Another claim to a working device...

[Furcurequs]

...uh...

The claim that you now seem to be discussing is made in the comments section of this web page:

http://www.pureenergyblog.com/2013/09/1 ... d-working/

These seem to be the relevant quotes:

One commenter here today says he knows from “sources� that the machine runs for hours BUT eventually stops, no doubt due to friction.

Right now RAR looks good. In the last 24 hours we have had several positive reports that it has been running for hours on end, BUT finally ground to a stop. Maybe due to kinetic energy having kept it going. BUT maybe due to technical glitches.

When Frank Grimer asked this fellow Stuart Campbell to "enlarge upon" the last quote, this was his response:

Read the comments from others. That’s where it was posted.

Well, I've read through all the comments of others on that page two or three times now, and I haven't seen anything at all about how long the RAR device can supposedly run. So, unless the comments he was referring to have been removed, he seems to be imagining things or making stuff up.

I also noted he was factually incorrect about some other RAR claims, too, like how much power the big device was supposed to produce. He said enough to power a 1000 households. The official claim is more like enough to power 22 hand held hair dryers (at least like the one I have).

So,I would personally take his comments with a grain of salt, though if anyone could actually find the statements he claims to be referring to - for maybe I could have somehow overlooked them - I would certainly stand to be corrected.

Dwayne

[eccentrically1]

latest image

[Furcurequs]

On the http://peswiki.com website numerous claims of working free energy or overunity devices are reported, yet I don't personally take any of them too seriously.

I see there too many scammers and ignorant and deluded people making totally unsubstantiated claims that could be quickly validated if what they had actually worked.

Is RAR any different?

Well, they've taken out newspaper advertisements in cities on two different continents claiming they have a gravity powered motor/generator.

We've seen something similar, though, to this with the Irish company Steorn taking out an ad in The Economist magazine claiming to have a free energy device. After years and apparently an examination of what they had by real scientists, they've shown no convincing evidence that their claims were/are true.

What about the size and apparent cost of the RAR device, though?

Surely they wouldn't build something so big and costly unless they knew it was going to work, right?

Well, there's the Aldo Costa "gravity wheel" to consider. Here's a link to a picture of it. It's rather big, too. You can see the inventor there in the middle if you look closely. ...but as big as it is and after all the effort that was surely involved to build it, apparently it doesn't work.



http://peswiki.com/images/1/1a/Aldo_Cos ... l_jp70.jpg

...and the cost?

Well, Renato Ribeiro is supposedly a multimillionaire and possibly even a billionaire, so when it comes to what he's spending on this device in proportion to his total wealth, it could be less than what I'm spending on my tabletop experimental devices made of pennies and tongue depressors. ...sadly.

In other words, the RAR people seem to be just like your everyday ordinary free energy nuts. ...but very wealthy ones.

So, time will tell, I guess. ...or not.

Dwayne

[Grimer]

...uh...

The claim that you now seem to be discussing is made in the comments section of this web page:

http://www.pureenergyblog.com/2013/09/1 ... d-working/

These seem to be the relevant quotes:

One commenter here today says he knows from “sources� that the machine runs for hours BUT eventually stops, no doubt due to friction.

Right now RAR looks good. In the last 24 hours we have had several positive reports that it has been running for hours on end, BUT finally ground to a stop. Maybe due to kinetic energy having kept it going. BUT maybe due to technical glitches.

When Frank Grimer asked this fellow Stuart Campbell to "enlarge upon" the last quote, this was his response:

Read the comments from others. That’s where it was posted.

Well, I've read through all the comments of others on that page two or three times now, and I haven't seen anything at all about how long the RAR device can supposedly run. So, unless the comments he was referring to have been removed, he seems to be imagining things or making stuff up.

I also noted he was factually incorrect about some other RAR claims, too, like how much power the big device was supposed to produce. He said enough to power a 1000 households. The official claim is more like enough to power 22 hand held hair dryers (at least like the one I have).

So,I would personally take his comments with a grain of salt, though if anyone could actually find the statements he claims to be referring to - for maybe I could have somehow overlooked them - I would certainly stand to be corrected.

Dwayne

"BTW sources tell me that they've seen the generator run for hours but eventually it winds down as expected."

You missed that one didn't you.

[Furcurequs]

Oh, there it is! Oops!!

Thank you, Frank. Apparently the browser I was using didn't load all the comments. I tried another and was finally able to find the quote using SeaMonkey (on my Linux).

So, I apologize for suggesting that Stuart Campbell might have been imagining things or making stuff up.

