Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

Started by AquariuZ, April 03, 2009, 01:17:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 78 Guests are viewing this topic.

Philip Hardcastle

@omnibus,

I saw a post by you saying I broke my word.

I take exception at that, it is not the case.

I said ok to you using my email.

I did not agree to be silenced however I did respect your wish not to debate that rubbish.

I have left you to your quest in peace but do not go about attacking my good name.

My problem with you is that you lead a lot of people on with your claim that gravity energy is proved when the paper you showed me is not a proof, it is an opinion, not a good one in mine.

You should not claim to have proof when you do not then you would advance sensible debate on this forum.

Simply saying to all around you that a b or c is proved so lets move on is wrong unless a b or c is actually proved.

Now you gave me a document that you said proved such and then you expect me to agree by being totally quiet about it, well that is simply wrong omni and unfair for you to expect such.

Like I said I wish you luck but my opinion is the same that I believe you are wasting a lot of time when you could pursue better ideas.


Phil

mrsean2k

Quote from: Philip Hardcastle on April 15, 2009, 08:11:20 PM
@omnibus,

I saw a post by you saying I broke my word.

I take exception at that, it is not the case.

I said ok to you using my email.

I did not agree to be silenced however I did respect your wish not to debate that rubbish.

I have left you to your quest in peace but do not go about attacking my good name.

My problem with you is that you lead a lot of people on with your claim that gravity energy is proved when the paper you showed me is not a proof, it is an opinion, not a good one in mine.

You should not claim to have proof when you do not then you would advance sensible debate on this forum.

Simply saying to all around you that a b or c is proved so lets move on is wrong unless a b or c is actually proved.

Now you gave me a document that you said proved such and then you expect me to agree by being totally quiet about it, well that is simply wrong omni and unfair for you to expect such.

Like I said I wish you luck but my opinion is the same that I believe you are wasting a lot of time when you could pursue better ideas.


Phil

A simple apology for breaking your word would be a lot more palatable than this inelegant wriggle.

You agreed not to debate it here. You insisted on debating the matter despite giving your word - in other words you broke it.

You even apologised for doing so before you started, it's not as if it was accidental:

"Sorry to be blunt, and I know you do not want a debate, but anyone saying that it is proved by that essay is not being rational."

That you decided in retrospect that what you read wasn't worth the promise you made isn't a defence of any kind.

A bit rich to be getting on your high-horse; you did break your word, plain and simole.

hartiberlin

Hi All,
I have tried to model the Bob machine over here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2326.msg171876#msg171876

Still need some help with the model.
There is still a motor attached to get the disc to speed
and the rope pulleys are not yet correct, so the weights are not yet
pulled up correctly.

Maybe someone can fix it.
Many thanks in advance.

Regards, Stefan.
Stefan Hartmann, Moderator of the overunity.com forum

LarryC

Quote from: Omnibus on April 15, 2009, 12:28:46 AM
The statements of the main two inventors about CF slam energy should also be ignored.

I'm sorry Mr. Omnibus, I did not know. If I understand you correctly, the inventors of OU devices should pass their statements by you for approval.

I sure wish that Stefan would post this info on the home page, so that the poor ignorant hardworking, actual builders, inventors understand the rules.

Regards, Larry

X00013

@Omni , ur havin too much fun with this, I just had to chime in. If you want to draft try http://www.solidedge.eu.com/isapi/pagegen.dll/pages?page=free_2d

Its a free full working 30 day trial, save as dxf, then import from working model. I've been running all the various models, in 2d and 3d, with better physics engines than wm2d. If I find somthing  I will post it. I have found the wheel wants to run backwards, kinda reminds me off the "ball race", shorter path or greater distance with gravityt? Speed and distance wins every time! Like u said somewhat, the math of my pc is determining the physics, which reminds me, u all need a kick ass graphics card and kick ass processer and tons of memory to get good results in ANY physics program. thank u n good nite