Brilliant concept, but will it work?

[Belfior]

I don't want to ruin your day, but I got one question. Why would you ever want to start your OU investigation with a device that has friction? It seems to concept and principle of capturing excess energy from the ambient is somewhat alien to us, so I would suggest planning it as efficient as possible from the start. No moving parts, no friction, no air drag and purest copper to avoid massive copper losses.

Then when you have a idea you refine it to take into account Lenz law and other nasty shit. (Good video on how to remove Lenz https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MiEJ6KI8 )

I was just watching a Joseph Newman documentary and this guy probably has found something, but he is also an angry&bitter old man set in his ways. He says you need mass to produce the OU effect. I think he can harvest extra energy EVEN when he uses massive multi ton rotors. I think he has mistaken the flywheel effect for the source of his OU

So why are you trying to "run 100m record under water"? Just because there is water near you and you own scuba gear?

[magneat]

@Belfior,
on your own link a black screen
respectfully

[ramset]

original Contributor here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI7j6YYZ8-I

TinMan doing some tests here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHxxhzh6kRc

and potential energy available in Brad's chart below

this one keeps a lot of folks awake at Night.

Belior...
no stone left unturned

respectfully
Chet K
PS
any comments on why this should not work [what are we missing??
PLEASE contribute....here or at TinMan's You tube link above

not worried about friction seals or  leaking ATM just issues with the theory ??

[Low-Q]

I don't want to ruin your day, but I got one question. Why would you ever want to start your OU investigation with a device that has friction? It seems to concept and principle of capturing excess energy from the ambient is somewhat alien to us, so I would suggest planning it as efficient as possible from the start. No moving parts, no friction, no air drag and purest copper to avoid massive copper losses.

Then when you have a idea you refine it to take into account Lenz law and other nasty shit. (Good video on how to remove Lenz https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9MiEJ6KI8 )

I was just watching a Joseph Newman documentary and this guy probably has found something, but he is also an angry&bitter old man set in his ways. He says you need mass to produce the OU effect. I think he can harvest extra energy EVEN when he uses massive multi ton rotors. I think he has mistaken the flywheel effect for the source of his OU

So why are you trying to "run 100m record under water"? Just because there is water near you and you own scuba gear?

If a machine can run from excess energy, or any other energy sources, friction is not a problem. The goal must be to create a machine that can do some useful work. The machine does not know if it is friction or useful work it is doing. So friction is actually important to introduce into the design - more or less.


I still don't believe in excess energy, but the best concept I've seen this far is the video in post #1. This is the machine I want to test very first.


The other concepts that I've drawn are lifting weights up and down the same distance. Even if they look over balanced, they aren't. Because the rear side, where the wheels are closest, and the mass is closest to the center, the wheels circumference must lift that mass the same distance anyways. So in a way, the wheel is in balance. It will be a nice piece of artwork though. I will build it, and place it on my desktop at work :-)


Vidar

[Low-Q]

This design https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI7j6YYZ8-I change buoyancy in front and rear of the wheel.


One counterforce/countertorque is the difference in surface area on the front half side of each pipe and rear half side. Pressure will push more on the greater surface. Say you have 1 bar pressure at the top, and 2 bar pressure at the bottom, and the front side of the pipe is 100cm² and the rear side is 90cm², then the difference in force on the highest pipe is 10kg, but 20kg at the bottom. This difference in surface area must correspond to the angle between the wheels, and also corresponds to the difference in submerged volume. Do my conclusion seem right?


Vidar