Hey everybody,
here is some "holiday candy" to ponder if you feel for it.
Many years ago an old friend showed me something he told me nobody had seen before. He was earning his livelyhood by rebuilding heavy trucks into breakdown trucks and I had a great confidence in his technical ability and mechanical craftmansship.
He is not among us anymore, and I think it is OK to disclose it. Actually I think he would have loved to disclose it at a forum like this.
This wheel turns as long as there is water in the tank causing the displacement of the weights.
According to my friend it turned for several weeks until too much water had evaporated and the displacement of the boats ended.
He also stressed that the water was neccessary, since the boats had to move forward somewhat by their own before getting lifted again by the engaging hook.
Would it not be possible to replace the water with a magnetic field creating same effect?
If magnetic repulsion worked, the wheel would theoretically not stop for hundreds of years.
Any thoughts on this?
Gwandau
edit: Maybe I should emphasize that the sketch is no more than a simplified guess made from a somewhat vague memory of the occasion, probably far from correct.
.
Practically it is not possible to achieve that condition. When boat enters from sideways on the surface of water, it experiences upthrust (force) from water which holds the boat at that point itself. Boat cannot overcome this upthrust to move forward and rest vertically on water.
I had tried this experiment in a different way. I had made similar hook arrangement weights to rest on ground instead of water. The potential energy gained by the wheel was not enough to overcome the reactive force of the ground. It didnot work.
Quote from: Newton II on December 28, 2012, 10:44:37 PM
Practically it is not possible to achieve that condition. When boat enters from sideways on the surface of water, it experiences upthrust (force) from water which holds the boat at that point itself. Boat cannot overcome this upthrust to move forward and rest vertically on water.
The effects of upthrust from water decreases proportionally with weight of boat as long as the differential in displaced water volume is small. You know when you were a kid and probably just like most of us played with boats in the bathtub and you found that some of the heavier ones with right shape and bouyancy could go quite far when pushed. :)
As I understand, you have actually not tested the water alternative or even considered the parameters to optimize movement of inertia, and still you declare it is beyond possibility?
That's not very scientific of you, my friend.
But in any case, I have neither pride nor ego invested in this memory of mine, it's just a nice old memory.
Regards,
Gwandau
Quote from: Gwandau on December 28, 2012, 11:38:38 PM
The effects of upthrust from water decreases proportionally with weight of boat as long as the differential in displaced water volume is small. You know when you were a kid and probably just like most of us played with boats in the bathtub and you found that some of the heavier ones with right shape and bouyancy could go quite far when pushed. :)
As I understand, you have actually not tested the water alternative or even considered the parameters to optimize movement of inertia, and still you declare it is beyond possibility?
That's not very scientific of you, my friend.
But in any case, I have neither pride nor ego invested in this memory of mine, it's just a nice old memory.
Regards,
Gwandau
perpetual motion has been around for 200 years and failed, where does it stop? it won't stop because of idiots who don't know when to stop.
Quote from: Gwandau on December 28, 2012, 11:38:38 PM
The effects of upthrust from water decreases proportionally with weight of boat as long as the differential in displaced water volume is small. You know when you were a kid and probably just like most of us played with boats in the bathtub and you found that some of the heavier ones with right shape and bouyancy could go quite far when pushed. :)
As I understand, you have actually not tested the water alternative or even considered the parameters to optimize movement of inertia, and still you declare it is beyond possibility?
That's not very scientific of you, my friend.
But in any case, I have neither pride nor ego invested in this memory of mine, it's just a nice old memory.
Regards,
Gwandau
Forget upthrust, friction, everything you are trying to consider. This is impossible for the same reason all imbalanced wheels are impossible. The device always seeks a balance, and gets it. However you arrange the device, there is a midpoint, where all the levers are in balance, and there is nothing you can do to keep the device from reaching this point except to infuse energy.
Just think of a most basic unbalanced wheel. One weight on the left, two weights on the right. The two weights will fall and there will be two weights on the bottom, one on top.
Everything else is just a more complicated version of the above. You can fiddle by adding more weight, suspending some weights in water, adding levers that make weights fall, but there is nothing you can add which will stop the heavier side from settling into equilibrium.
Gwandau,
I like you ,and if this is how your friend "imagined possibilities"
I would have liked him too !
Thanks for sharing the "possibility"!
Chet
Guys,
this is actually a more interesting discussion than it may seem at first sight.
You all know just as well as me that the only way to reach a higher output than the observed input is through the interaction of misregarded or unknown parameters. Otherwise it remains a balanced system and nothing happens.
We all know that, only a quite slow person would not get such basic facts, but as indicated there is more to it than meets the eye.
A lot of unfortunate presumtions are thriving in this forum, making the very forward move into novel areas full of friction.
I know you guys are full of well meaning in your attempts to "help" in regard what is possible or not possible.
But you have a tendency to lock yourself in behind preconceptions almost as narrow as orthodox science, preconceptions based upon your own experiments which you seem to regard as fully covering the area of interest.
Overunity by definition is impossible of course, we all know that. Getting COP>1 is alway about engaging parameters overlooked by standard thinking. It has nothing to do with energy from nowhere.
Gravity and magnetism are such unknown phenomena, we only know the effects hitherto registered and fascilitated, but we really have no idea what is the source dynamics of these forces.
Therefore it is very unscientific to label gravity and magnetism as conservative systems, like many of you with great emphasis and eagerness tend to inform others here at OU.
