Hi,
has anybody studied this design yet ?
http://media-design.page.tl/GE3GE.htm#
Have a look at the youtube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzrT38qtg7o
How should it work ?
Is water only on one side of the swimmer elements ?
Regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan,
Here is the patent on this device: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO9853199&F=0
It needs studying, rather long patent text with 23 figures.
Hopefully it is able to work in practice...
Gyula
There's no mention this device does work. It's a concept (not to say it's virtually impossible to create such arrangement of water reservoir and the lower wheel). Beside that rivers run continuously is because of existence of geothermal heating and shining Sun causing water evaporation which is synonymous to water gaining energy enough to move back. 'Thermal gravitation' is a fantasy I think. Well, it's good that man tries to break established physical laws. But this should be done with some understanding.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 06, 2008, 04:35:18 AM
Here is the patent on this device: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO9853199&F=0
I'm wondering how you can stop water from leaving the reservoir if the reservoir is open on its bottom for the ribbon to move.
Quote from: aleks on April 06, 2008, 04:56:23 AM
Quote from: gyulasun on April 06, 2008, 04:35:18 AM
Here is the patent on this device: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO9853199&F=0
I'm wondering how you can stop water from leaving the reservoir if the reservoir is open on its bottom for the ribbon to move.
That's something all the proposers of this idea seem to think is quite easy to solve, but by somebody else, obviously. ???
One of the things that it seem like everybody is forgetting is, that water is resistance to go through as well. Friction with mass. You would need moving water in the correct direction and then, just use a paddle wheel instead. 8)
Quote from: ChileanOne on April 06, 2008, 09:57:31 AM
Quote from: aleks on April 06, 2008, 04:56:23 AM
Quote from: gyulasun on April 06, 2008, 04:35:18 AM
Here is the patent on this device: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO9853199&F=0
I'm wondering how you can stop water from leaving the reservoir if the reservoir is open on its bottom for the ribbon to move.
That's something all the proposers of this idea seem to think is quite easy to solve, but by somebody else, obviously. ???
As you may (not) noticed, gyulasun has posted a link to a document that proves that this idea has been patented. That means the inventor has solved all the problems you mentioned, otherwise he wouldn't get the patent. I suppose not everything we wish to know about it could be shown in a short animation (especially the "problematic" parts, such as the bottom of the reservoir). But has anyone tried to contact the author and ask him to explain his invention?
@TNG
Quote
As you may (not) noticed, gyulasun has posted a link to a document that proves that this idea has been patented. That means the inventor has solved all the problems you mentioned, otherwise he wouldn't get the patent. I suppose not everything we wish to know about it could be shown in a short animation (especially the "problematic" parts, such as the bottom of the reservoir). But has anyone tried to contact the author and ask him to explain his invention?
TNG would you please be so kind and contact the inventor to come over here.
But who knows,he might be here since some Time. ;D ;)
However nice to have you here.
helmut
Quote from: TNG on April 22, 2008, 05:37:21 AMAs you may (not) noticed, gyulasun has posted a link to a document that proves that this idea has been patented. That means the inventor has solved all the problems you mentioned, otherwise he wouldn't get the patent.
It's not usually necessary to 'prove' something is working to get the patent. This means you can patent almost anything that has technical appearance.
Helmut, thanks for your welcome!
Well, "over here" is very relative term, especially today, when we have internet. As you could see, if you watched the animation, inventor left his name and address for all those who wish to contact him. The question is ? Is there someone really interested in learning how the device is supposed to work, or we are just criticizing, without arguments? But I suppose, for most of us, reading and commenting at the forum are just a pastime.
Anyone can submit patent application, and that doesn't prove that the new idea is any good. But in order to get a patent right, one must prove that their invention is original and functional. Any invention must pass strict exams, before it can be patented.
Quote from: TNG on April 22, 2008, 07:41:21 AMAny invention must pass strict exams, before it can be patented.
Patent without working model cannot be checked. So, in the essence you may patent just about anything that looks like a working device.
