Agor95
Sorry all I am not getting this one yet - I have a head cold; However does this simple understanding help?
A ball rolls down a ramp because of a force which is parallel and vertical [gravity]. The ball increases in momentum due to this reason.
What happens when the force is radial? In this case the ramp is in the form of a spiral. The force being CF, does not the ball gain momentum?
I think pucks are moving along a spiral due to the strings instead of a ramp?
energy producing experiments
Moderator: scott
re: energy producing experiments
You are right greendoor electronic equipment can be challenging at times. The DV port on the DVD recorder, which communicates with my camcorder, went out. The ninety dollar memory upgrade on the computer did not seem to speed things up either. The only visual equipment that works well, for now, is my camera. I can post about two pictures at a time.
I used a suspended dropping mass off of the big wheel for a uniform velocity; the suspended mass hits the floor about the time that the ribbon releases the tab on the gray puck.
In picture one the white disk and gray puck are achieving maximum velocity. It appears that the tab on the puck has already pulled out from underneath the ribbon. I can see I need to improve this release system. The suspended mass on the big wheel will soon hit the floor and the disk and puck and wheel will gain no more velocity.
The second picture is a different run of the same set up. I just take a lot of pictures and then try to arrange them in the appropriate order. But this is a different event and not near as good as a frame but frame evaluation that can be achieved with a video, I will have to replace my DVD recorder.
The second picture shows the puck (with glaring white tab) coming clear of its seat but it has not yet passed under the ribbon. The ribbon is not loose because the momentum of the big wheel is pulling on it. The white disk is slowing down because the gray puck is pulling on it. As the white disk slows down the momentum of the wheel pulls on the disk through the ribbon. There is a dark line between the two layers of plastic; this is a carpenter’s mark not the fishing line. The fishing line is harder to see.
I used a suspended dropping mass off of the big wheel for a uniform velocity; the suspended mass hits the floor about the time that the ribbon releases the tab on the gray puck.
In picture one the white disk and gray puck are achieving maximum velocity. It appears that the tab on the puck has already pulled out from underneath the ribbon. I can see I need to improve this release system. The suspended mass on the big wheel will soon hit the floor and the disk and puck and wheel will gain no more velocity.
The second picture is a different run of the same set up. I just take a lot of pictures and then try to arrange them in the appropriate order. But this is a different event and not near as good as a frame but frame evaluation that can be achieved with a video, I will have to replace my DVD recorder.
The second picture shows the puck (with glaring white tab) coming clear of its seat but it has not yet passed under the ribbon. The ribbon is not loose because the momentum of the big wheel is pulling on it. The white disk is slowing down because the gray puck is pulling on it. As the white disk slows down the momentum of the wheel pulls on the disk through the ribbon. There is a dark line between the two layers of plastic; this is a carpenter’s mark not the fishing line. The fishing line is harder to see.
- Attachments
-
-
re: energy producing experiments
In picture three the puck is headed under the ribbon, the ribbon is still taut. Note the black square on the white disk, there is a small angular increase of this square between picture three and picture four. The tightness of the ribbon and the angular advancement of the square means the big wheel is still turning.
Shortly after picture four the big wheel and the ribbon and the white disk are stopped. The fishing line enters an open area and is attached nearer to the bearing. This closer attachment of the line causes the momentum exchanges to occur more slowly. Since the gray puck is not released it will reaccelerate the white disk in the same direction.
By picture five there is a large angular change in the black square as the puck reaccelerates the white disk. It will not restart the wheel however because the ribbon is limp, it can not push the wheel. There is not a uniform period of time between photos
I removed 448g from the big wheel because the white disk and wheel could not be stopped when the gray puck was fully extended. The length of line is a determining factor in how much mass the puck can stop. Longer lines can stop greater quantities of mass because the time over which the force acts has increase. This is not because of angular momentum conservation; remember you could use a twenty meter big wheel and then the puck would have to be moving at bullet speed to conserve angular momentum.
A few obvious improvements should be made in the experiment. I hope to build two electronic releases; one for a pinpoint release position of the puck from the seat of the white disk. And then I would like to release the puck from the rest of the system when the white disk and big wheel are stopped. This would leave the puck moving in a straight line (apparently) headed for the back wall. I also think the dropping mass can be incorporated in the mass of the wheel itself. Then the challenge would be to release the gray puck toward the back wall at precisely the same time that the white disk is stopped and the wheel is stopped with the extra mass at six o’clock. And then of course I should place the photo gates between the release point and the back wall.
