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 these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



I have a working Bessler wheel in my simulation !

Started by hartiberlin, May 19, 2008, 08:36:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

rlortie

NOTE: This is an edited  copy-paste from a post I just put on BesslerWheel.com    Thought some here may enjoy it.

My opinion for what it is worth!  Ignore this post if you are not interested in some opinionated trivia regarding WM2D

I am not  user of WM2D nor do I have a sheepskin in computer simulation applications. I have in the past downloaded the free demo, toyed with the sample simulations provided. I then dumped it to free up the drive space it occupied.

The number of discrepancy reports that are posted on this forum and others is influencing  me to believe that WM2D may have its advantages in numerous mechanical designs, but usage for the search for O-U using  gravity  is not one of them.

The trivial part of my 2 cents is in the form of  questions.  If WM2D will show such a high percentage of things running that should not, how can it be relied on for positive answers?

This runs but it should not ^ This does not run but it should. Does this balance?

How many designs have been discarded that WM2D showed negative when a real build may have shown positive? If it can foul up in one respect, how can you trust it in the other?

There is that old "adage"   What is good for the goose is good for the gander, or as the Chinese would say; the Yin and the Yang of it all.

Ralph         

Dgraphic911

Alen,  stefan wheres the video. I have been really looking forward to alens build. I love the chaos pendulum and was really hoping to see its movement.

hansvonlieven

G'day Ralph,

I agree with you that OU will never be found with a simulation programme. These types of programmes use the laws of physics as we know them. As such they obey fully Newton's laws as well as conservation of energy.

If OU depends on a yet to be discovered discrepancy in these laws, or on some sort of yet to be discovered or recognised energy (such as Orgone, for instance) then a programme of this nature cannot possibly help because of it's inbuilt restraints.

Yet, strangely enough Bessler said that his wheel does not violate any laws of physics. (He was aware of Newton) So maybe a wheel can be built this way.

Where WM2D shines is in simple structures, where it is remarkably accurate, and in its ability to show very quickly what happens if parameters, like the relationships between the weights, are changed. What would otherwise take many hours to find out, if you did the same on an actual model, can be done in a few minutes in WM2D.

This opens up to the experimenter a cheap and quick avenue of testing an idea in many of its iterations. As anyone who has ever played with systems such as Bessler wheels will tell you, it is extremely difficult to see the centre of mass in an arrangement of weights and determine the direction of movement or equilibrium. I used to cut out a cardboard disk and stick coins in the relevant places and pin it on a wall to see if there is movement. Many experimenters have spent hundreds of hours building models that did not work when a simple test of this nature would have quickly shown the shortcomings of the arrangement. I have commented on this here in the forum on several occasions.

The facility of quick and easy determination of centre of mass alone is worth the programme. As long as the designs are not too complex or have too many components the programme works fine.

I have said it before: There is no substitute for building!

Having said that, I remember an old engineer on my first job after graduating telling me over and over: If you have to make a mistake, make it on paper and in a model, never on the job, it gets too expensive. He then showed me his Meccano set, that he kept well out of sight for fear of ridicule, with which he tested new ideas. This is where I see WM2D fitting in, between the paper and the Meccano set.

Hans von Lieven

When all is said and done, more is said than done.     Groucho Marx

loop888

congratz on your WM wheel Stefan, seems pretty crazy, like me waiting to see the video of the real model  :D

hansvonlieven

G'day all,

Just for a laugh have a look at this Bessler solution. I have translated it from the German and put it on my website. This wheel needs an offering of your bathwater.  ???

http://keelytech.com/besslerdoppelrad.html

Hans von Lieven
When all is said and done, more is said than done.     Groucho Marx