raj wrote:Greendoor mentioned force x time as compared to force x distance. I believe there is something in here to do with my design. My physics knowledge is poor, even though I am a MATHS graduate. Can somebody explain the difference between the two entities.
Would there be a time difference between a weight fixed to the rim of a vertical wheel moving downwards 45 degrees with the force of gravity and the same weight swinging on a string through 45 degrees.
Your answers are crucial to me at this point.
Hi again Raj. From studying this site, you will see that my personal theory (regarding Gravity being the source of motive power, 'accumulating' Momentum, etc) is not necessarily respected around here. I have been very influenced by Pequaide, who I respect very much, but others also have issues with his theories too.
Which is fine. There are several other members who have their own theories of how excess energy can be created, and these could possibly be valid too.
There are also some outright skeptics who have nothing positive to add, and it's debatable why they frequent this site.
There are ways of categorising different personality types, and how different people approach the same problem. Its very interesting to see different strong personalities approaching this Bessler problem, and there are strengths and weaknesses with all different approaches.
If there is any truth to any of the various theories, I suspect that they may turn out to be different ways of describing the same thing. Just as Momentum is Mass x Velocity, but can also be described in terms of Force x Time. It isn't immediately obvious that these are the same things and directly related, but it can be shown with mathematics.
So take what I say about Force x Time with a grain of salt. But I do believe there is a solid Newtonian logic to my preferred theory, which gets confused when we try to convert everything into the more modern terms of Energy and Work.
To answer your question, from my biased viewpoint:
Yes - there is a huge difference between a weight fixed to the rim of a wheel, or the same weight swinging free. The fixed weight is forced to accelerate the wheel - and therefore the force of gravity acting on that mass is diverted into accelerating a greater total mass. For this reason, it will move slower than the free-swinging weight. BUT - in my view - a slow fall means that the force of gravity is available for a much longer period of Time before it has to climb back up again. Although the final Velocity of the wheel is slower, the amount of Momentum acquired during the fall is much greater.
For some reason, not everyone here is of the opinion that larger amounts of Momentum are useful. Despite the law of Conservation of Momentum, and the fact that we can transfer momentum between different masses and achieve higher or lower velocities with correspondingly lighter or heavier masses.
I would suggest everyone get very familiar with Newtons Cradle and Impact theory - especially between dissimilar masses. And then compare with the Bolas principle, and the yo-yo de-spin principle. They are significantly different, even though they are all methods of transfering momentum from one object to another. The difference is Force x Distance compared with Force x Time.
Ultimately - in a working Bessler wheel, we need falling weights to develop more Energy in falling than they need to rise and reset again. Conventional physics can't see any way of doing this. Personally, I believe the secret is a Slow Fall (acquiring more Force x Time) followed by a Fast Rise (using less Force x Time).
Pequaide's thread about Creating Energy in the Lab goes into a lot of detail about the basic theory required.
