We All Need to Face Up to the Limits of OB torque

[cloud camper]

We cannot modulate the gravitational field - therefore there is no point in spinning masses around an axis - any gain on one side must be paid back on the other in a symmetrical gravitational field that is the same on both sides of the wheel.

The only field we can modulate is the CF field and we can modulate that A LOT.

A collision with a weight under a high CF influence is then the only way to harvest this force as the force goes to zero on impact.

Without a collision we would have to pay back in full the gravitational field plus the CF field to retract a weight.

With the CF field becoming zero at impact we can cheat the system and only pay back the gravitational field.

This is using gravity as a catalyst in the reaction!

Meanwhile we have converted the accumulated CF at impact to power the wheel.

And we know B was definitely aware of CF as shown in MT142!!

Maybe now we can appreciate B's admonishment to put the horse before the cart - CF is the force we should be employing to power the wheel, not gravity!

[Fletcher]

And it's why B. never calls his PM wheels "Gravity-Wheels", or his deeply hidden (but so simple) PM Principle of Motive Force the "Gravity PM Principle".

DT John Collins pg 209 digital ..

.." And in truth it now seems to me that the time is long overdue, now that I have achieved my goal, once known only to God, that I and the world should see this principle, in itself so simple, and yet at the same time so deeply hidden, of everlasting motion, described in total detail and in mathematical simplicity, in praise of God’s boundless wisdom, and for the benefit of the entire world."

Even if some of us insist on calling our attempts at ever-lasting motion and innate motive force "Gravity-Wheels" ! It's a misnomer ! A water-wheel is a gravity-wheel.

They are in reality Pseudo-Gravity-Wheels or Faux-Gravity-Wheels. In the sense that a solid disk acting as a flywheel would no more be responsible for the continuous rotation than one of these mass displacement type wheels would be.

And that is the cut and thrust of MrV's topic heading "We All Need to Face Up to the Limits of OB torque".

DT John Collins pg 220 digital ..

.. "and also about one hundred previous ideas which were erroneous, and, to my cost, actually modeled by me (the so-called Pseudo P.M.).

However B. categorically says ..

DT John Collins pg 190 digital ..

"NO, these weights are themselves the PM device, the ‘essential constituent parts’ which must of necessity continue to exercise their motive force (derived from the PM principle) indefinitely – so long as they keep away from the centre of gravity."

Concluding .. many of us believe a traditional OB wheel "action/movement" has its role to play in the final solution, but it is as a supporting cast member to the masked star of the show who takes the final bow and applause on Broadway. Every star must have their foil !

As CC says, find and put the horse before the cart ! A force simply pushes or pulls something.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Until you know for sure how he did it, it's hard to say. I think you might be selling gravity a little short-----------------------------Sam

[eccentrically1]

The only field we can modulate is the CF field and we can modulate that A LOT.[/quote

That would still be a symmetry break of Newton's 3rd. For every force there is an equal and opposite force. Put in your way, for every modulation there is an equal and opposite modulation.

[cloud camper]

The only field we can modulate is the CF field and we can modulate that A LOT.

That would still be a symmetry break of Newton's 3rd. For every force there is an equal and opposite force. Put in your way, for every modulation there is an equal and opposite modulation.

Yes absolutely, the whole idea is to create a symmetry break.

What you're missing is that the CF field only exists during actual rotation.

Upon impact the weight essentially stops killing all CF.

If there is no longer a CF field, there is nothing to pay back!!

Voila - symmetry break!!

Kinda like borrowing $500 from a friend and before you can pay it back that friend dies - there is no one there anymore to receive the check.

Sorry for the macabre example!

[WaltzCee]

. .. .. .

Kinda like borrowing $500 from a friend and before you can pay it back that friend dies - there is no one there anymore to receive the check.
. .. .. .

So that's why you haven't paid me my ten dollars back!!

A collision with a weight under a high CF influence is then the only way to harvest this force as the force goes to zero on impact.

and now you're going to smack me?!??
I take back anything nice I ever said about you!

On a serious note, let's discuss that liar Newton.

I have designed a Rube Goldberg contraption that manages the reaction of any action in 3 ways.

• Variable magnitude
• Variable direction
• Variable number of reactons

I just now had WM do the math and have the confidence to get off my lazy arse & go thru the expense of a build. I call it The Fletcher but I'm open to other ideas.

I don't know if Fletcher wants to become more famous.

[cloud camper]

Sorry bout that Walt - the checks in the mail!!

Good luck on your build!!