Quote from: aleks on April 22, 2008, 07:50:14 AM
Quote from: TNG on April 22, 2008, 07:41:21 AMAny invention must pass strict exams, before it can be patented.
Patent without working model cannot be checked. So, in the essence you may patent just about anything that looks like a working device.
Yes it can. Of course, working model is a better solution, but with the help of laws of physics, you can assume if something is possible, or just a science fiction. And I'm talking about presenting a technical solution, that is defined in details, with all the necessary blueprints and all answers to a possible questions and problems.
Quote from: TNG on April 22, 2008, 07:41:21 AM
Helmut, thanks for your welcome!
Well, "over here" is very relative term, especially today, when we have internet. As you could see, if you watched the animation, inventor left his name and address for all those who wish to contact him. The question is ? Is there someone really interested in learning how the device is supposed to work, or we are just criticizing, without arguments? But I suppose, for most of us, reading and commenting at the forum are just a pastime.
Anyone can submit patent application, and that doesn't prove that the new idea is any good. But in order to get a patent right, one must prove that their invention is original and functional. Any invention must pass strict exams, before it can be patented.
@TNG
The invention is very interesting. Most of the Members probably would like to whatch this Mashine in action.
Some become rebuilders to get their own experience with the matter.
But to be realistic,this kind of wheel is not a weekend job and will not be easy to be errected in a private workshop.
I guess that it takes Manpower from 1200 to 2000 hours.
As i see the invention,it workes the way,that the volume of the containers increase under the whaterline to double the space,what causes the buoyancy.
But thats just as i see it.
If you get no comment on this invention,it does not express that it is not of interest.
It just means nothing.
The inventor has to search vor Investors,or a small factory that will build this wheel
for their own energy supply.
Perhaps he can find someone,who makes a simulation in addition to show a zoomed
view of the filling process.
Keep on working , it is worth to do it.
helmut
Please, read new text on English and Bosnian/Serbo-Croatian language.
We have direct contact with Mr. Miroslav Å tabek.
Thanks!
http://media-design.page.tl/GE3GE.htm
or very soon (under construction!)
( http://mdppg.myvnc.com )
Thermal Gravitational Energy Plant
Quote
....When gravitation together with heat from natural sources drives the motor ge3ge without using energy, then there is no belief that it is possible....
;D
Is there something special going on when "Heat from the natural sources" helps to overcome the conservative nature of Gravity? Minto wheel, anyone? Buoyancy chains, ...? Really?
Operational Plant?
Ah, well....
New sites about GE3GE:
www.ge3ge.com & www.ge3ge.ba
;)
HI all,
This patent seems a copy of :
Mikhail Smeretchanski's Perpetual Motor - France Patent #2830575, 2003. "This invention relates to a device allowing the mechanical production of energy, using the variable-volumes elements by the gravitation and the Archimedes force for its operation."
Any comment ?
Obelix
Quote from: Obelix on December 14, 2009, 04:30:19 AM
...This patent seems a copy of :
Mikhail Smeretchanski's Perpetual Motor - France Patent #2830575, 2003. "This invention relates to a device allowing the mechanical production of energy, using the variable-volumes elements by the gravitation and the Archimedes force for its operation."
Any comment ?
Obelix
The patent is as stupid as all other perpetual wheels that I have already seen.
The author does not take account for the work needed for changing the volume of the variable-volume elements, yet this energy is the extra-energy that he thinks he could recover for free!
Same stupidities in the link given by gyulasun (http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=WO9853199&F=0):
the water pressure exerts forces against the volume elements when they enter in the water tank but the author is expecting to freely recover this energy that must be provided for the volume elements to penetrate the tank.
Such claims of perpetual motion are said to be compatible with the laws of physics (only the energy conservation principle would be in question). But if the laws of physics apply, the equations of mechanics too, in particular the lagrangian that can describe the system, and this implies that energy is conserved.
In conclusion such patent claims would have interest if they assert either that physics laws does not apply (archimede, gravity, magnetism etc... fail) and/or that there is an hidden energy source.
In all other cases we can discard them immediately, saving time for more realistic projects.
http://www.ge3ge.net