Roll on the 20th June

[sm0ky2]

assuming the 3 were evenly spaced. they would end up with one pointing straight up, and the other two
spaced at like 8 & 4 (or something like that, didnt feel line triangulating a circle tonight, so an approx. will have to do...)

like a "peace sign"

[ramset]

Bad    somehow I think your no math is good in this context [IMO] seems like common sence will prevail in Archers wisdom   good night all [except ARCHER] you sir have a world to change   much work to do      will be thinking of you in my prayers [to whomever] cares   Chet

[oak]

OK, here's another message in an email from Archer:

"the disks are only disks, instead of a solid piece, as i had them in hand, they do not slide, a permanent magnet the same or larger than the disks is on each end."

I (Oak) followed up with these questions seeking additional clarification:

1. Am I reading it right:

(a) the disks are attached to each end of the rod we see in the photo (and they don't slide on the rod);

(b) they happen to be disks rather than a solid piece only because that's what you had readily available; and

(c) attached to the group of disks, like a cap, will be a disk magnet about the same diameter or slightly larger.

2. And may I ask: does it matter what the disks are made of; does it only matter what weight/density they are. In other words, can they be aluminum, steel, stainless steel, etc., and either attracted to magnets or not.

Archer then replied as follows (I made some minor typo corrections but did not change anything):

"yes to everything, except the disks (weights) cannot be magnetic, an electromagnet is designed only to repell the same pole, the steel would be attracted to the electromagnet regardless.  stainless would be perfect but expensive for a trial unit unless you have some.

"my previous machine had solid magnets not disk on each end, i am trying disks myself this time even though they are far less efficient, i am adjusting the thrust and distance to compensate.  you must attach or have them together under pressure or independently fixed.  they cannot afford to have a bump effect or impact from any movement.   they can be apart, but the closer a weight is to the end the greater the power."

---------------

I (Oak) note that this suggests to me that an electromagnet is placed somewhere around 7 o'clock for each tube, to repel the rod and its weights & magnets toward 1 o'clock.

(Perhaps the electromagnet is triggered just as the tube is passing, and this both pushes it upward and gives a bit of extra rotational oomph.)

[mental breakdown]

Maybe someone here can help me understand something.  A long time ago I read that it is inertia and centrifugal force that keeps a a satellite in space. (Is this true?)  When  I asked Archer about the devices potential application in motor vehicles...Archer emailed  me prior to posting - (hope this is okay Archer - oh ya, i used spell check ... you must have been in a hurry.   ) 

Archer wrote:

"Ok, to answer the questions in order, the application to motor vehicles with be the most difficult, but by use of battery charging techniques and the fact that it keeps running, means that whilst you are shopping, at work or stopped at the lights it keeps charging the batteries, provided they have a run time of around 2 hours themselves I cannot see why it would not work, the problem is more inertia, gravity being the power source will have to fight the inertia of the moving vehicle, however a simple wind scoop to air catchers on the end of each arm should compensate as the air velocity is actually greater than inertia in moving vehicles." 

Archer (or anyone with the knowledge) - The problem I'm having is relating the analogy of the satellites to this earthbound device.  If a satellite relies on inertia and The Archer device must fight it in the application of a vehicle.  It would be conceptually a much different principle.  Though I do not fully understand these concepts, I'm trying.  If inertia can be used in space to help something remain in motion perpetually, then gravity under the right conditions should be able to keep something in motion perpetually.  Unfortunately, I will probably get the classic response of Newton's Laws and the Law of Thermodynamics, but either way I'd like to know.

I'm just trying to comprehend some of these ideas in a way that makes sense to me.   ie (What is the opposite of inertia?  )

Any enlightenment would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Scott



Another thing I was wondering.  Is it correct that if you had very heavy bunch of weights on a large balanced wheel and you could get it spinning quite fast... it would only take a constant "tap" every now and then to keep it going?  Sort of like a heavy barrel on a flat surface if you start it spinning you could keep it going with just a stick if you could tap it frequently.  If that is true then that may be the method Archer is stealing the energy from the machine as he knows how to give it a constant tap yet utilize the energy by the insignificant resistance that the generator is stealing from the unit.

Thanks again...

[The Eskimo Quinn]

ahh the real tricky stuff, the peace sign effect is a newtonian illusion, draw a line from the tip of eac arm to the next, it is a triangle with no offcentre of gravity but vertical through the axel. one of the great head spins of all time.

ever wonder why the egyptians used triagles? much easier to put a stick in the sand and use a string to draw a big circle so why pyramids not cones? (dan akroyd would have been proud

a cone has no functional centre, where when knowing the base size, one can know the area of the entire object from a single side, why traingulation not grids? a triangle is vastly more fuctional than a square, triangles are the building blocks of squares and pyramids are the building blocks of cubes.

just thought i'd through that triva in, but a triangle has no centre outside vertical, when placed vertical. it is an illusion, YET, don't forget the weights!!!

go back to the basics, imagine you have already got your environment, your balanced wheel, you have already magically found out how to get the wheel to turn itself (or waited until the 20th) what could make moving the weights easier or cut your load down, would a planet with lessor gravity help? or can you do that here in a fashion?

you need to get away from the basics you already know about the wheel.start adding new components, the key is not a word whispered to the machine so it must be a device of sorts with parts.

Peace anyway.