Roll on the 20th June

[helmut]

@pi

Why  you      -r-a-p-e-   the forum  with foolish comments.?
delated
helmut

[purepower]

@DarkStar

Wow. Seriously, that is why I am "wrong?" Either I wasnt clear or you dont understand, or both. Looks like I'll be making a movie to night, if time permits.

If the weights are hung down below the axis of the lever RIGIDLY, then the lever will auto-level itself as described earlier because the new center of mass will remain in a fixed location relative to the lever, causing the lever to rotate so the CM is at its lowest possible point.

If the weights are hung down loosly (ie by string), then the lever will not auto-level. This is because as the lever rotates, the center of mass is NOT fixed relative to the lever. Instead, the CM is free to shift and will always remain below the axis of rotation. Since the force of the weights can be equi-statically applied to any point on the string, it can be applied to the start of the string at the point on the center axis of the lever which would prevent auto-leveling.

The key is how it is lowered. It was my mistake and should have been more clear. I know my posts are long so I try condensing, often leaving out details.

Does that last description check out with your observations, or do I still need to make a vid? Hope this feud can end here, especially since it is only a product of poor typed communication. And I know my spelling has gone to shit, my last 20 or so posts have been from my phone at work; cut me a lil slack please.

@All

Im sorry if I have belittled anyone. I came into this thread only willing to discuss ideas and concepts. My folly was when I tried my hand in politics. I will no longer respond to personal attacks, not because I am weak but because I just dont care. Your opinions of me are useful to no one and nothing. I will discuss/debate ideas, but I no longer feel a need or desire to prove myself. I am not perfect; no one is. I do not know everything; no one does. But I will always do my best to help those in need. Whether or not you chose to listen is your own decision, just know I am only here to help.

-PurePower

PS I agree with starting Batman and trigate threads.

[fletcher]

Shakman & Exxcom .. this may surprise you but I actually agree with both your sentiments - everyone is entitled to their opinion but it should IMO be prefaced & stated as such [e.g. IMO=In My Opinion, FWIW=For What It's Worth, TTBOMK=To The Best Of My Knowledge etc] - we all like to support the underdog, the small guy going up against the giants of this world - no disputing that, we want them to rise above the impossible odds & win - it just seems to be part of our emotional psych ?

Recognising that is fine & I even understand it, having some of the same feelings myself from time to time - you or anybody are free to support whom you like but there is carefully considered support stating your positions [which you have done] & there is unbridled & exaggerated hyperbola, devoid of little factual argument, which I can find at any testerone filled sports bar.

It has been said here before now, but, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"

Graham Clarke's [rusty's] tri-gates are of interest to a lot of people here - he makes no claims of OU & admits they have some 'problems' but he is willing to keep experimenting & combining his findings with those of others also interested & experimenting with his initial setup - working & sharing together they hope to discover a physical anomaly that can prove against the current odds that a permanent magnet or magnetic array can do work, & thereafter can be used for OU - more power to their elbows, they have not oversold anything.

Batman appears to have made claims - he has established an independent website with certain documented promises/offerings - so far, he has not failed to meet any of these promises so I'd say he was delivering on target [very exciting if it pans out] - to early IMO to call any judgement on Batman or the validity of his device until more details [or lack of] comes thru - at this stage Purepower has more knowledge than most about the design & application but even he cannot analyse it until the full details are revealed to him - so it's wait & see if the extraordinary proof is supplied to back up the extraordinary claims.

Compare both these approaches to others you might know of ? - there are plenty of OU claims, modus operandi & history to be found in this field.

JMO's.

P.S. the spell check next to the post button is a wonderful thing [thanks Stefan].

[arXiv76]

Try using the drupal engine to setup your web site. Very easy to use, professional looking templates and great modules.
drupal.org

Can't wait to see what you have.

Man people are coming out of the wood works this year. This can only keep getting better.

BATMAN....HI ALL

The batwebsite is energybat.com The website Will CHANGE A LOT.

Have fun..................BATMAN.

[DarkStar_DS9]

Lowering the weights below the center axis is similar to lowering the entire lever from the fulcrum. For further description and visual representation, please see post on page 51 where I address the effects of a "slung" lever. And yes, one having them hang at different heights would produce a different effect due to unequal vertical shift contributions from each side (also, like Rusty said, the weight of the rope too would have some effect).

If the weights are hung down loosly (ie by string), then the lever will not auto-level.

Wow. Seriously, that is why I am "wrong?"

Uhm well I don't know. I'll just leave it at that.

Hope this feud can end here

I'm sorry that you feel this way. At the time I asked the question I did not know the answer. I didn't ask just for fun, I asked because I had an idea for another probably-not-quite-workable device, and it would only make sense (...) to pursue this design if the answer was that the lever will not auto-level. So your answer discouraged me, because I put quite some trust in your judgement. Later this month, my toys arrived and allowed for a simple experiment - and it turned out that your answer was... uhm... not the answer to the question I tried to ask. So I tried to get you to re-evaluate what you have said. That's it. No feud.

Anyway, I am currently building a prototype, so I'm fine. The non-engineers in this thread can now read that there is a difference between hanging-on-a-string and hanging-in-some-rigid-way from the guy who knows his math, so they are fine too. Guess everything is fine then

Regards,

Rainer