to alter up/down stroke is simple and the only difficult part.
Red_Sunset

Hi RedSunset,
  I have a meccano model I built - pictures posted previously - which, I think, replicates the mechanism of one 'piston' of the machine...

It doesn't seem to show any signs of OU. The forces are still symetrical - as I showed in my previous post. But I could be missing something - and I'd be grateful if anyone could suggest anything that might make it work differently.

After playing around with the mechanism - I can't see any obvious way that it could work... I'm quite mystified by the whole proceedings TBH...

Regards
Tim

[vince]

Hey Tim
Try your model again.  Look back at my post 88 you will see that indeed the force required to lift the weight back up if attached to the vertical arm is a fraction of the down force exerted if attached to any other arm. It is basic roberval linkage which  has been proven in science and commercially sold.
Look closely at their machine and you will see that on the upstroke the weight rests on the vertical beam via the arched lever and a permanent stop on that arch. At the top it has a hook that attaches the weight arm to the lower links therefore nullifying the roberval balance effect and using the full length of the lever arm.  The science is real and proven.
The question is,have they achieved the task of automatically and mechanically switching the point of attachment of the two link systems, and will the machine accomplish this task on its own without any external forces aiding the link attachment?
This is not rocket science! For those of you that do not understand what they are doing read up about the roberval balance and you will soon see that they are just exploiting this mechanical anomaly.


Vince

[powercat]

@@ Red_Sunset
nearly a year since you last posted on this forum, and your absolute blind belief that Wayne Travis is an honorable person and talks the truth is the biggest load BS I ever heard, and still after all this time no verification of his device, and note in his new look website that he has removed the monthly update section, you remember the one, he kept promising verification was going to happen very soon, and time and time again he broke his word. 
http://hydroenergyrevolution.com/

I advise other readers to take anything Red_Sunset  says with a very large grain of salt, Wayne Travis and Red_Sunset  have repeatedly failed to prove in scientific terms that they have a working over-unity devise, let alone how to make one work, their history speaks for itself.