Roll on the 20th June

[exxcomm0n]

the pissing contest has been delayed due to wind...

Current score:

  AQ: 17       Exxo: 14

with 3 posts left in the 3rd 1/4


can we get back to work now?
----------------------------------------------------------------

Sure man, I just hold QtE in contempt since he now longer will touch the topic of the wheel and I'm grooving on my new status as an "oil man".
I'll reply to him separately.

BTW....what are you using as score criteria?

It was recently pointed out to me, by someone who has already attempted an Axial-Bypass situation,
that the 'bending' of the rods i experienced is a common result for that approach. 

It was then suggested that i add a center-piece to the axle, that allows a guided movement of the rods.
i made a few minor assumptions as to what exactly that means..
and drew a little something to pass around.
maybe someone has a few thoughts on this?

I gots a couple.

1st, your bypass looks like it'll work and if you want to go that way there's a few ways I see it happening for cheap and ease of installation.

a.) Braze/solder a small length of appropriate diameter copper tubing to a non-SS hose clamp and !viola! you have an easily adjustable rod guide anchored off the spindle. There will be some weight differential that may mess w/ things but if you pre-measure/size the clamps before attaching the pipe to the hose clamp track and you can have the screw/tightener be exactly opposite of the guide this can maybe offset the tightener assembly weight.

A "less weight", but "no adjust" type scenario can use a piece of PVC pipe of the appropriate diameter w/ a hole drilled in the middle of one side. Then you can use a screw/post that will fit into the pipe and put it through the hole and use that to mount the pipe to the spindle by screwing it in or using glue for the post in a pre-drilled hole in the spindle.
If you use a screw you might just want to cut off the head and epoxy the threads into the hole you drilled in the side of the pipe as now there is nothing obstructing the rod travel or providing extra drag.

b.) I thought about the just offset placement of the rods way back when and came to the conclusion (NOT through experimentation!) that it would make tuning the balance of the wheel  and the attract/repel arrays a complete PITA.
If you offset the rod you start playing w/ the angles it is at when coming into a mag array.

Instead of having a rod end every 60 degrees going around the wheel that has an exact opposite such as:
(I.)   rod 1 - 0 to 180 degrees one way and 180 to 0 the other
(II.)  rod 2 - 60 to 240 degrees one way and 240 to 60 the other
(III.) rod 3 - 120 to 300 degrees one way and 300 to 120 the other

You now have a wheel with:
(I.)   rod 1 - 357 to 183 degrees one way and 177 to 3 the other
(II.)  rod 2 - 57 to 243 degrees one way and 237 to 63 the other
(III.) rod 3 - 123 to 303 degrees one way and 297 to 117 the other

....when viewed in regards to the spindle center.

So this new offset rod wheel doesn't have the 7:00 to 1:00 o'clock push but both a 7:15-ish to 12:45-ish push and a 6:45 to 1:15 push (if you use the rod exact center as your "clock" center) and BANG!, gravity grabs ya by the 'nads and says, "No dice sailor".

I still highly suggest you think about drilling THROUGH the spindle and using that as another strengthening leverage point/guide as then all your angles "stay true" and you have one less weight balancing headaches as all your holes "lose" the same weight and there is no addition of weight like the guide assembly would add.

I'll agree that when the weight is sooooo close to the spindle that the weight difference seems negligible, but that "negligible" seems to have this ability to effect "possible" a busload!

Just turn both wheel ideas in your mind. it's not as easy as it sounds because each "lever" the rod is, is "above offset" when it goes through the arrays the 1st time and "under offset" when it goes through the arrays the 2nd time.

Remember when "underslung" was the magic bullet for the E-gypt-ing Fulcrum? It might work against ya.

Each rod encountering an arrays will alternate over/under and  that might negate this entire argument but as it turns in mind, the extra effort of conquering the overslung axle defeats the more relative ease of the underslung and the wheel stops.

Just some thoughts dude. Shouldn't take too much time or materials to mock up a toy for a trial run and see.
I did not come to these conclusions from testing, but just armchair vegging so take that fact into account.

[sm0ky2]

@ Exx

thanks for the reply,  ive torn through the problem of the overslung/underslung rods when they are offset from the axis.
both mentally, and physically.. There are notable problems, as you mentioned, and also the angle of entry into the magnetic array(s) with respect to each rod, is off-center to the center of gravity of the wheel itself. This is why i think the bending occurs. The off-set model i did with wooden rods, were sturdy enough that they did not bend, but friction fron the twisting got the best of me, and they did not slide properly.