This is an utterly unscientific act and has one sole effect, making the spirit of those not well enough versed in the contemporary scientific limitations to deflate and lose their zeal.
Long live the independent research and long live those who dare oppose the guardians of selfappointed conservationism!
Beyond the thickhead domains await great novel areas of discovery, and this has been historically repeated again and again through our scientific paradigm changes.
And remember that nearly all big breakthroughs has been made by people not engaged in the contemporary scientific stasis, and the few discoverers who did belong to the orthodox scientific community all stumbled upon their findings by pure chance.
You will get nowhere if you keep your mindset inside the box.
Get out of that box guys, get back to the childhood mindset, like Einstein and Tesla. They were kids at heart, accepting nothing for granted.
I'm not advocating the functionality of this wheel described here, I am just using it to highlight a very unfortunate situation that have eveolved here in the OU- forum.
The only fruitful critiscism that should be present here is when you have performed and exact replica of the suggested experiment and failed, but remember to be humble even there since you might still have overlooked some small hovewer important parameters.
People who seem to focus on stomping out any fire that does not fit into their own paradigm are lacking an essential ingredient in free research.
They lack an Open Mind.
Regards,
Gwandau
PS. @ ramset, you seem to be the only guy who read the reason for my posting, to honor an old friend. He was highly respected by his friends and family as a man of great integrity and honor, and his past as a fighter in the airborne division of south Sweden had given him a reputation of reliability and high esteem. I would find it very odd if he for one single time in his life decided to tell a lie right into my face. For what?)
Gwandau
Today more than ever "things change" [lately the speed of light is even in question].
Our reality has even begun to be questioned by science .{Quantum ""Viewer"" ].
Some Peeps would not sleep well unless they could count on things like
Gravity ..........
Let them have their rest now,Very soon things will stir......
"all things are possible"!
But thats just me ,[you Too I think?].
Thank you for sharing your friends thoughts,I wish I had enough time to play with that wheel,In my eyes it just needs a little Luv from someone...
Chet
Quote from: Gianna on December 29, 2012, 03:42:42 PM
Actually no. They are intelligent enough to realise that gravity and magnetism are conservative fields and due to that fact it precludes ANY mechanism from being devised that would generate energy using only those forces as the prime mover. Also included is buoyancy which is simply an effect of gravity on masses of different densities.
Gianna,
Never stop put anything to question. The moment you stop questioning everything unconditionally, you are dead weight in the novel areas of research.
Sure you have your own wild dreams. What are your favourite white spots on the map, where science lack ability to grasp what's going on?
Or do you really believe contemporary science has got it all covered? In that case, what on earth are you doing here at OU ??
Sure you must have your own wild route heading in a direction that opposes everything science has told us?
In what direction are your Open Mind looking?
Cheers,
Gwandau
Quote from: ramset on December 29, 2012, 04:29:14 PM
Gwandau
Today more than ever "things change" [lately the speed of light is even in question].
Our reality has even begun to be questioned by science .{Quantum ""Viewer"" ].
Some Peeps would not sleep well unless they could count on things like
Gravity ..........
Let them have their rest now,Very soon things will stir......
"all things are possible"!
But thats just me ,[you Too I think?].
Thank you for sharing your friends thoughts,I wish I had enough time to play with that wheel,In my eyes it just needs a little Luv from someone...
Chet
Ramset,
thank you for your input, especially when considering that we earlier have been quite agressive antagonists in regard to the mystery of life.
The Wheel posted here seems actually to carry some effect. It has started things to roll. ;)
As far as I am concerned, the very idea of light being something that travels from A to B is the unfortunate result of preconceptions based upon tests that really does not prove anything but a timedifferential between "light source" and receptor.
Contemporary science takes so much for granted, primarily based upon the way our senses are reacting upon input. Our non-holistic science of today is good enough for many pragmatic things, where the actual fundamental source dynamics behind physical events like gravity and magnetism are unimportant.
You do not need such knowledge to build an electron michroscope or whatever, you just need to know how magnetism relates to other phenomena. Science today have taken a quite bold and unfounded step into the very definitions of fundamental dynamics and a a result have drawn a lot of wild conclusions primarily based upon the limited human sensory input, instead of keeping to the basic knowledge of how to use these forces pragmatically, which is actually the only thing we really do know.
But to take that critical step beyond the known boundaries one has to let go of preconceptions and put one leg out into chaos and start fishing. Those who believe novel areas may be reached by keeping footing on known ground, are going to stay on known ground, the only thing accomplished from known ground is the ability to improve what already is there, like making a better vacum cleaner, and so forth. That has nothing to do with novel research.
Regarding the outlook onto physical phenomena through the eyes of quantum theory, I am not sure this angle of approach is a fruitful angle. I am not saying it is not a valid angle, I am merely saying that the angle of approach is an unfavourable angle, making everything entangled in an abysmal turmoil of ever increasing paradoxes and contradictions.
I regard quantum theory as being in the same unfortunate situation as when we once thought our world was a static center surrounded by a moving celestial vicinity. The observations made of the celestial paths in the sky around the static flat earth was very correctly noted, but the paths made by the planets were very strange and really did not make any sense at all.
