Grease power

[preoccupied]

I placed gears on the orange platform that stays upright. So the weight falls on the ascending side on the red lever and presses against a gear that turns against the catch in the direction the wheel is moving. The positions are fixed, the only thing this might do is put pressure into the system without moving anything differently by using the pressure from the spring against a gear that turns against the rotating gear that rotates against the catch in the center. The spring gains its force from the weight falling when ascending. Just because the weights are further from the axle on the left doesn't mean that it is an overbalanced weight also. I think that the overbalance weights on the left are contradicted by the catch in the center. But I think the spring because it is connected to a larger gear has leverage that puts more force into the system. I could play with this a little bit and make the large orange gear even larger and I think it would be more effective. There is some contradicting motion in the gears because its rotating to stay upright and extra gears are on the orange platform, so the large orange gear would need to be a ratchet. While descending the ratchet would be used and on the ascension it would catch the ratchet and push against the wheel in the direction the wheel is moving from the spring when the red lever falls.

[preoccupied]

Now this makes a lot more sense to me. If I use two weights on the platform, one on both sides, it's neutral both as far as how overbalanced the weights are on the wheel and how it effects the catch in the center by the green gears. So weights working in pairs like this allows the whiplash on the ascending side to be used without effecting much else on the wheel because the weights in pairs keeps the use of the gears mostly neutral.

The weights should be about balanced on both sides of the wheel.

The weights impact on the gear arrangement should be about neutral.

The red lever can lift and fall from whiplash of the wheel and on the ascending side pull on the gears with the spring as the red lever falls while ascending.

In this drawing the wheel is supposed to turn CCW.

[preoccupied]

I've emphasized in blue what I'm about to explain. The platform in orange is connected to the gear that is rotating CW and moving along the wheel CCW. If this lever or platform were pulled to the right by hand the wheel would be forced to turn CCW. So the large orange circle is connected to the platform and is rotating CW by being pulled on by the springs but it is not rotating unless the whole system rotates by forcing the lever to move to the right like the blue arrow indicates. If the lever that is this platform with this stuff on it moves tot he right any the whole wheel must turn with it. What I think I've done is create a balanced wheel that can use the whiplash of a weight falling against a spring to add turning power to the wheel. This might effectively bypass the law of levers because it's a balanced wheel that is getting input from the whiplash of a weight falling as its ascending only. And I mean only. The only force being put into the wheel to overbalance it is the spring and the whiplash of the weight falling. The weight falls because it's ascending but it's balanced on the wheel doing this. It's balanced on how it impacts the springs it's balanced on the whole wheel. The ONLY force being added to the wheel is in the CCW direction because I am causing the big orange gear to turn CW that then pulls the blue arrow direction on the lever/platform. The only trick that needs to be achieved is the build design in which the big orange gear must turn a separate gear that moves against the gear that is pushing against the catch. It can't turn the gear connected to the platform because the big orange gear is connected to the platform and it would be pushing against itself but it should be able to push on a separate gear that connects to the large green gear connected to the platform. A separate gear at the base of the platform can push on the green gear and it would try to tilt it to the right now with the blue arrow in the drawing. I thought of how this could be a bidirectional wheel. You would just have the same wheel but in the opposite direction as well two perpetual motion machines connected to each other and because the large orange gear is on a ratchet it won't matter how the weights shift because turning in the wrong direction won't touch the wheels rotation. The wheel moving would be the driving force of the wheel because the wheel runs on the force of the weights whiplashing downwards as they ascend. A continuously upright platform not effected negatively by the shifting of weights because they are acting in pairs in this drawing can use only the force of the whiplash downwards of the weights ascending to add power to the wheel. I've isolated most all negative forces and applied a force only in one direction that can turn the wheel from the spring. It might be possible that this could work without the spring but here is what I think might be wrong with that. Actually I forget. The orange gear will eventually lag downwards the levers so it might be real that I would need a spring to bring up the levers. On the descending side a gear must bring unravel the small amount of space that the levers fall extra. If the springs aren't placed on the whiplashing levers they should at least be on the orange gear to pull the levers back up on the descending side. The levers fall not that much anyways by turning the large gear. It might not be necessary to have springs on the lines that I've drawn because the whiplashing of the weight would have similar force but if there are springs the force might last longer which I see no reason for the force to last longer. What is probably more important is having the orange gear bring the weights back up after they unravel a little. But my main point here in the picture in blue is that if you pull on the blue parts in the direction of the arrow by hand it would force the wheel to turn in order to move it. So A separate gear can push and try to tilt that lever even though the force is coming from an identical location almost as if the lever were grinding against itself but it would actually grind into itself if there weren't a separate gear in the same location. And I almost thought this idea couldn't work because there were gears in the same location because a gear can't grind into itself but I think differently now that I am almost certain that the whiplash of the weights can push pressure on the wheel in this model. I'm almost certain that the big orange gear can be pulled on and put pressure on the same location in a different gear of the platform it is resting on. If there is no spring on the line it would look like crosses are rotating around the wheel but there needs to be anyways a spring on the large orange gear that pulls the weights back up. when descending on the other side of the wheel.

