Chas Campbell free power motor

[linda933]

@linda933

Hans' depiction is correct but the main point is keeping advantage on the drive side.

Chas' original design does not have bearings on the drive and generator pulley so both of them will suffer from direct side stress on the motor bearings. First mistake...

ACCORDING TO LAWRENCE TSEUNG, THE WOBBLING UNBALANCED BEARING-DESTROYING FLYWHEEL IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY KEYS TO CHARLES' NEW SUCCESS! [liNDA]

...Also, the other trick is to use a smaller drive and larger generator and not to run the generator at full potential, meaning just take enough to loop the system and some small extra. This is the only point here. We're not looking to light up Manhattan. 

IF YOU ACHIEVE SELF-RUNNING AND ANY SMALL AMOUNT OF USEFUL ELECTRICAL OUTPUT OR ABILITY TO DRIVE EXTERNAL ROTARY LOADS FOR A PROLONGED PERIOD OF AT LEAST SEVERAL DAYS WITHOUT DECELERATION, YOU WILL EFFECTIVELY HAVE LIT UP THE ENTIRE WORLD, IN MY OPINION.  [liNDA]

So even if this design comes very close to OU without breaking the barrier, there then leaves room for better drive and generator choice, RV potentials, etc., and maybe then Honk or others could jump in with some fancy circuit control.   ETERNALLY OPTIMISTIC..."HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL", THEY SAY. [liNDA]

Like I said on the outset of this thread, Chas' designs may not work, but there is a foundation there that has potential to be explored...

I MUST HAVE MISSED THAT PART...THE FOUNDATION.  WAS IT WHEN HE LIED TO EVERYONE BY SHOWING THE GRAVITY WHEEL HOOKED UP TO THE FLYWHEEL MOTOR/GEN THINGY, WHEN HE DELUDED HIMSELF BY USING UNMEASURED SHORT-DURATION OUTPUT POWER PULSES, WHEN HE DECLINED TO EVEN MEASURE THE INPUT POWER AND, INSTEAD, READ IT OFF THE MOTOR NAMEPLATE, WHEN HE PAINTED EVERYTHING PRETTY COLORS, WHEN HE INSISTED THAT ONLY PULSED LOADS WOULD REVEAL THE SPECIAL OVERUNITY OPERATION OR WHEN HE GOT ASHTWETH TO BEND OVER IN FRONT OF THE WATTMETERS SHOWING EVERYONE HIS PLUMBER'S BUTT AND THUS TRYING TO DISTRACT US FROM THE METER READOUTS WHICH SHOWED 12% ENERGY EFFICIENCY? 

WHICH PART WAS THE "SOLID FOUNDATION"?  [liNDA]

Plus, if you ask me, there are many who are trying this right now. Jesse McQueen is hard at work putting out his patented demo unit as we speak and it relies on gears also...

ANOTHER OBVIOUS CASE OF SEVERE SELF-DELUSION AND ZERO DEMONSTRABLE FUNCTIONALITY.  NEVER SHOWED A WORKING PROTOTYPE TO ANYONE, NEVER MADE A VIDEO, EVEN.  [liNDA]

And imagine. @weri812 had the insight to go all the way back to the beginning of the threads to find the design. Crunch the numbers and make these corrections. Although his corrections to the rpm does not change the 3-6-9 design, you're always better to have the right numbers. Hats off to you guy.  YES...HATS OFF...DEFINITELY...LOVE THOSE NINES!  THAT MUST BE THE KEY THAT WILL MAKE IT ALL HAPPEN, BUT I LIKE MY SOLID GOLD APPROACH BETTER...SO MUCH SMALLER AND LIGHTER!  [liNDA]

I still would like to know what simple idea Chas is talking about? Every bit of "applicable" info would help.

WELL, LAWRENCE TSEUNG SAYS ITS THE WOBBLY FLYWHEEL AND SPECIAL FIRE-PROOF BEARINGS.  HOW CAN YOU IGNORE THAT? 

CHARLES' MAIN NEW SIMPLE IDEA, I THINK, IS THIS:  WAIT UNTIL NO ONE IS AROUND, SNEAK INTO THE WORKSHOP, DO NOT TAKE YOUR VIDEO CAMERA WITH YOU, COME OUT A HALF HOUR LATER, WRITE AN EMAIL TO PATRICK KELLY AND PROCLAIM SELF-RUNNING SUCCESS PLUS 75W EXTRA.  THEN TELL ABOUT HOW THE MACHINE MELTED DOWN DUE TO IMBALANCED FLYWHEEL AND MELTED BEARINGS JUST TO MAKE SURE NO ONE CAN ASK FOR A VIDEO OR LIVE DEMO!  SEE HOW SIMPLE THAT IS?  [liNDA]

EVERYONE SAID HE WAS A GENIUS...NOW THERE IS NO DOUBT!

