kinetic energy hypothesis

[AB Hammer]

preoccupied

Man in general, is flawed. It is how we work around our flaws that makes the difference. Yet if man was not flawed? We would not have to experiment, for we would already have the answers.

Alan

[daxwc]

Here is half of your chain problem by inverse where it allowed to fall at full gravity acceleration.

[preoccupied]

preoccupied

Man in general, is flawed. It is how we work around our flaws that makes the difference. Yet if man was not flawed? We would not have to experiment, for we would already have the answers.

Alan

I am flawed diamond in the rough.

Description of MS painting:

MS painting piston enters pipe and then fills with water. The water then becomes part of the pipe and the piston is pushed back out of the pipe without the water escaping. This pressure pushing the pipe back out should be equal to the hydrostatic pressure, thereby allowing a counterweight to be lifted that can then help push the piston back into the pipe later.

arrache should build this for me if they like the idea. [I could have swore that I tried to ask him about this before, before anyone else. FOR SCIENCE!] What if he is building it? I would have forgotten that it even existed if not for the heat wave making me frustrated a day or so ago. Maybe my memory is going. Senile at late 20's. How am I going to be when I'm 60?

Consideration from arrache? No wait. Jim_Mich do you want to build this? It's free. I don't want it anymore. I hate all of my ideas that make me bleed. I remember giving up immediately when I cut my finger on a Pepsi can. (LOL)

Now I await someone to correct me about what I missed. I admittedly don't know much about hydraulics.

[daxwc]

"We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard" -John F. Kennedy, Rice University, Sept. 12, 1962

[preoccupied]

yeah that's what she said!

[preoccupied]

This was kind of hard. I actually spent a good half hour thinking about it. Jeeeezzz...

The counter weight does all of the work in this version. The wider tub allows the lower pipes rod to be pushed further distance per water filled in the empty chamber from it. How the device down there would work is the rod is pushed in and then the block on the rod opens up so that it can be pushed back into place and the block has to push itself back into place to be used again. Then the piston has to first close the large tub/pipe with a thin block and then push itself in to force water up the shorter tower. At the end of the thrust in the shorter towers block is locked in and the piston is removed before the process starts over. This would work because the mechanical advantage could be any amount for the weight to be lifted with, as the tub could literally be any width making the distance that could be traveled horizontally to push the rod be any amount then. Think about it? The larger the rub the slow the fill for the empty chamber, thereby only requiring a small amount of water to push the rod using constant hydrostatic pressure a long distance. This thing would push constant pressure using the hydraulic jack a variable distance reliant on the width of the large tub/pipe. The mechanisms would be tricky to build and design however they would only require doing a few things like opening and closing blocks in the pipe, such as at the beginning of the rod in the pipe where the pipe has to close it self to be pushed on or the end of the piston thrust that has to close the water from falling out of the smaller tower. Piston that pushes into a pipe and gears that lift and interact with the weight are less in the depth of complex water levers and such. I'll put this on my maybe list. My motion without external force idea is my main squeeze. I'm glad I brought this up though even if it was by accident because rlortie might miss the chance to improve his water design with my concept. I think I have something here with my concept. I just want to be a good guy. You are all appreciated.

[preoccupied]

I'm cocky but it's probably undeserved recently because I have been disoriented.

MS painting water pump and lever shows a lever that has about 8 leverage pumping a piston into a hydrostatic pressure of 7. The lever has about 1.3 units of water in it. There is therefore 10 vs 7 in my advantage to use gravity for work here. Any thoughts or suggestions? What have I not explained well enough maybe?

EDIT
It's probably not a very good idea because arrache rejected at least this version quite speedily before. There is likely more to it that I had back then but it's not recalling in my mind well. If arrache rejected it then it's probably no good. I'm forgetful and I would have let this idea slide without trying to remember what I was doing with it if not for that heat wave that made me even more disoriented than I already am. I am probably forgetting something that I shared or drew or whatever, man this is really ancient history to me right now. I still wonder about it though. If I had cared about this before then what was there that I was looking at? I think I have 44% of my previous idea drawn now. I can't remember the rest of it. But I feel like there might have been more. rlortie blessed me and said he hoped my memory loss would improve. Well I definitely remember at least drawing this before, but I feel like it might have been a first draft version. I do draw stuff sometimes that is not posted on the forum. Look the point is, now that I'm looking at this idea again, I will at least make an effort to try to remember even if the idea is not good and nobody would be willing to test build if for me.

[preoccupied]

I want to apologize. I was actually a little worried a few days ago. I remember sharing way back when what I think maybe was this water lever design a few times and then later Arrache announced working on a water wheel design so I was paranoid about whether they were using my idea and sharing it amongst their friends. Admittedly I don't remember exactly what I shared and I had some rough moments between now and then. Like I have been repeatedly told that Arrache keeps no records so I can't revue what I might have shared. Clearly though anybody with adequate physics background (not me) would be able to see why this might not work. I measure it to work with my limited knowledge. Well, I don't think anybody is using my idea and I was bad to be paranoid. Sorry for being suspicious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGLR25EJtfE

[rlortie]

preoccupied,

Your apology excepted!

'Arrache' (rlortie) does not save or file ideas that once analyzed show no viable chance of being usable.

Ideas that generate innovation kindled by their concept is saved and the submitting party is notified and recognized.

Currently under construction is a molecular mass gravity oriented design sparked by forum member Erick. Although there is very little resemblance to his submitted design, he still gets the credit of being co-inventor.

