Jim_Mich's beef with Ralph

[AB Hammer]

Everyone knows I deal with Ralph, and support Ralph, but to be honest I have never had a beef with Jim_Mich either. I think if Jim could take things a little less literal and show more of what he means in diagram, there may be less conflict. But it will take a bit of pride control and leave the insulting behind, and things will be allot better.

[jim_mich]

It is obvious that Jim is not going to let his vendetta toward me rest unless he has the last word. I am tired of his misquotes aimed at me fowling up a good thread. IMO in the end it only hurts all of us

I did not misquote Walf! That is a absolute lie! I copied Walf's words exactly. I left off "LOL" because it is not words spoken, but an expression of emotion. How do I know the reason Walf was waughing?

And it was not me that fouled up the thread with a long insulting off topic post. Talk about a vendetta! A simple, "Jim, I was joking." would have been the correct polite response, instead of fouling up the thead with this post:

Jim_Mich,

Why must you be so damn "nitpicking" about what I post on this forum. You screw up my meanings just as you did above. Yet You say I am the one that waffles my debate.

I know the difference between an original and one re-constructed. You left off the "LOL' on your above version of my quote. It was a joke, a way of bringing something to light. If your going to quote me do it verbatim! Not doing so by some is considered slanderous.

The only one you are hurting is yourself, my private mail box shows proof.
If you want to make a point, ask Bill why his reconstructed facsimile differs from the original.

Better yet, go build your CF wheel that you cannot talk about. If it is such a hot item then why are you hanging around here. Does making the "Joke thread" mean anything to you?

Wong Way Walf

Bullying is what got Ralph into his pickle with me. I told him flat out a while back that he was wrong. Instead of acknowledging his error and trying to learn from it he tried to bully his way out. That was a BIG mistake for I refuse to be bullied. In the process he insulted me numerous times. Then when finally forced to admit that he was wrong he did it in an insulting way.

And every time I point out one of his mistakes, by private message or even in a rather polite jesting way by simply using the same "Wong Way Walf" that he himself coined, he goes off the deep end. He pumps himself up to be some sort of forum idol by trying to pat his own back and then he insults me some more.


Walf, I'll be a thorn in your side from now until forever unless you quit your insults and bullying tactics. That is a promise.

[evgwheel]

Jim and Ralph

First of, I like to thank you for putting interest (for me) back into this forum.
At the moment I have been in the doldrums as far as the possibility of ever seeing a working wheel. Yes I think of it every day and it puts me to sleep every night. I’m a believer in gravity O.B. wheel, however the wonderful ways that speed and c.f. overcomes earth gravity with ease, astonish many people.
In my opinion the two of you have very active, imaginary and truth seeking brains and for that reason both of you will never be subdued by the other and is that not the first rule of broadening our minds. My rule has always been, accept 3% of what you hear and see, then put it all together and make up year mind on the information you have.
And as long as you both do not have a working wheel, it is likely you’re both wrong, (there is a slight chance that I may be wrong (no, never!))

[docfeelsgood]

Jim ;

I give you multiple "Atta Boy" !!!! 8>])

[CADMAN3D]

OK... This thread has annoyed me enough for me to quit my lurking and actually register just so I could post!

Am I the only one that sees the misunderstanding behind Jims technical question to Ralph? The "balance" refers to Ralph spinning a weight horizontally, attached only by a rope. This balance refers to the CF vs. gravity, which are nearly at right angles! In this case, yes- you would need to spin it faster to achieve a similar "radius" that you had with a lighter weight (essentially creating a "flat" spin).

Jim- you can only compare the CF equations you've referred to with the weight in question if they are pointing the same direction; if they are at any sort of angle, it doesn't really apply that way and a free body diagram is needed. To remind you, you said "He who admits his mistakes is honorable." I admit that it's easier to discuss technical issues with someone using the same terminology, but it's risky to assume that person doesn't know what they're talking about...

[rlortie]

Welcome to the forum CADMAN3D :-)

(more later)

Ralph

[jim_mich]

Cadman, welcome to the forum.

I'm sorry, but you are wrong! Your are suggesting a situation where horizontal CF balances against vertical gravity weight. So if you make the weights heavier then both CF and gravity weight change linearly and thus they will continue to balance. If you need a more detailed explanation in order to understand this then I can provide one.

Ralph's original scenario involved a "Fly-ball" governor with CF pulling against spring tension. The spring tension was assumed to be constant. If the weights are heavier they will produce more CF. In order for the greater CF to balance against a same spring tension the speed must slow down. With a slower speed and heavier weights the CF could remain in balance against the constant spring tension.

Ralph stated the opposite:

If weights were heavier it would take more velocity(RPM) to pull them to the rim and in balance.

Neither Ralph's scenario or Cadman's scenario require the weights to speed up to maintain balance.

[CADMAN3D]

If you need a more detailed explanation in order to understand this then I can provide one.

That's a good one Jim. I'm a Mechanical Engineer, a certified Professional Engineer licensed by the state, and I used to teach classes in 3D modeling and kinematic analysis software. When I get some more time to do a full free body diagram and post all the pictures of the balanced forces, I'll give you a more detailed explanation. But between working too much, neglecting my yard, finishing my basement... it could be some time.

