Big try at gravity wheel

[TinselKoala]

Heh... I wish I could find my old slide rule. I'm afraid I use a calculator like just about everybody else these days. On the computer I usually use
SpeedCrunch
http://www.speedcrunch.org/
and at the workbench I use my trusty old Sharp EL-520W.

But calculations are only as good as the data that goes into them... if that. Some people evidently think that all you have to do is multiply everything together and write down all the digits that come out of the display. With SpeedCrunch... that could get to be a problem.

[MarkE]

wow, you would never guess we are all meant to be searching and designing and inventing things together, you know, on the same side.

you gotta wonder that if we, a group who are dedicated to the same thing, cant stop bickering between each other, then how the hell does any invention brought here stand a chance of being spread?

as for those waiting for this guy, who hasnt even asked for us to look at his machine ,to put YT vids up. why not get off you back side and try some inventing your self and publish here.
we have all (well, at least some of us) spent money making things only to find out we missed something somewhere along the line.

even if this big thing doesnt work, we could take something out of it, the principals high lighted by this machine can inspire us all.

1) counter weight, work out a system of having weight A spinning around somehow, and haveing weight B counter balance A as A goes up. then detaches as A comes down only to reattach as A goes up again.

2) perhaps use counter balancing in another way. (see attached)

so, perhaps rather than waiting for someone else to do the work for you, you could stand up and try it your self.. if you really want to know if this machine will work or not, give it a go.

What Wayne Travis and HER propose cannot produce surplus energy.  Their machine is a buoyancy device.  IE they lift and drop weights where at least some of the weight is submerged in a fluid other than our good old atmosphere.  Gravity is a conservative field.  Take a test mass and place it at some point in the field.  Then move the mass around:  up, down, sideways, do with it what you will.  Keep track of the energy that you expend or gain moving that mass.  Keep this up until you eventually return the mass to where you started.  The net energy that you will have measured from moving the mass in the gravitational field is zero.

Mr. Travis and his compatriots have relied on misdirection to give the impression that they have encountered a discovery that offers them a cheat on the conservative nature of gravity.  It may or may not be that Mr. Travis and his compatriots were so ignorant of basic science that they were unable to recognize Archimedes' Principle at work when they first started six years ago.  However, they have had plenty of time to investigate the miracle of dropping rocks in water, versus dropping them on dry land.  They have also been exposed to many people who have explained that miracle to them. That Mr. Travis still insists that he has a cheat on nature means that either Mr. Travis is knowingly lying, or that he makes those statements in reckless disregard for the truth.

Webby did in fact offer to show his work.  He did that on February 3, 2014.  He has failed to live up to his promise.

What you propose is a machine that generates energy by moving weights around.  See the paragraph above about gravity being a conservative field as to why your concept is dead on arrival.

[Marsing]

wow, you would never guess we are all meant to be searching and designing and inventing things together, you know, on the same side.

you gotta wonder that if we, a group who are dedicated to the same thing, cant stop bickering between each other, then how the hell does any invention brought here stand a chance of being spread?

as for those waiting for this guy, who hasnt even asked for us to look at his machine ,to put YT vids up. why not get off you back side and try some inventing your self and publish here.
we have all (well, at least some of us) spent money making things only to find out we missed something somewhere along the line.

even if this big thing doesnt work, we could take something out of it, the principals high lighted by this machine can inspire us all.

1) counter weight, work out a system of having weight A spinning around somehow, and haveing weight B counter balance A as A goes up. then detaches as A comes down only to reattach as A goes up again.

2) perhaps use counter balancing in another way. (see attached)

so, perhaps rather than waiting for someone else to do the work for you, you could stand up and try it your self.. if you really want to know if this machine will work or not, give it a go.

you missed the point.   you should  read from the beginning

[TinselKoala]

you missed the point.   you should  read from the beginning

Better yet.... start here, the real beginning of Mister Wayne Travis's encounter with this forum. It's a real hoot.

http://www.overunity.com/10596/hydro-differential-pressure-exchange-over-unity-system/

That's the first page of the 228 page long thread that Mister Wayne finally asked to be closed.

[Pirate88179]

I have been fixing cars for over 40 years, in that time I have run across variations of the method I put forward from many manufacturers.  I put the parts together that I discussed to solve for an identical problem.

This method is not new, it is within existing art.

The method that you are requiring only allows for a 1:1 volume transfer, my method allows for a 1:1 energy transfer.

With all due respect, there is no such thing known.  Any and all energy transfers have losses.  Some more than others but, there are losses just the same.

My 2.3765 cents worth.

Bill