IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[Sam Peppiatt]

Hi Peter AX,

A spring can pull a pendulum in on the up side or out on the down side. If you stretch the spring all the way across the wheel from one pend. to the other it will do both. This may be the so called connectedness principle and why the weights worked in pairs.

However, the spring will also swing the pendulums the opposite way, and cause reverse rotation. I may have found a way to prevent this from happening by, putting one pendulum on top of the other.

This may be what Bessler meant when he said, "when the weights come to be placed together", if you like clues that is----------------------------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

I have done some testing and George is correct! We should all bow before him. Instead of driving in a straight line, I now zig-zag down the road. I will never have to pay for fuel again!

[Sam Peppiatt]

Tarsier 79,

I assume your ridicule was meant for me, although you don't address me personally. When I first joined this forum and some body gave me a big ration of sh*t, I would just say, "Fuck Off!!", or words to that effect.

Now I don't know what to say. Maybe horrible recognition is better than none-----------------------------------Sam Peppiatt

[Tarsier79]

Sam, I have no reason to ridicule you. My words were a test to see if a computer program can recognise sarcasm.

[Sam Peppiatt]

You know where you can stick your test---------------------------------Sam

[Tarsier79]

Sam the world does not revolve around you. Be offended if you like, it is your choice. Ill spell it out simple for you.... My words were directed at George/Peterax/Indian-Visual-Basic.

[Sam Peppiatt]

I was right when I first joined. Fuck Off!!

[Tarsier79]

Sam, Is English your second language, or are you just an angry little man?

[PeterAX]

To Sam Peppiat.
=======================
Hi Sam,
Hi dear colleague,
------------------------------------------
1) First of all do not pay any (even a slightest!) attention to the writings of Tarsier79. This man is (a) either an ignorant and pathological hater (the latter being a severe mental disorder by itself) or (b) a paid agent of the official science mafia, who makes some money by trying to manipulate the audience in a clumsy and unskillful manner or (c) a rustic wiseacre, who considers himself as the center of the Universe. Simply ignore his posts! (The same for WaltzCee and MrTim. (In my poor opinion one and same person uses these three different pseudonims.))
------------------------------------------
2) Well, you give a very interesting idea again -- to gather together the gravity wheel and the zigzags. Perfectly agree with this new approach of yours. Need some time however to consider carefully and thoroughly your new interesting suggestion and think over the details. Please give me some time, if possible.
-------------------------------------------
3) About the animation/simulation of the gravity wheel. Our team's experts in animation/simulation are examining now the matter closely. Let us give them a few days to familiarize with the, more or less, quite sophisticated gravity wheel concept.
-------------------------------------------
And let me remind again -- it's a great pleasure for me to correspond with you!:)
Let us push forward together the technology progress!:)
Regards,
Peter

[PeterAX]

Asking our two simple questions for the 21st time.
--------------------------------------------
1) Consider carefully and thoroughly (and many times!) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY .
--------------------------------------------
2) Assume that:
a) Ma = 1 kg;
b) Mb = 4 kg; the value of Mb can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
c) V1 = 1m/s = const;
d) Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N; the latter can be further decreased as many times as you want;
e) N = number of zigzags = 10; the value of N can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
f) Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids; the latter can be replaced by any other curve patterns.
--------------------------------------------
3) It is evident that if V2 = 0.6 m/s and if V3 = 0.1 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is valid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is invalid.
--------------------------------------------
4) It is evident that if V2 = 0.8 m/s and if V3 = 0.3 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is invalid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is valid.
--------------------------------------------
5) It is evident that both (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy are actually invalid simultaneously in this special particular zigzag case.
--------------------------------------------
So let us ask again our two simple questions for the 21st time.
--------------------------------------------
QUESTION 1: V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
QUESTION 2: V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
--------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your two answers for the 21st time.