[preoccupied]

I wrote an email this morning to someone and I began describing my wheel. Here is an excerpt.

"I have a static gear in the very center that allows another gear like it to rotate around it on the wheel and it reverses the gear direction also so that I can have a lever that remains upright as the wheel turns. I use this upright lever that remains upright around the entire turn of the wheel. I turned the upright lever into a platform that holds two levers on opposite sides. Because of their consistent upright position they will whiplash downwards as they ascend on the wheel. These two weights keep balanced both sides of the wheel and it's also balanced on the pressures on the gears. So the weights can rise and fall without effecting the balance of the wheel or the pressure on the gears. Now my goal is to harness the whiplash of the weights falling down as the wheel ascends on one side to further put pressure to move the wheel. I do this by putting a large gear on the platform and tugging on it with pulleys connected to the weights on the end of the levers. These things are located on the platform that remains upright constantly. It basically looks like a bunch of T shaped crosses rotating around the wheel staying upright but on the ascending side the weights are whiplashing downwards and pushing into the gear arrangement without effecting the balance of the wheel. If the weights are pulled back into position on the descending side by a spring, the power of the wheel turning if it's a true perpetual motion machine will come from an initial push and each new whiplash on the wheel accelerating against gravity on the ascending side. A thought of caution is that to tilt the platform and make the gear arrangement move I need to place the moving gear in the same location as the platforms gear. I can't place the pressure on the platforms gear because it would grind against itself. But I can try to place the impacts of the whiplashing weights on a gear that is located in the same spot to make it push against the gear that rotates around the static gear. It appears as if it's possible a lever is grinding against itself but I insist that the extra pressure could be put into the gear arrangement anyways because there is movement coming from the levers even though the gear movements aren't really changing. The levers unravel and fall further down and need to be brought back up. A spring should bring the levers back up when on the descending side and to give an initial push, the initial push should overpower the spring allowing whiplashes to starts. The spring would allow this to run forever otherwise it would possibly become very violent temporarily until it stops."

Happy New Year!

I actually think the wheel would work with the pull of the weights and the spring I drew in my drawing is unnecessary. The spring does emphasize the movements in a way that can be visualized in the drawing though. A spring would be employed to bring the weights back upright when it is descending. If force is gained by the wheel from the whiplashes then the next revolution would have more force and each new whiplash as it rotates would be stronger.

I think this would be a monster to simulate because of the 3d arrangements of the gears. I actually don't know how the simulation programs you guys use work. It might be easy to simulate in which case I encourage you to do it for me. I hope to learn FreeCAD and maybe I will have a 3d printable version of this wheel eventually. If I have the time.

[preoccupied]

The extra large orange gear would have been hard to build even with 3d elements. This drawing may be more practical. And now the levers are guaranteed to work in unison because they are connected by gearing on the orange platform instead of free swinging like I think I drew in the previous images. The ratchet can be placed now on one the levers gear and a spring can pull it back up on the descending side. The initial push would provide whiplash whatever is over causing the spring to move and that movement in the form of whiplash would add power to the wheels rotation and with a smooth enough operation would have stronger future whiplashes.

[preoccupied]

The last two days I have been reading Perpetual motion an ancient mystery solved? by John Collins. I'm on chapter 13 now but I want to draw attention to page 176 which is one of my favorite parts right now which I think is an excerpt from Triumphans Orffyreanum,

"Unlike other automata, . . .. these weights . . . are the essential parts and constitute the perpetual motion itself; since from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the center of gravity; and when they come to be placed together, and are so arranged one against another that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or another of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis, which in its turn must also move."

