Roll on the 20th June

[ramset]

Graham times have changed  I know the talent is here to tell you if it pays  can you post how much power you used in the electromag ?and how much it weighed? and RPM achieved? thanks  ChetPS with the right switching that little fellow looks like it could fly

[therealrasta]

I think i have just realized the knockers are not the problem, the problem is showing the build at all.

the knockers never have to prove or show anything as being done before,not vertical not going over the loop, nothing. Me oi would have thought that anyone who achieved a first in history no matter what it lead to as a final product would at least have that acknowledged, but, the filth of the world created by newtonian mind controlllers of these are the laws they cant be broken simply overides any actuall footage.

so I am going to go with rusty newts and purepowers advice of forget showing us whow to do it, just show us the wheel.

fine when its finished I'll post a video, and you can go and beat thenm do death to tell you how its built after all it can all be explained with newtonian physics, and its all been done before. no more build vids.

I find all your tests and videos insightful.. I would love to see more of the development of your machine.. Not just the finished product.. Which of course we would all like to see , when it is completed.. But your problem solving process is also very interesting indeed.

[purepower]

@purepower
Glad to see you're being constructive. It is greatly appreciated by all.

Anyway, I always said you'd have me hands down in a physics/mechanics debate but sorry dude, I think you're missing the point, you are failing to look at the mechanics altogether.

If you are expending less energy at any one time in a perpetual cycle then this would be a good thing, don't you think?

So even if the end result of a single action as per your example may equate to (in as far as physics is concerned) the same amount of energy used, if you need to repeat the same action perpetually then it would make far more sense to do it the way that requires the least energy at any one time since time is not a factor... don't you think?

Okay, you will argue that the amount of work being done at any one time is far less, but I don't think this is really a primary concern in the initial design concept considering the ultimate goal is to achieve the perpetual momentum in the first place. Ya dig?

Now consider a wheel with multiple arms, all of them performing this action. If you achieve the perpetual motion, there's your torque. This may not be completely accurate but I'd say that the end result power output would be comparable to a multiple of the number of arms doing the work at any one time.

Feel free to correct me, I know you may need to on some points. But I just wanted you to open your mind to this idea. Time is not a factor worth considering if you wish to start a perpetual action. And start considering the mechanics side a bit more. The subject is closely linked to physics so you should already have a leg up. This machine will be using mechanical advantage.

Perform your example calculation but substitute 50 for infinity and calculate that for me... oh, you can't.

shakman

Okay, I think I know where you re going with this...

First off, this is a tangent from my original statement. Archer said to lift the roller a height x will take less energy on a wheel than going strait up. This is not true, as per my support and evidence.

Now that this principle is known, we can look at the system.

To understand a system, we look at a complete cycle.

For a complete cycle, the system will loose a certain amount of energy y regardless of how fast it goes (not entirely true due to velocity dependent losses like drag, but just play along).

Now, the power lost is (energy lost per cycle)/(time per cycle), or y/t.

To decrease "power loss," we must increase t (since y is constant). If we increase t, the system is just going slower.

While decreasing "power loss" may seem better, its "energy loss" that matters.

Energy defines the system, power tells us how fast the energy is being used. Its like distance vs velocity. Once you get to B from A, it doesnt really matter how fast you got there. All that matters is that you are there. (okay, not the best final remark, but I'm leaving work right now so I don't have time to think of something better!)

-PurePower

PS keep the energy questions coming! I'm not the best at electrical systems or magnetism, but this is my bread and butter!..

[ramset]

graham do you still have the prototype Chet

[ramset]

Graham if this device is still around it can be evaluated for efficiency Chet