My simple experiments have proved that I am on right path.
I was confussed with impulsive energy component of gravitational energy,but I latter realised that my engine runs on concept of overcommable resistance and not on impulsive energy component.
Hence I want to share the exact easy to understand proof example / Analogy of my engine.
With reference to the sketch on:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/59145126@N07/6927929850/
Here is the analogous example of a very heavy weight red ball hanging,to explain a single cycle of the proposed gravity engine working principle.
Energy is only supplied here to lift the ball upwards and recovered when ball comes downwards.This comprises of half cycle motor and half cycle generator controlled by a commutator in the original engine design at the red pivot.
A commutator reverses the direction of flow of current,changes motor mode to generator mode.
The splashing water on right side indicates how gravity is used to overcome resistance,and convert gravitational energy in to splashing of water which is analogous to converted net electrical output of the engine concept.
The more the weight of ball,the more the resistance overcomed.
Here,two downward processes occur simultaneously:1) recovery of supplied energy to lift the red ball.
2) The conversion of Gravitational energy in to electrical usable energy due to Overcommable weight obstacle resistance by the gravitational energy acting for more time by slowing the downward process.
This is just an Very similar analogy,actual engine will be actually completely different but will work on same principle.The resistance element in actual concept is like elastic solid body which can store sudden impact impulsive energy,but not fluid.
This resistance occurs due to weight of the fluid.This type of resistance can also occur due to solid body weight.
Because less gravitational energy is available to push the water/fluid,the gravity pushes the water/splashes fluid,a little bit slowly(9.8 m/ second square minus a tiny value subtraction)
Gravity is a continuously flowing force from earth,even if it's in graviton particles waves format.So if ball slows down slightly due to water resistance,Graviational continuously acting force is used to splash out the water,this is the key to my concept of energy conversion.
So this concept engine taps the energy required to go against the resistance by the gravity.
To make sure,you are not confussed,the resistance system or water is on right hand side semi bowl of the bowl and is not on left side of the bowl,as per the above mentioned rough sketch Flickr webpage.
Because of inefficiency of water resistance,I am using some other overcommable resistance system which is allmost 10-15 times more efficient quantitatively and qualitatively in actual engine and unlike one single forward cycle as in example,the cycle is repeated continuously in actual engine design.The resistance used is also not very rigid and is not fixed fully and is overcommable,otherwise the system won't work.
Note:
This is not a perpetual motion machine if Modern "Perpetual" Defination from Wikipedia is considered.Meaning to say this does not produce output from nothing.
I am in a very beginning stage in patent application.
Everything here in example agrees with common sense.
Minor Frictional losses are present.
Little minor Energy which is lost in recovery process at pivot carrying rod is provided from energy output of resistance system.
My invention converts gravitational energy into electrical energy.It does not produce new energy,and hence complies with laws of thermodynamics.
Defination of analogy(from Wikipedia):
Analogy (from Greek αναλογία – analogia, "proportion"[1][2]) is a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analogue or source) to another particular subject (the target), and a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process. In a narrower sense, analogy is an inference or an argument from one particular to another particular, as opposed to deduction, induction, and abduction, where at least one of the premises or the conclusion is general. The word analogy can also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is often, though not necessarily, a similarity, as in the biological notion of analogy.
I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravitational energy.Latter I realised my gravity engine Concept works on concept of Overommable resistance.Its real Non-Perpetual gravity Engine
Moderator: scott
I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravitatio
Last edited by Aman on Thu May 10, 2012 6:35 pm, edited 9 times in total.
Science is the king,commerce and MBA are servants of mankind.True Gravity-magnetic powered engines are possible but they cannot be against 3 basic laws of thermodynamics and newton's laws of motion.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
I think we have a joke section somewhere...
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
Aman,
Good thinking. EXCEPT.
When you convert from electrical energy to mechanical and back again, each time you have a loss.
You are showing one input, and a closed loop system.