The first thing I want to address is that I believe when he said "one or another of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis" that I think he was referring to the drawing boards straight edge. This would be my platform that I keep upright using the rotation around the static gear in my design. And when he says "so long as they remain out of the center of gravity" I think he is actually trying to say when they have no gravitational pull. The weights in my design have no gravitational pull based on their location as they sit on opposite sides of a fulcrum that remains upright as the wheel turns, and the wheel I designed should probably be able to sit without being touched and not move. The quote ends by saying "which in its turn must also move." and I think that is a hint at the mechanics that the device that sits right angle to the straight edge of the drawing board must turn in order to move the wheel. And I take this assumption straight out of my design but choice words by Bessler to state that if we have the same design. Since the device rotating around the wheel that is remaining upright is what is caused to move by whiplashing weights. Well actually the weights are turning against the gear next to it but the platform does also move. And it looks as if the platform is grinding against itself because the gear in purple in my previous MS Painting is in the same location as the gear in which the platform rotates on. So I summarize that I have a platform rotating upright around the wheel as the wheel turns that contains two weights on opposite sides (remaining balanced even when the weights move that move in unison) and a gear connection that applies the whiplash of those weights falling, the platform raises and the weights fall some, and thus this gravitational yank downwards put its force into a wheel that is otherwise balanced. The wheel should be balanced according to the weights location from the wheels axle and on the gears and the only force is the redirection of force from the falling weights on the ascending side of the wheel. The weights are brought back up on the descending side by spring I think with no problem or change in power of the wheel turning in the correct direction.

A possible design modifications that I can see right now in my MS painting is slowing the levers descent by making the gear on the levers larger, which would require the weights to fall slower because they are trying to turn the device faster. This will reduce the power from the whiplash but would guarantee possibly room for the weights to fall and they might not have to fall as far down before being lifted back up on the descending side. In the MS painting I shared the gear size on the lever is the same as the other gears on the platform. That gear on the lever could be larger, reducing the whiplash power but requiring the lever to move less in its rotation which might be necessary and I have not the exact measurements to know right now how large the gear must be to prevent the levers from crashing into each other. It looks like it could benefit from having a larger gear on the lever though. Without the whiplashing effect of the platform ascending along the wheel the weights shouldn't fall at all because the spring would hold them up. The spring strength could also be played with. The spring could be strong enough to hold the weights up all of the way while the wheel is not moving or the spring could be strong enough to lift the weights as they descend which would be a less strong spring then. With the lever on a ratchet the lever is not lifted up by the wheel, only the spring and when the levers fall they push into the wheel. So the wheel should only be effected by the levers in the direction the wheel is trying to move. The ratchet should be, located connected to the lever inside of the gears that he levers pressure on so that the gears with the ratchet only put force from the levers falling and otherwise when the levers rise they do so because of descending on the wheel with the spring pulling up on them.

Jim_Mich once said it was important to keep the wheel balanced and I bet he would like my design if he were alive today. Another thing he had was a plan. Heath Ledger Joker said to two face in the dark knight movie "Do I really look like a guy with a plan? You know what I am. I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do if I caught it. You know I just do things" I much more am a dog chasing cars. For me, a guy who is drawing pictures and sharing them in real time as he comes up with ideas, I still think there is some opportunity to make money if I have discovered Bessler's wheel. So I will throw it out there that I will justifiably feel obligated to monetarily reward who can help me figure out how to make money on this if I found Bessler's wheel and I feel like I would be generous.

So I'm on chapter 13 of John Collins book Prime mover for the millennium. A lot of people have mentioned the Prime mover on the forum. I stopped short of reading the last chapter because I never knew what people meant by "Prime mover" and I feel like I want it to be a surprise so I will save the last chapter until I am ready to be surprised.

[preoccupied]

From what I understand by thinking about this, the two weights on the red lever will come together and clap after 90 degree swing/whiplash. It should do this at the same angle that the wheel rotates divided by 2 (I think) because it is also rotating the platform in the same direction which at least with the gears being the same size would lose just as much, and I actually hypothesize that with different size gears it would still lose half or I don't have the geometry to understand a more complex scenario than this. So gears that are the same size will clap at 45 degree turn of the wheel. If the gear on the lever is 2x the size it will clap (or I mean the weights will come together) after whiplashing 90 degree turn of the wheel. And if the gear on the lever is 4x larger, if the weights are whiplashing from the very bottom to the top they won't clap because it will take 180 degree turn of the wheel to clap (or I mean the weights will come together) or it will clap (or I mean the weights will come together) when it reaches the very top. A gear on the levers that is more than 4x the size will not come together while ascending because the lever will move less than 90 degrees before the wheel moves 180 degrees. And actually because the spring will have more time to pull the weight back up on the descending side, gear sizes greater than 4x on the lever could overpower the wheel because it would pick up a greater maximum speed by having greater number of revolutions in which the levers fully whip lash, so something like 10x size of a gear would pick up speed slower but reach a higher maximum speed and the wheel might explode at the maximum speed. There is actually no reason to have the weights come together and clap earlier than 90 degree turn of the wheel because the ratchet would allow the weights to come together without locking up the wheel. So a 2x gear on the lever would make a good demonstration model of this overbalanced wheel and that is what I've drawn in my MS painting. And a gear much larger than 4x with a higher maximum speed might or might not be better to produce work, I don't know; it would possibly pick up to a higher maximum speed though but I don't know if it will keep that power under loads because the input forces that starts the rotation would be less, or I mean the initial push into the wheel would be weaker and it would be start slower then. Do you agree with my calculations?