Fletcher will be proud!!

[Fletcher]

Until you know for sure how he did it, it's hard to say. I think you might be selling gravity a little short-----------------------------Sam

In my opinion Sam there is overwhelming evidence, from thousands of years, and possibly tens of thousands of attempts, to cheat conservative gravity with an entirely SOLO "Pseudo-Gravity-Wheel", is a complete BUST !


It is like having a penny and nowhere to spend it !


That is what MrV and others in his thread are attempting to give air to it, .. bring it in the open. And why ? For some, to face facts and let other thoughts sneak in, and possibly find new directions to explore !


But all is not lost ! A Faux-Gravity-Wheel is still an important part of the mix to success imo !


To continue with my earlier parody of a stage act - every protagonist needs a foil. Every comedy duo has straight man.


And so the Psuedo-GW is the straight man in my narrative of a duo functionality of a runner, imbuing excess motive force !


IOW's I believe that the Pseudo-GW can not, and NEVER can be, a strict monologue, AND be a runner !


It's difficult to find an accurate analogy or metaphor.


(Spoiler Alert ! - don't read on if this will upset you) Something like a ventriloquist needs a dummy, but they are really the same man lol.


@ Walt .. world famous in my man cave lol.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Fletcher, Cloud camper, Tarsier,
I still don't know for sure; I'm just trying things. You can't go by what these scientists say, they don't know sh*t-----------------------------Sam

[Fletcher]

It's everyone's prerogative to make up their own minds, and try anything that takes their fancy Sam. That's how we learn, and how B. learned too.

[eccentrically1]

The only field we can modulate is the CF field and we can modulate that A LOT.

That would still be a symmetry break of Newton's 3rd. For every force there is an equal and opposite force. Put in your way, for every modulation there is an equal and opposite modulation.

Yes absolutely, the whole idea is to create a symmetry break.

What you're missing is that the CF field only exists during actual rotation.

Upon impact the weight essentially stops killing all CF.

If there is no longer a CF field, there is nothing to pay back!!

Voila - symmetry break!!

Kinda like borrowing $500 from a friend and before you can pay it back that friend dies - there is no one there anymore to receive the check.

Sorry for the macabre example!

I’m not missing anything. Keep trying though.

[cloud camper]

Newton was right as far as he went - assuming steady state symmetrical field conditions.

What he did not consider is a normally conservative action in a changing field with time - assymetrical field.

We can just consider a typical gravity only wheel with just one weight circulating.

Lets say we can turn gravity on for the downgoing side of the wheel but turn it off for the upgoing side.

The wheel would quickly gain rpm until it explodes!

Thats what we're looking at with CF as well but we CAN switch CF on and off allowing us to switch it on when we want it and switch it off when we don't!

The ability to switch fields on and off is the essence of any motor!

[Sam Peppiatt]

Cloud Camper,

Just for the record. The wheel won't keep gaining in speed. The reason is gravity, so to speak, resets every revolution. The acceleration always starts from zero at 12:00. It's not the same as free falling where the velocity accumulates. If I'm saying it right-----------------Sam

[cloud camper]

Sam of course you are right for a wheel in a symmetrical unchanging gravitational field.

I am just posing a hypothetical scenario where we could turn gravity off on the upgoing side of the wheel.

If this were possible the weight would always accelerate on the downgoing side up till 6:00 then simply coast thru the upgoing side without losing speed where gravity was turned off.

At 12:00 the weight would reenter the gravity field with considerable velocity then begin accelerating again.

Does that make sense?

Thanks for your input and good luck on your build!

[Tarsier79]

CC. A complete cycle of your proposed mechanism:
1. The weight is stopped.
2. The weight is accelerated until it achieves the correct CF.
3. An impact occurs: We harvest the momentum to use.
1. The weight is stopped..........

So if we are to break COE, you need to harvest more energy from the impact than it takes to accelerate the weight from 0 to max:

You are going to get a predictable and measurable amount of KE from your weight. The CF is a calculable based on its radius, mass and speed. An impact occurs, normally assumed as a (less than) unity transaction.

So a break occurs only if our current mathematical understanding is incomplete or incorrect. How will a simulation show this if it is based on current mathematical understanding? Where do you see the excess energy? Can you set up a simple experiment to prove your theory?

PS: I don't mean to sound negative, just trying to define the pieces clearly on the board, (partly for my own benefit).

PPS: Also, if you turned off gravity for half the cycle, it would accelerate till the equivalent of "terminal velocity" (or destruction depending on build quality).