Not until we started to look at reality from the viewpoint of a non static round earth moving around the sun, all the paths of the planets became harmonic and easily predictable. The same situation is holding mankind in its grip presently when it comes to quatum theory. We just observe reality from an angle that tells us very little of what actually is going on. As soon as mankind realizes that there is no such thing as light speed or physical matter or objective time, or even a linear universe, we will move into next level of understanding.
Regards,
Gwandau
Quote from: eatenbyagrue on December 29, 2012, 04:29:41 AM
Forget upthrust, friction, everything you are trying to consider. This is impossible for the same reason all imbalanced wheels are impossible. The device always seeks a balance, and gets it. However you arrange the device, there is a midpoint, where all the levers are in balance, and there is nothing you can do to keep the device from reaching this point except to infuse energy.
Just think of a most basic unbalanced wheel. One weight on the left, two weights on the right. The two weights will fall and there will be two weights on the bottom, one on top.
Everything else is just a more complicated version of the above. You can fiddle by adding more weight, suspending some weights in water, adding levers that make weights fall, but there is nothing you can add which will stop the heavier side from settling into equilibrium.
Eatenbyagrue,
That is a very static outlook on things, my friend.
Where are your wild side, the daring one, the childish one, unafraid of questioning the most obvious?
We need a lot more radical thinking if we ever will manage to find the sweet spot of our dreams.
It is all about creating unbalance, the very portal to COP>1 systems is opened by creating unbalance in a system.
(COP>1 is just a term indicating that we have unknown parameters working for us)
Do not get caught in the prison of preconceptions,
any balanced system may be altered into a state of unbalance, given the correct parameters. The moment we hack the code behind the electromagnetic field dynamics we will have the means of altering the visible vectors of the electromagnetic field geometry in favour for same unbalance as in a simple electric motor, which as you know is nothing else but a magnetic motor set to a state of imbalance.
Today science stubbornly believes that it actually is the rotational force put into the axis of the generator that is directly proportional to the electricity generated by the generator. That is again one of those preconsceptions made by the limitations of the human sensory input.
Where are all the free minds, those daring to defy what we are told since young?
Or are we all a bunch of dessillusioned old farts that finally have coagulated into a grey spot on the front mat?
Will this forum turn into a place mainly filled with naysayers that almost fight each others in their eagerness to stomp out any ideas opposing rigid science.
Welcome brave new world.
Cheers,
Gwandau
Quote from: Gwandau on December 29, 2012, 06:28:28 PM
Eatenbyagrue,
That is a very static outlook on things, my friend.
Where are your wild side, the daring one, the childish one, unafraid of questioning the most obvious?
We need a lot more radical thinking if we ever will manage to find the sweet spot of our dreams.
It is all about creating unbalance, the very portal to COP>1 systems is opened by creating unbalance in a system.
(COP>1 is just a term indicating that we have unknown parameters working for us)
Do not get caught in the prison of preconceptions, any balanced system may be altered into a state of unbalance, given the correct parameters.
The moment we hack the code behind the electromagnetic field dynamics we will have the means of altering the visible vectors of the electromagnetic field geometry in favour for same unbalance as in a simple electric motor, which as you know is nothing else but a magnetic motor set to a state of imbalance.
Today science stubbornly believes that it actually is the rotational force put into the axis of the generator that is directly proportional to the electricity generated by the generator. That is again one of those preconsceptions made by the limitations of the human sensory input.
Where are all the free minds, those daring to defy what we are told since young?
Or are we all a bunch of dessillusioned old farts that finally have coagulated into a grey spot on the front mat?
Will this forum turn into a place mainly filled with naysayers that almost fight each others in their eagerness to stomp out any ideas opposing rigid science.
Welcome brave new world.
Cheers,
Gwandau
The problem with your logic is that while it sounds inspiring, it is actually a crippling piece of advice. As a society, we benefit from lessons learned in the past. We do not need to revisit things that are established. Imagine having to recheck basic multiplication tables every time we want to create anything complex. 2x2 is 4 already, quit trying to make it 5.
Quote from: Gwandau on December 29, 2012, 06:28:28 PM
Eatenbyagrue,
That is a very static outlook on things, my friend.
Where are your wild side, the daring one, the childish one, unafraid of questioning the most obvious?
We need a lot more radical thinking if we ever will manage to find the sweet spot of our dreams.
It is all about creating unbalance, the very portal to COP>1 systems is opened by creating unbalance in a system.
(COP>1 is just a term indicating that we have unknown parameters working for us)
Do not get caught in the prison of preconceptions, any balanced system may be altered into a state of unbalance, given the correct parameters.
The moment we hack the code behind the electromagnetic field dynamics we will have the means of altering the visible vectors of the electromagnetic field geometry in favour for same unbalance as in a simple electric motor, which as you know is nothing else but a magnetic motor set to a state of imbalance.
Today science stubbornly believes that it actually is the rotational force put into the axis of the generator that is directly proportional to the electricity generated by the generator. That is again one of those preconsceptions made by the limitations of the human sensory input.
Where are all the free minds, those daring to defy what we are told since young?
Or are we all a bunch of dessillusioned old farts that finally have coagulated into a grey spot on the front mat?
Will this forum turn into a place mainly filled with naysayers that almost fight each others in their eagerness to stomp out any ideas opposing rigid science.
Welcome brave new world.
Cheers,
Gwandau
"Today science stubbornly believes that it actually is the rotational force put into the axis of the generator that is directly proportional to the electricity generated by the generator."