[John Collins]

I’m always interested in your posts, but I’m also curious about which drawing/sketching app you use. Your drawings are very good and I’d like to be able to use the same software too. Can you let me know which one you use?

Thanks. JC

[Trev]

Looks like GeoGebra, I've been teaching myself to use it over the winter: https://softradar.com/geogebra/download/5.0.104.0/de/

[preoccupied]

I’m always interested in your posts, but I’m also curious about which drawing/sketching app you use. Your drawings are very good and I’d like to be able to use the same software too. Can you let me know which one you use?

Thanks. JC

This MS painting drawing shows the overbalanced wheel I have been designing in more manageable to build parts. The weights on the orange platform push against the inner static gear catch and turn the wheel and its the only force turning the wheel because the weights are all balanced on the gear that rotate it to keep it upright and the wheel itself is also balanced with the weights positions even wen the weights shift because there is two weights opposing a pivot. Two weights opposing a pivot are equivalent to being inside the pivot as far as how it effects the wheels balance of the weights. The weights on the pivot because they are evenly spaced on each side are the same as being on the pivot itself. The weights can shift and be balanced on the wheel so the only force is the whiplash of the weights falling turning the wheel and this if it adds force to the wheel will make the next whiplash stronger if the whiplashes are caused by the rotation of the wheel. The weights thus gain force from the wheel turning from their own swinging/whiplashing and otherwise everything else is supposed to be balanced and is actually balanced based on the position of the weights. The wheel should reach a maximum speed based on the spring lagging and not pulling up the weights in time on the descending side. The slowing of the weights resetting relative to the speed of the wheel keeps it from turning faster and faster to infinity.

To describe my picture in more detail, the green gears keep the orange platform upright and the purple gears turn into the inner static gear and moves the wheel some with extra force by the ascending whiplashing weights. The size of the orange gears allows the whiplashing weights to come together after whiplashing for 90 degrees while the wheel also turns 90 degrees. If the orange gear were the same size as the purple gear it first contacts by the belt it would whiplash its 90 degrees coming together and the wheel would turn 45 degrees. If the orange gear were 4x larger than the purple gear it contacts by the belt it would have the weights come together after the wheel turns 180 degrees. I have in my drawing a 2x gear because the wheel doesn't lock up when the weights come together because of a ratchet. The sets of weights are 90 degrees apart along the wheel so it will always have whiplashing weights and they take turns whiplashing in my drawing.

This and and my other drawings are made in Microsoft Paint that comes with windows 10 operating system. And it's really an honor to have your attention. You are the famous author John Collins and you are talking to me. Yippy! I read your book in the last 3 days. And it's really odd that I hadn't read it sooner because I have been on the forum for a while. We may have a PERMO with my overbalanced wheel design. I probably discovered Bessler's wheel. I still don't know what a prime mover is. I read chapter 13 and I didn't understand what prime mover means.

Near the end of my last post I mention MS Painting which means that I used Microsoft Paint and I've bolded that part of the quote here,

... So a 2x gear on the lever would make a good demonstration model of this overbalanced wheel and that is what I've drawn in my MS painting. And a gear much larger than 4x with a higher maximum speed might or might not be better to produce work, I don't know; it would possibly pick up to a higher maximum speed though but I don't know if it will keep that power under loads because the input forces that starts the rotation would be less, or I mean the initial push into the wheel would be weaker and it would be start slower then.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Preoccupied,
I don't understand your words but, I like your drawings too. I wish I had your ability-------------Sam

[John Collins]

Thanks preoccupied. I’ll try it.

