You're right Agor, the burden is on me. All I can say is, I'm trying to find a way to prove you wrong, which has been very difficult.
You've been right for a 1,000 years, maybe you always will be---------------Sam
.
.
someone once said, " . .. .. . thinking from a different perspective is an option if you want to look from a different viewpoint.", Sam.
I wonder what the other options are. Gonna put that on my list of things to ponder upon.
The brachistochrone curve is the fastest path of descent in a rigged race where point B is arbitrarily chosen yet as a function of GPE, a dead drop beats the brachistochrone hands down.
HI Waltcy,
Critics! They have you by the short hairs. How can you argue against them. You can't, and they know it. That's the worst freqking part of it. I would like to tell the little SOB to "F" off, but then he would probably get me banned-----------Sam
.
.
Every once in a while they may make a point besides the one between their ears on top their pointie little heads. Never know. Something else to ponder upon.
When it comes to work & power, B's looking conspicuously arbitrarily placed also.
I don't understand a lot of things and I certainly don't understand this thread. Nevertheless I will still read and try to comprehend, but yes Mr. Bessler...I still don't understand.
Posted communications on a forum is a harsh medium.
It's best to have a positive frame on mind.
When a person states the current orthodox understanding.
That does not mean they back it.
Or talking about members looking for an alternative.
It is true people find it easy to be critics in the negative.
One method is to take the negative and use it to your advantage.
That can be hard to see. It take practise for example jb has but forward a valid logical argument. One that can be admired and I know not to push a car up hill with fuel or not.
So in creating a device design I select them that operate using an alternative process.
Again also hard. However who said it was going to be easy.
[MP] Mobiles that perpetuate - external energy allowed
62 through 86.Mostly fill. Bessler repeats themes of sliding weights and long arms lifting weights more or less in the number sixteen configuration of the A's, square axles. Seventy through seventy-two are interesting. Eighty stands alone from anything on either side of eighty-one has the NB.
No. Arcing in the z axis would be wasted motion, right? Lost distance. The time spent moving across the drum’s depth (or heighth depending on your orientation) would be better spent moving in a shorter arc in the X and y axes.
Look at the position of the masses in the 8 and 2:00 tubes. Now look at where they are at 6 and 12 (ccw).
The arc is quite short. If they began moving when they were at 9 and 3 then they took very small arcs to the axle and TDC.
An improved path would be a straight line but if I’m not mistaken, that would be as impossible as perpetual motion or expecting any mass to travel in a straight line in a gravity field. Right?
I bet Bessler discovered that eventually.
