Mechanical overunity, call it a Gravity engine if you wish.

[nicbordeaux]

@ nicbordeaux.
This is an interesting topic. First, in your reply number 6, you describe a simple proof of concept device with a pendulum and lever [ see-saw or teeter- totter] . Your description resembles the two stage oscillator of Milkovitch. {google it] .In your first post on this topic you describe a machine that will drive 2 bicycle dynamos for up to six hours. To me this is the Holy Grail, because, if it will work for 6 hours, with development and optimisation, it will run forever. I find it really hard to believe that you built this device and did not make photos or video. If you really believe that the world needs free energy, you need to share with us all that you have, so that we can help you develop it. If, like me; your computer skills are limited, get some help. I do not mean to sound unkind, but we all have limited time and resources, and unless you help us here, we cannot help each other, or the planet. Kind Regards, Neptune.

Neptune, thx for your kind answer. My computer skills are a little limited, very true. The world needs "free energy" ? Yes. But let us define free energy. Free energy is mechanical energy produced by a device which delivers more mechanical output than is required to start it. (Zero point energy, hocus pocus, I don't understand). That energy will to most people signify energy to be used to produce electricity. If people have free energy, they will be happy because they can run their household without paying electricity bills. It won't make them use less energy, just a lot more (they won't bother to turn the electric heating off, the light bulbs will be left lit all day...).

That concept is dangerous in general, but also to individuals or groups who would produce the device. The esssence of control by central power is energy. If people are independant for their energy needs, reliance decreases, profits for state monopolies or "private" companies funding states disapear. Tax revenue disapears and something else has to be taxed. Not easy

This isn't the case with a device which will run two bicycle dynamos, but general implication of knowledgeable people with imagination could no doubt perect the device. I am now a long way away from revolving bicycle wheels, much simpler systems exist.

A small example : Imagine a lever. On one end is a weight. At some point of the other side of axis or pivot is a weight sliding in a telescopic device or a curtain rail (tough curtain rail  ). Curtain rail is mounted on pivot or axis to lever at other side of axis, but nearest to fixed weight. Device is in balance at start of movement. Lift curtain rail a bit and weight will slide towards fixed weight, past fulcrum. Force is fixed weight + (when it reaches end of travel) a part of sliding weight. A part because weight is not sliding to end of lever where fixed weight is. At some point before fixed weight reaches end of travel, a rope attached to wall is bought under tension as it is fixed to curtain rail too at other end. As fixed weight continues to rotate on lever, rail is "pulled" or moved relatively so that weight slides other way. One complete cycle.

It is slightly more complex than that in that that a profiled cam is necessary, but there you have another example of mechanical OU. It is much more complex than that if you want the cycle to start again. It can be done. It has been done.

So, I have devices (not designs) which do things on the principle of moving weight(s) shifting CG. ButI am not a genius. I think with what I have said here and in previous posts, people can, if they want, understand what I am saying and build better devices than mine. See things in theory that I don't, and test those things.

oh, BTW Neptune, I didn't say anywhere that I don't have photos or videos of the "device" . But think of this : I put a video online, the result is the same, a load of people are going to scream it's faked.

Some guys on this forum are beginning to get the idea, and some will actually try working on models, and come up with working devices.

Somebody else posted "can it be turned upsd ? My answer is it weighs 30 kgs with support bench, so no. To the question will it work if turned upsd or in any other plane ? Anwer to any other plane than upsd is NO. Answer to upsd is yes, but you'd need to reverse a load of things, if only because power is delivered only on the "downstroke" to a bicycle wheel via chain and freewheel (the freewheel means drive in one direction only, and resistance to return is limited to beam and weight, not also a 700 c steel bike wheel with two of those awful bike dybamos on it).

[spoondini]

nicbordeaux,
   Have you actually checked energy input vs energy output?  I have a hard time believing that sliding weights on levers will actually 'generate' energy.  If it actually was overunity in excess of friction, we should see these devices continuously accelerate.

