Another claim to a working device...

[murilo]

Photo Nº 39 shows the adding of huge pendulums at lower parts of sets.
The behavior of pendulums - I think - for this case will be a bit wild, beside will force necessary 'rhythm and regulation'.

[zoelra]

murilo,

I was wondering about those hanging objects. I wasn't sure if they were just added weights to help shift the black levers downwards/outwards. But why hang them from cords/levers unless you wanted them to swing, so they probably are meant to act like pendulums.

[Grimer]

I guess that those are the weights I hoped would appear.

I also guess the mechanism is intended to take the weights
up one path (cycloid) and down another (non-cycloid).
The non-cycloid path will necessarily involve third derivative Jerk energy.

In honour of my late departed friend, AC 2 Peter Carey, I've decide to name
the unit of Jerk energy, the erk.

It would seem that the Brazil Nut is essentially the same as the
Sjack Abeling wheel, although on a much larger scale.

Of course, I must echo Jim's oft repeated get-out;
"I could be wrong" and add Mr Monk "but I don't think so".

Trouble is of course , compared with the weight of all the rest of the gubbins that weight just ain't big enough. Still, you could say the same about the Abeling.

[murilo]

murilo,

I was wondering about those hanging objects. I wasn't sure if they were just added weights to help shift the black levers downwards/outwards. But why hang them from cords/levers unless you wanted them to swing, so they probably are meant to act like pendulums.

zoeira,
they did them as fixed plane pendulums, so as to add mass in bellow part.
They will sing but not twist, thanks to those double cords/levers.
I'm not sure if I like this. 8|

[Grimer]

I think I am beginning to grasp one of the essential requirements for a gravity mill.

One must have a closed path for the weights on one side of the main axle but no
closed path on the other.

In other words we must have at least two centres of motion for the weights.

We probably need three but preventing structure as a whole moving relative
to the earth will possibly give us the third.

[daanopperman]

Hi Grimer ,

That was the thought with the multiple axels .

[Grimer]

I wonder if any of the museum of impossible devices have multiple axles.

[Reticon]

Some fool and his money are quickly being parted here. If we were really clever we'd be talking about the best use of all of that scrap when they get done with it. Charlatans can sell ice to Eskimos, but by their very nature will never come up with anything of practical value. They are so practiced at deception that they wouldn't know the truth if it landed on their head. If you are irrationally optimistic you may think that they could discover this for the mere fact that they've spent so much time acting it out. If that's true then how about we skip this free energy stuff and go straight to James Doohan for the blueprints of an anti-matter reactor? While we're at it we'll need to ask him how to get anti-matter in a cost-effective way. In fact, probably just need to ask him that second question.

[iacob alex]

.....this time a real walking big robot , with a very small power supply (input energy) , at :

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HYESMMI9_g

It uses the same basic articulated mechanism , as Rarenergia.com ,but...for walking.

Al_ex

[Tarsier79]

There is an additional connection point at the top of the black slider. I am guessing they will add hydraulics, then tell the cutomer it is overunity, and the price they are paying to power the hydraulics is much less than directly powering the mill.

Problem solved. Idiots fooled. Money in the Swiss bank account. Plane tickets booked.

[Grimer]

I think I am beginning to grasp one of the essential requirements for a gravity mill.

One must have a closed path for the weights on one side of the main axle but no
closed path on the other.

In other words we must have at least two centres of motion for the weights.

We probably need three but preventing structure as a whole moving relative
to the earth will possibly give us the third.

LOL. It's all to do with the conservation of energy.

Each energy derivative is conserved. The two familiar ones are of course the first and second derivatives, Momentum and Force x distance. We can think off these as velocity "energy" and acceleration energy. We could add conservation of heat within an insulated space as a third familiar conservation.

But all derivatives must be conserved since we are talking in all cases of more and more complicated examples of the basic conservation, the conservation of momentum.

So jerk is conserved, snap is conserved, crackle is conserved, pop is conserved and all higher as yet unnamed derivatives are also conserved. Heat covers a range of derivatives depending on the number of independent particle motions involved.

To return to the subject in hand, if we have a simple closed path which weaves in and out towards a single axle centre then though we have plenty of change in acceleration towards the centre (jerk), the positive jerk on the one side is necessarily balanced by the negative jerk on the other and so there is no net gain in energy.

However, if we have a major and a minor centre and we loop around the minor centre on one side but not on the other then we have more jerk energy on one side than the other. So we can use the jerk vector to unbalance the wheel - which is basically what Trevor is trying to do - and the Boys from Brazil as well for that matter.

[Grimer]

Some fool and his money are quickly being parted here ... Charlatans can sell ice to Eskimos, but by their very nature will never come up with anything of practical value. ....

For the reason given in my previous post I cannot agree that they are charlatans.

Whether they have bitten off more than they can chew in going from a model to full scale has yet to be seen.

[murilo]

I agree to Grimer... they simply and absolutely don't NEED to be charlatans!

Anyhow, I still prefer to my old avalanchedrive project with OUR obvious power surplus!

[Reticon]

If there were a working model then I'd say there is a reason to be optimistic. Do you know of a working model?

Some fool and his money are quickly being parted here ... Charlatans can sell ice to Eskimos, but by their very nature will never come up with anything of practical value. ....

For the reason given in my previous post I cannot agree that they are charlatans.

Whether they have bitten off more than they can chew in going from a model to full scale has yet to be seen.

[Grimer]

They claim to have one.

Since for the reasons I gave I believe that their approach is sound I'm hopeful that their machine will work - providing of course they haven't tackled a bridge too far.