Hello
Just a quick question
i'll try and describe it as best i can.
Take a cylinder and piston. Connect the piston rod to a pivot.
If you placed this so the pivot was just above a bowl of water, the piston would lay horizontally on the surface.
Then if the cylinder was pushed closer to the pivot removing the air in the cylinder the cylinder would sink
Now then if you attach a magnet to the end of the cylinder and then place another one at the bottom of the bowl of water so they attract each other.
Would the attraction of the magnets be enough to pull enough air into the cylinder to make it buoyant again and thus break free from the pull of the magnet
and return to the surface?
im guessing not.
as then you may be able to have another magnet on the surface to do the pushing, and the cylce starts over.
hmmmmm
it took me a while to visualize your idea...
Its very interesting...
Although I do think it'd be caught in "equalibirium" between actions...
P.S. This sentence concerned me...
"Then if the cylinder was pushed closer to the pivot removing the air in the cylinder the cylinder would sink"
how does this occur... what pushes it closer??? where would this energy come from...?
I suppose you could use a magnet here aswell...
but then it would seem we would only be exchanging the utlization of one force for another in an attempt to alter an old idea in different manner of operation...
Perhaps we could adapt a SMOT assembly to this idea...???
But I still see it as similar to many older ideas...
try it...
Opinion is one thing, proof's in the pudding...
prove me wrong... seriously... There are alot of people that need to be proved wrong...
thats why were here...
actually the more i think about it ... the less likely it seems to work ;D
But need is the mother of invention. When there is a need, we try to find a way to
fill the need. The key here is your thinking and that is what leads to inventions. No
thought, stagnation. If you cant baffle them with bull, then astound them with a
neat new invention they cant live without. And yea, I know the quote is backwards
but thats how you sneak up on them too.
sugra
Can?t you just draw up a JPEG or GIF pic and attach it to your reply over here ?
Then it gets much more clear.
Under Options you can attach a file to your posts !
Regards, Stefan.
am so new to this that i am not sure how the site works or how to reply. All day at work i had an idea floating in my mind and i get home and the first thing i see on the site here is another idea with an aspect that concerns the idea i had. What if you took a radial engine block, lay it flat, replaced the pistons and cylinder heads with magnets, and utilized the coils and distributer and battery to "fire" the cylinders, in thier original order, but with the magnets?
This kills the idea:
QuoteNow then if you attach a magnet to the end of the cylinder and then place another one at the bottom of the bowl of water so they attract each other.
If it is to be a self-sustaining device no external activity (e.g. bringing in or out magnets) should be part of its functioning.
There are, however, other interesting ideas with using conservative fields such as gravity and a hydrostatic force due to formation of voids in liquid.
One general remark ? if the idea with the magnet motors is viable then it can be applied to other conservative fields as well.
Quoteam so new to this that i am not sure how the site works or how to reply. All day at work i had an idea floating in my mind and i get home and the first thing i see on the site here is another idea with an aspect that concerns the idea i had. What if you took a radial engine block, lay it flat, replaced the pistons and cylinder heads with magnets, and utilized the coils and distributer and battery to "fire" the cylinders, in thier original order, but with the magnets?
I don?t see where the "overunity" concept in this is.
A Bulgarian fellow by the nickname of Darklight proposed the following motor based on the combined action of gravity and hydrostatic force (see attachment).
The apparatus is immersed in water. Heavy plates (in red) open up volumes when turning around a hinge under the action of gravity force G. This causes the appearance of Archimedian counter-force F. The resultant force moves the belt. All volumes are connected and the total volume of the system is constant ? when an element closes the gas (air) flows into an element that opens up.
Look pretty promising ! I guess this could work.
How is the air transfered ? Only inside the device or from
above from the water surface somehow ?
That is no so important. May be it will be good to block the motor when we put it into the water. In this position the elements are conected whit each other and with the air above the surface. When all heavy plates reach their equilibrium position, we remove the conection with air above (elements remain conected with each other) and unblock the motor. To keep constant conection with the air above the surface is the best case, but there will be too much constructive dificulties I think.
This will work . The problem is that it will be too heavy with low power output. Because of it's weight and water friction it will turn very slowly. I don't think that is the future of free energy, but the principle is important :)
Darklight, this is one of the most interesting ideas I?ve seen and I strongly encourage you to make a working model. Never mind the now seeming impracticality of the device. The importance of a working model goes well beyond its direct practical application. It will show that excess energy can be produced by a mechanical device in another conservative field but magnetic one. This will have far-reaching consequences.
This concept is similar to an idea I had last year, ( See picture 1)
Finally I found out that the wheel can't work.
I'm afraid that your design has the same problems....
But when I interpret your picture well, it should look more like this ( picture 2 )
I have just drawn it, without thinking very much about it.
What do you think ?
Picture 2
I just came upon this http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm). Obviously, these ideas have been around for some time. So far, the only viable ones for production of excess energy that have been demonstrated convincingly are the production of excess energy in an undivided electrolysis cell (continuous), the SMOT (periodic) and probably the Wesley Snyder motor (continuous). This doesn?t mean that other viable principles are impossible, including those based on buoyancy.
Quote from: macelyne on March 17, 2006, 12:52:08 PM
This concept is similar to an idea I had last year, ( See picture 1)
Finally I found out that the wheel can't work.
Please tell us, why it does not work.
Thanks !
Regards, Stefan.
Position of the hinge is very important! In my scheme the hinge is outside and the desired position is the position with minimum potencial energy - equilibrim , but in other schemes the hinge is "inside" , and the desired position of the plate is that with maximum potencial energy - the center of mass of the heavy plate goes up when the plate closes the element, and in my proposition it goes down => minimum potencial energy.
To move up the center of mass we need energy. In my prpopsition it is not so because the center of mass goes down to local minimum of potencial energy. That's why these schemes don't work and my will :P
I think the link posted by Omnibus explains it all,
I couldn't do it better...
Did you read my explanation? Look at it and think for a moment. Take a hinge with a massive body attached to it. Look what will happen when the hinge is lower than the center of mass of the body, and what will happend when it is above the mass center. There is a great difference. And exactly that difference determines will this work or not.
...but when the hinge is outside of the wheel
the center of mass moves more to the outer side of the wheel,
when it opens up the air chamber !
Yes but this work is done by gravity. We don' t need to put in any external energy. The center of mass of the heavy plate goes down due to the gravity force.
When the mass center goes down we use gravity to do that. Whet it goes up - we need to put in external energy to overcome the grawity force.
with my construction. Why did you draw that?
Please have a look here for physics involved...or not involved.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm)
I am not sure if this will work.
But, I am open to why it would!? ;D
Quoted from Bottom of page:
QuoteAll of these illustrate that geometry is the underlying reason why overbalanced wheels will not work. You may indeed get a boost from the imbalance of mass, but in a cyclic process that mass must be moved back to where it started to repeat the cycle, and that's where you lose what you gained.
Now, if you could use GEOMETRY FOR you, instead of AGAINST...or a combo of magnets and the wheel (perhaps a picture of how the magnets are used)...
Free Energy, I think that my scheme is clear enough. Direction of rotation is exactly the oposite of that you draw! Big volume goes up, small volume goes down. In my scheme the energy that is needed to close elements is minimal, in yours - it is not. That is very important because if this energy is too much, the motor will not work.
never mind..(delete)