PM "leitmotiv"...

[iacob alex]

...in the long history of human imagination,as the development of a musical theme,has a diversity of key words/"notes".

To compose your personal opinion,regarding this topic ,everybody has a plenty of words,ans so many designs...looking on net.

One persistent "leitmotiv" is that of "simple hinged arm " imagine (Honnecourt,Taccola,da Vinci,Bessler and others).

Here,in my opinion,we have some "key notes" to develop the "music"...

All the best! / Alex

[iacob alex]

.....in the folklore of PM is that of "simple hinged arm" (Honnecourt,Taccola,da Vinci,Bessler and others),as you can easy notice,in the history of this obsessive "dream".

The recently gravity wheel of Mikhail Dmitriyev,is a 1438 redivivus model,shape...intended to work due to his proposal(addition of two inclined planes)....maybe yes,maybe no.

The problem is that a "leitmotiv" is a "skeletal idea/simple line",something usually unseen on the "surface of a shape"...a kind of minimum minimorum.

But as a paradox,this time..."tout est ouvert "...

All the best! / Alex

[iacob alex]

.....to be short ,is the variable arm.

Playing variable arm,we really play the variable torque difference (regarding the mass, the system is "conservative":nothing goes "in" or "out").

In a natural model (Earth-Moon),the variability is due to gravity atraction and rotational effect.

In the "folklore" of PM ,there are a lot of solutions,but the most predominant is the hinged arm (a "pure" mechanical one...)

All the best! / Alex

[iacob alex]

.....or the "traditional" design (a kind of "folklore"),in the long history of PM ,you can see at :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohap0KAo7kE

In my opinion,it can be a good starting point ,if:

-we "cut"/simplify it (see "MT13 digest...")

-we use a heavy hub as inertial storage (see <The "missing" body...?!" )

-we minimize the top commutation path (see <The "missing" self...> )

All the best! / Alex

[iacob alex]

.....can be represented by a "symbolic" and so old design,at :

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Taccola_ ... _wheel.jpg

I see it as a heritage of our ancestor's "dream machine",or simply...a human "proposal".

If we take a look to the sky,we can see and understand the "heavenly proposal' (see ""The cosmic pattern..." topic) regarding the natural perpetual motion machinery

In my opinion,starting with Taccola's design,we can modify this one(some cuts,some adds...),so to "meet" the reality.

All the best! / Alex

[iacob alex]

...as a short history of an eternal dream , at :
https://www.credit-suisse.com/ch/en/new ... obile.html
Al_ex

[primemignonite]

My Dear jacob alex:

I have studied these materials which here you have most kindly presented for our consideration, and have found it all not only compelling but as well, an effort convincing past any perceptible fault.

What baffles me truly about this extended, admirable, mufti-particulate mono-effort of yours, is that fact that I - the second best cynic presenting himself on this estimable site - have thus far been the only one to comment !!

It is in fact vexatious as well as a thing merely puzzling. (To this assertion, might you not agree, jacob alex? If you were-to, surely I would not be taken aback. In this assurance, please be reassured?)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And please . . . to all that do not deign condescendingly (ordinarily) to make commentary upon such like, meritorious efforts, might you now kindly do-so?

This jacob alex would appreciate greatly. I am positive he would.

He does not conjure and then post items of such extended, depthful luminosity, in order to be regarded only as just so-much smoke as blown-out his greatly laboring, posterior orifice!

No, he does not!

Therefor, just a little due respect, please?

We await actions, right and proper . . .

James

[Ed]

Please give it a rest, James!

Alex's style of drive-by shooting YouTube links and your style of spoon-feeding a mouthful of pulled pork are not that different.

Each can only be taken in measured amounts. ;-)

[johannesbender]

alex is not bothered by lack of responce to his posts as you may have noticed by now primeignite .

we all know that a form of variable action is needed , it is not that we need to be told it is that we need to find HOW to accomplish it , alex's post focuses on what we know we need ...

saying it over and over does not makes us better at understanding HOW .

i do not see a lack of respect , where is my reapect in the same regard then?

[primemignonite]

johanesbender:

It is understood that you do not. As for the last, here, mark that as 'unknown'.

[primemignonite]

"Ed" !!

You've gone over the line and now you get it full-bore !!

Although YOU have been set to 'Ignore' for a long-while now . . .

(along with the absolutely impossible to deal with on any reasonable human-dimensioned level - one Ovyyus, like-type friend of yours over a long period as noted - as well as an other - a Fiver to whom I have been truly civil as well, and at that voluminously-so in PM's, but to no corrective avail whatsoever)

mI caught an unpleasant glimpse of the newest of your typical offerings (as most likely born of your chronic physical pain as combined with an unmistakably diseased rotted-out soul/spirit) at the top of the 'Topic Review' window, while answering to johannesbender.

"Obvious truths need not be proved." - Maxim of law.

There you stated in so many jabbing, needling worten, that you do not like what I write nor the way I do it.

So, given this, why not do as I do and in-kind set my name to 'Ignore', as well ?

Huh ?

Wouldn't this solve your abiding, gnawing problem as you have with me?

"Actions speak louder than words." - Wise old saying.

That you have not yet says much, and serves as demonstrated truth-by-action, or rather inaction, that perversely you DO benefit by what I write and the way I do it, this so that you may then object to it publicly by your trademark moaning, complaint and jabbing derision. Obviously you are some species of cowardly sadist just like your way overbearing friend in Tasmania, and are both fast-headed for the human crap pile - as in humus! Understand?

And further, while I'm about it . . .

Your last PM you sent to me did the necessary trick here. (Best believe it.) You were, are and likely always will be an impudent and affrontrous type of person, one of a positively anti-civil abrading stripe featuring a really, really nasty black streak, and in this same way you will die, doubtless-so!

Well good!

"Tigers do not change their stripes" - Wise old saying.

Get on with it! (And in this opinion similarly, I am not the only one indulging it here. Also, best believe it, punk!)

You hateful scum!

Set me to 'Ignore' damn it, and get out of my face, or trouble will come to Paradise.

[Ed]

Now THAT is an unpleasant glimpse of YOUR typical offerings!

Yes, I made a joke about your writing style, but it is you who seems to be the hateful one. I don't want you to stop writing (except for the rants) and I don't have a problem with your style. I find it interesting, especially when you mix them. It's like the Victorian and post-modern eras had a verbose offspring. Al Bacon is the only other person I've seen do that. If I didn't already know you were two different people, I would think you were the same person. Lord knows he likes his pseudonyms.

Do you think I'd start ranting and threaten someone if they made a joke about my jokes only being able to be taken in measured amounts? No, I would laugh it off and then take some time for self-reflection and decide if I needed to make some adjustments. That's what one should do in a civilized society. You know, like the one you think you've lost to "some species of human"?

In regard to our private messages, I've always been cordial to you, even when you've sent them to me unsolicited. So I gather you were upset when I commented, in my last message to you, that your writing style seems Dickensian? Because that is the only thing you can point to (that I can think of) that could be considered negative, and I've since said that publicly. Why didn't you tell me you had a problem with what I said at the time, instead of just putting me on ignore? I would rather work out issues than to use a broken mechanism like the Ignore feature.

In your last post here (above) you are being pretty spiteful, which goes against your claims of things YOU would never do!

Remember what happened another time you went over-board? So please, put down the screwdriver(s).

Well, at least we now know how Dirty Harry got dirty... by being a 19th century chimney sweep. :-)

-Ed (from my wretched hive)

[Ed]

Best believe it!


&#12304;&#12484;&#12305;