Your system must be an open loop system. Which means it has a closed loop on one input to make it self running, but it must have another input in order to gather energy and put it to use.
It is possible to do this using only gravity, only electricity or a combination of things.
Good thinking. EXCEPT.
When you convert from electrical energy to mechanical and back again, each time you have a loss.
You are showing one input, and a closed loop system.
Your system must be an open loop system. Which means it has a closed loop on one input to make it self running, but it must have another input in order to gather energy and put it to use.
It is possible to do this using only gravity, only electricity or a combination of things.
You do know that the US patent office (and also in many others countries) require a working model of any perpetual motion machine? So before you waste money on a lawyer or patent application fees, you need to first make a real physical working device. Otherwise you are just wasting your time and money.Aman wrote:I am in a very beginning stage in patent application.
Theories cannot be patented. If you have full detailed drawing of a proposed device that uses a theory, then you can patent it. But if the examiner doubts that it will work as you claim, then they will ask for proof that it will work, since any unworkable device cannot be patented. The proof could be a written explanation, but if the examiner does not understand it or does not believe it, then the examiner wins, you loose. The only real proof is a working device.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
I know,they need a proper document and working prototype.And I will present working model too.I have detailed actual engine drawings,but on internet if I present my invention/leak out my invention completely,anybody can copy and patent it before me.So to be on safer side,I have explained only analogy,example,theory.jim_mich wrote:You do know that the US patent office (and also in many others countries) require a working model of any perpetual motion machine? So before you waste money on a lawyer or patent application fees, you need to first make a real physical working device. Otherwise you are just wasting your time and money.Aman wrote:I am in a very beginning stage in patent application.
Theories cannot be patented. If you have full detailed drawing of a proposed device that uses a theory, then you can patent it. But if the examiner doubts that it will work as you claim, then they will ask for proof that it will work, since any unworkable device cannot be patented. The proof could be a written explanation, but if the examiner does not understand it or does not believe it, then the examiner wins, you loose. The only real proof is a working device.
But real Gravity engines cannot be Perpetual.
According to wiki,
Perpetual motion describes hypothetical machines that produce more work or energy than they consume, whether they might operate indefinitely or not.
This Defination does not suit to my engine.My engine converts gravitational energy into electrical energy.
It simply converts freely available gravitational energy from one form into another form.
My engine does not magically produce any new energy against law of conservation of energy.
People think falsely that Gravity engines should be perpetual and cannot work.This is totally a non sense thought,because real gravity engines converts Gravitational energy to electrical energy,therefore does not violate laws of physics.Anything that is a energy converter and not new energy generator is not Perpetual.The source of energy in my engine is gravity which is used in a completely different way/approach.That is why I used the words"Non-Perpetual".
Last edited by Aman on Fri May 11, 2012 5:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
Science is the king,commerce and MBA are servants of mankind.True Gravity-magnetic powered engines are possible but they cannot be against 3 basic laws of thermodynamics and newton's laws of motion.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
Aman,
If the COP>1 then it would fall into the category of a perpetual machine.
If the COP<1 then it doesn't.
How you achieve it is irrelevant as far as the definition is concerned.
If the COP>1 then it would fall into the category of a perpetual machine.
If the COP<1 then it doesn't.
How you achieve it is irrelevant as far as the definition is concerned.
Good Question,thanks!
The idea is to extend time spent by gravity to act on a heavy object by a few nanoseconds due to the slowing down of the heavy ball speed due to resistance offered.The more the time gravity acts at a particular height(H=H1),the more the gravity energy gained to overcome resistance (splashing the water resistance in analogous example given) as well to rotate the half cycle generator rotor.
In other words,take this example:
If you hold any object by a hinged support continuously at a height(like a cantilever),will gravity act only for a single pulse on the object????
No No,it will act Continiously and hence there is a continuos opposite reaction force from the holder/hinged support and thus making the net further increase in P.E. to allmost zero.