I'm obviously new here, but I have lurked for a while, and while I've seen that you are right nearly all of the time with your technical explanations, I don't think it's right to belittle those who aren't as technical as you. And this is all a misunderstanding based on Ralphs nontechnical explanations.

Ironically, I agree that all of my training, and your technical knowledge also, will point us to the conclusion that an overbalanced wheel is not physically possible. I personally hope that we (you, me, Einstein, Newton, etc) are all missing something, which is why I venture around here occasionally also. Anyway, I probably started this on the wrong foot- I apologize if I sound smug myself- that's what annoyed me in the first place! As been stated originally, we're all dabblers with widely varying backgrounds that are seeking the same thing...

[jim_mich]

Cadman, if you go back and read the original postings that Ralph and I made you will see that this all got started by Ralph insulting me by saying that I was wrong. No matter how I tried to explain the situation he continued to insist that he was right. Instead of addressing the single technical point of whether the weights must speed up or slow down he would throw pages of crappy verbiage back at me. I guess that the problem was that Ralph didn't have enough technical knowledge to be able to discuss the subject.

One of the beefs I have with Ralph is that he puts himself forth as being "experienced"...

I am an ole' timer with many years of mechanical experience and over 50 of those years on gravity wheels and other forms of Over-unity under my belt.

On the other hand Ralph's posts make it quite clear that his "experience" has not made him an expert.

You will note that I do not go around insulting or belittling other members, only Ralph gets that special attention.

Cadman, when you first posted I was going to reply with a rather technical explanation. But I didn't know if you would have the knowledge and background to understand the post, so I made it as simple as I could. Now that I know your background we I discuss this on a higher level. Please take the time to examine what I've stated and you will see that I am right.

There have been times that I've posted things that turned out to be wrong. In those cases I've always admitted my mistakes.

[rlortie]

Ralph insulting me by saying that I was wrong.

There have been times that I've posted things that turned out to be wrong. In those cases I've always admitted my mistakes.

Almost comical to say the least, if I point out that you are wrong it is an insult, but if some one else brings it to your attention it is not considered an insult and you admit to your errors. Dam it feels good to be so recognized!

On the other hand Ralph's posts make it quite clear that his "experience" has not made him an expert.

Cannot recall that I ever put forth the image that my experience classified me as an expert. Can you point me in the correct direction to a Gravity wheel expert. I would most certainly love to talk to him.

You will note that I do not go around insulting or belittling other members, only Ralph gets that special attention.

It's nice to have someone to take your frustration out on. Maybe it's because you are not that much more of an expert than I. Or is it because you feel like "King of the hill" by belittling me with your dazzling compositions.

Lets do others a service and keep it in this thread. Do you think you could do that?

Ralph

[axel]

"Ironically, I agree that all of my training, and your technical knowledge also, will point us to the conclusion that an overbalanced wheel is not physically possible. I personally hope that we (you, me, Einstein, Newton, etc) are all missing something, which is why I venture around here occasionally also. Anyway, I probably started this on the wrong foot- I apologize if I sound smug myself- that's what annoyed me in the first place! As been stated originally, we're all dabblers with widely varying backgrounds that are seeking the same thing..."

Yes an overbalanced wheel is possible. It is the only solution.

All of you are arguing about points that don't matter.

Bessler's clues are not clues. They are for operations security, for the keen mind to either accept or reject.


Have a nice day.

[rlortie]

Jim_Mich


Experience: A.. Activity or practice through which knowledge or skill is gained. B.. Knowledge or skill so derived.

Expert: A.. A person with a high degree of skill in or knowledge of a certain subject or field. B.. highly skilled or knowledgeable.

Where as I do not have the knowledge of a working wheel, I am not an expert!

Experience by process of eliminating that which is knowledgeable may someday qualify someone with expertise to discover Bessler's secret, or prove he was a fraud! If accomplished then I would consider that person an expert.

You claim to accept being refuted by others, but coming from me it is an insult and makes you mad. Why is that? Do you feel insulted to have someone of my knowledge question you, or is it a petty personal biased
frame of mind???

You claim it makes you mad when I say you are wrong. Yet more than once you have told me I was wrong, and I should accept your opinion without debate. Is that because you are an expert??

You intentionality look for faults in my posts and do so without ever comprehending the gist or essence of what I write. You have just recently proved that point on another thread.

The consensus says that I should simply consider the source and ignore you. Problem is, I believe someone should bring your belligerent egotistical frame of mind to your attention for your own good. :-)

Ralph

[rlortie]

Axel,

"Ironically, I agree that all of my training, and your technical knowledge also, will point us to the conclusion that an overbalanced wheel is not physically possible.

It may point that way but to accept it is a forgone conclusion, a submission of surrender. I, as John Collins and others believe the answer still lurks out there somewhere. "Seek and Ye shall find"

Ralph

[FunWithGravity]

IT IS POSSIBLE !!!!!

[Michael]

Too bad this thread couldn't end with a photo of a smiling Jim sharing a nice steak dinner with a smiling Ralph at a picnic table in a park at somewhere, U.S.A.