The main problem  have here is this... A rear-face mounted wheel just is not pheasable. At least not with the materials i can easily obtain.
not sturdy enough

The center axle is sturdy enough to hold a 200lb man sitting on the stone wheel.
But,. theres a solid axle in the center of the spindle.
  Drilling through the spindle wont work, because the center axle is stationary, while the outer spindle spins on top of it.

My sort of "last resort" idea, was to attach a piece on the end of the spindle, that sticks out past the axle.
Then i can drill the holes close together, so that they just barely clear the Axle-Bolt. this gives me a much smaller offset to have to deal with.
As well as serving the purpose of the stabalizing center-guide.

im still concerned with friction at this center point, and i may consider an EB-type function on the center piece.

The new EB's im designing are triangular. using 3 bearings
i think it should function the same with 3, just have one less frictional surface - so its an upgrade i believe.

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

As far as scoring is concerned. We generally use the Webster's Cyberbattle Guidelines.
Points are assigned for acts of textual aggression, including but not limited to insults, using obscure factual ( or fictional) content to emphasize your point of view, name-calling, and tactics geared towards convincing the audience that you are "winning".

Bonus points are awarded in several categories, including:

using the enemy's own words against him
substitution - this is where you insert an irrelevant idea in place of the
                   one you have failed to logically present.
diversion - this is when you steer the course of the argument to a
               completely different direction than your competitor was
               trying to take it.

in short - you're doing quite well, but you are going to have to step your game up if you seek to conquer the reigning champ.

[WilbyInebriated]

As far as scoring is concerned. We generally use the Webster's Cyberbattle Guidelines.
Points are assigned for acts of textual aggression, including but not limited to insults, using obscure factual ( or fictional) content to emphasize your point of view, name-calling, and tactics geared towards convincing the audience that you are "winning".

Bonus points are awarded in several categories, including:

using the enemy's own words against him
substitution - this is where you insert an irrelevant idea in place of the
                   one you have failed to logically present.
diversion - this is when you steer the course of the argument to a
               completely different direction than your competitor was
               trying to take it.

in short - you're doing quite well, but you are going to have to step your game up if you seek to conquer the reigning champ.

nice!

[exxcomm0n]

@ Crooke....ummmmm....Archer

Of course no comment on the second video proving your silly claims unfounded EX and clearly new and improved means you gave up basic math and physics - no matter what you say nothing in the world can make the main comment untrue nothing,

Look weenie boy, you address the topics you want to recognize when replying to someone and forget the specific questions and observations they originally posted.
While this action may be seen as the ruse of a self-aggrandizing fop with low self esteem and nothing to back up that small amount of self esteem they do have, I'll let your track record with both math and reading comprehension speak for themselves as they're evident for anyone to read if they want to waste the time.

(top comment)AGAIN

Excellent, this video actually shows over unity as it stands, likely the first of its kind in world history, basic math shows in the film something never achieved before, if it was a one metre lift requiring 1 kilowatt, then the fall would equal 1 kilowatt, even if it required a mechanical lift to 9 o’clock costing 500 watts it is still producing 1 kilowatt of fall, so it is still self sustaining. Well done.
nothing you ever say or any human at all for that matter will make this comment untrue, I beat Newton, videoed it and gave all instructions.

I'm sure you massaged your schwantz quite thoroughly over that comment and probably hurt your back in the attempt to honk down on yourself in congratulations after you posted it, but the "math" that you like to alternately embrace and disdain isn't being used here.

You're trying to liken your array travel cost to that of a free falling weight and neither side of a magnetic array is really free fall at all is it?
It travels in defiance of gravity.

Now since you wanna use the kilowatt vernacular to describe the effect could you tell us the weight of the thing it takes 1 kilowatt to lift 1 meter?

I'll stick w/ using weight since I'm so math challenged.

Let's say your roller is 1kg.
You ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO HAVE an array potential that is greater than that to pull the roller up and into the array so let's say the array lift potential is 3kg therefore:

3kg - 1kg = 2kg
HooRay! you have extra energy!

You have 3kg of array potential acting on 1kg. of roller weight making the roller weightless with an excess of 2kg roller energy potential left over!

But, we forgot about gravity. BUMMER!

Let's figure a cost of .5kg to lift the roller into the array because of the leverage it can use against the sheet metal.

