Furcurequs (aka Dwayne) questions Jim_Mich

[jim_mich]

Mr Randall has made two fundamental and fatal errors in his "motion wheel" calculations.

Number one is the belief that weight inertia can generate a force. Randall clearly believes this as he has repeatedly claimed that CF is nonlinear so therefore must be non conservative and then generates these huge forces that can be utilized.

But even by Randall's own definitions, inertia is not a force, only a resistance to a force. CF is then only a manifestation of this resistance and is not a force either.

Randall keeps mesmerising himself by calculating impressive CF values at all different rpm's, but continually fails to consider that CP is constantly opposing inertial resistance with exactly the same values such that the difference is always zero. This is "idotic" according to Randall.

Fatal error number two: Randall has neglected to account for the energy required to accelerate an extending weight from it's initial low circular velocity at it's location close to the wheel hub to the much higher circular velocity at it's extended location now close to the rim.

This acceleration requires energy input, which Randall has totally ignored.

The end result of these two errors are that what Randall had calculated as a gain is actually a loss.

The resident troll has arrived spewing his usual lies.

Mr. troll, you claim to know everything. Tell us what the CF is of a 1 lb weight at 24 inch radius rotating at 10 RPM. Then tell us the CF at 20 RPM. Then at 30 RPM. And at 40 RPM. Now graph those results. Then come back and tell us you have a linear straight line on your graph.

Hint: At 10 RPM CF is 0.068 lbs of force and at 40 RPM it is 1.0907 lbs of force.

If I'm wrong, and CF is linear as the troll claims, rather than non-linear as I've said, then CF would be 0.4090 at 20 RPM and 0.7498 at 30 RPM. But CF is not linear. Clod camper is wrong.

My point is that clod camper keeps posting lies about me.
My point is that I fully understand CF, while clod camper hasn't a clue.
And furthermore, clod camper doesn't know how to spell.

jim_mich,

Why is it that you insist on calling Cloud Camper "clod camper"? Why do you refer to him as "a troll," "the troll," "the resident troll," or even "Mr. troll"?

In my opinion this is incredibly childish behavior on your part. It seems to me to be a behavior similar to that of perhaps a mud-slinging politician who would attempt to discredit his opponent by attacking his character rather than truly dealing with the substance of his opponent's arguments. It would seem to be like the behavior of a gang leader who would show no real respect for "outsiders" to the gang while expecting his lapdogs to treat those outsiders very cruelly to then "earn" his own so-called respect. It would seem to be like a corrupt national leader demonizing others so that his order taking followers might later at his command do the vilest of things to those others who they later will quite obviously view as "inferior" and "enemies".

It is my observation, then, if not only opinion, that you have some very real issues.

Yes, maybe Cloud Camper can get a little personal himself, but then maybe you shouldn't have started making it personal to begin with - and so I see that maybe he is now only giving you but a very small taste of your own rather foul medicine.

I actually commend and applaud Cloud Camper for challenging you, for you need to be challenged when you make ignorant and unsubstantiated claims as if they were fact.

I'm not saying that Cloud Camper always gets everything correct, either. Which of us mere mortals actually does, huh? ...but I certainly don't see in him the kind of arrogance and self-righteousness I see in you where you would refuse to even check yourself when blaring mistakes are truly pointed out to you.

You act as if you simply cannot be wrong - even when you are obviously wrong to others who may be more knowledgeable than yourself. ...well, at least when it comes to so-called Physics 101, huh? ;)

Now, as to your claims, as Cloud Camper and even others have been trying to explain to you, you seem to be overlooking some things.

So, if we are going to do some graphing, how about we along with graphing the centrifugal force a moving mass exerts on a swing arm or track at different rates of speed when that swing arm or track is constraining it to a circular motion at a given radius, we also graph the kinetic energy of that mass too?

Like the centrifugal force, you should see then that the kinetic energy is ALSO a function of the speed of the mass SQUARED. So, if the rate of rotation of the mass is 4 times as great, then, yes, the centrifugal force will be 16 times as large, but of course the kinetic energy of that mass moving at 4 times the initial speed will also be 16 times what it was before as well.

So, to get the much larger centrifugal force (which is a nonlinear function of the speed of the mass, of course), you will have had to have also added a proportional amount of kinetic energy - since the centrifugal force of the mass moving at a given radius IS a linear function of the kinetic energy of that mass.

You seem to have trouble with "dynamic" analysis, which is something that when I went to school was covered in the second quarter of our freshman level college engineering curriculum.

In the first quarter, of course we had "Statics."