Shortly after picture four the big wheel and the ribbon and the white disk are stopped. The fishing line enters an open area and is attached nearer to the bearing. This closer attachment of the line causes the momentum exchanges to occur more slowly. Since the gray puck is not released it will reaccelerate the white disk in the same direction.
By picture five there is a large angular change in the black square as the puck reaccelerates the white disk. It will not restart the wheel however because the ribbon is limp, it can not push the wheel. There is not a uniform period of time between photos
I removed 448g from the big wheel because the white disk and wheel could not be stopped when the gray puck was fully extended. The length of line is a determining factor in how much mass the puck can stop. Longer lines can stop greater quantities of mass because the time over which the force acts has increase. This is not because of angular momentum conservation; remember you could use a twenty meter big wheel and then the puck would have to be moving at bullet speed to conserve angular momentum.
A few obvious improvements should be made in the experiment. I hope to build two electronic releases; one for a pinpoint release position of the puck from the seat of the white disk. And then I would like to release the puck from the rest of the system when the white disk and big wheel are stopped. This would leave the puck moving in a straight line (apparently) headed for the back wall. I also think the dropping mass can be incorporated in the mass of the wheel itself. Then the challenge would be to release the gray puck toward the back wall at precisely the same time that the white disk is stopped and the wheel is stopped with the extra mass at six o’clock. And then of course I should place the photo gates between the release point and the back wall.
- Attachments
-
-
-
re: energy producing experiments
Fletcher, I would be delighted if people would repeat any of the experiments. I endeavor to give enough detail to make replication possible. I would not see replication as a form of distrust, but only as good science. And the simpler experiments of the ‘cylinder and spheres’ or the ‘disk and pucks on the air table’ should not be passed up. Their lack of bearings makes them deadly accurate, and they are inexpensive. Their low mass makes them susceptible to air resistance, but you design the experiments different ways: slow and small with no bearings, faster and bigger while using bearing, etc
re: energy producing experiments
That's good to hear Pequaide - have you been able to think of a way to use this concept in a wheel or self-setting rotational environment as ralph requested, before he would attempt a formal build ?
re: energy producing experiments
Fletcher; I think useful cycling units would employ a smooth steel track. The puck would be a car with a mass of several tons. The big wheel would be about 5 meters with a mass of 40 metric tons. When given the motion of the big wheel the new white disk could cast the car up along the rising track 20 meters. Only a few of those 20 meters would be needed to restart the motion. The remaining motion would be a steel fall ready to be used for energy generation.
The question would be: how much do the original energy producing machines need to look like the larger power plants to get a university or corporation to build the power plant.
I don’t think it is necessary to show that an object moving at a certain velocity will rise a certain distance. We have a formula for that, d =1/2v²/a.
If you drop a 300g object .2 meters we know exactly how much energy we have used. .2 = .5 * v² / 9.81 or v = 1.98 m/sec. Ke = ½ * .300kg * 1.98 *1.98 = .588 joules. If the .456 kg gray puck is headed for the back wall with a velocity of 3.54 m/sec, and it has been sent there by the .300 kg dropping mass then we know that the energy in the system has increased. I personally don’t believe we have to catch (as in a pendulum) the puck and make it rise, or make it roll up a track. It can be done of course, but it seems excessive.
The 300 grams of over balance causes the wheel 2,200g (rotational inertia, its actual mass is 3,400g), the white disk 300g (again rotational inertia), and the puck 456g to acquire a certain momentum. All that momentum is given to the puck were upon Newtonian physics requires that the energy of the system has increased greatly. The cylinder and spheres, the disk with pucks on an air table, the three wheels, they all make energy. The three wheels look most like the power plant. Build any one you like.
The question would be: how much do the original energy producing machines need to look like the larger power plants to get a university or corporation to build the power plant.
I don’t think it is necessary to show that an object moving at a certain velocity will rise a certain distance. We have a formula for that, d =1/2v²/a.
If you drop a 300g object .2 meters we know exactly how much energy we have used. .2 = .5 * v² / 9.81 or v = 1.98 m/sec. Ke = ½ * .300kg * 1.98 *1.98 = .588 joules. If the .456 kg gray puck is headed for the back wall with a velocity of 3.54 m/sec, and it has been sent there by the .300 kg dropping mass then we know that the energy in the system has increased. I personally don’t believe we have to catch (as in a pendulum) the puck and make it rise, or make it roll up a track. It can be done of course, but it seems excessive.
