My Project

[Tarsier79]

What is the funny thing, is what isn't understood. Horizontal displacement doesn't mean any gain when you are talking about the ability to do work. So you can pump your water horizontally 3 meters, and the angle it applies positive work to the fulcrum decreases proportionally.

here is someones attempt at taking advantage of that 45 degrees with solid weights: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... sc&start=0

[john]

Tarsier,
He did mention a wedge. With water, it is the static head that matters.
As Ralph pointed out, water will balance itself.
In this set up, the water is being acted upon by a solid weight/pump. Think of it as when you drive through water. You do not hydroplane because your tires were designed to pump water. And they do so rather efficiently.
And at a 1:1 ratio, 1 pound weight can pump a pound of water (28.3 cubic inches?) equal to it's vertical drop. At an angle of 45 degrees, the vertical lift is 29.3% less.
At a 2:1 ratio, the vertical height can be double because water reacts to pressure, a solid weight can not. Go diving and you'll understand what I mean about water pressure. Or drive through standing water on a rainy day and hope you don't splash some one :-)

John

[Tarsier79]

Yes, I feel I understand hydrostatic pressure relatively well. I studied this device for a few weeks, and are better off for it.

http://www.joespiterisargent.com/how-it-works/

I have not found any gain in using a liquid over a solid at this stage.

[john]

Tarsier,
I will not be able to view the video possibly until Saturday :-(
I am going to start over on the prottype I am working on. I am using
a rotary tool. Unfortunately, a sloppy build would do nothing to gain
the respect of anyone.
One thing I am hopeful of is that by making known the basic premise, both mathematically and mechanically, then when it is demonstrated everyone will have a better understanding of what I am hoping to accoplish. And if all goes well, maybe Bessler will recieve a kind word.

John

[john]

@All,
I have decided that this weekend I will post a video demonstrating the basic mathematical/mechanical relationship I referenced.
And if it works as I believe it will, then I will be done with this.
If a working wheel is necessary to prove something, then those asking for such proof do not know as much as they claim.
See you guys this weekend one last time :-)

John

[john]

@All,
I am in the process of building 3 sections of an octagon. This will hopefully demonstrate why I like this concept.
There are a couple of things that can be shown by the demo I am working on even if does not rotate (it won't).
There are a couple of reasons why perpetual motion is considered impossible. When these are known, then can an idea be demonstrated it can over come these reasons ?
The first is a weight dropping can only lift another weight a height equal to it's drop. This is probably the number one reason why people doubt perpetual motion.
The demo I am working, I plan on lifting 24 ounces (680 grams) using a 1 lb. (453 gram) weight. And I will hopefully be doing that while having the 1 lb. weight drop much less than the 24 ounces is lifted. If I use a simple 2:1 ratio, then the 1 lb. weight might drop only 2 inches while the 24 ounces of water would be lifted 8-12 inches. If I am successful in demonstrating this, then I am confident I will be able to demonstrate Bessler's claims as most likely true. Even with a working wheel, it would be no great surprise to continue to have doubters. And this only being that perpetual motion is possible. With Bessler, it might even be more so.
Also, with the demo, it will be helping me to work out the mechanics for the build I will be doing. So, for me, it will be as much about development of the mechanics as it will be for letting everyone else see how it works.
I will also probably need to build an actual basic wheel to further work out the details for the mechanics of the levers. I will be using a nesting design which will help to balance the force it applies to the pump while increasing the leveraged ratio.
At some point of which I am not sure, I will need to consider adding pulley's. This will be to improve the efficiency of the design. I think I've mentioned enough for now :-)

John

edited to add the last paragraph and complete the last sentence of the preceeding paragraph.

[ovyyus]

This topic should be moved to the fraud section and this latest Jim Lindgaard incarnation should be terminated.

[john]

ovyyus,
I guess when you guys can't keep up, that is all you have to say.
It's not really my problem if math and engineering are to much of a challenge for you and your friends.
Even ralph posted he won't discuss math. What is engineering when math is omitted ?


Jim

[ovyyus]

ovyyus,
I guess when you guys can't keep up, that is all you have to say.
It's not really my problem if math and engineering are to much of a challenge for you and your friends.
Even ralph posted he won't discuss math. What is engineering when math is omitted ?


Jim

Same old toothless leopard, same old faded spots :D

[WaltzCee]

ovyyus,
I guess when you guys can't keep up, that is all you have to say.
It's not really my problem if math and engineering are to much of a challenge for you and your friends.
Even ralph posted he won't discuss math. What is engineering when math is omitted ?


Jim

Same old toothless leopard, same old faded spots :D

ep, same 'ol same 'ol

'cept 'ol Jimmy's kinda quiet lately

[ovyyus]

WaltzCee, you must be bored :D

[WaltzCee]

Bored? Moi?

Mais non mon ami!!

I'm trying to make a point, yet no one seems to be getting the point.

The point is, in this day and age how could someone make a claim of perpetual motion & be believed without showing the whole ball of wax, given the parade of frauds that have come before that claim.

Bessler said it was a very simple idea. I think "using wm2d' is a good example.

It's a very useful tool. It market's for maybe $2500USD. Does anyone buy a copy? Hell no!! Why buy it when one can steal it.

I think the idea of a monitized channel is a good idea. Come watch me tweerk!

But who wants to see my little bootie slinging around?

People, we have a problem.