Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


Roll on the 20th June

Started by CLaNZeR, April 21, 2008, 11:41:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

ramset

Whats for yah ne're go bye yah
Thanks Grandma

dirt diggler

@ Spinner,

No I'm not looking for a fight at all.
My problem with your explaination is that while I totally agree that the beam is only slightly heavier on the short side, it is none the less heavier.  Now when he adds 5.3 MORE KG's on the short side, so now we have 5.3 +whatever the slight imbalance is, lets call it 1KG, we end up with around 6.3KG, being lifted on a 5:1 fulcrum, with 1KG on the other end.
please explain.
I'm looking for answers, but not getting any that would seem to cover this.

ciao, Dirt
No, really, I love beating my head against this wall.......

spinner

Quote from: dirt diggler on June 12, 2008, 11:25:41 AM
@ Spinner,

No I'm not looking for a fight at all.
My problem with your explaination is that while I totally agree that the beam is only slightly heavier on the short side, it is none the less heavier.  Now when he adds 5.3 MORE KG's on the short side, so now we have 5.3 +whatever the slight imbalance is, lets call it 1KG, we end up with around 6.3KG, being lifted on a 5:1 fulcrum, with 1KG on the other end.
please explain.
I'm looking for answers, but not getting any that would seem to cover this.

ciao, Dirt

You see, here's the misunderstanding. Where did you see that Archer's "20kg" weight is additionally equipped with 5,3 kg weight? In one picture only? Have you seen it while the fulcrum is in "operation"?

Why Archer never performed a simple task of balancing the "fulcrum" before claiming  a 1:20kg lifting?
Why he didn't perform a test (proposed by (Rusty?)), where additional 1 and 20 kg weights would be added to the original ones?
Maybe because of the fact that the "test" would show a fallacy?

Look, Dirt Diggler, we are not talking about Archer's or Newtonians or whichever physics...
This is a fact of Nature. A lever. So?


"Ex nihilo nihil"

spinner

Quote from: ramset on June 12, 2008, 11:21:32 AM
WHERE IS BATMAN

Hmm.. BatMan is in the BatCave, reading a BatPhysics books?
Nah, I think he makes love with the BatGirl...

Ok, I'm curious... Batman, what kind of device we saw in your picture? Is it a special kind of dynamo? 500lbs of magnets? Seriously?
Or is it a PM motor?
Thanks for the response...
"Ex nihilo nihil"

dirt diggler

Ummmmm, spinner,
if you watch Archers video #2 of his third set, around the 1:30 point, you will clearly see 1Kg lift 5.3KG, plus the heavy end of the lever. which is likely at least another KG, if not more.
he then removes the extra 5.3 KG and shows that the lever is still heavy on the short end.
any insight you have into this would be greatly appreciated.

ciao, Dirt
No, really, I love beating my head against this wall.......