<--------- |— -------->= 0
What if the speed of heavy attached ball to rod reduces for nanoseconds by trying to go against water resistance?
The more the time offered for ball to stay at a position,the more gravity acts on it.
The key to any gravity engine design is to somehow use gravity as energy input.
It's also right if said theoratically that "energy supplying and recovery process "is just like a or analogous to a catalyst,which is used to let the resistance overcomming process through gravity take place without actually any net change of electrical energy form/format from one form to another form of energy.The energy used to overcome resistance is then converted to electrical energy by a suitable energy conversion system.
So COP does not exceed the frame of energy which can be processed.
People have horrible confussions about gravity engines:
1) 50 percent People at many forums are not ready to accept gravity as a source of energy input and say that Gravity engines break laws of thermodynamics and cannot work.This is a illogical idea,as if people have stopped using their brains and are continuing listening to things others are telling,without validating those things themselves by thinking about it.
These people even do not know that gravitational energy is a usable source of free energy.
One example of these kind of people is
http://community.discovery.com/eve/foru ... 48301/p/25
They are not willing to accept the proof I have given.
Everytime they try to show the example as wrong by wrongly Un-Succesfully manupulating it with failure to do so.By trying to prove me wrong ,they are actually violating laws of physics.
Another example is Science Hypography Science Forums who ban any post on Gravity powered engine inspite of giving real proof examples,because they do not want to accept the reality and want to stick to thinking that gravity engines cannot be made.No physics textbooks tells that gravitational energy is not source of energy,it only disagrees with concept of Perpetual Motion Machine.
2) 40 percent people think that Gravity engines are Perpetual,go against law of thermodynamics and are possible.But is actually not at all very correct.
3) 5 percent people either have no idea or have confusions about this.
4) 5 percent people have really understood logically and correctly that Gravity engines are possible and they cannot be perpetual because these engines use somehow gravitational energy as input energy and convert them to usable electrical power.And here you do not get more energy than that you actually totally put in to the system.I am in this category.
Surprisingly,These percentage distribution results are too horrible and unbelievable to me.How most people including big post professors are making such big mistakes regarding understanding of gravity as source of power?This percentage results is clearly showing the brain drain that's happening in the world.
The idea is to extend time spent by gravity to act on a heavy object by a few nanoseconds due to the slowing down of the heavy ball speed due to resistance offered.The more the time gravity acts at a particular height(H=H1),the more the gravity energy gained to overcome resistance (splashing the water resistance in analogous example given) as well to rotate the half cycle generator rotor.
In other words,take this example:
If you hold any object by a hinged support continuously at a height(like a cantilever),will gravity act only for a single pulse on the object????
No No,it will act Continiously and hence there is a continuos opposite reaction force from the holder/hinged support and thus making the net further increase in P.E. to allmost zero.
<--------- |— -------->= 0
What if the speed of heavy attached ball to rod reduces for nanoseconds by trying to go against water resistance?
The more the time offered for ball to stay at a position,the more gravity acts on it.
The key to any gravity engine design is to somehow use gravity as energy input.
It's also right if said theoratically that "energy supplying and recovery process "is just like a or analogous to a catalyst,which is used to let the resistance overcomming process through gravity take place without actually any net change of electrical energy form/format from one form to another form of energy.The energy used to overcome resistance is then converted to electrical energy by a suitable energy conversion system.
So COP does not exceed the frame of energy which can be processed.
People have horrible confussions about gravity engines:
1) 50 percent People at many forums are not ready to accept gravity as a source of energy input and say that Gravity engines break laws of thermodynamics and cannot work.This is a illogical idea,as if people have stopped using their brains and are continuing listening to things others are telling,without validating those things themselves by thinking about it.
These people even do not know that gravitational energy is a usable source of free energy.
One example of these kind of people is
http://community.discovery.com/eve/foru ... 48301/p/25
They are not willing to accept the proof I have given.
