Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Omnibus]

Everything important has been and is so badly manipulated that it would be prudent not to invoke historical hearsay when discussing these matters. It very well may be that Da Vinci or someone else had such machine made but that fact is erased from history deliberately by the powers that be. They didn’t even need brothers Wright to know that bodies heavier than air can fly and yet the lackeys of propaganda were shoving down the throat of society that it’s impossible. It’s just the commercial or military potential of any idea (which perpetuum mobile lacks) that are allowed to find their way in society. Nothing, no matter how innovative, no matter how obvious, which would work against the financial and economic hierarchy of society is allowed. It is viciously suppressed by those in power. 

We are deluding ourselves that now in the era of the internet things might be different but we see what innovative ways these powers have to have it their way. They have billions to waste for nonsense such as the CERN hadron collider experiment and it’s nothing for them to devise Mylow or alsetalokin scams designed to exhaust, punish and discourage the perceived by them wide-eyed enthusiasts through leading them into a dead-end. Claiming democracy, they can’t just start shutting down web sites of people trying to make perpetuum mobile, the way they have shut down access of such to the academia placing fascist bans on certain research equating it unjustifiedly with nonsense. They could do it then. Now, web in existence, it’s a little different and maybe not less efficient with those Mylows and others paid on-duty characters infesting the discussions with their diversion tactics to discourage any effort out of the party line.

Anyway, I’ve mentioned the above more than once but it has to be repeated over and over again because the forces of discouragement are overwhelming, their goal being to chase away talent from this research.

Now, back to our problems. How can we find systematic ways to assess friction, the way there’s already a systematic way to judge definitively for the perpetuum mobile effect and its reality? The laws of mechanics, regarding torque, are set in stone and, in absence of friction, a given construction has its strict characteristics in this respect. Friction, on the other hand, is variable, it can be made high or low, depending on the materials, lubricants and construction. So, here we have construction again. Especially the left-hand side of it. Given the most favorable materials (Teflon comes to mind) and lubricants (even a pivot based on magnetic levitation), it appears that constructions with favorable torque are unfavorable regarding, say, area of surfaces in contact for one full turn. There should be a way to assess that area quantitatively and optimize it for an optimum torque. Those who claim that perpetuum mobile is impossible should prove that friction can never be made less than that counteracting the excess torque. Such a thing is impossible to prove given the variable nature of friction and it’s theoretical zero limit compared to the clear non-zero excess torque.

[stgpcm]

The above proves you don't know the essence of this problem. Like I said, useless exchange.

The above proves you have no interest in discovering the true source of Abelings perpetual motion, but are intent on leading people down a blind alley.

[Omnibus]

The above proves you have no interest in discovering the true source of Abelings perpetual motion, but are intent on leading people down a blind alley.

You have no grounds to say that because you don't understand the essence of what's being discussed.

[stgpcm]

Please divert your excess energy towards creating a PMM. It could have been invented, documented and independently confirmed halfway your quarrel, let alone if you worked together.

Thank you.

Unfortunately, I am not clever enough to devise a system capable of being such (although I have created one that works if you use Omnibus's method).
I am, however, clever enough to spot where Omnibus has made a mistake, and provide three different methods of calculating the same, correct answer - which also matches the experience of those who have attempted to build the machine - namely a counterclockwise acceleration where Omnibus's constructions predictions show a clockwise acceleration.

[stgpcm]

You have no grounds to say that because you don't understand the essence of what's being discussed.

you only have grounds to say that because you live in a fantasy world where just because you say something it is true.