Since science hasn't successfully separated the counter magnetic force during power generation, it ends up being directly proportional, power out to power in, with the difference depending on the efficiency of the device. However, a generator is not actually a power conversion device in reality; converting power input in to power output. It has that appearance because of it's design, but it actually is not a power conversion device.
Quote from: eatenbyagrue on December 29, 2012, 09:39:06 PM
We do not need to revisit things that are established. Imagine having to recheck basic multiplication tables every time we want to create anything complex. 2x2 is 4 already, quit trying to make it 5.
What on earth does 2 x 2 has to do with science lacking any knowledge whatsoever of the source dynamics behind gravity and electromagnetism?
You just cannot be that stupid. Of course you must know I am referring to the
interpretation of observations made,
not the actual values observed. Your unability to grasp the situation is not only utterly boring, it is alarming.
Gwandau
Quote from: Gianna on December 29, 2012, 10:12:22 PM
Sure, but doing so costs energy to do so. Exactly the same amount or more than can be recovered back to useful work.
It is proven mathematically to be so (Noether's theorem) and no experimental evidence has ever shown this to be untrue.
You're just wasting your time with such ideas.
Gianna,
Noether's theorem naturally will apply for all hitherto undiscovered physical parameters, in which case the new parameters
will conform to this theorem. But newly discovered parameters initially always tend to create a seemingly violation of the physical laws
until mainstream science have managed to revise and become updated, like what is happening right now in the LENR labs.
But your comment indicates that you believe there are no more unknown parameters in physics to be discovered, am I right?
Physical reality conceals a never ceasing abundance of unexplored and unknown parameters awaiting to be discovered .
There just is no end to what lies beyond the human domain of knowledge.
My advice for you is to conentrate on the weak spots of the orthodox scientific paradigm, since it's there the most obvious portals into novel areas lie.
As I said before, I am not questioning the values attained by observations,
I am questioning the unfounded conclusions based upon those observations. I am questioning our basic scientific fundamental conclusions as being anthropocentrically derived from the illusions created by the human sensory input,
which in other words means that the structure of our scientific foundation is based upon mere assumptions derived from our way of perceiving the world through our limited senses.
We are still relating to phenomena as the primitive humans we are. If you shoot an arrow, it goes from A to B. Therefore we draw the conclusion that the phenomenon of light likewise must do so.
Is light really something that moves from A to B ? What makes you so sure? Because it looks like it does?
What makes you think gravity is a force? Is gravity really something that is executing attraction? What makes you so sure? Because it looks like it does?
What makes you think magnetism is executing attraction? Is that the only alternative to explain the behaviour of magnets? What makes you so sure?
Personally I think science has painted itself into a corner and need a total revision of the basic outlook on physical matter, gravity, light and so forth.
The hopeless entanglement of contradictions and uncertainty states permeating quantum theory indicates this.
Science need a total revision, and it won't come from the established scientific community. They are dead locked into their own limited frames of reference.
The revision will come from novel innovations by radical researchers in small homelabs, people with radical mindsets like Tesla.
People able to think outside the box.
Gwandau
Quote from: Liberty on December 29, 2012, 10:31:16 PM
"Today science stubbornly believes that it actually is the rotational force put into the axis of the generator that is directly proportional to the electricity generated by the generator."
Since science hasn't successfully separated the counter magnetic force during power generation, it ends up being directly proportional, power out to power in, with the difference depending on the efficiency of the device. However, a generator is not actually a power conversion device in reality; converting power input in to power output. It has that appearance because of it's design, but it actually is not a power conversion device.
Liberty,
Everybody seems to miss my point, whatever I try to say. It must be because of my inability to master the english language, which is not my native one.
What I was trying to say was that, as far as I am concerned, electricity is not genereated by exiting existing electrons within the system, electricity is generated by creating an unbalance in the field equilibrium of the vacuum, thus tapping the vacuum of electromagnetic potential. The vacuum is anything but empty and mankind will soon discover the abundance of energy formally seething within the vacuum.
Contrary to orthodox science, I am convinced that there is a source dipole being the very origin of generated electricity, therfore the only thing the rotational torque does is enabling the favorable electromagnetic unbalance.
Gwandau
Quote from: Gwandau on December 28, 2012, 09:03:40 PM
Hey everybody,
here is some "holiday candy" to ponder if you feel for it.
Many years ago an old friend showed me something he told me nobody had seen before. He was earning his livelyhood by rebuilding heavy trucks into breakdown trucks and I had a great confidence in his technical ability and mechanical craftmansship.
He is not among us anymore, and I think it is OK to disclose it. Actually I think he would have loved to disclose it at a forum like this.
This wheel turns as long as there is water in the tank causing the displacement of the weights.
According to my friend it turned for several weeks until too much water had evaporated and the displacement of the boats ended.
He also stressed that the water was neccessary, since the boats had to move forward somewhat by their own before getting lifted again by the engaging hook.
Would it not be possible to replace the water with a magnetic field creating same effect?
If magnetic repulsion worked, the wheel would theoretically not stop for hundreds of years.
Any thoughts on this?
Gwandau
edit: Maybe I should emphasize that the sketch is no more than a simplified guess made from a somewhat vague memory of the occasion, probably far from correct.
.
Looks like it will work, but in the few moments the boat at the top right hand side slides outwards, the boat is loosing potential energy by "falling" freely and will not apply torque to the wheel.
