Non cycle or rotational speed dependant applied torque

[Quartz]

John Lindsay

You have a vary interesting approach, it sounds like you have heeded Bessler’s warning greed is an evil root , this torque twisting you talk of reminds me of the toy page the bottom figure with the two men that seem to be twisted around them self’s , I like the way you think, your defiantly not thinking in the box, I look forward to more of your post’s.


The Same goes for you Mr FunWithGravity


Ken

[Michael]

Form is the envelope of pulse

John where did you find that saying?

[Quartz]

Michael

I know what you mean because, Bessler said the motive force, the ability to move itself and drive other objects makes up the FORM of the device" ... The "essence" I see a lot of paralleles here.

Ken

[John Lindsay]

Thank you Ken. And Michael, the quote "Form is the envelope of pulse" comes from a book entitled Sacred Geometry, which is well worth checking out if you get a chance. John

[Quartz]

Hi FunWithGravity

You asked John Lindsay

“Can you post some pictures or drawings so we can see if we built the same wheel? My problem with shortening the time frame appears to result in uncontolled RPM. I will probably shorten to control overrevving.�

Can you post some pictures or drawings for us to see?

What your working on sounds vary interesting.


Thanks

Ken

[John Lindsay]

I can't post any drawings at the moment. What I can say is that one can move weights around that are odds with each other and try different arrangements "until the cows come home" (as my parents used to say) and keep coming up with the usual equal and opposite scenario. A part of me said "Keep looking!" So I did. I showed this concept to a mechanical engineer for a second opinion and he said my theory is correct. I modified my original idea to a freefall scenario which keeps getting recycled, so to speak. My point is that there are imaginative avenues that we can all explore. This was an area that I had made a note of that had potential. You just have to "Keep looking". Best regards, John

[FunWithGravity]

There it is
"So I did. I showed this concept to a mechanical engineer for a second opinion and he said my theory is correct. "
NOONE needs to have something that works checked. Another paper idea, sorry i thought we were on the same page, You are right we are not.

[John Lindsay]

Sir FWG, have fun with whatever you have come up with. There is nothing "wrong" with a sound design that will do something surprising relative to conventional thoughts on force and share it with some one else in the know for the fun of it, even if you haven't built it yet. One "paper" design that has the obvious potential to do something out of the ordinary with energy is personally priceless to me relative to an infinite pile of nonworking redundant constructions. I'm just reporting what I have found with the gift of curiosity. J

[pequaide]

Lindsay quote: Two weights are at odds with each other in a way that one wins over the other.

Lindsay quote: In other words this torque will keep being applied whether the wheel is going 30 rpm or 3000 and it will keep accelerating if no work is being done. It doesn't care what speed it is going, the same amount of twist stays the same. This is based on the accelerating force of gravity … and the different tensions involved when a larger weight is at odds with a smaller one.

This constant acceleration and opposing masses are demonstrated in an Atwood’s machine. In an Atwood’s a small overbalanced dropping mass can give you a huge quantity of momentum. If all that momentum is placed into the overbalanced mass (at the bottom) the small mass will rise far higher than what it was dropped. The time of rise and fall of the unbalanced mass are the same be the height is far different.

I don’t think it will be long now; we will soon have free energy.