The 300 grams of over balance causes the wheel 2,200g (rotational inertia, its actual mass is 3,400g), the white disk 300g (again rotational inertia), and the puck 456g to acquire a certain momentum. All that momentum is given to the puck were upon Newtonian physics requires that the energy of the system has increased greatly. The cylinder and spheres, the disk with pucks on an air table, the three wheels, they all make energy. The three wheels look most like the power plant. Build any one you like.
-
georgexbailey
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:49 pm
re: energy producing experiments
pequaid - your math proves to you that energy is created. For thousands of years man has attempted to create a perpetual motion machine. If your math is right, the key to perpetual motion and creation of energy has been solved.
But, it is time to prove the math is correct with a real world experiment. Many, many people have created a self sustaining system on paper. No one has done it in the real world. You claim that the puck has enough energy to reset itself. So, let's make this happen.
Many here, including myself, will build a setup to prove your math. The problem is, we don't know what to build. Please humor us and think of a way to incorporate your energy producing wheels into a system that will reset itself and continue to operate.
GB
But, it is time to prove the math is correct with a real world experiment. Many, many people have created a self sustaining system on paper. No one has done it in the real world. You claim that the puck has enough energy to reset itself. So, let's make this happen.
Many here, including myself, will build a setup to prove your math. The problem is, we don't know what to build. Please humor us and think of a way to incorporate your energy producing wheels into a system that will reset itself and continue to operate.
GB
re: energy producing experiments
Pequaide,
Another evasive question to avoid the issue. A self sustained machine doe not have to look like anything but what ever they look like. Size is not an issue. In fact you would probably require one that you can set on the patent appeals board speaker podium. One that would fit in a large size briefcase.
There is no need to concern yourself with Universities or corporations, they will beat a path to your door once you prove you have something of interest.
Ralph
The question would be: how much do the original energy producing machines need to look like the larger power plants to get a university or corporation to build the power plant.
Another evasive question to avoid the issue. A self sustained machine doe not have to look like anything but what ever they look like. Size is not an issue. In fact you would probably require one that you can set on the patent appeals board speaker podium. One that would fit in a large size briefcase.
There is no need to concern yourself with Universities or corporations, they will beat a path to your door once you prove you have something of interest.
So we should all buy an air actuated hockey table so we can watch pucks act like a power plant. How much energy is consumed by the air supply and how do we capture the alleged net gain?The cylinder and spheres, the disk with pucks on an air table, the three wheels, they all make energy. The three wheels look most like the power plant. Build any one you like.
Ralph
rlortie - please don't be snide - it serves no purpose.
If there is a basic overunity energy principle, it has to be proven in a repeatable, simple experiment. I believe that is what pequaide is presenting to us, although I admit I don't understand it yet. Years of conditioning are hard to break.
Simple experiments at home are typically flawed by poor designs with excessive friction. I'm sure the hockey table is simply a means of removing friction from the picture. Once we can see the principle in action, and IF there are sizable energy gains, we should be able to use conventional lossy bearings since wasting a percentage of free energy is never a problem. So the issue about the energy requirement of the hockey table is a red herring, and you know it.
If there is a basic overunity energy principle, it has to be proven in a repeatable, simple experiment. I believe that is what pequaide is presenting to us, although I admit I don't understand it yet. Years of conditioning are hard to break.
Simple experiments at home are typically flawed by poor designs with excessive friction. I'm sure the hockey table is simply a means of removing friction from the picture. Once we can see the principle in action, and IF there are sizable energy gains, we should be able to use conventional lossy bearings since wasting a percentage of free energy is never a problem. So the issue about the energy requirement of the hockey table is a red herring, and you know it.
re: energy producing experiments
Greendoor,
Sorry if you interpret my input as 'snide'. I consider it an attempt to make a point.
We now have six pages of disks,cylinders and hockey pucks with pleas to give an example for an experimental build. The best thing to a response I have seen so far is to perform the experiments on a hockey table that looks like a generating plant, and to build as we like.
I already have the air table, it is the "off bearing table for my 10" cabinet saw. I can float a full 4 X 8' sheet of plywood on it. I am also astute at building low friction magnetic bearings. What I cannot do is understand how this is going to help in a power producing device, wheel or otherwise.
Sorry but I believe I have heard enough of the hypothesis and theoretical input, I am a nut and bolt man with wrench in hand, If there is an experimental build here, I do not see it.
