Video at :
http://youtu.be/DtN9W5LRlhg (http://youtu.be/DtN9W5LRlhg)
NathanCoppedge :
Please have a look at the video and details in pdf attachment. Does it has anything to do with your 'Master Angle' ?
I love the soundtrack!
And I'm sure Lawrence will love this one, too. It's a perfect example of his "lead-out" conjectures.
Quote from: TinselKoala on September 10, 2014, 12:31:15 PM
I love the soundtrack!
Me too! Looks like a crow is also appreciating the music! (vineet, be careful, that crow might release shit on your head)
BTW by pushing the central shaft to the other side, you will be lifting the lever arm up carrying the weight. So, it slides down down due to
gravity making rotation. It is same as lifting a weight and allowing it to fall freely. Why do you expect overunity in that process?
Quote from: Newton II on September 10, 2014, 09:13:32 PM
Me too! Looks like a crow is also appreciating the music! (vineet, be careful, that crow might release shit on your head)
BTW by pushing the central shaft to the other side, you will be lifting the lever arm up carrying the weight. So, it slides down down due to
gravity making rotation. It is same as lifting a weight and allowing it to fall freely. Why do you expect overunity in that process?
Thanks for your advice. Next time when I conduct that experiment, I shall wear a helmet.
Surely weight will be lifted up when the shaft is pushed to the other side. But the trick here is to synchronise various motions and forces so that input energy is minimised.
A moving weight can be lifted easily without much effort. A simple example is, if you start a loaded truck near a steep slope upwards on a road and accelerate the truck, the truck will not move up the ramp. But if you come from a distance with speed, the truck will easily move up the slope.
In this experiment the action and reaction forces, moment of inertia, kinetic energy of rotation etc., everything comes into picture thereby minimising the input energy required to move the plate and you have to take the energy output from rotating shaft which developes considerable torque at the centre because of lengthy lever arm carrying weight only on one side.
Quote from: vineet_kiran on September 11, 2014, 12:19:00 AM
In this experiment the action and reaction forces, moment of inertia, kinetic energy of rotation etc., everything comes into picture thereby minimising the input energy required to move the plate and you have to take the energy output from rotating shaft which developes considerable torque at the centre because of lengthy lever arm carrying weight only on one side.
Cannot makeout if it can really be a OU device. But how about using a lengthy central shaft above the lever arm to get additional mechanical advantage so that it can be pushed easily to the other end with negligible input energy?
Hi Newton II,
this looks like a step in the right direction.
Quote from: telecom on September 11, 2014, 12:27:01 PM
Hi Newton II,
this looks like a step in the right direction.
But how will you take power output from a 'oscillo-rotating' shaft??!! ??? ???
I know how works rotation inside gravitation !!!
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tw7h9kfZcf0/VBk0W5TEt6I/AAAAAAAAB_k/YKxK437pygQ/s1600/CIMG3331.JPG
EN > http://youtu.be/U941EYo-5XY
PL http://youtu.be/cqe17UHE0OU
Quote from: Newton II on September 16, 2014, 10:49:17 PM
But how will you take power output from a 'oscillo-rotating' shaft??!! ??? ???
You can take power output like this! (see the attachment).
more simple
1 start rotation energy Eo
2 move up mass m +m energy Eup
3 stop rotation ( here You will take back Eo )
4 You can exchanege potenial Energy Ep to work
Ep-Eup >0
Each mass m during fast rotation is losting gravitation mass !!!
I'm first engineer inventor who proved this fact
My above picture it is only theoretical explain why and how I schuld get NOBEL Prize for my work
I solved very old problem for physics ( I'm moving or not !!!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U
Hi, small power at the input, more power at the output. The gain is from mechanical advantage and gravity.
Good luck with your project. Cheers
Quote from: burnit0017 on September 23, 2014, 09:31:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U)
Hi, small power at the input, more power at the output. The gain is from mechanical advantage and gravity.
Good luck with your project. Cheers
He is rotating the shaft, not oscillating. Rotating a wheel carrying weight only on one side is a highly inefficient process.
Also compare the time consumed in rotating the shaft and oscillating the shaft. When you oscillate the shaft, the time consumed is very less and rotation of shaft is taken care of by acceleration due to gravity which is 9.8 m/sec.sq.
Seems that everybody here wants to reinvent the John device ;)
See TheJohnDevice: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfLjEMMCeS75UIRadEiJ2cQ
Quote from: AlanA on September 24, 2014, 10:08:10 AM
Seems that everybody here wants to reinvent the John device ;)
See TheJohnDevice: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfLjEMMCeS75UIRadEiJ2cQ (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfLjEMMCeS75UIRadEiJ2cQ)
Is there any working prototype?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxIRaJlTD4Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxIRaJlTD4Y)
Hi, this is similar.
Quote from: burnit0017 on September 24, 2014, 08:30:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxIRaJlTD4Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxIRaJlTD4Y)
Hi, this is similar.
Fantastic!!! But why "still engineers are skeptic"? Did anybody try to verify it?
It clearly implies that the lever principle of 'Force X distance' can lead to overunity by adjusting in time using horizontal (eccentric) and rotational movement with a lengthy vertical axis.
@ burnit007
Yes it might be similar but nevertheless different to. The John Device is much simpler. But both are based on the same principle. On Youtube you can wath quite a lot of videos about the John Device. As he wants to have a patent for his inventions there are not so many information. It would be quite interesting if this inventions is really overunity. The inventor claims ;) but that is not enough.
I personally think that the skinner device is the most promising invention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U)
Hi, when they did their calculations they only used the input to output values. They did not include all the power that was added at the input by the mechanical advantage and gravity. If they measured the torque at the output and tried to generate electricity then the story would be different. They were playing math word games to grab headlines.
Thanks for the info.
Hi, I wonder if two solenoids was used to drive a scotch yoke to convert the reciprocating action to a circular motion would work to drive the device?
Hi, on the Skinner device, what is the reason for the top weight? Is it needed?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCOctgVIR6Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCOctgVIR6Q)