Take one boat, and calculate the average potential energy in one cycle. If you find it greater on one side than the other it would work. But as you for sure understand, potential energy in a gravity field on earth, points strictly vertical. It does not matter how the boats moves in the horizontal plane, such as in a circle (Which is a combination of horizontal and vertical movement) as long ther is not forces in that horizontal plane.
Vidar
Quote from: Low-Q on December 31, 2012, 05:43:34 AM
Looks like it will work, but in the few moments the boat at the top right hand side slides outwards, the boat is loosing potential energy by "falling" freely and will not apply torque to the wheel.
Take one boat, and calculate the average potential energy in one cycle. If you find it greater on one side than the other it would work. But as you for sure understand, potential energy in a gravity field on earth, points strictly vertical. It does not matter how the boats moves in the horizontal plane, such as in a circle (Which is a combination of horizontal and vertical movement) as long ther is not forces in that horizontal plane.
Vidar
Vidar,
if it wasn't for my personal memory of a friend telling me about the experiment performed in his youth, I would have great difficulty to believe such a wheel to actually work. But he just wasn't the type of person that would pull such a prank on a friend for no reason, especially after some lengthy digging in the attic just to show me the remnants of the original wheel. Do you understand my ambivalent situation in this regard?
Gwandau
Vidar
Quote
At 1-2 oclock the boat is loosing potential energy by "falling" freely and will not apply torque to the wheel.
---------------------------------
Sir
Perhaps I misunderstand?
During the "Falling Freely" won't the Energy gained by the fall be manifested as additional Torque once it "connects" back to the wheel?
@Gwandau
Will you play with this idea?[A tribute to a friend!]
"The tribute"
its catchy.......
And I have a weekness for "gravity"as well as an appreciation of Friendship.
Besides there are other things to throw at this design.....
?
Chet
Quote from: Gianna on December 31, 2012, 06:39:30 AM
All the 'parameters' you allude too may very well provide science with keys to unlocking new sources of energy.
However, all such talk is entirely speculative. One should be aware that scientists, far from being rigid thinkers as you pretend indulge in such speculation all the time. One thing they do have on their side however is a very rigorous and exacting standards for determining whether the hypothesis they develop are supported or rejected by experimental validation. This is something that over-unity tinkerers would do well to emulate before announcing to the world yet another crackpot theory that is not supported by any valid theory or accurate experimentation.
You introduced this thread by showcasing a device that does not employ any 'new' physics and the possibility of it working has been comprehensively disproven. In it's defence all you can offer is vague speculation about that science is somehow inadequate but provide no comprehensive theory or experimentation that provides any indication you are any more competent than the scientists you appear to despise.
Gianna,
yes I introduced this thread by showcasing the wheel claimed to have worked by an old friend of mine, but my response to your input did take a wider turn.
Regarding the wheel I am myself quite sceptical, but this discussion seem to have accelerated into excluding the very probability of gravity and magnetism as possible parameters in novel areas of new energy discovery.
Therefore I felt obliged to emphasize the complete inability for science today to postulate any "does not work"-postulates in regard to electromagnetism and gravity.
That's my standpoint, which has nothing to do with the question if the wheel would work or not. The wheel was just a fun thing that surfaced from my memory.
Additionally, you know just as well as I that most scientists today are afraid to touch any area of research that would threaten their grants. Just look at the slow progress of the LENR movement, grants just don't seem to go in that direction. Look at the hot fusion research, who still after 50 years of total failure still get huge grants.
And as I have said before, history shows us that all really big paradigm changing discoveries in totally new areas always derive from persons initially unknown to the scientific community, independent researchers still uncluttered by dogmatic thinking.
Regards,
Gwandau
Quote from: ramset on December 31, 2012, 09:26:36 PM
Vidar
Quote
At 1-2 oclock the boat is loosing potential energy by "falling" freely and will not apply torque to the wheel.
---------------------------------
Sir
Perhaps I misunderstand?
During the "Falling Freely" won't the Energy gained by the fall be manifested as additional Torque once it "connects" back to the wheel?
@Gwandau
Will you play with this idea?[A tribute to a friend!]
"The tribute"
its catchy.......
And I have a weekness for "gravity"as well as an appreciation of Friendship.
Besides there are other things to throw at this design.....
?
Chet
Chet,
of course I will put the wheel to test.
That's the least I can do to pay my respect for a friend that no longer is here to defend his claim.
And, not to forget, it's a quite simple construct, which makes it a fun side project.
Happy New Year,
Gwandau
To make gravity turn a wheel clockwise the top right quarter has to be kept heavier than the bottom and the floating would help to do that but the real problem for me has always
been easy to unbalance the wheel and get rotation but not easy to reset it for another cycle.
You can check this idea out here
wheel deflection trick
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/12341-mikhail-dmitriyev-input-1000-w-output-near-3000-w-13.html
I made a crude model of this and the lifting of the weights does turn the wheel
but the net result must be more force produced than it takes to lift the weights.
Norman
@Gwandau
I'm In.........[very to simple to play with]
I really like the "water switch" at the bottom,Please try to remember any details you can!
Thx
Chet
Hello and Happy New Year everyone :)
Did your friend make his boats like this ?, I made a model boat years ago that would move forward when I dropped it in water. It trapped air underneath that could only escape at the back. If dropped from 1ft high it would travel 3ft forward, this was to clear the weed at the edge of the lake.
