Roll on the 20th June

[NewKid]

Hello everyone,

I have been following this thread since Engadget and this is my first post. As much as I would like to believe that Archer has a solution for FE, I don't see anything special here. Purepower has explained whats happening clearly in his video. Archer never shows the lever balanced with no weights on either side. The beam most probably balances out completely with the 20L can on the short end and maybe around 1L at the long end (at which point the total weight on the short side of the fulcrum is 5 times the weight on the long side - both the lever and water included). When Archer puts a 2L weight on the long end, it drops and stays at the bottom. However when he reduces it to 1L, it bounces back almost to the starting point indicating that the lever is very close to the balance point.

All Archer needed to do was to start his video showing that the beam is perfectly balanced in a horizontal position and then show how he is claiming 1:20 lift

[oak]

Somewhat OT.   For "greendoor", in case you haven't yet seen this:

http://www.oswirus.krakow.pl/cat_14/gyroscope/artykul_JTP.pdf

(A symmetric harnessed gyroscope accelerated to a given spinning frequency
takes different time periods to stop, depending on the direction of previous spins.)

[purepower]

Just an observation:

When I verbally debunked Archer's lever, there were rebuttals. Understandable, sometimes what I say goes over the Archurians' heads.

But now that I have provided video proof, the one piece of evidence everyone has been wanting from the start, there is no rebuttal! Instead, a diversion tactic by changing the argument to batteries. Take that discussion somewhere else please.

I hereby accept your lack of substantial rebuttal as the acknowledgement that Archer's beam is not an overunity device.

For all who have not seen it yet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlQik236_tc

June 20 will pass just like any other day. Those holding their breath for something great to happen will pass out and wake up to the world and find it exactly as it was.

At this point, I think I have said all I can say about the lever. The verbal analysis is there. The video proof is there. Anyone who still does not understand the truth is a lost cause. I just hope you dont blow the mortgage chasing Archer's failed dream. Chase your own, be creative, be inventive, and be wise.



I would like to continue to discuss the wheel. My advice and expertise are here for you to use. If you have a dynamics, energy, or any question to ask, please feel free. My motivation is to find free energy. If it think something is a failure, I will tell you why so we can move on. If I think something will work, I will tell you why so we may all develop.

-PurePower

[sm0ky2]

Hi all
I was always into FE but I have leant something from this thread that makes me think maybe science was right and it can't be done except through wind water or sun, I alway thought that magnets would do it and I came up with a motor setup that makes a permanent magnet setup work no different to an electromagnetic setup but while I was testing I learnt something I didn't know and this goes to Archers wheel to, what I learnt may not be new to some people but it was to me and thats magnets react different with a load, I was testing a distance theory with my Trigate, I had the roller go through the gate, then I let it go through the gate at the same distance with a load and it didn't move so I thought the load was to heavy but I moved the stators in and it moved again like it did with out the load, this showed me distance matters with magnet and if I set a system up to spin once I add a load to it it will stop because the distance was set for no load so I need to move the magnets in to have it work again for that load and heres where I come to Archers wheel, Now I have said it may spin if setup perfect weight to magnetic force and if you add a load it will stop, now not only weight and friction will stop it but the magnets will to, why because the distance needs to be perfect to have it spin and once a load goes on the distance changes like I have said so now it will stop, it will loss its push pull because it to far away, to change that you have to move the stator magnets in for the load.
Time will tell and as yet we havn't even seen it spin but for it to spin everything has to be perfect and thats why I can't see it happening.
Take Care All
Graham

This suprises me Graham. You are always good with the magnets.....      The mass being moved by the magnets s independent of the load. That mass is the mass of the sliding rods. and once set for the magnetic-system, this never changes.  YES it does have to be perfect to create spin, but this has nothing to do with the friction/load on the axle. its all in the rods.  If the system is set to turn the wheel, with enough force to support a load - then it (should) work with or without a load -  As the rods never change.

[Rusty_Springs]

This suprises me Graham. You are always good with the magnets.....      The mass being moved by the magnets s independent of the load. That mass is the mass of the sliding rods. and once set for the magnetic-system, this never changes.  YES it does have to be perfect to create spin, but this has nothing to do with the friction/load on the axle. its all in the rods.  If the system is set to turn the wheel, with enough force to support a load - then it (should) work with or without a load -  As the rods never change.

Hi Sm0ky2
I agree if its set to turn with a load.
Take Care Sm0ky2
Graham