JC

[preoccupied]

Preoccupied,
I don't understand your words but, I like your drawings too. I wish I had your ability-------------Sam

I want to discuss what you don't understand.

Here I have the the design with 3x bigger orange gears than the small purple gear it connects to. If the weights are whiplashing they will reach their come together point after 90 degree rotation as the wheel turns 135 degrees. What did I just say? I said that the weights come together after turning 90 degrees. And I said that the wheel turns 135 degrees.

What are the locations of what I've drawn? The back part in black is the wheel's backboard. Then separate from the wheel in the center is a green circle that is a static gear. The wheel's components circle around this static gear. Two types of gears touch the static gear. Those are the green gear and the purple gear. What are the layers of this mechanism? What are the locations of what I have drawn? Same question. First is the backboard then the static gear next to it. Then on the wheel the green gears and thee large purple gears. The large purple gears and the green gears are connected by pivots into the backboard. On the far out green gears the orange platform is connected. The orange platform sticks out the furthest and it fits between the green gear and the orange platform the small purple gear. This might be the most complicated part. Because an axle or pivot is part of the orange platform. The orange platform sticks out the furthest but leaves an axle between the green gear and the platform. The platform has to be the furthest out so that it doesn't whack the belt when rotating on the bottom side which means it needs to fit the small purple gear between it and the green gear that keeps it upright.

With a 3x bigger orange gear that I've drawn, the large purple gear will be turning into the wheel 3x faster from the free falling red levers. The red levers are on a ratchet that allows them to not lock up when the weights come together and can be lifted back up by the spring on the descending side without effecting the wheel in any way. the ratchet should also allow the wheel to turn in the opposite direction without locking up and by doing that you could have two perpetual motion machines facing opposite directions and the wheel would be bale to be bi directional like Bessler did for his demonstrations. So basically the weights if they are whiplashing can whiplash and push into the wheel 3x faster. 3x faster but 3x less efficient use of force because faster it pushes into the wheel the else leverage it has. 3x size orange gears would probably work good and 2x size gears might work too. The red levers move the orange gears.

So there is energy I hypothesize for this wheel to work in the force of gravity holding weights in position and resisting lift. The weights whiplash that are ascending and this whiplash is amplified in speed by gears to add power to the wheel. The wheel would gain this power in the form of faster movement of the wheel and each whiplash would add power to the next whiplash. The weights will whiplash and come together after turning 90 degrees on the orange gears and red levers. In this drawing the wheel will turn 135 degrees when the weights whiplash together.

I know I said before that when I had access to my investment bank when I was a kid that I paid 5 billion dollars for Bessler's diary. I do not remember anything from the diary right now. But it would give me a distinct advantage in finding Bessler's wheel if I were to remembered it. I must have some subconscious ability to remember what's in the diary even though my brain isn't working very good. I do not have an investment bank right now and I'm worried about it because I haven't been able to communicate with it since 2005 because I got hit on the head and forgot its contact information. I somehow didn't involve my family in my bank and I was adopted around 3rd grade but right now they are claiming that I wasn't adopted, but it makes it possible in this circumstance that I am the only person who believes I had this bank. If I found Bessler's wheel it's very likely that I am remembering subconsciously information in his diary in which he basically just delivered exactly how it worked. I might have had the solution in my mind subconsciously from reading the solution as a kid. And if it was there in my mind it's buried in a lot of head trauma because I've been hit on the head a lot.

[preoccupied]

Thanks preoccupied. I’ll try it.

JC

I'll comment that MS paint isn't a special program. I admit though that I didn't use it correctly at first. There is numbers on the bottom bar that help you make a perfect circle, if you hold our mouse steady and meet the measurements. For a long time I eye balled it on the picture instead of using the numbers on the bottom bar to measure the size of what I was making. As far as I know there is no special commands like holding ctrl to lock in special alignments. But I am able to make a circle and then copy and paste that circle. If the image is being covered by the pasted objects then you can select transparent selection on the Select button. In my drawings I have a thick frame of the wheel in black and I made the objects colored. This is mainly so I can remove the objects based on their color if I want to by using the fill with color command which I can right click with to remove a filling because the color number two is white. Left click is color number one on the fill color command. By making the frame of the wheel black and the parts in different colors I can remove and edit parts easily. MS painting is not a technical drawing. It is the most basic available program for drawing a picture in windows. Much rather would I prefer to learn FreeCAD. It's on my to do list.