Apparently the comment he was referring to was from a "Ken" who seemed to be using that statement as evidence that the RAR prototypes didn't actually work, though. ...even suggesting that they may be delusional.

He ended his comment with this:

Either way this will never work.

Anyway, here's the link to his full comment so you can judge it for yourself:

http://www.pureenergyblog.com/2013/09/1 ... 1042738637

Here's another quote from "Ken":

http://www.pureenergyblog.com/2013/09/1 ... 1042696010

Dwayne

[Grimer]

And the fact that Ken was dismissive of the motor suggests the he didn't make up the report from his "sources".

[Fletcher]

'Ground to a stop' is a common saying from my parts - it means came to a stop.

So it needs clarification.

[Unbalanced]

IMHO, Regardless of whether it ground to, coasted to, screached to, desentigrated to, or just came to a stop, I think we can safely assume it proved to be less than an example of self-perpetuating motion.

I personally have never seen a more well thought out and conceived devise of this magnitude. Experimenting on this scale is unprecedented as far as I am aware.

Chances are good, that with the resources available to these brothers, if a work around is possible, they will find it.

A close examination of their last four photos shows that they have altered the design significantly several times. The refinements they have made seem to suggest that they are either working on teasing out more power or working on trying to make it self perpetuating.

What I am more curious in knowing is, does this devise want to self start or does it require an input of energy initially? If it requires an input of energy does it accelerate from there or just coast to a halt like all our attempts?

I believe the most relevant question is this:

Is the force generated by the action on one weight or series of weights dropping, sufficient to cause a chain reaction of the next weight or set of weights to drop ad infinatum?

Was it mechanical failure or design failure? Are the laws of physics still intact?

[Fletcher]

Intact until proven otherwise.

[Grimer]

Assuming there will be weights attached to the vertical members - the geometry of this setup appears to create an asymmetry between the acceleration / deceleration phase of the weights movement.
Could this asymmetry alone become a source of input energy?

I

I've been going through this thread and noted to my no small embarrassment how my view has changed 180°...


@ Honza

Yep. I reckon you've put your finger on it. Gravity acts asymmetrically on weights making curved paths around a centre. Because of the conservation of angular momentum the one nearest the axis has a dragging action on the one furthest away. This is illustrated dramatically by the way tall chimney stacks break in two as they fall. It is allso shown by the classic falling stick with coins experiment.

Any closed path (or partial closed path) eccentric to the main axis should demonstrate the same effect. The Milkovic is a good example.

[rasselasss]

I agree with Grimer,there is no doubt it is a brave attempt but with so many linkages friction slowly eradicates the feedback motion,no matter what proportion the structure the motion of work got out will never overcome the motion to keep it going ...always the inability to sustain reload so to speak will bring it to slowly stop....IMO.

[Andyb]

I agree with grimmer as well, there are to many bars and weights but what a effort, i would like to work with them, they certainly do have a lot of drive, good on them, we need more people like this in our world, superb work keep trying rar i for one am proud of your attempt.

Yet again we are waiting for concrete evidence i hope we see ,i personally would love to be released from my toil and get on with building more real money printing devises, thankfully i do not feel threatened by rar, there's room for a real wheel yet,oh i think the museum of unworkable devices may need a extension.

[DrWhat]

If it slows down to a halt, then several things could be happening.

Heating of the bearings could be causing the device to seize up.

Some instability eventuates over time that causes chaotic movement which slows it down.

The machine is given an initial powerful impetus and simply slows down one way or another (ie it doesn't work)

The RAR team should show their smaller working model to prove they have something amazing. I guess IF they do have a smaller working model they want to astound the world by making a big show with the huge structures they have built. Maybe start them up simultaneously in two parts of the world.

Good on them for trying. I hope they are genuine. If not then their dream has far exceeded reality!

Damian

[Oystein]

What seems very strange is that they choose to experiment with the parts, lenghts/ratios of the levers in this final gigantic machine. Why not finish the experimenting on the small one? Seems very strange to do those adjustments/rebuilds with sych big/heavy parts. And why start the build of another one when they state that even this 30KW model is to small to be of any practical value. (Like distribution of electical energy). Many things that points to that they only have a working computersimulation and to much money.

If they succeed, I don`t see this as a threat, but a "door opener" for the real Bessler technology. This is not the same principle as Bessler used, and with such a huge construction the Bessler technology stacked 16 times side by side, 5 meteres high and 200 pound weights would deliver much more than 30KW.

So a success would just boost and legitimate the interst for a better and competing technology.

[Grimer]

"So a success would just boost and legitimate the interest for a better and competing technology."

I agree.

Good suggestion that they may only have a computer model.