Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[Obelix]

Hello,

Just an idea of how resolve the right trace of weight:

[mondrasek]

I was on the wrong track, at least for the invention at hand, but someone could have told me :-)

Cloxxki, that is one of the problems with these forums.  If you gain the reputation of the debunker, you risk gaining the reputation as the skeptic, a negative contributor, a MIB, etc.  And that can lead to attacks and other negative action.  So it is sometimes easier for us to ignore some stuff.  Especially if it is in a thread on a different idea or tact or possibly covered earlier in the thread.  But don't be discouraged.  If you have a good idea you can't find fault with, be persistant.  Starting a new thread and inviting critique appears to always break the silence.  Also, PM it to the members who's opinion you really seek.  I sometimes PM offers for assistance or explanations for why ideas won't work as expected to members to avoid derailing a thread or help them avoid any embarrassment or any violent counter attack from fanatics.

Welcome to this discussion!

M.

[Omnibus]

@mondrasek,

The categorical spirit of your conclusion doesn't follow from the gist of what you're saying. The more likely outcome of this analysis is that wm2d is just not fit for such kind of exploration and one`can only conclude subjectively either pessimistically or optimistically, depending on his inclinations. That's even worse than not having any modeling tool.

[Omnibus]

@mondrasek,

I did not say to introduce external torques.  I was trying to explain that in a symmetric gravity wheel that it must be able to run with only two weights (or movements) at 180 degrees apart.  The only purpose in adding more weight pairs is to increase the output.  Likewise if two weights do not create a net torque, adding more pairs only further decreases performance as witnessed by decreasing rundown times from a given start RPM.  So testing with only two weights is valid.  It also allows the sim to avoid the 8 x iteration error and 4 x calculation problems in this particular sim.  Try it.  It is very quick, easy, and allows the sim to run much faster and without the abberant movement.

I should reiterate, I don't agree with that. Any suggestion for a construction different from the particular one under consideration is not modeling it and cannot be substituting it for any conclusions regarding it. If the construction under consideration indeed works it would be something unusual and it is by no means to be expected that other trivial mechanical constructions would mimic its action. If this were the case the phenomenon we're seeking would be an everyday occurrence demonstrable by the available pendulums, weights and the like which isn't the case, as is well known.  Thus, either there should be a reliable tool to correctly model the particular setup of interest or we should just not waste time playing with sims that only model their own instabilities. Seemingly similar examples won't do the job other than demonstrate problems with the modeling software which isn't the goal in our case.

[Cloxxki]

OK, I woke up from a 48 hour euphoria.
All at once, I don't see anymore why a device like Dusty's Abeling replication would work, or any, when weights are to return just as high as they started. Let alone from just a gentle initial push.

Do any of you a special energy exchange that would be giving over unity?

Someone's simple explanation of, if at all, WHY such a device would self-accelerate and continue to run, would be most appreciated.

Thanks!