Jim Mich...

[silverfox]

Sorry to hear about Jim's passing. He was a determined and dedicated seeker chasing after a beautiful but elusive dream in his own unique and often cantankerous way, just as all the rest of us are. Stubbornness comes with the territory, and you need plenty of it to keep going and trying.

In the final analysis, and by that I mean the summation of any of our lives, it is what we ultimately learn about ourselves in this odd little adventure, rather than what most attracts our attention or pre-occupies our minds to the exclusion of all else.

He never shunned stirring the pot and I won't fault him for that... there isn't a single message on these boards that isn't an attempt to do that in one way or another, including this one.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

RIP Jim, I will miss you! I want all to know that Jim Mich died still holding my respect.

I think that all here share the same inflections, "in our own ways"!

Jim Mich earned my respect with some of his many designs that showed me he was a well advanced member here, if only he had stayed with the use of Gravity I think he would have found the solution.

I am sure he would not agree with me, but this is how I feel.

RIP Jim, and you do not need to reply to this post, I think I can guess how it would read!

[ChrisHarper]

Rest in Peace Jim,

May you perpetually tinker in Heaven's workshop +

Chris (Triplock)💔

[Fletcher]

To Wubbly and CC ..

If only I knew how to mechanically achieve a gravity slingshot that robbed a bit of the earths angular momentum and gave it to a wheel - it does seem a rather attractive solution that breaks no rules - perhaps that is where the true mechanical artistry lies if that was indeed JB's (the accomplished mechanic) solution ?

The same applies for your potential solution CC, in that AFAIK resonance amplification requires a mechanical intervention and an energy input that must be accounted for in the energy budget ? If that energy came from the environment then it would not be a true gravity only wheel which it is purported to be, FWIW.

At least both your potential solutions have a physical law basis even if the mechanics are not known to me. Verses the first two scenarios of gravity and inertia which at the present time have no basis in physical laws, as it stands.

I still have to re-read ME's contribution again and see if I can follow his logic.

LOL, jim_mich would be saying "keep sticking your fingers in your ears".

[WaltzCee]

• • I still have to re-read ME's contribution again and see if I can follow his logic.

Most have to do likewise. Marchello is simply amazing. I do appreciate your banging his drum. Keeps me from being the only one. Now I owe you twice. Damn, I wish the mighty would just sit still so I could have some profit. I have to eat too, you know.

[ME]

Fletcher, perhaps I can add something to that contribution.

The possible confusing part: I said "two-way wheel", but there's no implementation. Just a theoretical principle.

To repeat:

3. A principle based on Maxwell's demon

I'm looking for an option which combines this with your option 1.
Possibly implemented like a two way wheel (so mathematically balanced), and yet prefers one way; thus creates imbalance by an almost arbitrary choice.

Of course my base-idea still misses some crucial parts... Almost there, for a year now, it could take several more days.

The main problem with things going in circles is the closed-path integral.
Mathematically those things (actually the formula's of physics) are zero-sum, equal, mutual exchangeable, or do not introduce new forms of energy.
And with friction it only gets worse.

I suspect (who knows for sure) it doesn't matter if energy start out as (1) gravity (E[p], potential energy), or (2) motion (E[k], kinetic energy).
For both situations there's no option in having spare energy getting lost by friction, overcome other inaccuracies, generate heat, sound, perhaps even light or static charges. Any (1) preloaded potential, or (2) pre-pushed motion will eventually be lost.
One could want to avoid all energy calculus; but when doing the basic physics-calculus then CoE is the only energy-related thing one gets for free. With E[p]=E[k] both options (1 & 2) are simply the same.
Perhaps (1 & 2) can be combined to give rise to something new as proposed by Cloud_Camper, but I doubt such combination helps just because of exactly that mentioned equality --> yet, of course, I don't know.

Hence the idea where things should be mathematically inconclusive, read: being a bit chaotic, introducing some unknown variable.
When a mechanism is continuously (or often enough) in some unstable equilibrium then there's room for options. Options which should not (entirely) be information-complete before it starts, and (hopefully) a mathematical nightmare.

To make such thing (duality) act as we really want (one-way motion) we need some sort of sorting machine to undo this difficulty: a Maxwell's deamon is an existing and suitable theory.

