Roll on the 20th June

[purepower]

@ ALL

I know, Ive become a little obsessed with the site; finally a chance to speak openly with others sharing the same dream. I really would like to take this discussion back to mag-grav wheels, but it doesnt seem like we can until this lever is put to rest.

Just a little thought on the "oil man." As we all know, oil is a limited resource; there is only so much under our feet to well and once it is gone, its gone. Im pretty sure the oil companies realize this, which is why a few of them have started looking for other energy solutions (BP, Chevron). I really dont think the oil companies are out to destroy other energy sources as they understand one day they will have none of their current product (oil) left to sell. I think they are more looking to OWN, not destroy, the new energy solutions to come.

But thats just my take on it...

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

@exxcommon

The reason the lever must be balanced is simple. If it is not, the imbalance in the lever influences the lift ratio. With an influence on the lift ratio, the length ratio is no longer identical to the length ratio.

If the lever is balanced, then the length ratio is identical to the lift ratio.

This is why I wanted you balance the lever, then do the experiment. As you can see, Archer having his lever imbalanced is what gave him his magic "20:1" lift on a 5:1 lever.

If I were to remove the counter weight, the weight of the lever alone is enough to lift the mass on the short end. This doenst mean I have created lift with no work, as Archer's logic would have you believe. Please see below picture.

No balance, no equal length and load ratios, no magic.

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

@MrKai

"Personally, I would think you would welcome some folks that have a bit more insight into why energy works the way it does so that they may help you exploit things like this."

"PurePower has a beef with archer...but you know what?

HE STARTED OFF AS A PROPONENT...and stated so clearly. My understanding is that once Archer started throwing around bad math, then getting *nasty about the guidance* that it turned ugly."

I think you understand me better than anyone...

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

@sm0ky2

The build is looking good. To balance it out, you also might want to try taping/gluing weights (washers maybe?) to the back of the wheel. This would probably save you a lot of time/effort.

In regards to your energy question, your thinking is headed in the right direction. You are correct, analyzing the rods individually verses the lever as a whole would give you different results. This is simply because the control rods are a small part of the entire lever. If you take your control rod analysis, add in the analysis for the rest of the lever, you would have the analysis for the whole lever.

The most simple and accurate way to analyze any body/system of particles is to analyze its mass center.

"E =  3kg (9.8m/s/s) ( say... 3 inches verticle displacement?) * (# of rods)"

is absolutely correct, if the 3 inches is measuring the displacement of the mass center for each of the rod. Where I think you might be struggling conceptually is here:

"the energy of the entire massive lever moving several meters as a result of this tiny imbalance"

Okay, if we are dealing with a "tiny imbalance," then we are not dealing with "several meters" of movement. Again, analyze the mass center. For a "tiny imbalance," the mass center of the lever is going to be pretty close to the fulcrum. As we move closer to the fulcrum, the displacement of the mass center becomes much smaller as the lever rotates. If we are dealing with a greatly imbalanced lever, then the mass center would be pretty far from the fulcrum. With a mass center far from the fulcrum, then we may be dealing with  "several meters" of displacement.

Hope this cleared things up!..

-PurePower

In regards to the pictures, please note the descriptions below. Also, pay careful attention to the location of my counter weight as I vary its location to accomplish different results.

Photo1- Lever loaded with 51.6 grams on short end, no load on extended end, no counterweight

Photo2- Lever loaded with 51.6 grams on short end, no load on extended end, counterweight in position 1 to achieve balance

Photo3- Lever with no load on extended end or short end, counterweight in position 2 to achieve balance of lever

Photo4- Lever with 18 grams on short end, 3.6 grams on extended end, lever still in position 2 to achieve balance of lever

[purepower]

Couldnt attach them all....

At this point, I think arguing the lever is fruitless. The Newtonians know what they know; the Archurians feel there is more to come. The score will never be settled until it all comes out on the 20th, so lets please all drop it until then. We can argue it for the 12 days we have left and accomplish nothing, or we can save our fingers/time and discuss the wheel which is not still shrouded in secrecy...

[purepower]

Just a worthwhile video series for anyone who as not seen them yet and is still interested in the lever...

Archers original...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2G5BWR4WBY&feature=related

My rebuttal...

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

Exx's re-rebuttal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd8bxAeHGm0&watch_response

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

Is anyone familiar with ferrite or any ferromagnetic material? Any experience at all? Please pm me!