The least I would expect is a direct response to Fletcher, I and others who have asked a direct question which have all been subtly ignored.
If pequaide wishes my respect all he has to do is say 'No I do not know how to utilize my theory' and I shall move on.
Ralph
Sorry if you interpret my input as 'snide'. I consider it an attempt to make a point.
We now have six pages of disks,cylinders and hockey pucks with pleas to give an example for an experimental build. The best thing to a response I have seen so far is to perform the experiments on a hockey table that looks like a generating plant, and to build as we like.
I already have the air table, it is the "off bearing table for my 10" cabinet saw. I can float a full 4 X 8' sheet of plywood on it. I am also astute at building low friction magnetic bearings. What I cannot do is understand how this is going to help in a power producing device, wheel or otherwise.
Sorry but I believe I have heard enough of the hypothesis and theoretical input, I am a nut and bolt man with wrench in hand, If there is an experimental build here, I do not see it.
The least I would expect is a direct response to Fletcher, I and others who have asked a direct question which have all been subtly ignored.
If pequaide wishes my respect all he has to do is say 'No I do not know how to utilize my theory' and I shall move on.
Ralph
I am embarrassed to say I still don't understand the dynamics of the Pequaide "discovery". Not sure what exactly moves where and how it creates usable energy.
A sketch with arrows saying: this spins here, is pulled out to here would be a great help to clarify things.
Then maybe a model would be possible. Maybe I haven't read the posts intently enough.
A sketch with arrows saying: this spins here, is pulled out to here would be a great help to clarify things.
Then maybe a model would be possible. Maybe I haven't read the posts intently enough.
re: energy producing experiments
I think I understand the "Atwood concept" and what pequaide is driving at with the "accumulated" momentum due to a lesser mass causing the overbalance.
The mechanical arrangement needed to implement the tranfer is not so easy to arrive at.
Basically, if we stop the wheel rotating after half a revolution, and give all its momentum to the overbalanced mass, it will be capable of rising to a height greater than that which it started from.
I assume this means the mass is to leave the wheel at 6 o'clock and re-attach at 12 o'clock.
As the mass contains more than enough energy to do this, we can tap some of the excess for our own use.
When we experiment with a Newton's Cradle, the falling mass is stopped by transferring its momentum to an EQUAL mass. What we need to happen is for muliple balls to be stopped by transferring all their momentum to a SINGLE ball!
Hmmm...can that be done?
What about a lever?
I suppose I'm thinking along the lines of the "Ring the Bell" fairground
challenge.
However, the receiving/transferring mechanism would also have to allow the wheel to rotate again on the next cycle, although I suppose if the wheel is starting from zero rpm again it could travel in the opposite direction, giving the possibility to a dual direction receiver mech.
Regards
Mick
The mechanical arrangement needed to implement the tranfer is not so easy to arrive at.
Basically, if we stop the wheel rotating after half a revolution, and give all its momentum to the overbalanced mass, it will be capable of rising to a height greater than that which it started from.
I assume this means the mass is to leave the wheel at 6 o'clock and re-attach at 12 o'clock.
As the mass contains more than enough energy to do this, we can tap some of the excess for our own use.
When we experiment with a Newton's Cradle, the falling mass is stopped by transferring its momentum to an EQUAL mass. What we need to happen is for muliple balls to be stopped by transferring all their momentum to a SINGLE ball!
Hmmm...can that be done?
What about a lever?
I suppose I'm thinking along the lines of the "Ring the Bell" fairground
challenge.
However, the receiving/transferring mechanism would also have to allow the wheel to rotate again on the next cycle, although I suppose if the wheel is starting from zero rpm again it could travel in the opposite direction, giving the possibility to a dual direction receiver mech.
Regards
Mick
-
georgexbailey
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:49 pm
re: energy producing experiments
Just trying to understand momentum transfer...
If you put a small weight on a wheel at 1:00 it will turn the wheel until it stops at 10:45 (approx).
Is the wheel not using it's momentum to try to lift the weight back up?
Is this different from transfering the momentum from the big wheel to the puck?
-gb
If you put a small weight on a wheel at 1:00 it will turn the wheel until it stops at 10:45 (approx).
Is the wheel not using it's momentum to try to lift the weight back up?
Is this different from transfering the momentum from the big wheel to the puck?