I am not saying the wheel will work.... just a thought. ;)
Thanks everyone for your input,
even the sceptics have all been quite well meaning and polite, which is a bit unexpected due to the highly provocative title of this thread.
Chet, you actually seem to have sensed the feelings I have in regard to this old memory of mine. It's intriguing, isn't it?
And thanks Bumblebee for your suggestion, it will certainly become part of the tests performed in shaping the "boats".
I again want to emphasize the unpretentious intent surrounding this little project of mine, there are neither personal claims or any ego invested in this.
I will mount a bicycle wheel in my workshop and weld a simple set of fastenings onto it that will enable a multitude of configurations.
That will allow for gradually closing on the original parameters, which presently fails my memory.
Since I have very little spare time to spend beside my two main projects, the tinkering with the wheel will be used as a way for me to relax from
my more demanding objectives and the wheel will as such probably develop at a rather slow pace.
Additionally, and contrary to my main projects, I am not restricted from any disclosure, which will allow me to enjoy posting my results.
I'll keep you updated on the progress.
Happy New Year to you all,
Cheers,
Gwandau
Gwandau
I had a silly thought for the boats ,Christmas tree ornaments ,they should be cheap now.....
I had some nice Superlight bike wheels laying around before the snow came?
I will play with this Too .......
Just as you not a hurried pace just a quiet place to ponder and "play"
I was even wondering about a little "static" attraction [before the water capacitor !:']?
Lots to ponder!
Thx for sharing
Chet
I think that it would work out better if you have a track of magnets at the bottom ( lets say all with N facing up) and have the weights with a magnet on the bottom (with N facing down). This will repel the weight up and off the hooks. This way you can control the weight position up or down and not have to worry about water evaporation( or getting your hands wet ;) )
Draw a circle around the buckets and you will see that the CG is lower than the
axle. The mechanism looks great but its the CG that really counts.
Norman
Chet,
I soo agree, playfulness is the key, and in combination with a perfectly balanced wheel this is the ideal way to explore the hidden relation between gravity and inertia.
Additionally the self evident simplicity and low cost characterizing this little project is giving it the perfect touch of ease and childish fun.
It's great to have you in on this.
Cheers,
Gwandau
PS. I've really been trying to visualize what I saw the brief moment I watched the old wheel displayed those many years ago, and I seem to recall that the shape of the "hooks" attached to the wheel maybe had a slightly different form than shown in my little sketch.
The "hooks" maybe was deviating somewhat from the even arcs shown here, I believe they were actually more straight, at least the two thirds of the end part of the hooks, along the part of the hook where the loop carrying the boats were gliding.
I also remember him mentioning something about the shape of the hook in combination with the size of the loops being critical to the effect attained in contact with the water. I recall something like: "The hooks has to be able to move as far as possible through the loops of the boats floating on the water without touching the loops."
I think he also said something about the gradual reconnection when the hooks starts to get hold of the boats again. He mentioned something about the part just prior to getting lifted again, where the boats were subjected to a partial drag when still partly in contact with the water. Maybe he stressed the importance of using this friction when leaving the water as the final positioning effect on the hook.
As I understand, it is absolutely crucial that the full dispositioning of the boats towards the center of wheel is executed before leaving the water.
@Duranza,
thanks for the input, and I absolutely agree, as you maybe could read in my initial post, replacing the water with magnetism is my goal,
but as a proffesional product developer since many years I know better than to engage new parameters until the known are functioning.
Water wheel first, then magnetic replacement.
Regards,
Gwandau
Quote from: norman6538 on January 02, 2013, 05:08:43 PM
Draw a circle around the buckets and you will see that the CG is lower than the
axle. The mechanism looks great but its the CG that really counts.
Norman
norman6538,
please do not pay too close attention to my sketch, it only vaguely resembles the original, which I only had brief look at many years ago. (1982)
regards,
Gwandau
Draw a vertical line through the axle, dividing the machine into left and right halves. For the device to turn and keep turning, say clockwise, the right half has got to be heavier than the left half. Or more correctly, the _moment_ has to be greater. How do we find the moments for this simple system where all the forces are due to gravity and act downward? You take the horizontal distance from the centerline to the weight, and multiply this distance by the weight. Assign "positive" distance to the right half weights and "negative" distance to the left half weights. Add up all the individual moments. What is the result? For the wheel to keep turning clockwise the total moment computed this way must be positive, for every position of the wheel around the cycle.
QuoteThe Principle of moments is if an object is balanced then the sum of the clockwise moments about a pivot is equal to the sum of the anticlockwise moments about the same pivot.
From the Wiki.
Gwandau
I have a few more days till My shop is usable.The funny thing about this wheel..
It would NEVER free wheel,[will save countless spindown Fussing hrs] If you get it to move at all ...it should Cycle ?
Well that and your friend saying it worked !
Funny you mentioned Toy.....
One of the things I'll be doing in my new shop is building Specialty furniture
Which I design for children with special needs to enhance their Quality of life.
A Toy.puzzle like this For a child with aspergers syndrome or Autism would probably lead to a breakthru in a working Gravity wheel.
I have been totally amazed by some of these boys and their grasp of Math and the "physical" world around them.
We shall see.
@TinselKoala
Glad you looked in...I know you have "spun" more than your fare share!
