Roll on the 20th June

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi All
First your totally right Power but people are not getting it so I will sit back and wait for the 20th then they may get it.
No Acher follow answered me, why are you trying to change his design when its perfect and works in your minds? could you all have douts and where are those douts comming from could it be that your logic is sending you warning bells, is something just not sitting right.
If you have no douts then theres no need to try and improve it is there?
Take Care All
Graham

[ramset]

I miss BATMAN    Chet PS  Batman has over 400-500 hits on his picture on Archers thread [here] Archer is chasing 42000 on this thread PPS  where is the Batdude   whats 617 hp and your picture have to do with each other

[MrKai]

http://www.surphzup.com/gpage.html

Um...

I fully acknowledge up front that I have no idea what he is saying...can someone xlate this for me?

No this is NOT sarcasm. I am utterly con-friggin-fused about Part 3...the Secret of the Ooze.

Thanks in Advance,

-K

[Rusty_Springs]

Nah Rusty,  just harvest the heat being produced by the friction to run a stirling engine, then you have two devices pumping out the free energy

At first I thought this wasn't even worth a responce but since I can't help myself, first you have to get it to spin to get the friction to run your stirling engine.
Second if its that easy why don't you just run an electric motor get the heat from it to run your stirling engine which puts the energy back into your electric motor to keep it going free energy from two devices running.
Take Care dirt
Graham

[arXiv76]

@ Rust_Springs
I personally love friction. Body friction is currently my all time favorite friction of them all. 3 kids and counting..

@ PurePower
Mmmmm, your thinking of the the gravy also!

Welcome! Here's something I posted a while back. It addresses your post well.

"Analysis of the mag-grav wheel:

Okay, to begin with, in analyzing the rods on the wheel what must be considered for calculations  of torque and energy is the locations of their mass centers (or the center of the rod if symmetry exists). In regards to the whole extension arm bit, there is no additional benefit to having additional weight five feet out or at the ends or located at the mass center.

L=length of arms from mass center
x=distance from mass center to fulcrum
m=mass
y=extension from end of rods

T= m*(L+x) - m*(L-x) = 2mx
T= m*(L+x+y) - m*(L-x+y) = 2mx

As you can see, adding the extension gives no benefit to total torque. All that does matter is total mass (2m) and distance from mass center to fulcrum (x). Now understand having additional magnets on the extension would provide more magnetic force, but as soon as you see the analysis it is up to you to decide if that would be beneficial.

In regards to the analysis of the magnets, the force and energy must be treated with care. For starters, the force of the magnets vary with the distance^2. Few manufacturers provide values so it would probably be beneficial to take some measurements on your own and do a curve-fit analysis. With magnets (and other field forces, like gravity), it requires the same amount of energy for one magnet to enter another's magnetic field as it gains (or loses, depending on orientation) from exiting the field. Simply put, you can not gain "extra energy" from a magnet by moving it into another's field from one direction coming out another. This is why Steron has failed. Similarly, this is what most people encounter with the "sticky wall effect." They are able to move into a magnetic field, but trying to get back out will require the same energy it received by moving in.

Now what Archer has done is used an imbalanced wheel to try to overcome this sticky point. By placing all the mass centers of the rods on one side of the wheel, the magnets will be moved past their sticky point at the expense of energy from the "falling" mass centers. Once the sticky point energy is overcome, the rod is allowed to free fall and contribute it potential energy to the device.

Sounds great in a vacuum, but there is a hitch, and it is this that has prevented people from successfully achieving overunity (including myself). The issue is simple: the device must be constructed so that the potential energy of any one  rod is always greater than the sum of the "sticky point energy" and the energy needed to reset the potential energy for a complete cycle. To overcome this will most certainly result in overunity.

Now the reset energy is simple. Thats where the magnets come in. By moving the magnets on the rod into the stator magnets' fields, the bar is lifted to reset its potential energy. However, as stated before, the gain the magnet received to move out of the field (E=mgh) is the same energy it took to move into the field. The energy it took to move it into the field (E=mgh) came from equal contributions of each of the other two rods (E=.5mgh). Now if each of the rods exerts .5mgh joules to lift one rod, and mgh joules to lift both rods through the whole cycle, and its only energy was its original potential energy (E=mgh), then where is the free energy supposed to come from?"

-PurePower