I'm actually out of contact with my investment bank that dwarfs anything a Bessler wheel could earn monetarily by being the largest trust in the USA. If I manage to regain contact with this bank I might regret revealing a working gravity wheel because I'm still not convinced its safe for the planets gravity to be using gravity to do work. Some things that would be bad is diverting Earth out of the goldilocks zone, slowing or speeding up the planets rotation, becoming lighter everything becoming lighter or heavier or cooling the core of the planet because I still think heat in the core might play a role in gravity traits and using gravity might spend that heat in the core. And I will divert off topic a little to say that I think life is on every planet in our solar system. I think the planets out of the goldilocks zone are large enough to produce their own heat and the intense gravity that they are supposed to have actually doesn't exist near the surface because of sideways pulls of gravity that negates some downward pulls. What do I mean? Well on a sphere there is more mass along the perimeter and this pulls sideways and should negate downwards pulls of gravity so I think gravity at least near the surface of these large bodies of mass is similar to Earths gravity but deeper down it is so heavy that the intense pressures create heat and heat the whole planet making it a mute point that its not in the goldilocks zone. When I was time traveling, I went to when the dinosaurs died and was forced to fight off Giants from Jupiter that would have otherwise likely swallowed Earth because they were so big and annoying. And I think I can expect that Jupiter near its crust has gravity similar to Earths and plenty of warmth because its a larger planet. Other than these giants I encountered frogs humanoids that kind of remind me of Kermit the frog but like a little taller than an average human maybe like a basketball player size person. I am pretty sure these frogs might come from Neptune. It's just in my opinion very likely life is on all of the planets in our solar system and that it might be more difficult for life to be on a smaller planet like ours that we are lucky to be in the goldilocks zone because of our small stature and if this gravity Bessler wheel if I have discovered it is used for work and we travel off the goldilocks zone we will all freeze or burn to death.

[Gregory]

I'm actually out of contact with my investment bank that dwarfs anything a Bessler wheel could earn monetarily by being the largest trust in the USA. If I manage to regain contact with this bank I might regret revealing a working gravity wheel because I'm still not convinced its safe for the planets gravity to be using gravity to do work. Some things that would be bad is diverting Earth out of the goldilocks zone, slowing or speeding up the planets rotation, becoming lighter everything becoming lighter or heavier or cooling the core of the planet because I still think heat in the core might play a role in gravity traits and using gravity might spend that heat in the core. And I will divert off topic a little to say that I think life is on every planet in our solar system. I think the planets out of the goldilocks zone are large enough to produce their own heat and the intense gravity that they are supposed to have actually doesn't exist near the surface because of sideways pulls of gravity that negates some downward pulls. What do I mean? Well on a sphere there is more mass along the perimeter and this pulls sideways and should negate downwards pulls of gravity so I think gravity at least near the surface of these large bodies of mass is similar to Earths gravity but deeper down it is so heavy that the intense pressures create heat and heat the whole planet making it a mute point that its not in the goldilocks zone. When I was time traveling, I went to when the dinosaurs died and was forced to fight off Giants from Jupiter that would have otherwise likely swallowed Earth because they were so big and annoying. And I think I can expect that Jupiter near its crust has gravity similar to Earths and plenty of warmth because its a larger planet. Other than these giants I encountered frogs humanoids that kind of remind me of Kermit the frog but like a little taller than an average human maybe like a basketball player size person. I am pretty sure these frogs might come from Neptune. It's just in my opinion very likely life is on all of the planets in our solar system and that it might be more difficult for life to be on a smaller planet like ours that we are lucky to be in the goldilocks zone because of our small stature and if this gravity Bessler wheel if I have discovered it is used for work and we travel off the goldilocks zone we will all freeze or burn to death.

Sounds like a nice peyote trip in a great ceremony with a Navajo shaman...

All these Giants, man! So annoying! And why do they always just angry and attack other tribes?
Mindless giants, guess that's why they were banished from everywhere... even in the Bible, but also in northern or greek mythology and other scriptures as well... Giants are just bad.
Frog people on the other hand are much nicer! They are also in a lot of different creation myths and stories, but more likely as teachers and guides or such. :-)

I am actually a great fan of myths and sci-fi stories, so I just reacted. It was a fun short story to read.

Anyway, I think you should not be afraid of gravity wheels throwing Earth off its track. It doesn't work like that. I think some wheels and weights connected to the surface of the Earth can't really pull on it in any meaningful way to modify its trajectory. Not to mention that the effects in question are so ridiculously tiny compared to Earth... they are practically non-existent.