I remember my college Dynamics teacher telling my class that for some reason practically everybody seemed to have trouble with dynamics - even including many of those that actually did well in "statics" - and that he didn't really understand why that was. (I personally did well in both, though, IIRC.)

It is my observation, if it's more than but a mere opinion, of course, that most all so-called "perpetual motion machine" designs that I have seen seem to have a design based upon a purely static analysis of the forces by the "inventor."

It would even seem to me that those in the mainstream who would poo poo any attempt at an overbalanced device don't seem to move beyond a static analysis themselves (even if they actually were capable of doing a dynamic one) whether in analyzing the failed designs of others or in speculating about some ideas of their own. Didn't even Simanek confess to having tried to come up with some of his own designs early on?

Anyway, jim_mich, there's more of my input. Are you going to just ignore it like the last while holding out hope I'll just back off out of disinterest or frustration (which is certainly a possibility) and you can get back to business as usual and maybe even to conning others into banning that mean old resident troll? ...lol

Dwayne

[jim_mich]

(Note: I had to break this into two post. For some reason it would not post as one long post.)

Why is it that you insist on calling Cloud Camper "clod camper"? Why do you refer to him as "a troll," "the troll," "the resident troll," or even "Mr. troll"?

Why does this clod of crap keep sticking to the bottom of my shoe?

Why does this clod keep writing about "fatal errors" when he knows nothing about which he writes? Need I go into details?

Why does this clod not understand the meaning of linearity verses exponential?

Why does this clod keep writing that I don't know this or that, simply because I ignore him.?

Why does this clod write lies about me, saying I've said this or that, when I've never said what he claims? On a number of occasions I've went back and proven his lies about me. But does he come forward and apologize like a man? No, simply attacks me with more lies.

And you Dwayne, have also made wrong assumptions. Once again, because I don't explain all the details concerning my CF method, you assume that I don't know things. You say I seem to have trouble with "dynamic" analysis. That is simply your assumption.

And you assume I'm attacking other people when I point out that statement they attribute to Bessler are false, and that Bessler never wrote what they think he wrote. Most everyone has read where Bessler wrote about 1 lb lifting 4 lbs, and they assume that this is in some way a reference to a solution. When I point out that this was Bessler being sarcastic, then some don't like this. They say it is only opinion, when in fact it was pure sarcasm by Bessler.

So Dwayne, what is it you want from me. Are you demanding that I stop posting? What gives you that right?

Are you demanding that I call Mr. camper by his forum name? Don't you think clod camper should do the same? I could call clod camper by his real name, but unlike myself, and Mr. McMurtry, and Mr. Lortie, and many others, we don't really know Mr. camper's real name. It would me good manners for all forum members to address other forum members respectfully. Unfortunately, this clod has repeatedly addressed me improperly. "Mr. Randall" is what a mother call a son when she is upset with him. Friends never call me Mr Randall. So obviously this clod is not a friend.

And then you ask why I insist on calling him clod camper and a troll?

[daxwc]

I am beginning to believe Cloud Camper and jim_mich are elusive secret lovers and I am their illegitimate child. Is that an opinion, statement or sarcasm?

[justsomeone]

Bessler being sarcastic is only a FACT in your mind Jim!

[rlortie]

Jim,

(Note: I had to break this into two post. For some reason it would not post as one long post.)

So where is this second post?

I personally was shocked when you had the gall requesting fellow members to ban cloud camper. You are not the president or Sargent of arms of this forum.

IMO your integrity and demeanor has taken somewhat of a setback. I find myself pondering as to how you you are maintaining your five green "highly regarded" status.

It appears that the consensus of the active members of this group is calling upon you to either put up or shut up. I have prodded and begged with you to get off the computer and put you tooling to good use and back up your claims. If you cannot do this, then I recommend you cease and desist.

Ralph

[jim_mich]

So where is this second post?

Post one and post two of this thread are the first post and the second post. Duh!!

Bessler being sarcastic is only a FACT in your mind Jim!

You are free to think that. But in the real world one pound cannot lift four pound.

I have prodded and begged with you to get off the computer and put you tooling to good use and back up your claims.

And Ralph, you have some secret camera in my workshop showing only cobwebs? And you have traced my every move showing no work done towards my plan? Just because I spend a little time at the keyboard from time to time, resting my old weary bones, then you assume I don't spend time in the shop?

You guys make a LOT of assumptions. You assume Bessler was being serious when he said...