-PurePower

[sm0ky2]

@ Clanzer

It's nice to have you back on board !!  with your site being down, and haven't seen you post in a bit...

i guess i understand now, you were just sitting back trying to stay out of all this nonsense.
ANY time someone goes against the grain, the sheeple will stand up in mutiny. Its not just with science, its with anything that someone holds to be their "truth". wether its 100% truth, or completely incorrect, or mostly correct and somewhat incomplete (like many areas of science). I'm not concerned with the critics. They often keep my own mind in check when i start to stray. But i also do my best to maintain correctness in the things i do. I'll give anything a try when it comes to FE/OU.
Like many of us here, i've been down the long road of what doesn't work, and have found a few things that do.
That and that alone is what keeps me trying at it. But for decades before that, i kept trying purely of my own determination.  Because i didnt believe that it was "imposible". I questioned this from the age of 5. the only answer i would get is because it was taught to be impossible, and noone has been able to achieve it.

Does continuing to pursue something, that main-stream society thinks is "impossible" make you crazy??
  for centuries people were labeled crazy for strapping wings to their backs and trying to fly off cliffs.
----------Now days, Hang-gliding is a recreational sport.

Over the decades, i've gained a much greater understanding of why it is deemed "impossible". But i have also learned that there is no area of science that does not have an exception, a 'fudge factor,an anomoly, a set of conditions where the normal rules no longer apply, and we devlop a special set of rules for that instance.

So to me it seems illogical to even label a scientific theory as a "law" in the first place. Much less - completely abandon your scientific approach when USING those theories. - they want to call US crazy..

These same drones of society will be giving a "crazy person" a  gold medal should someone actually suceed...

YES, its sometimes irritating when they clutter up our forum with arguments over "why" something wont work the way its intended , especially when they have no clue what they are talking about. But intelligent, constructive criticism can be helpful. (cyber-battle not included)

If i post a video, it shows EXACTLY what it is/doing/whatever. That's why all mine are short, sweet, and to the point.  I'm not going to let RandomUserX stop me from showing you guys because he said such n such on page 236.  If theres something that needs to be shown, maybe it can help another member on their build,, or they can see what i have and give me a suggestion.

I'm like a grade 2 builder.  Clanz - yur like a 10++ i'd hate to lose out on what you have to offer because of these $#^&^*&!heads that crawled out from under their rocks when Archer Quinn stirred up the forest.

They weren't here before, because we mostly kepts our things in the thread. Archer has managed to get the word out on at least 26 webgroups, his own site, and now people are popping his videos up all over youtube and sending them to each other on their cell-phones. which is i think exactly what he wanted...

our forum just got caught up in the middle of it., Which has its goods and bads.   
The true FE-chasers will stick it out. and things will calm down after the 20th.

[Rusty_Springs]

@ Chet

Dude, I asked 5 different questions in that one post, so I guess I have to explain them all.

1.) Why is everyone trying to have it (the lever) balanced?

Because that's the easiest way to shift your focus from the weight it took to GET the lever to balance.

2.) Why do you have to use a control arm weight?

You don't, except to change the amount of weight effected by the long side.

3.) What happens if you don't?

You get to lift more weight.

4.) @  PureP

Can you take your device and show its measures again without the counter weight?

We'll have to wait for him to chime in on this one.

5.) The thing that is still puzzling me is how one weight can lift another weight 5x it's distance of fall?

It's a sorta question.

But I'm starting to see a way to do it.

I will keep you informed.

Hi exxcomm0n
To me its all about the claim lifting 20:1 why does the lever need to be balance because until its balanced you can't say your lifting 20:1 because most of the weight is used to balance the lever before any weight starts lifting and as I said your lifting nothing, the heavy side is falling.
Ask yourself how much weight are you lifting when you put the ruler on the screwdriver at 10" because one end goes down the other up, to know the true weight it needs to be balance then you put 20 on one side 1 on the other and watch it drop to the 20 side, the one will never lift 20 and your setup will never lift 20 magnets with the 1 because I don't beleave your rullers weight is the same or more then 20 magnet.
As I pointed out Archer beam weight is just right to make everything balanced until he puts the 1ks on and once he does that it drops, it doesn't matter what side of the beam he puts that 1k on, short or long side it will still drop to that side.
I think this could be my last post people just don't get it so why should I waste my time trying to show them.
Take Care All
Graham