Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

Let me be more specific, although I've already said it. Your analyses of the wm2d results are more or less a guessing game, indirect deductions. The only rigorous methodology you've proposed is outside of wm2d and that still remains to be applied onto a proper model. Besides, when applied onto a proper model the results from its application have to be in harmony with the already so much mentioned discrepancy in the position of the pivot and the mass center. If the torque analysis deviates from what follows as a result of said discrepancy, the latter takes precedence and the torque analysis should be deemed flawed.

We should really try to agree on simple yet rigorous criteria and not beat around the bush using semantics or indirect signatures. One such very simple but reliable criterion is whether or not the two centers (axis and mass) coincide. Never mind anything else that the program calculates. If these centers are correctly placed by the program (as they seem to be) at the different moments of turning of the wheel and if they always stay sideways to one another at any position of the wheel, that's a definitive proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Interestingly, that's exactly what's observed with the model of Abeling's device.

[hansvonlieven]

You don't get it Omnibus,

The mere fact that your so called centre of mass is on the right hand side and your rotation to the left, as you have already noticed, must indicate that there is something wrong with the simulation. This simply cannot happen in the real world. If the centre of mass was accurate the wheel should turn in the opposite direction.

QED

Hans von Lieven

[Omnibus]

You don't get it Omnibus,

The mere fact that your so called centre of mass is on the right hand side and your rotation to the left, as you have already noticed, must indicate that there is something wrong with the simulation. This simply cannot happen in the real world. If the centre of mass was accurate the wheel should turn in the opposite direction.

QED

Hans von Lieven

It's exactly the opposite. The center of mass is calculated correctly by the program (which is proven in several ways, as I already explained) but the rest of the calculations are messed up by the program. The fact that the program messes up the rest of the calculations is a moot point, as I already said, because the most important calculation -- the position of the center of mass -- the program does well. I already explained that. The conclusion is that the model of Abeling's rig is a perpetuum mobile at least in the ideal case.

[Omnibus]

One may not even bother with clicking on Run in wm2d. The only thing necessary is to have system center of mass turned on by going to View>System Center of Mass. One also doesn't need the ramp. Just the slotted wheel and the spheres, positioned where they would be if the ramp were present, is enough for the conclusion (the ramp, by the way is very light and practically doesn't contribute to the calculation of the center of mass). This can be repeated for different positions of the wheel within its full turn only to observe that the center of mass is positioned always sideways to the pivot. That clearly is a proof that the device is a perpetuum mobile. Simple but categorical criterion.

This is a simple tool which can also help us in making the device more efficient by reshaping the track (ramp) so that it will keep the spheres at positions such as to ensure maximum deviation between the pivot and the mass center.

[hansvonlieven]

This idea is nothing new. A while back there was the Andy motor. What this guy did was actually rather clever. Rather than having the weights run in a slot he made an iron hoop in which magnetic rollers ran instead of weights.

Below is an animation of the principle and a photo of an actual replication. They never did get it to work.

Hans von Lieven