Physicist needed, will this self-loop?

[ARMCORTEX]

To answer your question: Your device will not work.


Vidar

O.. I was expecting this type of answer by a mongrel.

Rule #1 Please, I dont need opinions of amateurs. I need numbers of pro engineer who wants a nice challenging model to practice.

Thank you, have a good day.

I think you are just jealous, is what I think... Lil noooooobie.

[Low-Q]

O.. I was expecting this type of answer by a mongrel.

Rule #1 Please, I dont need opinions of amateurs. I need numbers of pro engineer who wants a nice challenging model to practice.

Thank you, have a good day.

I think you are just jealous, is what I think... Lil noooooobie.

Not jealous, and not an amateur. Sorry, your device will not self loop. Even if your idea is unike, it is still a closed mechanical system. Such systems has been debunked/proved wrong every single time. People confuse force with energy, and do not know that energy is a product of force and displacement/distance. So you are the amateur. Not me
Rule 2: Accept the truth even if you don't agree.
Physics and science isn't about opinions, democracy, agreements, or wishful thinking.
Fortunately for me, the burden of proof is on you.


Good luck.


Vidar

[ARMCORTEX]

You fell into my trap, this will be delicious mmmm.

And dont you think I know that? The in/out efficiency is like 20% on a single array, 50% on a dual array, and 75% on a quad array ( these numbers I got considering wheel diameters,  based on breaking point @ maximum torque value then substract sum of individual motor hp). There is angular speed and torque present on the shaft everywhere so I use power in comparison to power. I notice that the more moments of peak force repeats, the stronger the device will resist breaking untill breaking point, the single array is very fragile and has very poor efficiency.

So it works either in single array form, or in pairs, that are simply phase shifted based on the number of pairs you have.

My guess if that more and more arrays would "plateau" and a final value of 99% would be there since my arm components are weightless and frictionless, the "pendulum like" movement in the arm component is actually a damping factor here, I want it to be weightless if possible.

Having said that, you can see now that these  freewheeling bob weights are good candidates for "pulse force input mechanism", so this is a very unique situation that was never tried.

Its not possible to build more than quad array in the sim, wich represents my design above nor is it possible to test pulse inputs, wich is where a good system modeler (physicist) would be handy.

And no, I am not about to turn myself into a physics graduate just so I can be good enough with mathlab and system modeling to come up with definite results, neither do I expect that from you. So to be clear, you are not smart enough to know, you might think you are, but you are not.

And the same goes for all of those that came before you and flapped their gums on this forum.

You dont understand that pulsed flywheels unbalanced systems, can never be connected directly to the generator, this kills the pulse and all momentum, and you end up with stalled system. Here the fact that centrifugal force is used to keep the motion going does not kill the momentum, too much brake on the main staft simply lags the arms, once this happens the device stops abruptly and is too late nothing can bring it back even reducing the load.

But still, my idea shows that power is present on the shaft, and that the independant weight feel nothing untill a breaking point, wich intoduces lag and loss of resonance, my simulation cannot take into account pulse system efficiency of my ideal drive system, is simply has a motor, with an angular speed and torque slider.

It is said that kinetic energy is conserved, kinetic energy(in this case) causes motion, motion causes centrifugal force to have a  concentrated vector direction on an unbalanced wheel, wich causes its centerpoint to shift if its not totally rigid, such rigidity would causes immense force on bearings in any event, a problem wich cannot be overcomed unless higher rating longer cylinder bearing is used, and this is a longevity formula wich again, is complicated since not all cylinders will use at the same rate. You can use this shifting force and guide it via many ways, and even to generate a rotation with some torque in it, and losses in it. Yeah center point shift is an issue of loss but still it causes a nice elliptical trajectory and a mass can still be kept in motion and the dual arrangement pinches that in the direction I want. How efficiently can I keep these masses in motions is the point I am trying to make, and NO, you are not in your place to answer this in any quantifiable terms, put a zipper on your mouth.



My system is an "open system". But you know, this term is actually empty of all meaning, it is simply a non-professionnal term that was coined by Aaron Murakami.

You, and this site, are simply uncapable in calculating such a device in a phased array, so stfu, you assume things wich far surpasses you, based on the results of trash users, past and present.

[ARMCORTEX]

Ok Low-Q has been educated.

Whos next?

Come flap your gums in my thread.

[ARMCORTEX]

You know what I need?

I need a person with much energy and social skills to present this in a more physics oriented forum where people are actually educated about science, not just pulse wood built bullshit pseuso-science.

I dont think I am the right person prepared to deal with these people, I will take this too personal...My beautiful invention.

I think my mind has been altered and I "believe that an impulse is somehow special" and would ignore whatever they say anyways since they will probaly just be a bunch of lazy dumbasses anyways.