Everytime they try to show the example as wrong by wrongly Un-Succesfully manupulating it with failure to do so.By trying to prove me wrong ,they are actually violating laws of physics.
Another example is Science Hypography Science Forums who ban any post on Gravity powered engine inspite of giving real proof examples,because they do not want to accept the reality and want to stick to thinking that gravity engines cannot be made.No physics textbooks tells that gravitational energy is not source of energy,it only disagrees with concept of Perpetual Motion Machine.
2) 40 percent people think that Gravity engines are Perpetual,go against law of thermodynamics and are possible.But is actually not at all very correct.
3) 5 percent people either have no idea or have confusions about this.
4) 5 percent people have really understood logically and correctly that Gravity engines are possible and they cannot be perpetual because these engines use somehow gravitational energy as input energy and convert them to usable electrical power.And here you do not get more energy than that you actually totally put in to the system.I am in this category.
Surprisingly,These percentage distribution results are too horrible and unbelievable to me.How most people including big post professors are making such big mistakes regarding understanding of gravity as source of power?This percentage results is clearly showing the brain drain that's happening in the world.
Last edited by Aman on Fri May 11, 2012 10:58 am, edited 20 times in total.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
Balance energy equation for my concept:
Energy supplied to lift Red ball through commutator controlled motor mode at pivot + gravitational energy required to push the resistance away + frictional losses + other entropy losses = supplied energy recovered though generator mode by commutator control at pivot(red coloured in sketch) + electricity converted from overcoming of resistance+ frictional losses + Back EMF losses + other entropy losses.
Also,losses is not something which cannot be solved or new.Every IC engine or every turbine has losses.
Infact in today's most efficient IC engine has efficiency of not more than 80 percent allmost.
What we have to ensure is that this engines successfully converts maximum amount of Gravitational energy into usable electricity by overcoming resistance,in a quantity much much more than losses incurred.This is a challenge to minimise losses but it is not impossible at all.
Although losses is a serious issue,it can be worked out or minimised by innovative and proper engine designs.
Now I believe my concept is 100 percent right,so what is next step now required is good level of engineering,be it materials engineering or engineering design of machenical elements or be it materials selection or be it use of efficient electrical-electronic assisting systems or be it finite element analysis for creating a gravity engine product with good Factor of safety regarding stress resistance,Fatique,etc.
I would now also want to somebody write a small Mechatronics Program for controlling my engine operation just like ECU Microprocessor controlled Engine Valve timing system.
Energy supplied to lift Red ball through commutator controlled motor mode at pivot + gravitational energy required to push the resistance away + frictional losses + other entropy losses = supplied energy recovered though generator mode by commutator control at pivot(red coloured in sketch) + electricity converted from overcoming of resistance+ frictional losses + Back EMF losses + other entropy losses.
Also,losses is not something which cannot be solved or new.Every IC engine or every turbine has losses.
Infact in today's most efficient IC engine has efficiency of not more than 80 percent allmost.
What we have to ensure is that this engines successfully converts maximum amount of Gravitational energy into usable electricity by overcoming resistance,in a quantity much much more than losses incurred.This is a challenge to minimise losses but it is not impossible at all.
Although losses is a serious issue,it can be worked out or minimised by innovative and proper engine designs.
Now I believe my concept is 100 percent right,so what is next step now required is good level of engineering,be it materials engineering or engineering design of machenical elements or be it materials selection or be it use of efficient electrical-electronic assisting systems or be it finite element analysis for creating a gravity engine product with good Factor of safety regarding stress resistance,Fatique,etc.
I would now also want to somebody write a small Mechatronics Program for controlling my engine operation just like ECU Microprocessor controlled Engine Valve timing system.
Science is the king,commerce and MBA are servants of mankind.True Gravity-magnetic powered engines are possible but they cannot be against 3 basic laws of thermodynamics and newton's laws of motion.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
People falsely stupidly relate Perpetual motion machines with "Gravity engines" without understanding about PMM and how gravitational energy can be used to run a gravity engine.
