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 60 Guests are viewing this topic.

fletcher

No data supplied omnibus ? - how about starting height, finishing height & end velocity - I think I can deduce that if the ball that takes less time to get there it has a greater average velocity.

This is a kinetic world we live in - that means that kinetic energy is the currency for capacity to do work [force x distance] - so we're interested in the final velocity because that will tell us how much work can be done via impact or impulse - average velocity is useless to us because there must be an exchange of energy to be useful to do work & that means a collision at some point - it's at that point that we need to know the velocity to calculate the available energy to do work.

However omnibus, if you can show us that the balls have different Kinetic Energy's but the same energy's of height then you will have indeed brought to the worlds attention a means to create OU & break CoE & you can point out again what a bunch of morons the guys who made the vids are for not recognising the potential - all you have to do is have a variable pitch track to follow instead of a straight line decline - get your hot wheels car set & video out to prove your point.

The scientific community says that the path a weight takes does not matter, that we only need to know mgh = 1/2mv^2 - they say this precisely because of this sort of experiment i.e. the brachistochrone - same heights no change in Ke regardless of the path taken [wish it were different then this problem would have been solved eons ago & we'd have FE from gravity].

Do some homework next time ominbus & engage the brain before the mouth.

ramset

Fletcher
Just so I understand your point?

You feel that both balls are crossing the "finish line " at the same velocity?

And if they are not [the one traveling the longer path "faster"].

There is something "hokey" here, or I just don't know my physics?

I will not be offended by your response.

Thank you
Chet
PS
I see your response above,you feel all things being equal ,what these vids are showing is "impossible"?
Whats for yah ne're go bye yah
Thanks Grandma

itanimuLLi

Omnibus , great observation there is in dead gain in velocity and the trick is to use this to a usable method. if someone can do an experiment starting with same hight and using the velocity to end at a higher point .

Omnibus

@Fletcher,

It is obvious you cannot explain where the extra kinetic energy comes from for bringing one of the balls sooner at the end point (while traveling longer distance, to add pain to suffering), despite the fact that the two balls have the same initial (and final) potential energy and that's the reason for resorting to wishy-washy crap that

Quoteso we're interested in the final velocity because that will tell us how much work can be done via impact or impulse - average velocity is useless to us because there must be an exchange of energy to be useful to do work & that means a collision at some point - it's at that point that we need to know the velocity to calculate the available energy to do work.

Quite the contrary. You should read carefully the definition of kinetice energy and should try tounderstand that in that definition there is no mention of echange of energy. What is seen in the elementary formula for kinetic energy (aside from the mass) is only the velocity. Only the velocity. Learn it from now on and don't continue to clog the thread with nonsense. You lack elementary understanding of physics, as seen, and pushing some kind of new Fletcherphysics won't make up for that.

Yours is a classical case of obfuscation in the face of facts inexplicable to you. You can run but you can't hide.


P.S. By the way, don't bother involving scientific community (not to say what its understanding of brachistochrone is), as if it would side with you. You don't know elementary physics to have the nerve to do that.

Omnibus

Quote from: itanimuLLi on February 25, 2010, 05:00:13 PM
Omnibus , great observation there is in dead gain in velocity and the trick is to use this to a usable method. if someone can do an experiment starting with same hight and using the velocity to end at a higher point .

Indeed. What we see in the videos should be studied carefully and that's one of the most important studies in the OU field. Unfortunately, I can't do it right now because I'm in Europe but will start researching it as soon as I get back to the US.