one of the machines with the math

[the eskimo quinn]

if you cant understand this grade 5 math, then you should give up the game, anyone who debunks this is oil or an idiot, a panel of aerospace engineers mechanics and physics professionals has already agreed it is correct.

Gentlemen (and ladies) start your engines

http://surphzup.com/gpage.html

[AB Hammer]

Well I read what you wrote.

Pardon me, but you are sounding like a vacuum cleaner salesman. The way you wrote it out is how vacuum cleaner salesmen are taught to sell.

So to my point! Until I see the product I am not buying, especially when I have my own wheels. And I know what they can do.

[axel]

I read what you wrote too.

It is my opinion that your device cannot even stand on piss soaked hind legs.

I have had plenty of experiences to know, so don't challenge me on that point.

Axel.

[the eskimo quinn]

Some bastard just posted photos on the site, how could that be (coz i it doesnt really exist right?

[MrTim]

Friction is a variable and is the last variable of all. (..more..) This is why we never argue math in friction, it cannot be done, because it is unknown!!!

There are tables in any good machinist's handbook that show the co-efficients of friction between various materials. So it is not unknown.

[ovyyus]

Quinn's math is hilarious :D

I can't wait to hear the clown's excuse when his two "already working PM's" are found to be a big fat lie.

[AB Hammer]

@the eskimo quinn

Well I see aluminum tubing, and a table. I have aluminum tubing in my shop and I know allot of people who use them as tent poles as well.
I have followed this for awhile, and I haven't seen anything to get excited about so far. I was ready just to wait until June 20 but there has been so much talk and even some attempt by others and still nothing. It is building a great question mark in my thoughts. And the name (the eskimo quinn). When I think of Eskimos I think of snow. So unless there are two of you. You where suppose to have built this before, and you have no photos of what you have done or any video of it running? And now we have to wait for you to build it again?
I hope you understand why I am talking to you, because you have received much flack and some praise, with your presentations. But please take the all the time you need to get it done.

[the eskimo quinn]

the eskimo quinn by manfred man.

Ok you have seen orbo yes?? two centimetres of what?? and millions of dollars? and you would give some tube and stcky tape more crdibility than that? No neither would I, and that is the problem, if you kill it the first time round, the lazerus trick is even more difficult than perpetual motion itself.

I once saw a current affairs show about a crooked car yard, turns out it was the wrong yard, and the guy whop acted furious was reacting as he should. yet even after the correction and apology, the yard still closed down. most people just surf the tv and dont get to see the retractions, or some will think it was withdrawn for legal reason and the guy is still a crook. This is too great to be buried by over excitement. I can take the hits until then.

Go and check the site regularly you will start to see it clearly even before the date.

I'll give you a hint not on the site and not seen in the pictures, glue/skewer weld a cow a pig a car a duck 200 kgs of frozen elephant shit in a wiggly line and put it on a fulcrum point, what do you have? (apart from hilarious) a lever! a lever is a lever is a lever, every drawing you ever saw was of a flat plane in a straight line. and that was mankinds greatest error. it impedes the ability to do a far better job when correctly shaped. I simply saw what some lazy egyptian probably saw. watch and you shall see

[arthur]

quinn,

if this is your design -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRRzVHLs4bU&NR=1

you're not the first person to think of this.

[the eskimo quinn]

It is a good graphic to illustrate movement, but it seems a little offecentre and would never work, the magnetic wall prevents this, and if you read my site you would know this, seperation of mechanics is what makes mine possible, and using leverage "NEVER used before in the over rotation of extended arms past the magnetic field point. design of arms is available on the site.

No it is not my grahpic. but it's still a good effeort and shows the basic movement of the rods but lacks any mechanicla design.

[arthur]

If we have an aerial (well above ground) Fulcrum Beam that has a short section past the pivot of 1 metre and an extended section of 5 metres, with a radial arc equating to 2 metres dead fall (straight down not the arc length) on the short end, will equate to almost 8 metres of vertical travel ( not the length of the arc) on the extended end. We will make it harder on ourselves and call it 8 full metres

quinn,

vertical travel on the extended end will actually be 10 meters, not 8.

[the eskimo quinn]

time for you to get a string and put some marks on it, then draw a center line and swing down to around 4 oclock and equally the other way, it isnt 8 meters.

Sorry, you may accidently be think of a wheel though, a fulcrum swing to move the short end two metre is from 8 oclock to 10 oclock, the opposing side is alway 4 oclock at the drop, just further way. you have rotated too far as if it were a wheel, forgetting the short end is only moving two metres.

[the eskimo quinn]

it is actually less than 7 metres i will load a graphic later on the page to show this.

I use 8 metres for hieght and fricton coverage in the math just to qavoid the silly friction converstaion for something that does not exist in the machines function (if you have read that far inthe math, new updates all day as i take abreak from building.)

[arthur]

If we have an aerial (well above ground) Fulcrum Beam that has a short section past the pivot of 1 metre and an extended section of 5 metres, with a radial arc equating to 2 metres dead fall (straight down not the arc length) on the short end, will equate to almost 8 metres of vertical travel ( not the length of the arc) on the extended end. We will make it harder on ourselves and call it 8 full metres.

I'll re-phrase this.
you talking about:

A beam on a pivot:
...................
Extending 1 meter past the pivot on the short side
&
5 meters past the pivot on the long side.
===================
The long side will always travel 5 times the vertical distance of the short side.

If the short end of the beam travels 2 vertical meters, the extended end of the beam travels 10 vertical meters,
NOT 7, or 8 !!!!!

http://img232.imageshack.us/my.php?imag ... 533jh4.png

Quinn,
please get your facts straight.

[the eskimo quinn]

you are in fact correct, my machine has an unusual shape to it that makes the actual dish hit the 2 metre point, but the other still runs at 8 metres weird I know. it sounds like the fulcrum is longer than 2 metres but the lift and leverage point is not. Now is when you say hey mate if is on that side of the fulcrum at that distance then thats all these is to it.

normally yes, but not when one half of the dish support is sitting over the axel. Sorry no math for that anywhere, but I am not so arrogant to not admit a posting error and i shall fix it, for it is meant to be base math, so i will have to note that the dish is extended to that point not the arm and is not fully supported by leverage, rather half is suported by centre of gravity.

Well spotted