The problem with most people is they do not think properly about the fundamental Principle involved in any Gravity engine which needs little Electrical energy supplied initially.
95 percent working Gravity engines work on the principle that the gravitational energy input is made more than what energy needed to lift ball upward .Offcoarse this needs Innovative and detailing thinking power to design such a engine.
Idiot People who do not believe in Gravity engines Say that since you get more energy than supplied it violates physics and hence Gravity engines are impossible.
But the most worst thing is they do not consider the freely available hidden energy source in nature :The amplified larger quantity of gravitational energy used in innovative way than that of energy needed to lift heavy object up.
The problem with most people is they do not think properly about the fundamental Principle involved in any Gravity engine which needs little Electrical energy supplied initially.
95 percent working Gravity engines work on the principle that the gravitational energy input is made more than what energy needed to lift ball upward .Offcoarse this needs Innovative and detailing thinking power to design such a engine.
Idiot People who do not believe in Gravity engines Say that since you get more energy than supplied it violates physics and hence Gravity engines are impossible.
But the most worst thing is they do not consider the freely available hidden energy source in nature :The amplified larger quantity of gravitational energy used in innovative way than that of energy needed to lift heavy object up.
Last edited by Aman on Sun May 13, 2012 6:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Science is the king,commerce and MBA are servants of mankind.True Gravity-magnetic powered engines are possible but they cannot be against 3 basic laws of thermodynamics and newton's laws of motion.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
The splashing of water resistance (overcomming of water resistance)is quiet similar to the Overcomming of cantilever beam resistance by the central weight loading.The machenism of failure of two column supported beam(Simply supported beam) works similarly.Let weight W be loaded at centre.The overcomeability of a good beam should be less at initial stage.Initially there will be allmost an equal and opposite reaction from the beam for the weight loading,with little energy spent for deformation.Slowly ATOMIC Dislocation takes place(slippage of atomic planes/slippage of grain boundaries)and a point reaches where stress become unbearable(stress is resistance to deformation).As the stress become unbearable,there will be minimum equal and opposite reaction for the weight loading and then the most amount of continuous gravitational energy will be used to overcome this beam resistance/stress and finally the beam breaks.This is analogous to what happens in my engine with the exception of the speed at which all this happens.This is what I learnt in Material Science subject.No good material science Professor in machenical engineering would deny this.
The speed of this similar process is apply extended nanoseconds in my engine whereas in beams it is very low speed [It occurs in beams due to mainly Creep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creep_(deformation) ]
So my engine does not go against laws of physics.In fact what I have told here in this comment is the backbone of structural engineering and the first question for an interview could be "how beams fail under self weight load and external weight load."My technology does not bend physics but uses it in a altogether different way.
The speed of this similar process is apply extended nanoseconds in my engine whereas in beams it is very low speed [It occurs in beams due to mainly Creep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creep_(deformation) ]
So my engine does not go against laws of physics.In fact what I have told here in this comment is the backbone of structural engineering and the first question for an interview could be "how beams fail under self weight load and external weight load."My technology does not bend physics but uses it in a altogether different way.
Science is the king,commerce and MBA are servants of mankind.True Gravity-magnetic powered engines are possible but they cannot be against 3 basic laws of thermodynamics and newton's laws of motion.
re: I was confused with Impulsive energy component of gravit
Aman, 100% of the people that believe they have a working gravity engine, and go on to attempt to patent without a working model are delusional. 5% of those then go on to attempt to delude others with their nonsense, and go on about how wrong science is without any proof, 1% of those then repetitively post their imagined reality in bright and large lettering on this forum!
Take Jims advice:
1. Build a working model!
Then you should take my second step.
2. Your device doesn't rotate, please reattempt step 1.
Just because it spontaneousely rotates in your head, doesn't give you the final knowledge of what is going to work.
