Roll on the 20th June

[ramset]

WELL I was wrong its over 33000 posts [sorry to the 1000 or so unmentioned]  And the world [free energy] is a better place because of  "Archer Quinn'  and he didn't strike me as a liar  so I believe he should have stuck to his original wheel even duplicate the small one again I think he bit off to big a piece with the Fulcrom  for one man in that time frame and budget  IMO  Chet

[purepower]

Just stopped by Archer's site, surphzup.com, to see if he had any new discoveries of acheivments that may prove me wrong and this is what I find (mind you, this is the ALL he has posted):

"I have come to the true understanding there is more bad than good on this monkey covered rock. you can have the wheel that's it. Nothing else.

Those who sit and watch evil are as bad as those who do it.

I am only giving you this becuase you already know how to build it. but don't ever speak to me."

And what evil might he be speaking of? The evil of having a 'functioning' overunity device and keeping it from the world because he had his feelings hurt by someone on a website who understands modern mathematics and physics better? This sounds pretty evil to me. But wait, he doesn't anything. He has just come to terms with his failure and is seaking withdraw from the glory days in the only way he knows how: paint the world as a horrible place with everyone against him with their illogical, Newtonian thinking as to make himself feel superior once again.

And no hard feelings Archie, I know you mean well. But when you kick me out of your site for challenging your poor logic and the device (especially when I made it clear to you I was doing so for the greater good of the device/group and requested you use me as your advisor) and then stopped responding to my emails, did you think I would curl up into a ball and go away? No, I will simply contact you and the general public through another outlet and convey my knowledge for all to see.

Game, set, match.

[sm0ky2]

@ Purepower

i think you are missing a key factor here. one which most seem unwilling to address.

assuming the momentum of the turning wheel can "break the wall", and the rod moves into the magnetic fields....

the Energy is NOT E=mgh.  This is ONLY the case @ 6:00 - when the magnets leave the effective fields.

the correct energy value is:   E = m (g -M1 - M2) h   ; where M1 and M2 are the force variants for the repelling and attracting fields [which changes with the distance between the magnets]

The result is two VERY different energy values between the input and output of the system.
Lets disregard the FACT that the magnets do the lifting for us - and assume that the magnetic 'work' must be put into the system. The input energy is still less than the Potential Energy the magnets have when they leave the effective fields.

you cannot equate E=mgh to the rod position while under the influence of the magnetic fields.
The acceleration force of gravity is NOT -9.8m/s/s at this point.  It is the resulting difference between the gravitational AND the magnetic forces - and in this case the magnetic forces are pushing the rod UPWARDS, which SUBTRACTS from the effects of gravity.

the ^2 of the arc distance was taken with respect to the magnets traveling through the spherical field, and actually equates to a linear 'distance' from the moving magnet to the field source around the arc. The force decreases with the distance^2 just as i stated - there are books and books on this subject should you desire to understand it more.  But if it makes it easier for you to take the (radial) linear distance between the 2, at each degree around the arc - the values are the same.... Difference being with the linear perspective, you must additionally include the vector angle (real / imaginary) , whereas in the radial perspective its already included.

If you wish to use E=mgh to equate all energy values within the cycle, you MUST subtract the effects of the magnetic field. Failure to do so will result in an innacurate description of the device.

The "extension" of the weighted rods - provides leverage with which to overcome the "magnetic wall". This causes the wheel to require far less momentum to overcome that barrier - result being a "breaking of the wall" using a mass small enough for the magnets to lift back to the starting position.

[Slavo]

so purepower instead of waiting for 20th of June
you start this bullshit?
cuz youre offended like a little girl that someone doesnt want your advice?
dont you think the inventor knows better and doesnt give a fuck what you say?

Bessler stated

My machine is in front of you; I have demonstrated many experiments to you also. When you are sure of the truth, as you all have witnessed, I see no reason why still you need to  depend on the authorities for their expert advice? In the field, where nothing is known, tell me sir, who can be an expert except the inventor himself.?

of course world doesnt know anything about the wheel cuz of dickhead experts like newton gravesand etc

now what kind of egoistic motherfucker are you doing the same thing?


now anyone who still has faith in this, now i backed up old build pages of www.surphzup.com re-read em again and i think if Archer puts em back online (especially build page) ppl will start to respond again positively, theres a lot of truth in them
lets fuckin ask him to explain things more clearly instead of telling him youre wrong this youre wrong that,
fuck and if it would be on me i prefer to avoid  math explanations as much as possible
we need the fuckin machine

not to defend that liar virgin newton

[dirt diggler]

@ PurePower,  thanks so much for clarifying that for me, however I don't really care what the scientific term is because I'm not a scientist, however, by the time you continue your sine wave around the full 360 degrees, it would sure look elliptical.  The fact remains that a lever performs very differently depending on where it is in it's travel, and for a device that is using a very large lever such as Archers, that is kinda important.  Just arguing that it travels in a circle means nothing unless we know for sure how the lever is being used "in the real world".