Free energy from gravitation using Newtonian Physic

[pequaide]

Let?s review the steps to a free energy machine.

A 1 kg pendulum bob that swings down .051 m (vertical drop) will have a velocity of 1 meter per and a momentum of 1.

Ten 1 kg pendulum bobs that swing down .051 m  will have a velocity of 1 meter per and a momentum of 10.

A pendulum bob can swing in any direction; north, south, east, or west.

Ten pendulum bobs can swing down into the same circle and all could be moving in a clockwise direction in that circle. By releasing each bob at the bottom of the swing the ten bobs could be moving at one meter per second clockwise in the same circle; one at 360?, 324?, 288?, 252?, 216?, 180?, 144?, 108 ?, 72?, and 36?. The total momentum of the circle will still be ten because each bob could be released at the 360? point (in the rotation of the circle) and then the ten would be moving in a straight line. We will not release them; but we will transfer their motion to only two of them.

Using the cylinder and spheres experiment concept we will transfer all their motion to the masses at 360? and 180?. Two kilograms now have all the momentum (10). They must be moving 5 m/sec.

At 5 m/sec the two 1 kg masses will rise (d = ? v?/a) 1.27 m.   2 * 1.27 = 2.548

The system started with ten kg at .051 m.   10 * .051 = .51

2.548 /.5097 = 5   the energy of the system has increased by 500%.

It is quite possible that the circle with the bobs could have been a ring dropped as a torsion pendulum.

Or the circle could have been started as an Atwood?s machine using one kilogram accelerating 10 other kilograms. Or start by dropping one kilogram over a frictionless pulley accelerating a 10 kilogram block (ring) on a frictionless plane. These methods would also yield 500% the original energy.

[pequaide]

P-Motion: I am encouraged to see so many still trying to make free energy with the overbalanced wheel, but others are making a fundamental mistake. The mass that causes the overbalance (or imbalance) must be given the momentum of the more massive wheel and released, preferably, at the high point of the energy production. This is because overbalanced wheels make momentum not energy; you must engineer a momentum transfer that is then an energy increase. You can produce energy with an overbalanced wheel but you have to arrange a momentum transfer.

Here is what I mean. Construct a 9 kg rim mass wheel and place a 1 kg (overbalanced or imbalance) mass on the edge. Let the mass accelerate (drop vertically) .509 meters, and the wheel and overbalanced mass will have a momentum of 10 and an energy content of 5.

Drop the same 1 kg mass in freefall .509 m and you will get 3.16 units of momentum and 5 units of energy.  There is a momentum increase between freefall and the overbalance wheel but not an energy increase.    Formulas used 1/2mv?: mv: d = 1/2v?/a or √(2*a*d) = v : (a) in the wheel is .981 m/sec (a) in the freefall is 9.81 m/sec

If the overbalanced mass (1kg) had 10 units of momentum it would have 50 units of energy.

So if you find a way to transfer all the momentum of the overbalanced wheel to the smaller overbalance mass you would have an energy producing machine.

I have transferred the momentum using the same principle in three different arrangements; the cylinder and spheres device, a large center disk stopped by two air table pucks, and a heavy puck trailed by a lighter puck that swings out and stops the more massive leading puck.

So I am encouraging people to continue experimenting with overbalanced wheels but you must make the momentum transfer to the smaller imbalanced mass, then let the smaller mass rise (as in a pendulum) and then reconnect the mass to the larger wheel after it has risen.  You will then have more energy than when you started, because the imbalance mass will be higher than when you started. 

[supersam]

pequaide,

if i am hearing you right, then if we have an axis with two weights on tethers rotating, then all we have to do is shove the weights off of the perpendicular path that the centrifugal force wants to hold them to at the bottom of the rotaion and let the centripital force pull them back into line, for maximum gain in momentum, on the downswing. 

in other words if we have two bodies of mass rotateing on an axis and we were able, at the bottom of a swing, to shove the one body aside say thirty degrees, it's actual mass would be decreased significantly, because it will be effectively alot closer to the axis, and therefore alot eaisier to lift, by the other weight that is now in it's fully stretched out maximum radius swing.  therefore generating excess power.

at what rotational speed will the first weight be pulled back into the line of maximum radius for it's downward and aroundward voyage?  i think i can think of a way to shove or skew the weight at the bottom position so that the effective radius will be smaller, and therefore the actual weight.  i am worried about hysterisies in an actual model, but that is something for experimentation.

lol
sam

ps:  if this is possible we better figure out how to stop it or, what to do with the extra power.  and i mean quick!!!

[pequaide]

A ten kilogram mass moving one meter per second in a straight line can be caught on the end of a string and it will then be moving one meter per second around the circumference of the circle. After traveling 360? around the circle it can be release, and it will again be traveling one meter per second in the same original direction. Both momentum (mv) and kinetic energy (1/2mv?) are conserved.

A ten kilogram mass moving one meter per second in a straight line can be caught on the end of a string and it will then be moving one meter per second around the circumference of the circle. The mass can then be subdivided into nine kilograms and one kilogram and all the motion can be given to the one kilogram mass. The one kilogram can be released into the same direct of travel as the original line of motion of the ten kilograms. The one kilogram is now moving in the same original direction and the nine kilograms is stopped; what is the velocity of the one kilogram.

[supersam]

pmotion and pequaide,

thanks for your responses.  the idea i have is to take a simple two spoke wheel, around an axis, with the ability to shift the spokes latterally at the bottom of the spin and then bring the spoke back into alighnment at the top of the rotation. 

lets say that we use magnets, oriented the same way as weights,    on the end of our spokes.  at the bottom or 6 o'clock position we place another magnet oriented to repel our weight as it swings by, therefore disorting it's rotation laterally, moving it closer to the axis, at the same time the opposing weight is starting to gain momentum from gravity therefore unbalanceing the wheel.

at what speed will the weight that has been shoved laterally be pulled back into line right as the other weight is shoved latterl,y by the magnet?

lol
sam

ps:i hope i am getting the concept across.  i am still trying to get a picture of it in my simple mind.