I have now wasted enough time reading the complete rubbish you keep parroting. I hope no-one is fooled by the fairy tales you keep writing. I suggest you find some tangible proof to back up your theories before spreading them as fact.
Take Jims advice:
1. Build a working model!
Then you should take my second step.
2. Your device doesn't rotate, please reattempt step 1.
Just because it spontaneousely rotates in your head, doesn't give you the final knowledge of what is going to work.
I have now wasted enough time reading the complete rubbish you keep parroting. I hope no-one is fooled by the fairy tales you keep writing. I suggest you find some tangible proof to back up your theories before spreading them as fact.
My Gravity engine is so simple that actually it exists in nature.My engine comes from inspiration from nature,it is straightforward and uses regular principles of physics.It does not violate Laws of thermodynamics and is not Perpetual.
It uses Gravitational energy as Input energy.
Actually I proved that what I am doing is correct through experimental setup at my home.
If you can have a balance process equation as that of mine:
Energy supplied to lift Red ball through commutator controlled motor mode at pivot + gravitational energy required to push the resistance away + frictional losses + other entropy losses = supplied energy recovered though generator mode by commutator control at pivot(red coloured in sketch) + electricity converted from overcoming of resistance+ frictional losses + Back EMF losses + other entropy losses.
;then your gravity engine /Gravity wheel is more expected to run successfully.
If you all try to invent some mystical device which is Perpetual and gives more output than input and do not want to use gravity as source of energy,then it is obvious that the idea would not work.
I ask a question to all people here who try to make Perpetual Motion Machine:
What is the energy source of your engine?Can you provide us Balanced Process Equation
If you do not use gravitational energy source in a right direction with focus,then obviously it would not work.If you cannot write a balanced equation for your gravity engine neither can consider gravity as energy source,then it's obvious that your gravity wheel will not work.
This is the most simplest approach to real Gravity wheels:
Gravity engines mostly are made to work on the principle that the Gravity engine/Gravity wheel systems are innovatively designed to take in (consume) much more Gravitational energy than what energy needed to lift heavy ball upward.
Instead of attempting Mystical devices with more than 100 percent efficiency without gravitational energy input source,you all inventors here have to be logical.If your logic does not have a problem and you can solve the problems incurred during design process if incurred,then there is 80 percent sure that your gravity engine/Gravity wheel will work.
It uses Gravitational energy as Input energy.
Actually I proved that what I am doing is correct through experimental setup at my home.
If you can have a balance process equation as that of mine:
Energy supplied to lift Red ball through commutator controlled motor mode at pivot + gravitational energy required to push the resistance away + frictional losses + other entropy losses = supplied energy recovered though generator mode by commutator control at pivot(red coloured in sketch) + electricity converted from overcoming of resistance+ frictional losses + Back EMF losses + other entropy losses.
;then your gravity engine /Gravity wheel is more expected to run successfully.
If you all try to invent some mystical device which is Perpetual and gives more output than input and do not want to use gravity as source of energy,then it is obvious that the idea would not work.
I ask a question to all people here who try to make Perpetual Motion Machine:
What is the energy source of your engine?Can you provide us Balanced Process Equation
If you do not use gravitational energy source in a right direction with focus,then obviously it would not work.If you cannot write a balanced equation for your gravity engine neither can consider gravity as energy source,then it's obvious that your gravity wheel will not work.
This is the most simplest approach to real Gravity wheels:
Gravity engines mostly are made to work on the principle that the Gravity engine/Gravity wheel systems are innovatively designed to take in (consume) much more Gravitational energy than what energy needed to lift heavy ball upward.
Instead of attempting Mystical devices with more than 100 percent efficiency without gravitational energy input source,you all inventors here have to be logical.If your logic does not have a problem and you can solve the problems incurred during design process if incurred,then there is 80 percent sure that your gravity engine/Gravity wheel will work.
Last edited by Aman on Sat May 19, 2012 11:27 am, edited 6 times in total.