Big try at gravity wheel

[fletcher]

And you couldn't say it more plain or fairer than that MarkE.

Your agenda is at least clear.

[Red_Sunset]

........................................................
At this point it is pretty much up to Grimer to fill-in the remaining blanks.  If he does, then great, I am happy to take things to the next level.  If he doesn't, then the conservative nature of gravity marches on unchallenged.  In that case he will have to find someone else to help him find evidence for his extraordinary claims.

This is a simple case of a pending confirmation answer.
The answer is pending with clear indications of answer 'avoidance'.
No attacks are needed, all members are quite able to derive their own conclusions.
We all know where the ball came to rest in the court.
Nothing further needs to be said.

Red_Sunset

[minnie]

Hi,
   it's to do with the sideways shift towards the pivot point. What you have to do is calculate
the energy needed to put the bob back in line with the path were it to be a straight shaft and
subtract that from the height gained by the cycloid pendulum.
   You can not repeat the cycle over and again without moving the pivot point, what you have
to do is imagine doing the cycle many times and you see what happens.
     I therefore conclude there is no, or minimal gain in the proposed system.
Put your minds to developing a long lived electrical storage battery, then you will be on to
a winner!
              John.

[Red_Sunset]

.......................................
I draw members attention to the obscene first contribution made to this thread by Conrad:
I'm sure members can draw their own conclusions as to this Troll's agenda and motivations 

At this point, I think we have 3 options,

1..  PLAN-B,  discuss the Grimer's motivation
A discussion on why "Grimer" is avoiding to acknowledge the "MarkE" summary statement.
The summary statement appears to confirm pretty closely the theory statements that "Grimer" has postulated and published here already.
1..  What is "Grimer's" game?
2..  What is hidden ?   
3..  Does he think that he has overplayed his card to gain recognition?
4..  Would he like to retract his postulation?
5..  Did he assume that nobody would hold him to his word and put it to the test?
6..  Is he just playing with time for maximum exposure and attention ?

2..  PLAN-C,  proceed without Grimer
Proceed without "Grimer" on board.
The project definition as stated by "MarkE" is the basis for a verification test case.
Additional input is invited for evaluation to enhance the mission statement.
The next step would be the formulation of the test protocol and measurement requirements followed by
  1.. Test1 steps
  2.. Test2 steps
  3....ect....

3.. PLAN-D,   go home and do nothing.
Just ignore the ramblings as a distraction and go home.

Red_Sunset

[MarkE]

Red_Sunset the trouble that I have with the Plan B options is the highly subjective nature of each.  I would much rather deal with testing scientific ideas than guessing why someone behaves as they do.

Grimer has contacted me privately, but he has not offered confirmation or correction of my statement of his hypothesis.  While we wait to see if Grimer will perhaps come through, I will suggest things that we can think about towards devising an experiment under a Plan C, or if Grimer comes through a Plan A:

We can minimize air resistance losses up to and including placing the pendulum in a bell jar and pumping the jar down to a low air pressure.
We can minimize the losses bending the support arm around the cycloid chop through material selection and support shape selection.
We can take advantage of statement 1) in the hypothesis that notes a cycloid pendulum has only gravitational potential energy at its apogee.
We can take advantage of statement 1) and the fact that at its lowest point the cycloid pendulum's arm, like the circular pendulum's arm aligns to the vertical, and therefore the acceleration due to gravity is normal to the direction of travel at that point.
We can construct Gendanken experiments before setting up physical experiments that will help us predict expected results.
We can look to existing experiments to see if any cover part or all of what we ultimately choose to set-up in our own experiments.

Because gravity has so often been shown to behave conservatively, if Grimer believes as he says that he does that he has an exception it is very crucial that there is zero misunderstanding of his hypothesis as to the conditions under which he believes that gravity behaves non-conservatively. 

My proposed statement of Grimer's hypothesis repeated here again for Grimer's convenience to either confirm or correct:

1) The cycloid pendulum potential energy at its apogee contains only gravitational potential energy with all gravitational force operating normal to the horizon.
2) A circular path pendulum with a vertical length arm of y1 and bob mass m1 has at its apogee additional "third derivative energy" over and above the potential energy as an otherwise identical cycloid pendulum has.
3) A hybrid pendulum with vertical length arm of y1 and bob mass m1 that follows a circular path on one side of its travel and a cycloid path on the other half of its travel will convert the additional "third derivative energy" of the circular path half to additional gravitational potential energy observable as a higher apogee on the cycloid side than the circular side.