The builder and designer

[AB Hammer]

The builder and designer

There are people here who design an those who build and of course do both.

As a designer you spend many hours with pencils, rulers, and compass, drawing out design after design and altering them over and over. Some designers spend like wise but on a computer with programs designed for designers.

As a builder we build designs. Some of them old designs, some of your own designs, and sometimes other people designs that they would share in the glory if successful.

Of course there are those who look for designs to try to steal and claim for their own. There is always evil people out there.

As a builder we will have epic fails over and over and we will have some that seem to come close that keeps their hopes alive. Sometimes they fool us and we think we have it, but it is just no provable.

But in all! You really only fail if you give up on the quest altogether.

[raj]

Alan!
What a piece of interesting reasoning.
We are all doing our bits.
Raj

[AB Hammer]

Raj I agree

I believe I'll look in my notes and post show some steps that may help the beginner in designing and things that may help them on this quest.

Anyone else is welcome to add steps on how to achieve some design and building of parts as well.

[WaltzCee]

. .

There are people here who design an those who build and of course do both.
. . .

And some theorize. It's slow work, however I think I've come up with the proof gravity is not a conservative Force. I also think there's a build in that Theory. Everybody has their own opinions. I'm of the opinion that when I have something to show (ie a working wheel) then I'll show it.

Until then it's just all bologna. Viva La bologna.

Interesting builds in your album Alan. Are you working on anything lately?

[agor95]

That is the best a forum can expect.

Each member helps out with the skills and know how they have, even if that is a little here and there.

We all have something positive to put into the mix.

Regards

[AB Hammer]

Here is an early drawing of a chart I still us when figuring out design for locating the effects of gravity in a wheel. Then it can be turned sideways to see where the weights are above or below the east to west of aka the 3:00 to 9:00 o'clock line. This is just the very basics to start from. Print it on a clear sheet and lay it over the MTs or other drawings and see where the weights my effect the wheel.

[agor95]

I remember it well and is a good guide for static step analysis.

There is a need to do dynamic analysis of movements.

So either build it or math it out.

I took the math path however I also see the value in a build.

The first computers were analogue.

Regards

[WaltzCee]

They're probably more analog computers in the world today than there are digital. A speedometer comes to mind.

[WaltzCee]

This is probably an appropriate place to put this. Sometimes you get an idea like the design
for no good reason and you want to build it. So you do. You begin to specify materials. You
work on the layout. Put that baby together. And it don't work. Who hasn't been there.

So then you begin to look at single mechanisms. You build them and see if they behave like
you want them to. When they do you think oh yeah. And you build it. And it don't work. So
you blame it on your building skills. Probably you're right. Some of the problem might be in
the design. Who knows? However, some of the problem might be in the Theory. Perhaps
there is no Theory. I'd suggest that's a problem.

My present model operates on the theory that gravity is not a conservative Force. I'm
showing my work. I'm in the thinking phase of my work. I would suggest some of the
newbies try some thinking for a change. It might hurt however it's worth the effort.

Picture two orbs rotating clockwise around their barycenter. When the one orb is between
1 and 2 it collapses on the lower orb at a 45 degree angle. The attraction between the two
orbs causes lower orb to be pulled toward the upper orb creating an imbalance.

After a hundred and eighty degrees the top orb is now at the bottom and it falls away from
the now top orb which was at the bottom. A combination of Springs and the less attraction
Force the top orb up higher bringing the two orbs back into balance.

That's the model I plan on building. Although I'm not showing the work, the work is in the
thought process. I've had my days of coming off half-cocked. Now I'd rather think about
what I'm doing before I begin to do it.

The premise of this model is: gravity is not a conservative Force. the fact of the
matter when you look at the math behind the proof that gravity is conservative Force it's
pretty airtight. I think it's a bit misleading also.

In my opinion you should consider the physics of your model, you should consider the
math also. To not do it this way is the mark of a newbie. To ignore people and discount
their opinions just because they hurt your itty-bitty feelings is incredibly immature. However,
it's your precious time. Waste it as you see fit.

ETA: my gut feeling is that any out of balance wheel that spends more than 15 degrees to
create that imbalance is not going to have enough time left in the rotation of that wheel for the
imbalance to make any difference. This is why I think a hamster cage design is not going
to work. It goes two steps forward and two steps back. Half of the rotation is spent in
creating the imbalance. I can't imagine a wheel like that developing any momentum.

[Georg Künstler]

WaltzCee wrote:

This is why I think a hamster cage design is not going
to work. It goes two steps forward and two steps back. Half of the rotation is spent in
creating the imbalance. I can't imagine a wheel like that developing any momentum.

And exact here is the error, You can't imagine.
I can. Because I built Version for Version to come closer.
I can see the movment which is going on in the real Wheel construction, and not in the Simulator.

If I had not listend to the experts, the Wheel could have been completed years ago.

The Besslerwheel is a simple falling Forward construction in a Feedback Loop.
Selfaccelerating to the Swinging speed of the natural frequency.

Both versions of Bessler, the one way and the bi-directional Wheel are using the same technic.

Too simple for technicians.

I will file this two versions by the Patent Office in Germany, they cannot refuse the Patent Anymore because it is a follow up construction of the already patented Gravity converter from me in the year 2006.

But, maybe it will fall under the law of national interest, I will see.

[agor95]

Hi Georg

I believe you do not have to wast time defending your work.

It is and has been an inspiration to many.

The act of the Octagonal falling drum within a cage does supply
regular compression events. These in turn help the process
of putting the device out of balance by directing the rebound in another direction..

Keep on with the good work.

P.S. Have you a dedicated thread for this device?

It would help. Also does it have a name?

[Georg Künstler]

Hi agor95,
I have no name for the new device.
years ago I had made an spelling error/Translation error when we had a look to the Original design of Bessler.

Besslers Original drawing was titeled with "Der Kupferer" I think Steward was the name who corrected me, I had read the old german document as
"der Rupferer" which had made more sense to me.

So maybe I will call the new device "Der Rupferer", because it is a unsteady pulsating movement.

[agor95]

I will look out for the "Der Rupferer" thread.

Regards

[ME]

If I had not listend to the experts, the Wheel could have been completed years ago.

That's just weird, and all on you. Not on those 'experts'..
Had your listened to all those scientists who checked and verified physics for over centuries and you shouldn't even have considered perpetual motion to begin with.
Instead, you are trying anyway. Despite what people say.

Hence. I start with a general observation that whatever falls inside a drum will lack behind its rotation. (a washing machine is perhaps the most daily one)
Therefore. I conclude that your proposed oscillating motion, that's in interaction with this drum, will too.
...
However. Such observation, which is underlined by physics, should not be an end-all conclusion on this forum that explores the PMM possibility. Such shouldn't stop discussion, it is what ties it to the next.
Thus. The question that now arises is, what should we design that helps to refute such an observation with experimental evidence.
Yet. Unfortunately. Until it succeeds, it doesn't.

Good luck with 'Der Rupferer', looking forward.
The pictures, as posted elsewhere, are looking promising.

-> the Plucker? (It always sounds more bad-ass in German)

[agor95]

I appreciate what you are saying and the logic at it's foundation.

I also appreciate the search in looking for something missed.

I also accept there are members and guests who have curiosity on this and other subjects.

The greatest task is to learn how to communicate, politely, on matters of curiosity to a standard that allows mutual support.