Jim_mich also spent time and money building a fluid concept that he knew would not work. It's only purpose was to "save face" and appease members that questioned his building empirical skills.

IMO this turned into nothing more than an expensive FIASCO! I attempted to suggest methods of possibly salvaging his layman's build, but was responded with "you don't have any idea as to how my machine works"

jim_mich quote:

This particular configuration of my wheel does not work. I was attempting to use standard elbow pipe fittings so as to provide a simple way for a home
handyman to build the wheel without the need to custom bend PVC pipe. This particular configuration resulted in a significant portion of the wheel having straight pipe sections instead of the desired curves. The fluid flowing through the straight sections cause a reverse rotational force on the wheel.
With this configuration, the forward rotational force developed as the fluid flows through the curved sections is canceled the reverse rotational force
developed as the fluid flows through the straight sections, with the net result being that friction brings it to a halt.

The rotation of the assembly and the flow of the water within are the only moving parts.

Obviously my wheels don't work. Wheels must be out-of-balance and use gravity to self-rotate. My wheel is balanced. Besides, perpetual motion is impossible. ;)}

In the near future I hope to start a new thread regarding molecular mass based gravity machines. At present I am locked into a self-appointed NDA to protect Erick and myself from making any public disclosure loosing patent rights.

Ralph

[preoccupied]

That's great ralph. You just had to add an insult to Jim_Mich design. You literally did not receive anything from Jim_Mich with him disclosing his design to you. Why do you persist? I want Jim Mich to post about how you are wrong IMMEDIATELY! You keep saying this and why is Jim wrong? Why?

However, you know exactly how my idea works as I shared it with you long ago and I'm trying my best to remember it but basically in a nut shell there is some variance when adding water under a pressure system because of one trait that it constant potential state of fullness. If the water is added underneath that like adds additional distance. This used to be a hidden idea with greater detail put into it when it was important to me but it's now a forgetful idea that is more public. You have no rights to it rlortie and Erick. Placing water under pressure by blocking it to keep fullness is mine. What am I saying? I'm being paranoid again. Why do I even bother? I can barely think.

[rlortie]

preoccupied,

We have no rights or any claims to you're or Jim_mich's design nor do we wish to utilize or build on them. Placing water under pressure by blocking it to keep fullness is is your idea, we see it as a useless concept. Yes you are being paranoid, and I wish I could be of help health-wise getting your mind back into a pr-concuccionable stable state.

Ralph

[preoccupied]

I was drawing some swinging weights. I had some thoughts in my mind when I drew but at this point I'm not particular sure what I was thinking about.

Jim_Mich gave a suggestion for weights driving a wheel using their motions. Jim_Mich said that you wanted a balanced wheel that could shift weights to produce forces.

Now that I've drawn it, I see that it's not necessarily sitting balanced but it's not drawn "sitting". My hope is that it is balanced at some speed while in motion. I want to say that it approaches being balanced in motion and I believe that is right. If this works then it's likely the weights act like they are balanced while in motion during a moderate speed and act like they are out of balance while in motion when too slow or too fast. So maybe I took what Jim_Mich was suggesting a little further by looking for where the wheel could have balanced weights at a certain speed.

Where is the energy added to the wheel? The wheel in the image is turning counter clockwise potentially. The top two weights are supposed to slam by swinging to the left. The top weight has a position more horizontal on its lever and is driving the bottom one. At the bottom of the turn the driven weight lags by free falling and further to the right on the turn the driving weight free falls and hits the right side of the wheel. I want to believe that the slamming against the left is greater because two weights are slamming there instead of one on the right.

The levers would have to use ratchets and the ratchet for the driving weight would only pull on the other lever when turning towards the left.

If you like my idea then please recognize me as the author. If you share it please note that the information is from me. I would like to reserve the right if proven to be a perpetual motion machine to request from congress something special for it.

[preoccupied]

Continuing from my previous post: I drew the 45 degree angle of the design. It is closely balanced as the weights fall into place. One of the reasons that it would slow down when moving faster is because the free falling weight that slams on the rising right side is further from the axle the faster the wheel is moving. If the wheel were stationary it would slam dead center and produce no resistance in the 45 degree image. In the 90 degree image "slamming weights.gif"; the weights at the top right decide how balanced the wheel is in this position. They are already on their way to the left. If the wheel is moving faster around then perhaps they will flow to the left slower and the wheel would have less balance. So the wheel can't go too fast or it will have too much clockwise torque. The wheel is supposed to turn counter clockwise by weights slamming against the left side of the wheel. In the 90 degree image it is also observable that it might not work at all if too slow because the weights on the top would swing but not slam against the wheel. To slam against the wheel nice and hard I think the top weight has to have a good horizontal-like position for most of its fall.

[preoccupied]

Continuing my previous posts and as suggested by someone I will draw one weight going around. But since the weights work in pairs I will draw one pair. The weights work in pairs by one weight pulling on the other to make them swing together which will happen over on the top part of the turn.

I could only make 6 attachments to this post. So I won't post the other frames. They just sit on one spot though. You can just see where the weight goes in frame six and it just sits there until it reaches frame 1 again.

This post is to help display how the design would work to those who asked me. I'm notoriously bad at presentation.

[AB Hammer]

preoccupied

You need to look a bit closer at this latest design. Take a string and tape each end horizontally at each end from your view point but wide enough so you can spin your picture slowly around under it. I am sure you will see that there is not enough weight in the proper spots to make it run for it will equal at least 4 times in each rotation below the line and you will not have enough above the line to make a difference.