Georg Künstler's Ideas...

[MrTim]

The resonance of the Tacoma Narrows bridge did not amplify itself. It was receiving energy from high winds. It stored the energy as resonance until it could no longer contain the energy it was storing. This is in no way pm or f/e.

I have seen the old bridge wreckage and I belive it is still there. Galloping Gerty is still studied for an example on how not to build a suspension bridge.

Saturday, June 10, 2000
Millenium Bridge, London
http://www.arup.com//MilleniumBridge/

[rlortie]

While browsing I ran across this little tid-bit,

Resonance can also occur in mechanical, structural, and acoustical systems. If a system is excited by the continued application of external forces at the natural frequency, which is the frequency at which the system would vibrate if deflected once and then allowed to move freely, the amplitudes of the oscillation will build up and may lead to the destruction of the device or structure. The collapse of the Tacoma Narrows suspension bridge at Puget Sound, Washington, in 1940, for example, was caused by wind-excited vibrations at the natural frequency of the structure.

What Got my attention here is the wording amplitude of the oscillation will build. I see this as a play on words for if one can build amplitude, is this not the same as "build up" which is the same as amplify. Timing is the key factor, put in a little over time and get a whole lot out in a hurry.

Once again I am not saying that this is giving you something for nothing but it does apply to pendulums and some of Georg's statements.

Ralph

[ken_behrendt]

I like to think of a pendulum as being a miniature swing. If the pendulum weight has periodic forces of the correct "resonance" frequency applied to it at the correct time, then the amplitude or vertical and horizontal displacement of the pendulum weight will increase. If, however, the frequency of the applied forces is not equal to the resonance frequency of the pendulum, then the amplitude of the pendulum will be "dampened" until its motion just becomes sporatic.

I am still not exactly sure what the principle of Georg's self accelerating wheels is supposed to be, but I do not consider it impossible that he may have discovered some way to use gravity in a precisely designed wheel so as to increase the amplitude of and maintain the motion of some sort of internal pendulum which would then be able to transfer some of its oscillatory energy into kinetic energy which would be added to the wheel to accelerate it and maintain its motion.

If he has such a wheel, then I do not see any reason why, if it works when rolling across a floor, it could not also be mounted on an axle so as to continually rotate.

ken

[Wheeler]

the amplitudes of the oscillation will build up and may lead to the destruction of the device or structure.

Another way to understand this is to hit a 2 by 4 with a sledge hammer.

Hit it again and again and you have the destructive force of the oscillation input by the blow from the hammer.

Stretch a rubber band between two points (like your fingers) and pluck it with another input force (like a finger) and it will cause waves of motion.

This is my opinion only
Vibration is a common thing in physics.
A force is needed to start or continue the vibration.
Some materials will vibrate once, and others will hold or store the input force for a longer period of time. Like a tuning fork.

This is the same as the swing of the pendulum. The vibration of the force applied to a pendulum will keel over time.

If the waves of force that has been applied in such a manner that they oppose each other, and the material is weaker than the time each wave stays in one place the material can brake down.
I would like opinions on this.

Where is this force as it is dissipated?

[Georg Künstler]

So we try now to create an self amplifying oscillation system, is this correct?

But this is known technology. Amplifier and oscillation systems you have in every radio.

What Bessler did: he created a mechanical oscillating system, not more not less.

How can we manage to get a self amplifying oscillation, this should be the task now.
I showed you some of the possibilities with segmented cylinder version, cymbal weights and self-starting with a spring. I now make it easier without an impact.

Therefore we need three cylinders. One of them heavy, on the top. Look at the picture self-blocking overloaded system. The cylinders left and right, try to turn, but forces are equal, and so nothing turns.

In the next step, we cut the system in two pieces. In that case both system left and right begin to turn. In words of Jonathan we have a one shot. Have a look to separated overloaded system.

In an additional step, we prevent the cylinders with unequal mass distribution from falling, with a stick, between.
All cylinders can rotate.
Have a look to separated but connected. Obviously we have a well balanced system. But a little force, left or right, and the system begins to swing. Only to remember the not buildt version teeter tauter you had seen before (someone said Fintstones car) on this board.

We can see Besslers words: acting in pairs, one is arranging the other.

This views are for your mind collection.

We easily can change this version to a T-Pendulum, and also self-starting, or substitute the stick with a spring. Construction details were shown with ‘Rupferer’.

Have a look to T-pendulum version. And, to the spring version.

To get it self-starting you only had to turn one cylinder with the unequal mass distribution up, one down.

ThatÂ’s my theory. It may not be the arrangement Bessler had in his wheel, but there are many possibilities to make it different. Like cymbal weights, rolling weight on a T-Pendulum, segmented cylinder and others. Oscillating systems with a trouble force. They are all top-heavy, and you had to extract energy to prevent them from falling, you had to break out energy to reach its original position.

