Roll on the 20th June

[gyro]

Hello All
Been watching this thread, and just wanted to add my 2cents.
The electromagnet that is needed to lift the weights needs to be able to lift the weights using as little power as possible, would this be a good use for one of the "Hildenbrand valves" as the magnetic power in is 1 to 4. 1unit of energy into the coil is suppose to give 4 units of magnetic energy out. The problem with the valve in a motor is the valve is not able to switch on and off very fast, but in this application, the wheel will be turning very slow compaired to a fast turning motor.
Good luck to all who will trying to build this wheel
Bye
Gyro

[jratcliff]

I have nothing particularly substantive to add to this thread other than a big thank you to Mr. Archer Quinn.  I don't know if he is right or wrong about his invention; time will tell.  What I do know is that he is 'right' about how he he is communicating his ideas to the FE community at large.  I find it incredibly refreshing.  I'm the guy who went on, in another thread, about how valuable a 'toy' FE device would be.  Archer Quinn having now described the 'toy' version of his device makes me incredibly pleased.

Now, whether or not anyone here on the forum replicates this contraption is certainly going to be the sticking point.  However, if they do, what excites me the most is that this 'toy' version would be insanely easy to manufacture at a low cost and on a massive scale.  I am of the opinion that the only way to 'convince' the world at large about the potential of FE is an inexpensive widely available device; a 'toy' if you will.  Everyone will buy one, skeptics, hobbyists, and little children.  If the effect is real, then no amount of debunking efforts, suppression efforts, or any other attempt to put the genie back in the bottle would, or could, ever succeed.  How do you tell anyone that FE doesn't exist when they have a toy running on their desktop providing OU output and every high-school student is submitting one as their science fair project?

Keep up the good work Archer.  I hope you are right, and your device works, but, regardless, everyone should appreciate how open and supportive you have been in your effort.  You put all other OU proponents to shame.  Even if your device does not work, or is not replicated, I will still hold a high opinion of you for your good intentions in this effort. 

John

[ramset]

Archer    as a young man i built /repaired aircraft   have done alot since [other fields]  however my brain can't think as far as yours [maybe not as slow as the blonde]   you have a talent here  [i don't]  everything you say makes sense please continue the build    seems like you already told us how this works [given time could probably figure it out] What seems profoundly obvious to you   is not to me[ my lack of understanding  is not your reality] so many of the forums here are really smart folks trying to figure out what somebody ALMOST told them [some going on a decade now] [lots even with patents]     even if you tell us how to build the toy  so like  a  child I can learn what you already know   Thanks Chet

[badassdjbynight]

Please no one be cross with me.  I'm no hater and I wish Archer luck.  As I said, he's very bright and if the "toy" works then at a minimum it would be a cheap device to provide some small power for people in 3rd world countries.

But earlier in the thread archer brings up the point about moving the ball at different angles and how it travels farther at lower angles.  This was to illustrate what we now know about the design of his device - that he's using magnets to slide the weight across.

Here's my drawing and i'll talk about it in the next post

[badassdjbynight]

Let me make it clear that I did not use math or experiments to create this.. it's just a drawing.

It seems to me that in any gravity wheel the trick is to get the weight to move up that extra amount so that you can start it around to the next side.. or offset the weight.. or however you want to say it.  Isn't this overcoming gravity?  Which is possible with energy.  (in archer's case, energy stored in a magnet).

So in my drawing there is a force applied to each weight but the weight is restrained to move at a preset angle and we adjust the angle of the force to match it. Here it is 90', 45' 20' and 0'.  Archer's example claimed that the ball would move further along the plank if the angle was lowered.. I agree with this.  If you lower it all the way to 0' the ball will travel very far... but not up.

In his wheel, whatever force is being applied at the 45% angle to move the weight across would probably move the weight just as far UP at a 90% angle.  Correct?  Or is my drawing wrong?

edited to add:

Also I've been wanting to say this... Archer says Newton was an asshole.  I don't understand the anger.  It's a sign of something else going on.  I believe that any device archer makes, even if it works, can be proven with Newton's math and other physics math.  Telling us NOT to use math and getting angry when we do (or when we question things) is a strong warning sign.  There is stored energy in the magnets and magnets repelling each other is a force that can be measured and used in math.