[neptune]

we need  free energy to lesson our oil dependence. The likely poor power to weight ratio of gravity engines will probably limit their use in transport. people forget that modern agriculture would be impossible without oil-based fertilisers. That's right, we EAT OIL. Therefore we need to develop alternative energy. Those of us who have been on this forum for many years have spent untold hours on dollars on devices that turned out to be hoaxes . So forgive those of us who are just a bit cynical. Gravity engines, if they ever become a marketable reality, will see service in villages in the third world, powering a few LEDs or a small radio. Half a loaf is better than no bread., and two, or even one of those awful bike dynamos is a lot better than nothing.
          Again I would urge you to share at least some of what you have. The aim of this forum as I understand it, is to take care of the tech stuff. Let others worry about the Social Engineering. I have built more machines than I care to remember. Usually to other peoples designs. I now have yet another Idea of my own. I shall build it when time allows. On the one-in -a million chance it should work, I will of course open source it ,hiding nothing.Regards Neptune.

[nicbordeaux]

we need  free energy to lesson our oil dependence. The likely poor power to weight ratio of gravity engines will probably limit their use in transport. people forget that modern agriculture would be impossible without oil-based fertilisers. That's right, we EAT OIL. Therefore we need to develop alternative energy. Those of us who have been on this forum for many years have spent untold hours on dollars on devices that turned out to be hoaxes . So forgive those of us who are just a bit cynical. Gravity engines, if they ever become a marketable reality, will see service in villages in the third world, powering a few LEDs or a small radio. Half a loaf is better than no bread., and two, or even one of those awful bike dynamos is a lot better than nothing.
          Again I would urge you to share at least some of what you have. The aim of this forum as I understand it, is to take care of the tech stuff. Let others worry about the Social Engineering. I have built more machines than I care to remember. Usually to other peoples designs. I now have yet another Idea of my own. I shall build it when time allows. On the one-in -a million chance it should work, I will of course open source it ,hiding nothing.Regards Neptune.

Neptune,
you are quite right about power to weight ratio with the design I'm showing. After that, it's a question of speed of oscillation, which is dependant on distance of travel of "falling" weight and mechanism used to displace counter weight. It won't power a car    at least as it stands.

If as you say this forum is a place to chuck concepts (let's call it that) and have other people develop them really fast, then here is the best I am currently willing to do. This a cc of a post to another forum:

"So, only one or two people seem to have grasped the concept. ******** has it, for example, but please, don't think just rotary.

A video is up at http://www.dailymotion.com/user/nicbordeaux/video/xaqicm_mechanical-overunity-for-beginners_tech

Those who understand this, please do me favour and explain to the others, make your working models and we'll see the number of variants which arise.

The sound seems "off" at dailymotion tonight, and youtube doesn't like the video for some reason, maybe too long. And without the sound, the video isn't much use.

I don't ask you to understand my motivations, just to grasp that mechanical overunity, or to be more precise, gravity motor exists. And that the potential is very big.

Spoondini : The "output" has been checked by seeing how long I can get a bike wheel with a dynamo rubbing on the tire to spin by using any amount of force or speed of arm, and comparing to how long I can get that wheel to spin by using the lever/beam device in the video actuated by manual actuation force/speed. The result of having the device spun by the machine under self-sustain mode is 4/5 th of my best "weakling human effort" using either manual mode described. I predict but haven't bothered trying that if you were to add a load of ballast to the wheel with the dynamo on it, the results or proportions could change quite a bit, in favour of the human being of course. The number of rotations performed my the device would also improve. As long as enough residual is left in the system, as explained in the vid, I fail to see how even a hydrocephalic monkey could fail to build this very simple thing and surprise itself monstrously. As we are not hydrocephalic monkies, and if a lot of clever people work on this...

[spoondini]

Excellent video nichobordeaux.  Thanks for posting.  This gives all more clarity of the type of devices you are encouraging others to experiment with.