I think it's only fair (concerning this topic) to point to someone who had his own view: Jim_mich explains the Maxwell's Deamon.. I think Jim would have liked the slogan: "Ectropy from Entropy".
Unfortunately I'm still uncertain how to mechanize such principle: I try, over-complicate, simplify again, and start over.... as perpetual as it gets. It's a slow process.

While investigating this needed principle of chaos it's possible I'm starting to act it out. Could be either an indication of insanity, or/and (as mentioned many times) all is just theory until it becomes real and manifest.
Perhaps this effect is sensed by Walter. Sorry Walter. Hopefully all for a good cause. :-)


For our New Year I wish we have laid the right foundation to discover Perpetual Motion, or other bright ideas.

[daxwc]

To Fletcher, Wubbly, Cloud and Me;

Foucault's Pendulum does not move with energy from earth’s rotation but it does prove a body can be both fixed to the earth and out of frame of reference.

[Grimer]

...
For our New Year I wish we have laid the right foundation to discover Perpetual Motion, or other bright ideas.

But thanks to, you Marchello, Cloud Camper and the rest of the Bessler Wheel Forum the right foundation has been laid. Perpetual motion has been discovered.

You haven't being paying attention at the back. ;-)

Since this Jim's memorial thread a special mention should be made of his contribution on the force of a 360° pendulum at 6 o'clock on the pendulum rod (6G if I remember correctly). When I tried to praise him for it, in typical awkward Jim fashion he tried to deny it. I'll see if I can find the relevant posts.

The essential breakthrough is Cloud's recognition that energy can be obtained from oscillation. The Milko delivers that energy at the weight lifting end but in the traditional set up that energy is suppressed, or wasted. Cloud realised oscillation could be harvested with an escape mechanism.

The path to Rome begins with but a single step. The Forum has already taken several of those steps. Mind you, we still have to climb the alps. :-)

I loved that video by the way. :-)

[ovyyus]

Perpetual motion has been discovered.

The perpetual claim... sans something that works... again.

[Grimer]

Perpetual motion has been discovered.

The perpetual claim... sans something that works... again.

We have got something that works. The "DOMINANT FLYWHEEL"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3I2zeoUbzg

[ovyyus]

Another fake youtube video... some people never learn.

[Furcurequs]

Since this Jim's memorial thread a special mention should be made of his contribution on the force of a 360° pendulum at 6 o'clock on the pendulum rod (6G if I remember correctly).

Ideally, if the weight starts from rest at the top of the swing, the gravitational potential energy of the mass at the top will equal the kinetic energy of the mass when it reaches the bottom.

potential energy = m*g*h

...where m = mass
g = gravitational acceleration
h = height

...and...

kinetic energy = 1/2*m*v^2

...where m = mass
v = speed

If we let "r" equal the length of the pendulum (to the center of mass of the bob), then the height "h" in our problem will equal 2*r.

So...

m*g*2*r = 1/2*m*v^2

Since the centripetal force required to keep the pendulum bob moving in a circle at velocity "v" is m*v^2/r, we can divide both sides of the above by "r" and multiply both sides by 2 to get:

4*m*g = m*v^2/r

Which shows that the centripetal acceleration due to the speed of the swinging bob at the bottom is 4g.

Of course, the pendulum has to also support the actual weight of the bob in addition to the centrifugal reactive force. So, that gives us a total of 5g at the bottom of the swing.

I believe Jim correctly calculated and spoke of the centrifugal acceleration being 4g. (I can't remember whether he accepted or not that the total force on the rod would be 5 times the weight, though.)

[John Collins]

I posted suggestions about parametric oscillation years ago, it's not the solution......yet.

JC

[Grimer]

Another fake youtube video... some people never learn.

It's not a fake - and if you bother to go to my recent forum posts you will understand why.

I don't know whether you are an oil industry troll or not - employed to spread FUD - but if not, you're a very good imitation. ;-)

[Grimer]

I posted suggestions about parametric oscillation years ago, it's not the solution......yet.

JC

You're obviously not following cloud camper's posts. I suggest you read them.
Cloud has the solution. As yet he hasn't been able to demonstrate it experimentally. Personally I feel he would do well to switch to the Milkovic/Dominant Flywheel line of approach.

He knows he has the solution. The graduate student he consulted knows he has the solution and I know he has the solution. If you followed the argument you would know he has the solution, too.

You, of all people, have a huge incentive for someone to have the solution since without your work on Bessler none of us would be here. Indeed, it could be said the you were the first discoverer of PM in the modern age since you discovered Bessler and believed in him.