Youtube video of gravity device principle.. ?

[GavinPalmer1984]

First a "mass" is flipped (AKA) lifted to create a Potential Energy to move air through a moving and flipping passage submerged  in liquid.
Second a liquid is allowed to freely drain downhill, and then is lifted again by the energy obtained from draining downhill.

If many things won't work, will they work better better together?  Confuse the issue?

You can start with the output unit flipping if you would like.  Then the liquid drains into the partitions, which allows the output unit to fall below the uni-directional latches.  The partitions are lifted via the output unit.  And the liquid from the partitions will fall back into the original container, resetting the output unit.

Simply compare the Potential from the output unit to the work needed to exchange the liquid out of and back into the original container via my partitioning scheme.

PE from output unit=
m * d - f * d
m = mass inside of the output unit.
d = distance which m will fall
f = friction encountered per distance

Work needed to exchange water:
M * X * 2/n + F * X * 2/n
M = Mass of liquid exchanged
X = height of liquid in original container
n = number of partitions
F = friction encountered while lifting the partitions
X * 2/n = distance partitions must be lifted.

Notice that exchanging the liquid in the original container is the mechanism which resets the output unit.  And the reset work is decreased by increasing the number of partitions, so long as the exchange between original container and partitions are automated to occur in series due to potential from the previous state.

[truth]

Please explain where that "lever kicks the output unit" is in your math model?

Gravity is a wonderful energy storage force. A rock can be buried in a mountain for millions of years, but when the matter supporting it is eroded it rolls down the mountain. Funny thing is it never rolls back up.

You may be the first guy ever to try and create wind as his preferred output energy.   

I read the way you responded to folks on utube and don't want to insult you, but you have several fatal errors in you concept.

[GavinPalmer1984]

Please explain where that "lever kicks the output unit" is in your math model?

Gravity is a wonderful energy storage force. A rock can be buried in a mountain for millions of years, but when the matter supporting it is eroded it rolls down the mountain. Funny thing is it never rolls back up.

You may be the first guy ever to try and create wind as his preferred output energy.   

I read the way you responded to folks on utube and don't want to insult you, but you have several fatal errors in you concept.

As the water rises, it can lift a buoyant object which triggers the lever (much like a toilet).  It does not have to be in the math model because it is enacted by the reset work.

Please explain my fatal errors, after all, that is why I posted.  Most people on youtube are only saying I am wrong based upon their preconceptions.

[ramset]

MR Palmer

Thank you for bringing your idea here

I personaly feel water can change things

@Truth please comment on the flaws

@TinselKoala where are you /[this is what you do,comment on gravity devices][well one of many]

@ Hanns

@All help this man out ,please

         Chet

[TinselKoala]

At 2:59 in the video it is shown that an unpartitioned "giving" container is lifted its full height ABOVE the top of the receiving container, which would be necessary if the drain hole is in the bottom of the unpartitioned upper container. So it takes 2x the work to lift it this high, to replace the water in the receiving container. The scheme of adding partitions finally reduces to the "giving" container, unpartitioned, at the SAME level as the receiving container, and the water just "pushed over" horizontally. SO the receiving container is re-filled with not 2x the work but with exactly 1x the work received.
The 2x figure from 2:59 in the video is a red herring, as are the multiple partitions. You could use a siphon nearly as effectively. The partition scheme, as the number of partitions increases, converges on the UNITY figure, and will not ever go below that. So, at the end of the day, you can reduce the amount of work it takes to reset the apparatus all the way down to just the amount of work you get out of it (neglecting losses.)
You get out, what you put in, less losses. There is no mechanism for energy gain in this device. Yes, it is possible to make the amount of work to reset variable, especially if you start out with an unnecessarily high figure (like the 2x at 2:59 in the video) but you can never make it smaller than the amount of work you get out of the cycle.

@ramset: I am near Toronto, Canada.