Thx
Chet
Gwandau, you are not too far from Burt Rutan's model (http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/GravityMotors/BurtRutan/Burt_Rutan_Water_Wheel.jpg). You may want to revisit it.
Rutan's is not very far from Bessler's, for that matter. Aside from liquid weights, and hydraulic weight shifting, the differences are rather minimal.
Blessings, guys.
TS
Quote from: TinselKoala on January 02, 2013, 05:50:22 PM
Draw a vertical line through the axle, dividing the machine into left and right halves. For the device to turn and keep turning, say clockwise, the right half has got to be heavier than the left half. Or more correctly, the _moment_ has to be greater. How do we find the moments for this simple system where all the forces are due to gravity and act downward? You take the horizontal distance from the centerline to the weight, and multiply this distance by the weight. Assign "positive" distance to the right half weights and "negative" distance to the left half weights. Add up all the individual moments. What is the result? For the wheel to keep turning clockwise the total moment computed this way must be positive, for every position of the wheel around the cycle. From the Wiki.
TK,
Thanks for the suggestion, but why not just draw a vertical line through the axle with equal placement of weights on each side if the line and then simply compare the sum of distances from center of wheel on each side?
If the right side has a higher value, the wheel inevitably will turn clockwise.
In this simple setup you can actually observe the differential with your own eyes just by observing the origo created by imagining a circle through the center of weights.
If the origo is to the right of the physical center of wheel, it will turn clockwise.
Easy does it. ;)
Regards,
Gwandau
Quote from: ramset on January 02, 2013, 08:12:14 PM
Gwandau
I have a few more days till My shop is usable.The funny thing about this wheel..
It would NEVER free wheel,[will save countless spindown Fussing hrs] If you get it to move at all ...it should Cycle ?
Well that and your friend saying it worked !
Funny you mentioned Toy.....
One of the things I'll be doing in my new shop is building Specialty furniture
Which I design for children with special needs to enhance their Quality of life.
A Toy.puzzle like this For a child with aspergers syndrome or Autism would probably lead to a breakthru in a working Gravity wheel.
I have been totally amazed by some of these boys and their grasp of Math and the "physical" world around them.
Chet,
I just have to deviate a bit from the topic when you expressed your passionate devotion to help these kids.
I had a period in my life when I worked with both Asbergers and the total opposite, the ADHD, and even on one occasion I was engaged in helping a young boy with extreme CD to learn the magic of empathy. He was a unique very hard diagnosed pre-psychopatic young boy who made all the psychiatrists nervous when asked to perform a diagnosis since he really did not fit into any of the frames.
I came to understand that all these labels put on the kids were nothing but an attempt to categorize a field of behavioural differences actually quite far beyond our full ability to grasp. As a matter of fact I derived an insight in the matter that I tried to present to the psychiatrists and psychologists who referred my theory to something suggested in the sixties, but which never seemed to become thoroughly investigated at that time.
I found a correlation between each deviation of behaviour with a certain age before seven. It was like the kid somehow was interrupted in its normal pace of conceptual growth, making next step in it's developement erronous due to lack of needed input gained in the childs earlier phase of conceptual growth. You know, all kids at a certain age are totally lacking empathy, it is just not ready for that step, and if the surrounding in combination with its own inherited unability to evolve is below a critical level, the child won't be able to take next step in its mental growth.
It all fits together, and I really don't understand that this hasn't been more studied in depth. Behavioural science know that if an infant does not get any light the first weeks after birth, it stays blind for the rest of it's life. The "window" of input is only open a very limited period of time, and I am convinced this applies to all the other phases in the mental growth of a child. Adding to this is the frequent situation of the parents being deficient in giving the kids proper input, since many times they themselves has some similar issues, even if only minor.
As you suggest, a child with Asbergers syndrome is the perfect explorer in areas where the amount of alternative parameters gets overwhelming for us "normal" persons. But I think the combination of a supervising guy with a little more creative mindset would be needed in helping an Asberger to decide in which direction to take.
I highly regard your devotion to these kids and even if it may be quite taxing at times, it is a rewarding occupation in the long run. Especially kids with Asbergers syndrome have abilities that could be highly beneficial to society if stimulated correctly.
You have a big heart Chet, that is very obvious.
Best,
Gwandau
Quote from: TechStuf on January 03, 2013, 10:15:48 AM
Gwandau, you are not too far from Burt Rutan's model (http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/GravityMotors/BurtRutan/Burt_Rutan_Water_Wheel.jpg). You may want to revisit it.
Rutan's is not very far from Bessler's, for that matter. Aside from liquid weights, and hydraulic weight shifting, the differences are rather minimal.
Thanks, TechStuf, I will check that out.
Gwandau
Gwandau
Things can happen around us that change the course of our lives,I just try to pay attention and do the right thing.
This Most Recent Switch in my lifes work has come after some very ruff and trying times , I spent the last year or more helping a friend Run a private hospital for addicts...Very hard on the mind and ruff on my wife [away for weeks at a time ].I came right up against that wall of exhaustion ,completely wooped.
Well I had very good results with My Special needs Furniture several years back but My heart was not in it ,for very selfish reasons [Extremely depressing work for me] However after spending this time at the Hospital I received a whole new perspective .
I am not sure I will be able to stay away from helping at the hospital
However My wife thinks its a good idea to work at home for now [a very good idea].
An awful lot of what you said about aspergers is Oh so true....