A great craftsman would be that man who can "lightly" cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall? If he can sort that out, the motion will perpetuate itself. But if he can't, then his hard work shall be all in vain. He can rack his brains and work his fingers to the bones with all sorts of ingenious ideas about adding extra weights here and there. The only result will be that his wheel will get heavier and heavier - it would run longer if it were empty! Have you ever seen a crowd of starlings squabbling angrily over the crumbs on a stationary mill-wheel? That's what it would be like for such a fellow and his invention, as I know only too well from my own recent experience!

What was it Bessler learned "only too well"? It was that the craftsman, "can rack his brains and work his fingers to the bones with all sorts of ingenious ideas about adding extra weights here and there." And the result? He said, "The only result will be that his wheel will get heavier and heavier - it would run longer if it were empty!"

You can continue to assume that this was some sort of hint about how to make a gravity wheel. Or you can open your eyes and read what Bessler actually wrote, rather than blindly accepting writings that have been twisted slightly (but unintentionally) by translators, and then assumed to say things not said.

And Mr. camper is one of the biggest assumer of all. He has repeatedly assumed that I've said things that I have not said. I could go back and point out the many things Mr. camper has written about me, and point out why they are lies. But I have more important things to do with my time. So I simply try to ignore him and others like him whenever I can

[justsomeone]

Then I guess Bessler is telling you all YOUR work is in vain!

[jim_mich]

No, Bessler is telling everyone that all gravity wheel work is in vain.

Bessler said his wheel is rotated by weights that gain force from their motions.
Thus it is a motion wheel and not a gravity wheel.

[daxwc]

As in vainglorious.

[jim_mich]

OK, let's get back on topic...

jim_mich,

Why is it that you insist on calling Cloud Camper "clod camper"? Why do you refer to him as "a troll," "the troll," "the resident troll," or even "Mr. troll"?

Clod camper made a total of 14 posts during this past month of October 2013.

All of these 14 posts, every last one, was a derogatory post aimed at me.

Clod camper mentioned "Randall" total of 44 times during this past month of October 2013.

Clod camper made NO POST during this past month of October 2013 without mentioning something derogatory towards me.

Most people would call this harassment.
I call this harassment.
Check them out if you don't believe me.

Links to all of clod camper posts in October 2013...
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#115887
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#115905
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#115924
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116235
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116275
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116450
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116483
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116487
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116563
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116692
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116696
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116704
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116729
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ht=#116755

And then I'm asked WHY I call him clod camper, as if your are blind to such behavior. Much of the time I try to ignored this troll.

[rlortie]

Or should that read:"All OUR work is in vain"?

I still abide by my proclamation to ignore Bessler, his depictions and writings. Put your belief into the eyewitness reports that such a machine appears to be feasible, go forth with intuition and innovation of your own and others.

I have had all the cussing and discussing of weights and levers I can stands, I can't stands no more. I am what I am and Bessler no longer plays a roll or influences what I am.

Jim_Mich, I refuse to leave this forum, but I promise you, you have read the last post I will write aimed in your direction. No I do not have a hidden camera in your workshop. I hope you, Ovyyus and cloud camper have fun making the best of it!

I shall stick to my "Kendrick" concept of moving molecules and hope for the best.

Ralph

[daxwc]

Jim:

Clod camper mentioned "Randall" total of 44 times during this past month of October 2013.

That is your last name isn’t it?

[ovyyus]

I hope you, Ovyyus and cloud camper have fun making the best of it!

What do I have to do with this topic?

[jim_mich]

So instead of understanding my point that clod camper is harassing me, you choose to obfuscate and ask me about my name?

Yes, that is my real honest to goodness last name, same as my father, and his father, and his father before him. But no one ever calls me by that name, except phone calls from people I don't know. Sixty years ago my Mom would call me "Mr. Randall" when I was in trouble. No one here on the forum calls Ralph as Mr. Lortie. No one here on the forum calls Bill as Mr. McMurtry. Why does clod camper keep calling me Mr. Randall? My name is Jim. My forum name is Jim_Mich, which is because my name is Jim and I'm from Michigan. (For those who are a bit younger, before the post office officially abbreviated all the states in the USA using only two letters, the abbreviation for Michigan was officially Mich. )

My name is Jim. Use Jim when addressing me. Or Jim_Mich. I've never use the name Randall on this forum. Clod camper picked that up from my website. I find it insulting for him to keep calling me Mr. Randall.

Look... What does this say... It says . I prefer to be called Or Jim

[jim_mich]

Bill, Ralph objects to discussions about Bessler's writings. He think it better to strike out alone rather than attempt to glean info from someone who history says already did the impossible.