-gb
re: energy producing experiments
Yes georgexbailey it is different. Let’s say the rim mass wheel is nine kilograms and the extra mass is one kilogram. And let’s say that the distance from 11:00 o’clock to 6 o’clock is one meter. If the one kilogram is suspended from a string off the one side of the wheel’s circumference it will accelerate with an F = ma relationship. Since the overbalance mass will return to the original position (under perfect conditions), we can assume the attached velocity at 6 o’clock is the same as the suspended velocity of the same quantity of mass dropped the same distance. If this is true the wheel is moving 1.4007 m/sec when it reaches 6 o’clock. If the mass is left on the wheel it will impart the same magnitude of acceleration upon the wheel as when it was dropped, but of course in the opposite direction. So the overbalanced mass will rise one meter.
But at 6 o’clock the wheel of ten kilograms has a velocity of 1.4007 m/sec, which is 14.007 units of momentum. We know that all of that motion can be given to the one kilogram by using what NASA called the yo-yo de-spin device or what I call the cylinder and spheres phenomenon. If Newton’s Three Laws of Motion apply to this system, or if momentum is conserved, the velocity of the one kilogram when it is given all the motion will be 14.007 m/sec. At 14.007 m/sec the object will rise 10 meters. d = ½ v²/a
Rlortie’s Build. I don’t think making energy in the lab is an insignificant advancement. It would be one the most valuable scientific achievement in history; it would have to rank up there with the invention of the wheel and the control of fire. Of course it must be followed by functional machines, but you could not prevent that if you tried. You will have to bolt the doors to keep from getting trampled to death.
You could make a larger version of the disk and pucks on your air table (pictured on page five) and then move up from there. These same pucks and disk can be used in later more complex experiments.
Your air table is over four times larger than mine. I purchased mine out of a scientific catalog. The overall size of the table determines how large your disk and pucks and lines can be. So you can multiply your disk and puck and string dimensions by four, I had a disk of 7 inches and the pucks were 70 mm. Possibly more important than over all size is the distance between the air table holes, mine are 17.5 mm. If your holes are greater that four times that you may wish to make the pucks a little larger to keep the same number of holes under the puck. The disk is much larger anyway and the disk size should be no problem.
You said that your table would float plywood. Keep the mass to area relationship of your disk and pucks in the neighborhood of the same mass to area relationship of the plywood and everything should still float. Facing your plywood with a sheet of smooth cabinet top sheeting (Linoleum) would probably not make the puck and disk to massive to slide. Cut out seats at 180° for the pucks to rest inside the edge of the disk. Connect a string to each puck to hold it in place while you are accelerating the system clockwise. A small upright wall in the middle of the disk works great for accelerating the disk with your fingers and at the same time holding the strings that keeps the pucks in their seats. Wrap another string clockwise off each puck and drape it over a short inset pin on the circumference of the disk. Place this short inset pin somewhere closer to the other puck seat with both strings being of equal length. Seat an upright pin in the top middle of the disk which is also the middle of the wall, which is the position of the screw drive in the pictured disk and pucks on page 5. Loop the string or fishing line so that loop is held by the pin while the puck is seated, superglue helps with this micro adjustment of the loop. Glue the line back on itself, it work great.
You are now ready to spin the disk with the pucks seated against the disk. After you start the spin release the pucks. As the pucks swing out and pass the inset pins pull the center pin and both pucks will move away on two straight line paths. You may have to adjust the mass of the disk to get the disk to stop just as the pucks clear the pin, or you may have to make the lines longer or shorter by moving the inset pin position. A shorter line will stop less disk mass and a longer line will stop more disk mass. You can time the experiment using video tapes moving frame by frame, or you can use strobe light photography.
If you establish that Newton is correct and that the momentum of the system is held by the pucks, then you can stretch your system into the three wheels. The pucks are the puck, the disk is the white disk, and the big wheel can be introduced off the edge of the table. With the use of your magnetic bearings and your air table you should be able to make a fairly friction free system.
But at 6 o’clock the wheel of ten kilograms has a velocity of 1.4007 m/sec, which is 14.007 units of momentum. We know that all of that motion can be given to the one kilogram by using what NASA called the yo-yo de-spin device or what I call the cylinder and spheres phenomenon. If Newton’s Three Laws of Motion apply to this system, or if momentum is conserved, the velocity of the one kilogram when it is given all the motion will be 14.007 m/sec. At 14.007 m/sec the object will rise 10 meters. d = ½ v²/a
Rlortie’s Build. I don’t think making energy in the lab is an insignificant advancement. It would be one the most valuable scientific achievement in history; it would have to rank up there with the invention of the wheel and the control of fire. Of course it must be followed by functional machines, but you could not prevent that if you tried. You will have to bolt the doors to keep from getting trampled to death.
