Priority Claim

[Grimer]

Now there seems to be a lull in the proceedings I'll take the opportunity to make a post on topic.



The above image is a screen shot from Tarsier79's gpm.wm2d sim.
It shows the state of the pendulums after the second impact. As you can see the pendulums have reset perfectly, albeit in a stationary position. This position is maintained for 7 seconds.

If the SP and CP were locked together at that point one would have a perfectly balanced beam, but a completely stationary beam, ergo, no Ersatz gravity energy.
Laithwaite's movement of mass has be achieved but there is no conversion of Newtonian gravity energy into Ersatz gravity energy (angular momentum).
...

I have puzzled about this for a long time and then the other night the answer clicked.

Tarsier has exorcised Maxwell's Demon.

Well done cobber. Your name will go down in history as the first man to defy second law of thermodynamics. You have shown that you can take two bodies at the same gravitational potential and without bringing external energy into the system end up with one of the bodies at a higher potential gravitational energy and the other at a lower potential gravitational energy.

This is equivalent to taking a body of water at 10°C and changing it into ice and hot water.

Congratulations. :-)

[Tarsier79]

Grimer. The total energy level never increases. There is nothing special about that sim.

[Grimer]

Grimer. The total energy level never increases. There is nothing special about that sim.

You're missing the point. It's the difference which is important - just as it is with the Stirling.

When the Stirling runs on a temperature difference above and below ambient the heat content doesn't change, i.e. the total energy doesn't change but the energy developed from the loss of the difference in temperature does. It is taken off by the engine driving the flywheel.

Think about it.

[Tarsier79]

Trying another perspective sometimes only muddies the water. Try to consider how to exploit the difference, and how does 1 benefit over 2 x 1/2. I don't see the gravitational comparison to the stirling here.

[Grimer]

Trying another perspective sometimes only muddies the water. Try to consider how to exploit the difference, and how does 1 benefit over 2 x 1/2. I don't see the gravitational comparison to the stirling here.

Evidently.

You need to try harder. :-)

[Tarsier79]

Sorry Frank. I know that is the point you were trying to make, but were hoping you would take the next step. If there was a way to exploit a higher + lower weight(which afaik there isn't) a simple lever could reproduce these same vertical weight positions with much more efficiency.

To break thermodynamics, you need a gain in energy in some form.

[Grimer]

The total second order derivative energy doesn't increase. The third order derivative energy does increase.

There are different orders of energy depending on the degrees of freedom involved - the variance - the variety.
But I've been through all this before so we may as well call it a day. Be happy. :-)

[Tarsier79]

Before we do, how about you let us know specifically what advantage there is with a 1/2 mass at 2x height . Remember energy is linear with regards to a masses height and PE depends on available drop, not absolute height.

When you lift one mass, the other drops. You lose as much as you gain.

[Grimer]

Before we do, how about you let us know specifically what advantage there is with a 1/2 mass at 2x height . Remember energy is linear with regards to a masses height and PE depends on available drop, not absolute height.

When you lift one mass, the other drops. You lose as much as you gain.

When you lift the temperature of a body of water by adding 100 calories and you lower the temperature of another body of water by taking away 100 calories you lose as much as you gain, don't you.

But you can drive a Stirling engine with that difference. In creating that difference you have created a source of energy.

If you just mix them together you have lost the energy. You have lost the opportunity to extract the differential energy with a Stirling engine.

How do you extract the energy from a difference in NG heights. That's what we are here to find out. If Bessler did it we can do it. We are well on the way.

Your argument is the argument that conventional scientists use to rubbish Bessler's claim and say it must have been fraudulent. If you believe it, why are you here.

What Bessler invented was the gravitational equivalent of the Stirling engine. He did it by manipulating the interactions between NG and EG.

[Grimer]

Before we do, how about you let us know specifically what advantage there is with a 1/2 mass at 2x height . Remember energy is linear with regards to a masses height and PE depends on available drop, not absolute height.

When you lift one mass, the other drops. You lose as much as you gain.

And what is one doing when one stops the weights at different heights? One is altering the ground level, creating an earthquake, changing the ambient datum. This alters the "available drop". Putting in stops and triggers at various heights does not use up energy.

[ovyyus]

Your argument is the argument that conventional scientists use to rubbish Bessler's claim and say it must have been fraudulent. If you believe it, why are you here.

Accepting conventional conservation laws does not disqualify anyone from researching Bessler's wheel. Why would you believe it should?

[Tarsier79]

Grimer. I didnt copy and paste my response from a textbook. I like you, prefer to explore principles, but our methods of exploration are different.

Your comparison of temperature to gravity potential doesn't help PM, nor does it relate to CF. I could complete the comparison with the Stirling, but you wouldn't like it.

[daanopperman]

Hi all ,

In a Stirling engine , every time the displacer moves to the hot side , the hot air inside the engine is transferred to the cold side , here some of the heat is lost to the atmosphere .
If you do not have the heat source on the hot side of the engine at all times , the engine will coast to a halt . The more heat you may loose , the more more energy you can extract from the Stirling .

If Bessler's wheel was a gravity engine or a motion engine , the energy gain from the engine would be unlimited , only curbed by the amount of weight the wheel could carry .

[Grimer]

Hi all ,

In a Stirling engine , every time the displacer moves to the hot side , the hot air inside the engine is transferred to the cold side , here some of the heat is lost to the atmosphere .
If you do not have the heat source on the hot side of the engine at all times , the engine will coast to a halt . The more heat you may loose , the more more energy you can extract from the Stirling .

If Bessler's wheel was a gravity engine or a motion engine , the energy gain from the engine would be unlimited , only curbed by the amount of weight the wheel could carry .

Not true. You don't need a heat source. You can run it on ice.

[jim_mich]

Running on ice is in reality running on atmospheric HEAT.