[wattsup]

@linda933

Like I said. Nobody wants to talk technical gears, motion, inertia. The whole Chas threads are full off the same crap you just "lead out". So obvioiusly, there is a difference between someone who has actually built systems and someone who has obviously not held a screwdriver in their hands.

So you think we don't know the odds, we do not realize the challenge, we do not appreciate the difficulty. So when fishermen leave the port, you are the only one who knows there could be huge and dangerous waves in the coming days.  And those fishermen are just blind assholes wallking into danger.

What you are saying is totally rediculous. So thank you very much for being as helpful as your mind allows. Now we know.

[linda933]

@linda933

Like I said. Nobody wants to talk technical gears, motion, inertia. The whole Chas threads are full off the same crap you just "lead out". So obvioiusly, there is a difference between someone who has actually built systems and someone who has obviously not held a screwdriver in their hands.

So you think we don't know the odds, we do not realize the challenge, we do not appreciate the difficulty. So when fishermen leave the port, you are the only one who knows there could be huge and dangerous waves in the coming days.  And those fishermen are just blind assholes wallking into danger.

What you are saying is totally rediculous. So thank you very much for being as helpful as your mind allows. Now we know.

Yes, it is rather remarkable how, in only a couple of paragraphs, you now know all there is to know about Linda, from my ability to properly hold a screwdriver to my level of practical experience in design and building machinery.  You are truly remarkable in your perceptive abilities.  How do you do it?

If these fishermen are walking, as you suggest, then it is a high probability they will drown unless they have all mastered the famous "water-walking" technique.  Storm or calm! 

I do indeed feel like the long-suffering wife being left on shore as her husband and his fisherman brothers march determinedly and bravely for the seven hundred sixty-third time into a small but deep fresh water lake fully rigged for harpooning blue whales.  "But Dear Husband" she cries one more time..."there are no whales in the lake!  Take nets, not harpoons!  Seek small fish, not whales!".

The hardy men pay no heed to the foolish wench, of course and, those who return always come back empty handed, spent and with great tales of the sea monsters who drove away the whales once again.

Linda


P.S. Here is a hint:  Gears and pullies are analogous to transformers.  You can increase torque at the expense of speed or vice versa.  Like a transformer can increase Voltage at the expense of Current or vice versa.  Power, in either case, is the product of speed x torque or voltage x current and remains constant except for the inescapable losses.  In the case of your approach, I guarantee you will gain no power by gearing or using pullies and your losses will be large in all regards: time, money, noise, heat, wasted energy, frustration, etc. 

You may store energy inertially in any moving mass, of course, but you nor Charles Campbell nor Lawrence Tseung nor anyone else have suggested any actual working theory as to how, when or why any increase in overall energy from input to output should be expected from a system such as you and they describe.  Nor has anyone ever demonstrated such, nor will they in the future. 

Keep in mind as you hurl your insults at me:  I asked you a simple enough question...What is the basis for your belief that you might gain free energy from a system of gears, motors, generators and flywheels?  What is it you refer to as Charles Campbell's worthwhile "foundation" or principal of operation or theory?  You moan and whine and insult me about no one wanting to talk good solid physics here...well?  Tell us the physics theory of how you expect or hope to get freee energy out of this design, can you?  Please?  You can't, of course, without resorting to utter nonsense and meaningless babble like Tseung, can you? 

Build random ideas without any understanding of basic mechanics or guiding theory or working principals forever if you please.  No amount of effort or altruistic hopeful belief will cause a set of gears and flywheel to amplify energy...Sorry. 

It would be far far wiser to forever attempt to lift yourself into graceful flight by tugging upon your own buttocks, truly.  It wastes fewer precious material resources, costs less and, yes, you guessed it...the worst danger is you become an even bigger asshole!  Now you've got me expecting the impossible!

Linda

[wattsup]

@linda933

First of all you're the one throwing the stones.

Second of all, you talk of impossible and the futility of trying. Poor you.

Yet, for months on end you have been on this Forum bashing people left and right, trying to put some "sense" into their all ignorant minds, since you hold the true knowledge. So after so many months, you know now that it is "impossible. to disuade people from this task, and especially from people on this Forum.

So if anyone here is running after the impossible, intangible, unaccessible, it is clearly you and not I or those others here who "do give a damn". So you be happy pursuing your impossibilites and leave us to pursue ours. Could not be more simple then that.

[linda933]

Still no answer, huh?  You have none, do you.  I understand.  You're afraid if you were to force yourself to think hard enough to actually state your theory or even a good hint at it or to put into words what you think the foundation of Charles' machine consists of...that you would be forced to realize in your own mind just how silly and nonsensical it really is. 

That's okay...I'm glad I was able to help you fully realize that your endeavors have nothing to do with science or physics but rather form "a belief system" based on pure hope and strict avoidance of all critical thought.  Congratulations.  You have earned the rank of True Believer!

By the way, I am enjoying this very much and I really hope you are, too.  It's easy to enjoy and learn when you do not get all frustrated expecting the impossible to happen, isn't it?  Cheers!

Linda