Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[LarryC]

absolutely not - I've read what you said, and done my best to explain the principles involved - the exact opposite of the person you are likening me two.

While talking about skeet throwers is tangential to the topic, discussing whether centrifugal force is real or not is quite important when discussing whether centrifugal force is the cause of the imbalance in the wheel.

But, on that matter, a simple thought experiment.

You are sat in a car, and it accelerates. You feel yourself being "pushed back" into your seat. What is the force pushing you back? The answer is there is no force pushing you back - you are feeling the car push your forwards, and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive inertia, but it isn't a real force.

The car turns left, You feel yourself being pushed against the right side of the car. What is the force pushing you right? Similarly there is no force pushing you right, you are feeling the car push you left (centripetally), and you feel your momentum being changed. You might call the force you perceive centrifugal force, or you might be consistent and call it inertia again, but it still isn't a real force

This observation has nothing to do with the effects we're discussing here. It was explained at length why earlier in the thread and it's a waste of time to get back into that discussion.

OB and Anti-OB, stop it, you're cracking me up. OB gave the same example earlier as Anti-OB. But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry

[Omnibus]

@Cloxxki,

Of course, just talk. But at least it's not talk on how to calculate. The pure torque approach I'm sure has been tried by many people smarter than us, or even smarter than Abeling.
If he's found a detail that other missed, where to look for it?

I disagree. The torque approach, obvious as it seems, hasn’t been applied before. If you think it has, give a reference or a link. This is the first place such analysis has been made and that’s the basis of a solid scientific approach to find the solution of that problem.

Now, by this

A) The weight is allowed some level of freedom of movement in its way up. Either to:
  - advancing or delaying the energy consumption
  - using accelerations/decellerations effiently
  - cashing in on radial advancement between 6:00-9:00? Or slipping back less 9-11:00 to net a gain?
  - smart oscillations of rim speed positive pushing weight "over the edge", higher starting speed up ramp, slow rim speed during ramp, and then great power from counter weight to complete the half cycle?

B) Any other approaches he might be keeping from us?
  - CF harvesting, moving ramps?
  - eccentric axles, weight, slots?
  - springs and/or ratchets in the weights?

you are deciding that the device isn’t a self-starter which is contrary to the torque analysis.

If only we had something nicer than WM2D to methodically try some basic concepts against each other...

We have â€" AutoCAD.

[Omnibus]

OB and Anti-OB, stop it, you're cracking me up. OB gave the same example earlier as Anti-OB. But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry

Not clear what the point is of giving this link.

[Omnibus]

We need a real watchmaker to get interested in this. There was someone a year ago or so in one of the magnetic motor threads but I can't even remember what his handle was. Someone in expertise in fine mechanics.

[stgpcm]

But in the future, to save you and your other self some time, just point to   http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/HFrame.html under circular motion then centrifugal force.


Regards, Larry

I presume you are referring to {this}

As it says, it is an "effective force" that may be invoked to explain motions perceived if you are in the rotating frame of reference. It goes on to say "A person in a hovering helicopter above the car could describe the movement of the cup and the egg carton as just going straight" and references the centripetal force section.

{Wikipedia} corrects my overbroad assertion that there is no such thing as centrifugal force, and correctly insists that the to rotating observer the  "ficticious" force does exist. however, as we are analysing this from off the wheel (in the helicopter), there is no centrifugal force for us to calculate.

If you want to do the calculations as if the wheel is stationary, and the world is rotating around it, so you can invoke centrifugal force, go ahead - but you might get dizzy  - Also, you will need to account for coriolis forces, which (when you calculate the vector sum with the centrifugal force) ends up giving you a vector which is tangential to the  world that is rotating about you.

Wikipedia also explains the other usage of centrifugal force, which is an engineering usage, and talks about the stresses experienced by the frame as it provides the centripetal acceleration required to cause circular motion.