Thx
Chet
Ps
And Thx To TechStuff also
Quote from: ramset on January 03, 2013, 10:38:45 PM
Gwandau
Things can happen around us that change the course of our lives,I just try to pay attention and do the right thing.
This Most Recent Switch in my lifes work has come after some very ruff and trying times , I spent the last year or more helping a friend Run a private hospital for addicts...Very hard on the mind and ruff on my wife [away for weeks at a time ].I came right up against that wall of exhaustion ,completely wooped.
Well I had very good results with My Special needs Furniture several years back but My heart was not in it ,for very selfish reasons [Extremely depressing work for me] However after spending this time at the Hospital I received a whole new perspective .
I am not sure I will be able to stay away from helping at the hospital
However My wife thinks its a good idea to work at home for now [a very good idea].
An awful lot of what you said about aspergers is Oh so true....
Thx
Chet
Ps
And Thx To TechStuff also
Yes my friend, you have to be very observant regarding your own energy level when getting involved in the lives of addicts and others who have taken too many wrong turns in the forks of life. They can't help it, but they sooner or later get to you, and you start loosing energy.
Most of us are quite unaware of the leakage of energy we are suffering when dealing with unfortunate souls, and below a certain energy level, one becomes depressed. My wife is a therapist schooled in the american indian shamanic tradition, and as a person being very aware of this, she is practicing daily regenerating exercises in order to stay well and blissful in spite of the energy devouring environment of her occupation. She also takes long vacations each year on a tropic beach.
I think it is very important for all those of you who are engaged in the lives of the unfortunate ones to keep yourself revitalized by frequent retreats in the form of relaxing and joyful experiences. Otherwise the energy decrease will lead you into a downward spiral that may be quite fatal. To give to others you have to give to yourself, it's simple math. So take care and spoil yourself ones in awhile.
Regarding the wheel, as soon as I have constructed the main fastenings on the wheel and balanced it, I will post an image of it here to give you an idea of my solution to optimal variation ability. Many parameters may have to be altered during the process, from the very shape of the hooks to the construction of the boats in order to fully evaluate the claim made by my friend. I soo wish he was here today to give us the details.
He was a very inventive man who made his own tall smokestack and high temperature furnace system , enabling him to convert almost anything to heat. And I remember his electrical backup system driven by a big diesel engine which was connected to the heating element water system and thus always was warm and ready for instant startup.
During winter when the snow storms caused frequent power cuts in the area where he lived, his battery driven relays instantly swithced and started the big diesel engine, making the lights in his home only flicker a moment before everything was normal again.
And he let me use his big garage for me to renovate my double decker without ever asking anything in return. He was a man with a big heart and a free mind, always experimenting with something new. He would have loved being here now, engaged in the free energy movement these days of big changes.
Gwandau
Gwandau
Thank you for the insight,I would like a nice Sandy Beach [for at least 20 minutes!:,}
RE the Wheel
Sometimes a call to an old Friends family is quite rewarding.Perhaps he had some photos of this Wheel laying around ?
On another note..
Whatcha mean "double decker"....{not a bus??]
Chet
Quote from: ramset on January 04, 2013, 10:32:10 PM
RE the Wheel
Sometimes a call to an old Friends family is quite rewarding.Perhaps he had some photos of this Wheel laying around ?
Chet,
He never documented this experiment of his, and I am not sure any of his family members even knew about it, you see, he was always experimenting with all kinds of ideas when not engaged in his business, and I got the impression his family had a warm hearted patience with him but never really shared his passion.
One of his sons now lives there using the place for his tire business, and it is quite possible the attic above the main garage where he kept his old wheel is still left untouched. I will check that out next time I'm in that part of Sweden.
Quote
On another note..
Whatcha mean "double decker"....{not a bus??]
Chet
Well, not a British double decker if that was what you thought, it is an old Volvo bus with another half shortened and welded on top of it. It's actually a triple decker if you count the tiled sitting area on the roof. I built the bus at a time when I was dedicated into living in a rolling home.
But as you know, by getting older we all tend to get a bit more interested in comfort, and the bus is today merely a place for summer guests to stay. But it still starts at first try and the chassis and brakes are all fine. It has a small living room with a fire stove in the lower back end and a small bathroom complete with a bathtub just behind the driver cabin, and on the second floor the bedroom lies right below a wide roof hatch making it possible to sleep in the open.
Below is a picture of the bus taken in the midst of the Swedish winter.
Gwandau
Gwandau
Don't know why I only see a blank box for your Pic?
Probably this Junky Computor I use when I'm home. Seeing as how I'll actually be spending some time at home now ,I will be updating...
I Suppose I had that Gypsy Travel Bug Too, some time I will tell you How I modified a greyhound Bus For business[good excuse] .and used it to do engineering seminars In NYC and surrounding areas.[Had "too" much Fun ]
I Have some "resources" in your country?Maybe Closer to the "tire shop".
?
Thx
Chet
Gwandau
"Handsome little bus"! ,[finally could see that pic].seems in excellent condition!
@Techstuff
Do you have any more info on The Burt Rutan wheel?
I see in the links you posted ,you have a lot of "bench time" with Gravity wheels?
Thx For your contributions!
Chet
Quote from: Gwandau on December 28, 2012, 09:03:40 PM
Any thoughts on this?
Yes, see
here (http://www.overunity.com/4683/bessler-wheel-theory-by-alex/msg353826/#subject_353826). 8)
Regards