But, just before the 9:00 position there is no leverage against the metal sheet and the 1kg roller now has to cost more energy potential than the .5kg it takes to introduce it to the array. It's defying gravity!
Let's be kind and say that it only takes .75kg cost to keep the roller in the track in defiance of gravity instead of the 1 to 1 it takes to achieve weightlessness that real math demands.
Damn! More loss!

So now we have:

3kg -1kg -.5kg -.75kg  = .75kg energy potential!
Still busting through that OU envelope!

We lost 2.25kg energy potential somewhere.
BUT IT'S STILL EXTRA ENERGY!!!!

Until we remember that the .75kg is imparted by the 1st part of the array, and no matter how funky your magnet spacing on the other side of the array it still costs you energy to get through it.
The wall, remember?
But wall is more apropos of the problem with repel activity of magnets, LIKE THE WHEEL CONCEPT USES.

When you build a MA symetrically, both sides have the same attraction for entry or exit no matter of it's flat or circular, and a roller introduced into the array will zip back and forth but settle in the middle 1/3.
The dirt devil experiments proved this to me and helped me imagine the type and shape of the magnetic field.
It's not a wall of repulsion that you're battling, but an anchor of attraction the roller seems to be attached to that rests in the middle of the array.

Use a cylindrical magnet with no ball bearings added as your array roller and I bet you get that same middle 1/3 effect.

In fact why don't you film it, post it, and prove me wrong?
You've got the set up, your prior videos prove it.
My dirt devil and MA vids are still up, and while not the exact circular shape of yours, still prove the point.
But my videos aren't nearly as good as yours because I do MULTIPLE RUNS with DIFFERING OUTCOMES sometimes.
I must not be doing it right.

They are at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEgPQV_ZtM4

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fISJvmUYOQ
(in fact this has a comment from some dufus named newtonsend269. Too bad when I click on the handle UTube says, "This channel is no longer available because the user closed their account. ")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0M_1-5KJIg
(This has another comment from that Newton guy. He seems to think I understand the MA when he comments:

Second internal loop in world history, very cool. Some clown copied the original loop video and tried to make it look like i had flicked it around, clearly there is no need for a push it reaaly does accelerate at high speed away, with sufficient power to defy gravity. This along with the key is the future of all power generation.An inventor is not worth anything without those who independantly prove the original is the real deal. Watch this guy make a switch to go with it.Top stuff guys                            newtonsend269                 3 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLb_A174W1o

Say, where are all your old videos at?

Now while creative spacing seems to lessen that attraction, it don't make it disappear. There's a cost for escaping it.

So our roller is exactly 1/2 way through the array and it has .75kg energy potential left after getting there.
But that .75kg of potential is just enough to break from that attraction and deposit that roller smack dab in the bottom of the array track where we started.

In fact, it costs enough potential that the roller in the video just barely gets past our start point at the bottom of the array and settles back to the bottom.
I pointed this out with the statement "it looks like it <gasp> hits a wall!" before  in a previous post but you and your monkey boy ways just seemed to miss it since it's a valid observation and kinda goes against your grand claims. It's been within the last 5-6 posts so not to hard to find.

This means that we have to invest another .5kg to re-introduce it to the array.
This is only effecting the roller's own weight and not even driving an external load.

There goes the OU..... .....bye bye.

Now all of these weights and costs are hypothetical.
Why don't you use the math and physics you say I don't understand to describe your exact setup to prove I'm wrong and teach your future replicators something as well as me.

I bet TK would even come back to have a good laugh about
that.

(i think he is referring to the promise to beat Newton and produce a device that beats unity as the debt)

Nope weenie boy.
I'm talking about paypal'd cash that I, as well as other misguided OU advocates, sent to you.  It's all there in thread history.
It was at the time that you asked for "donations" to finish the wheel and Clanzer (you know, the thread starter) said he'd "been there, done that" and was now going to run as far and fast as possible from you and your concept.

If only I had listened to the older and wiser in OU experience.
Oy vey.

But no, I (as well as Joe Mayernik) sent you cash to FINISH THE WHEEL, and we all know how you like talking about that subject. No wonder you have a mental block about it.
Well that and the fact that you asked for donations to complete something that you never did complete.

So, to be perfectly clear, you owe me money as you didn't deliver on the SOG, now did you?

But, if you don't want to pay up, trot out your working SOG.
Otherwise, give me my money back.
Bitch.