You could make a larger version of the disk and pucks on your air table (pictured on page five) and then move up from there. These same pucks and disk can be used in later more complex experiments.
Your air table is over four times larger than mine. I purchased mine out of a scientific catalog. The overall size of the table determines how large your disk and pucks and lines can be. So you can multiply your disk and puck and string dimensions by four, I had a disk of 7 inches and the pucks were 70 mm. Possibly more important than over all size is the distance between the air table holes, mine are 17.5 mm. If your holes are greater that four times that you may wish to make the pucks a little larger to keep the same number of holes under the puck. The disk is much larger anyway and the disk size should be no problem.
You said that your table would float plywood. Keep the mass to area relationship of your disk and pucks in the neighborhood of the same mass to area relationship of the plywood and everything should still float. Facing your plywood with a sheet of smooth cabinet top sheeting (Linoleum) would probably not make the puck and disk to massive to slide. Cut out seats at 180° for the pucks to rest inside the edge of the disk. Connect a string to each puck to hold it in place while you are accelerating the system clockwise. A small upright wall in the middle of the disk works great for accelerating the disk with your fingers and at the same time holding the strings that keeps the pucks in their seats. Wrap another string clockwise off each puck and drape it over a short inset pin on the circumference of the disk. Place this short inset pin somewhere closer to the other puck seat with both strings being of equal length. Seat an upright pin in the top middle of the disk which is also the middle of the wall, which is the position of the screw drive in the pictured disk and pucks on page 5. Loop the string or fishing line so that loop is held by the pin while the puck is seated, superglue helps with this micro adjustment of the loop. Glue the line back on itself, it work great.
You are now ready to spin the disk with the pucks seated against the disk. After you start the spin release the pucks. As the pucks swing out and pass the inset pins pull the center pin and both pucks will move away on two straight line paths. You may have to adjust the mass of the disk to get the disk to stop just as the pucks clear the pin, or you may have to make the lines longer or shorter by moving the inset pin position. A shorter line will stop less disk mass and a longer line will stop more disk mass. You can time the experiment using video tapes moving frame by frame, or you can use strobe light photography.
If you establish that Newton is correct and that the momentum of the system is held by the pucks, then you can stretch your system into the three wheels. The pucks are the puck, the disk is the white disk, and the big wheel can be introduced off the edge of the table. With the use of your magnetic bearings and your air table you should be able to make a fairly friction free system.
Re: re: energy producing experiments
Sadly, I can't see the difference either. Sorry pequaide, I just don't follow your explanation of how this is different. As far as I can tell, you are making some HUGE assumptions that really worry me ...georgexbailey wrote:Just trying to understand momentum transfer...
If you put a small weight on a wheel at 1:00 it will turn the wheel until it stops at 10:45 (approx).
Is the wheel not using it's momentum to try to lift the weight back up?
Is this different from transfering the momentum from the big wheel to the puck?
-gb
Sorry - I can't assume this. It seems very clear to me that the same mass in vertical free fall will accelerate far quicker in the same distance than that mass attached to a massive flywheel.we can assume the attached velocity at 6 o’clock is the same as the suspended velocity of the same quantity of mass dropped the same distance.
At some point, a flywheel could be so massive that the added small mass can't rotate it at all, due to inertia. AFAIK - the actual velocity achieved by hanging a small mass off a massive balanced flywheel could be anywhere on a contiinuum from 0 to free-fall velocity. Your maths seem t be based on the assumption that the same free-fall velocity is always achieved, and I just don't see it. Surely you are forgeting inertia??
I think I can see why you are interested in the cylinder & spheres - it seems like a way of transfering practically all the momentum of a spinning cylinder into much smaller spheres. Since momentum is conserved, those lower-mass sphere will have to be accelerated to a much higher velocity, which must look impressive. This is probably more efficient than impact, which has losses due to elasticity and heat, sound, etc. However - if there are large energy gains as you suggest, then some ineffiency can be tolerated. I expect the Bessler wheel was not the most efficient device - but it had the secret of free energy, so it didn't matter.
Still looking for the answers ... pequaide, I trust you can answer these questions, because you have obviously done a lot of research and have a much deeper understanding of physics than I do - i'm just an engineer.
Anything not related to elephants is irrelephant.