[PeterAX]

Let us push forward together the technology progress!
---------------------------------------------
Let us popularize in any possible way the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY as it contains an absolutely free new technology information, which is able to make better and easier the life of any human being on Earth.
=========================
1) Having in mind the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY assume that:
a) Ma = 1 kg;
b) Mb = 4 kg; the value of Mb can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
c) V1 = 1m/s = const;
d) Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N; the latter can be further decreased as many times as you want;
e) N = number of zigzags = 10; the value of N can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
f) Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids; the latter can be replaced by any other curve patterns.
--------------------------------------------
2) It is evident that if V2 = 0.6 m/s and if V3 = 0.1 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is valid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is invalid.
--------------------------------------------
3) It is evident that if V2 = 0.8 m/s and if V3 = 0.3 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is invalid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is valid.
--------------------------------------------
4) It is evident that (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy are invalid simultaneously in this special particular zigzag case, which is described in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY .
========================
Let us popularize in any possible way the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY as it contains an absolutely free new technology information, which is able to make better and easier the life of any human being on Earth.
--------------------------------------------
Let us push forward together the technology progress!

[Sam Peppiatt]

Peter AX,

Yes, Tarsier 79, it's my own fault, I let him get to me. In a way he was right, you shouldn't put so much faith in me to figure it out-------------------Sam

PS Check out Calloway's post, we are on the same page.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Peter AX,

A thought has occurred to me. Could weights translating in a circle / not rotating, be considered a form, or demonstration of the conservation of momentum, if that's the right word to use.

The reason I ask, is because the weights have to be constantly accelerating in one direction and at the same time deaccelerating in another direction. I.E., constantly speeding up and slowing down. Yet, in the case of pendulums, the wheel seams to turn effortlessly-------------------------------------Sam

[PeterAX]

To Sam Peppiat.
==============================
Hi Sam,
Please excuse me for not sending to you my posts within a period of 1 month. The reason was that we (our team) were fully occupied with some sophisticated experiments related to our 11th technology breakthrough. But now I (together with some members of our team) will focus entirely on your gravity wheel concept.
Please give me some time to consider carefully and thoroughly your last post. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,

[PeterAX]

Asking our simple question for the 100th time.
--------------------------------------------
1) Consider carefully and thoroughly (and many times!) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY .
--------------------------------------------
2) Assume that:
a) Ma = 1 kg;
b) Mb = 4 kg; the value of Mb can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
c) V1 = 1m/s = const;
d) Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N; the latter can be further decreased as many times as you want;
e) N = number of zigzags = 10; the value of N can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want;
f) Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids; the latter can be replaced by any other curve patterns.
--------------------------------------------
3) It is evident that (always) V2 > 0 m/s and V3 > 0 m/s.
--------------------------------------------
4) It is evident that if V2 = 0.6 m/s and if V3 = 0.1 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is valid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is invalid.
--------------------------------------------
5) It is evident that if V2 = 0.8 m/s and if V3 = 0.3 m/s, then (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is invalid and (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is valid.
--------------------------------------------
6) It is evident that if (a) V2 is not equal to 0.6 m/s, and if (b) V2 is not equal to 0.8 m/s, and if (c) V3 is not equal to 0.1 m/s, and if (d) V3 is not equal to 0.3 m/s, then both (e) the law of conservation of linear momentum and (f) the law of conservation of mechanical energy are invalid simultaneously in this special particular zigzag case, which is described in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY .
--------------------------------------------
Asking again our simple question for the 100th time.
--------------------------------------------
QUESTION: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 3-6? Yes or no? (And if yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
--------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer for the 100th time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
========================
NOTE.
It is worth to note a simple interesting experimental fact, which is as follows.
A) A certain number and a certain shape of the zigzags lead to the validity of the above written item 4.
B) Another combination of number and shapes of the zigzags leads to the validity of the above written item 5.
C) And a third combination (and more precisely, a group of combinations) of number and shapes of the zigzags leads to the validity of the above written item 6.
========================
We (our team) are open to any suitable form of collaboration of mutual benefit (a) for a further perfection and development of our 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs and/or (b) for a production of our 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs on a large industrial scale.