<Bold emphasis used in this section only to point out that all the bolded words should be considered synonymous.>

Until you do one or the other, dance monkey boy, dance! Your capering amuses me.

For all others who followed my advice about the gold last time to reach 1200 when it was at 625, next tip silver 80 by xmas, world economy will fall in 75 days or less. why? Logic, the argument between the two US parties is weather or not to accept the dollar for dollar cuts against the debt increase, even if they accept it, there are no people in America in any financial institution that are smarter than a cow turd. why
The logic master will answer it for you, even with obama accepting the cuts, that only covers the debt increase, not the original 13 trillion dollar debt they were already unable to pay, so there is no benefit to the us to recover, and additionally 4 trillion in cuts will destroy the people just like greece

Oh good! You're on the run from your prior claims as you're spouting political rhetoric as if you have a crystal ball, just like you did last time the questions started making too much sense.
Thing is, anyone that passed primary school math and uses critical thinking practices could (and did) come to the same conclusion long ago and probably doesn't need your help.
I want my money back from you so I can buy more gold.

But it does come with new prognostication of a firm date in the future. 75 days or less until economic collapse.
But if I read the description of your 1st video it has another forecast date:

My name is Archer (the Eskimo) Quinn, this is a video of an energy weapon against the NATO western economy and my gift to Gaddafi and all free men and women who fight against tyranny.

Good quality oil will stioll be need to make plastics, car tyres and so on, but coal will be obselete and petrol as electric cars can be charged for free. and a vesion of this will be able to be fitted to many cars to continually charge the battery 24/7

The 21st of December is when my grandfather died and is the birthday of both my brother and sister (not twins), and it is my hope to officially open the first commercial version of this in Libya on the 21st of December next year in memory of my brother and grandfather and for my sisters birthday, and change the world forever to a new course, and in the mean time destroy the stock market value of coal and all other western stock market energy commodities

for anyone that has any doubts that this has already achieved the goal of destroying newtons laws of the conservation of energy, you must remember that the law is about energy not electricity, the train, being the magnets carried a cargo of steel up and over a hill and down the other side leaving the magnetic field and delivering it further along the track without any extrnal or other energy source, it was built by a third party will instructions for all other to do the same, i could put same green gass on the top if you like, but the train provided overunity from the replusion and attraction of the magnets and fields, not ever before achieved and in defiance of a law of physics that says that is impossible. you saw that here now, so you know without track friction and a rotor the machine is the real deal, and the first ever to prove it can be done not in theory but in actual machines, not harvard, yale,columbia.nyu or even nasa themselves have achieved what you are seeing now.

Oh really really GOOD! We have another predicted date that you still have time to meet as it's still in the future instead of the past like all your other prediction and release promises have graduated to.

But why are you waiting until a few months after the economic collapse to release this world changing energy device?
Won't it be tough to replicate after the economic collapse kills most, if not all markets and distribution for the magnets and hardware you specify?
Wouldn't that make it hard for the common man to really stick it to an "oil man" like me?
Let's not all hold our breath in anticipation of that forecast date as we all know how well you do at meeting the deadline of a prophecy.

Dance monkey boy, dance. 

@ smoky

Good 'nuff?

[WilbyInebriated]

I'm talking about paypal'd cash that I, as well as other misguided OU advocates, sent to you.  It's all there in thread history.
It was at the time that you asked for "donations" to finish the wheel and Clanzer (you know, the thread starter) said he'd "been there, done that" and was now going to run as far and fast as possible from you and your concept.

you just admitted that it was a donation... if you gave (donated) him money there is no debt.

If only I had listened to the older and wiser in OU experience.
Oy vey.

indeed. but you didn't...

But no, I (as well as Joe Mayernik) sent you cash to FINISH THE WHEEL, and we all know how you like talking about that subject. No wonder you have a mental block about it.
Well that and the fact that you asked for donations to complete something that you never did complete.

again you acknowledge it was a donation... not a debt.

So, to be perfectly clear, you owe me money as you didn't deliver, now did you?
But, if you don't want to pay up, trot out your working SOG.
Otherwise, give me my money back.
Bitch.

to be perfectly clear... and you have been, it was a donation. thus, there is no debt and you are owed nothing. if you want him to 'deliver', simply produce your contract with archer that guarantees his 'performance'.

i'd say the above idiocy puts you far ahead of archer... but i'm not an official websters judge.