Not Half Baked - Half built.

[Ant Burr]

How about a gravity wheel design based on 360 degrees or minimum energy = 0*6?, the frame of a squared hypotenuse!!!


http://www.metacafe.com/watch/796423/gravity_wheel_theory/

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zsTodzq4hXE


Ant

[hansvonlieven]

G'day all,

This is nothing but a variation on a medieval flap wheel. It doesn't work.

Hans von Lieven

[Ant Burr]

It doesn't work.

If below describes the medieval flap or you are a witness to a similar prototype not working, fair enough. But before you condemn the idea so sharply perhaps there is something you should know about the prototype. 

In the Video the three arms go to from 1 to about 80 incrementing squares so the true displacement of 111 incremented squares is not shown, there are at least 31 longer incrementing squares and three arms missing for MINIMUM rotation.

When I started I had no idea how long the arm needed to be or if it could be done at all. Through trial I found the more the arms were expanded the more weight was displaced causing it to turn more.

When I placed weights on the end of the arms the arms 'dugg in', rotation was retarded.

The 0 weight with 6 square waves, each 8 thick, is based on the downward sum of a non-linear 6?.

I could go on to how the specified length allows 0 to ride the same frame as the speed of light but won't here. I have been studying the Law of the Squares by JRR Searl since the early 90's, I find them interesting to say the least.

Each of my arms in the wheel weighed a stone+, anyone interested in making a prototype will need to find a suitable material, cut them to size, be willing to drill some 15,984 precision drilled holes etc. On the up-side as a prototype - the holes in the arms do not need 1,998 bearings, just pins. Friction created by the arms opening and closing works against them opening and closing. It is overcome by the proportional weight of the arm and the force of gravity.

The force of gravity and the angled position of each arm on the wheel opens and closes the arm at predetermined points when rotated. With six arms they open - weight is dropped and accumilated to the diameter, closed - rotation gravity and weight gently drops the arm into the closed position. The arms are sited in equal and opposite places - relative to the axle.

Centrifugal force does not keep the arms fixed in the open position, the wheel would need to rotate at speed for that to happen.

If '1' was defined as 0.01 metres and applied to the arm, each arm - when fully open, the arm would measure around 124.32 metres. This is the equivalent of 6,216 square frames measuring 0.01 metres each. Inside the wheel the arm does not fully open it just oscillates a little back and forth.

The weight on the axle and subsequent friction can be reduced by an axle bearing (no axle bearing on protoype).

Nuff said for now...

[shruggedatlas]

If below describes the medieval flap or you are a witness to a similar prototype not working, fair enough. But before you condemn the idea so sharply perhaps there is something you should know about the prototype. 

Gravity wheels do not work.   You have no idea how many people spent how many lifetimes trying.  You could finetune the wheel for a billion years, fussing with friction, arm lengths and weights, flips, levers, doodads, doohickys, and all that, but it will never work. 

An unbalanced wheel will always successfully find the balance point, and once it does, it has no incentive to be unbalanced again.  I know what you are going to say: "But at the moment it gets balanced, I will make it unbalanced again."  Stop.  You can't.  You will drive yourself nuts.  Whatever gimmick you put in to try to unbalance the wheel from the point of balance will never get started, because the wheel will not allow itself to leave equilibrium.

[hartiberlin]

@shruggedatlas
the Besslerwheel did work !

But most people over here forget, that you have to
store the down-movement in springs, so the potential energy
is not lost for the next cycle.

The perspective is to unbalance a wheel with a shifting weight going down,
but being on a spring,
then "cash in" the unbalanced gravity acceleration of the wheel,
which then has extracted enough gravity energy to
pull up the weight again via the spring for the next cycle to
again unbalance the wheel and "cash in" the next gravity energy.

The Besslerwheel must have have used this principle and was
successful.