Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[stgpcm]

No, scientific method isn't about refuting every stupid thought that might occur to somebody.

Now, you answer your own question.

Recall, the most conclusive criterion for perpetuum mobile is the persistent staying of the center of mass sideways to the axis of rotation.

FALSE

As long as you believe that you'll be building devices that fail to work.

Both of my diagrams persistantly have the center of offset to the axis of rotation. neither of which will turn. And because neither will turn it is persistant,

The above is corroborated fully by the torque measurements.

but you're not measuring the torgue, you're calculating it. And you're failing to calculate the effect of the resultant force.

see the shelf diagram.

[stgpcm]

@All,


Now we're on our way. Perpetuum mobile has been definitively proven real and the optimization efforts are under way.

FALSE, you have not proven that.

P.S. The point at 30 degrees is missing because at that position the curve is really performing bad and the value obtained is of unrealistically higher torque than the rest of the points.

"that result doesn't fit my expectation, so I'm deleting it."

it's irrelevant, because your core assertion is flawed, but ignoring facts you don't like appears to be your speciality.

[stgpcm]

Recall, the most conclusive criterion for perpetuum mobile is the persistent staying of the center of mass sideways to the axis of rotation.

No, the most conclusive criteria is a persistent tendency to accelerate.

(It's not required to be persistent, but if there are sections that decelerate you've got to do a whole shedful of extra calculation to show the acceleration phases overcome the deceleration phases, and you don't have a system that can self start from any position, but you can still have perpetual motion)

in order to accelerate from any position, there has to be net torque in any position.

as you've been objecting to the simplified models - on the grounds that they don't show the other (irrelevent) parts of the perpetual motion machine, I've include the whole thing. you will find the centre of mass is always to the right of the axis. You will also find a static torque analysis shows there is always a clockwise torque. You will also find that if you built it the device would stop in this position, despite a static torque analysis showing it should rotate.

[stgpcm]

But three simple questions:

1) does a static torque analysis (as performed for the SA wheel) show the "shelf" diagram would rotate clockwise, at the point shown? (I expect you to answer yes)

2) would machine in the diagram rotate? (I expect you to answer no)

3) is something missing from the analysis? (I expect you to bluster and ignore the question as irrelevant)

[Philip Hardcastle]

@stgpcm

Do not bother with Omni.

I tried to nicely tell him on page 3 or about.

He claims things proved based upon nonsense.

I admire his tenacity but feel he causes harm by inducing others to blindly follow his twisted logic.

BTW I like your diagram, it is a pity OB will not look at it closely.