You also can compare this function with a mechanical flip-flop.


The future has begun

Georg

[Wheeler]

is this correct?

yes

This is what we are going to do, and this is what you have done.
We will not keep up with you, but in the end we will understand?

[ovyyus]

... ThatÂ’s my theory. It may not be the arrangement Bessler had in his wheel, but there are many possibilities to make it different...

Am I reading this correctly? Is Georg now saying that his ideas are just a theory? Is there an actual working model or not?

[Wheeler]

ovyyus
I want to apologize for fluctuating on this topic, but because of my studies, I am seeing things in what Georg is writing.
You seem to ask questions that I and others would want to know.
Your questions are simple and clear.

I believe what George is leading us into is one of the most wonderful discoveries of nature.

He seems to indicate that in highly organized set of physics, motion can be found by a natural oscillation.

He makes it clear that it is not complicated, and seems to indicate that he has indeed a working model.

If you actually test his latest posts, you will find truth in them

I don't think anyone (even a fraud) would waste time with this amount of thought and study.

Just an opinion


No one , even a fraud would waste time in this manner.

[ME]

His text makes some sense, but his pictures does not (for me).
a bit anti-Alden?

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Wheeler,
have you heard about Trumpets of Jericho? If not, ask someone from the church, who is familiar with the bible.

When you follow up my mails, when did I wrote the first time "it is an oscillationg system with a trouble force". Result :Everyone laught. I can live with that.

I did a backward developement from centrifugal device to gravity powered wheel.

I had the luck to compare two devices which were equal in construction.
Without this models, i were not able to find the solution for the gravity powered wheel. So I was able to learn by comparison.

What I don't understand, are the experts. I was in University in Bremen for measurment of a centrifugal device. The experts now all about mechanical oscillation, but they aways stop a process when it gets undampen and resonance, instead of use this forces. For me, unbelievable. Look at turbine's which are destroyed with resonance.
We need forces to prevent it from destroying. Only to change the view.

The future has begun

Georg

[Wheeler]

ME
If you have any time, or interest, can you look at how some of Georg's and AldenPark's designs may overlap? Maybe work out an animation.
I noticed your beautiful animation of AldenParks ideas on his Pendulum topic.

I do not have much time to work on Georg Kunstler's theory because I am working on my own, but I think We may find out that George and or AldenParks designs may lead to answers .

Georg I will look up Trumpets of Jericho, and review your oscillation system with a trouble force as soon as I can.

I am convinced of the theory, but understanding is slow for me.
Is ovyyus correct in reading between the lines? Is this only a theory?

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Wheeler,

I used the words "theory" because Fletcher did it several times. My models are real, and not in "theory". Or do you think a "walker video" is made with a computer simulation software ? That I have a dowel wheel I had shown several times. Even Bill posted it a long time ago.

the future has begun

Georg

[Wheeler]

Hi Georg

Or do you think a "walker video" is made with a computer simulation software

NO
I was new to the forum when I first looked at your walker.

So many things to do, so many experiments waiting.
I still have not hang glided and I look forward to the sea.

[ovyyus]

Georg, I don't have a problem with theories and ideas, but I do think it's wrong to make claims of success based wholly on fragmented experimental anecdotes. Perhaps you would call that "progressive marketing"?

Your photo's of various mechanical constructions only show... well... various mechanical constructions. I have photo's of some of my past constructions too, some of them are still 'works in progress' - should I claim them as evidence of a working machine if I feel so inclined? I don't think so. If I did, would anybody believe me without any further proof? - probably! lol

You claim to have built several functioning engines that harness gravity as an inexhaustible energy source. These engines would be a miracle to behold, if true! But where are they?

I have no doubt that you have constructed experiments and models and that you might think that these 'work' to illustrate some aspects of your theory. But that's a far cry from claiming to have a fully completed and working PM energy machine. Isn't it? I think it's always a mistake to claim accomplishment before it is actually accomplished. Perhaps you aren't so fussy about this, perhaps you don't need the final proof of demonstration because you have faith in your experiments and/or calculations?

Nothing about your claim of having a fully functioning PM machine makes much sense. Every time you post another drawing, or another component photo, or another non-descript video, or another tease that has someone running off at your bidding, makes me wonder what it is exactly that you want from people here.

After all's said and done, you obviously can not present any proof to back up your claims, I wish you could. But I think you're still attempting to achieve that elusive success that, sooner or later, will send us all mad just like you :P

[Jetrix]

If I had discovered the secret of perpetual motion I would do something else besides teasing a handfull of people with cool ideas and this walker-video evidence. Georg Künstler, why haven't I seen your face on the cover of Time -magazine? Tell us about your future plans or reveal it's secret so we can put it in good use? (this fuelless pump would prevent millions of children dieing from thirst and lack of pure water)

been lurking for quite of time