http://www.mooieenergie.nl/en/

[Fletcher]

Hey Dwayne and Frank .. my 2 cents.

Here's the dilemma for anybody wanting to go the commercialisation route.

First I have to make some assumptions and sort of fold them into the scenario's.

1. That Abling has a working free-energy generator ! IIRC his does not subscribe to current physics in that it uses compressed air to launch/fire weights upwards into the weight imbalanced positions to create a Principle of Excess Torque, to be mined as RKE available for Work. Supposedly the cost of compressing the gas is less than the KE gained from the Excess Torque (Asymmetric Torque). That contravenes current physics beliefs. Before he could proceed to commercialisation he'd have to accurately meter the energy inputs and outputs to prove there was surplus free-energy availability (remember Wayne Travis ?). That would probably require independent assessments. Probably this is not an essential requirement for early investors in his stock, if they were bullish. FWIW this reminds me very much of the Warranic (sic) Wheel (can't find it on the net or wayback machine) of many years ago which had the exact same principle which quietly disappeared. Ablings wheels probably have no real a-priori so an effectual patent would be hard to protect from 'improvements'.

2. By comparison to Bessler's alleged true PM principle wheels. Which by all accounts also employed the Principle of Excess Torque. However in his case there was no input energy requirement to cause the continued imbalance (one-way wheels self started whilst two-way wheels required a small push to gain momentum). In the case of someone rediscovering his PM Principle (or their own), and assuming the positive, then a-priori would exist, which could be patented in some countries and markets. There may or may not be a violation of physics laws. However the downside is this. Bessler said it was extremely simple, so much so that he was frightened a buyer would want their money back. Karl said is was simple too, so much so that a carpenters apprentice could take a look and reproduce it without too much sweat. Karl also didn't buy it for himself !! Assuming this is accurate (i.e. the simplicity of the mechanics) then it makes it very difficult to commercially protect. Sure, you could get a patent in the States (first to file patent laws, not first to invent like elsewhere), but it could and probably would appear on Chinese shelves within months. And anybody could build one for themselves.

So where does that leave the inventor, who wants a commercial return on his investment ?

Lessons form history might be appropriate. Henry Heinz invented Tomato Ketchup in the States. It was a simple recipe, once settled on. But how to protect it ? There were other Ketchups around but none were Tomato based. Future competitors would undercut him in no time and take his potential market. Cheque-book superiority at its best, which happens all the time. So he'd have to duke it out until he and any investors he managed to secure went broke (again). So his plan was to go VERY BIG quickly. He built a massive factory (from investors money) and played the first up best dressed gambit.

Coca-cola did a similar thing by an early form of franchising where the owner didn't have to outlay much start-up capital for factories etc. He established his supply chain and also took political action in the form of lobbying for Food and Drug legislation to force competitors to comply (expensive). Many had made outlandish claims of health benefits etc that then had to be backed up with science. They went broke or shut down.

Will Kellogg basically also went big fast with his investors money to capture that 'corn flake' end of the breakfast cereal market. First up best dressed again.

So, if a true mechanical PM principle is indeed very mechanically simple, once proven by a working demonstration open to patent examining scrutiny, it could be protected for 20 years on the first to file laws of the States (AFAIK you have no jurisdiction in other countries and an international patent still doesn't cover all the planet). Then you might spend those 20 years defending your patent in various courts around the world as your competitors fill the home depot equivalent shelves with a knock-off.

Inventors are good at inventing. They are not necessarily good at raising money from investors, getting regulatory approvals, building factories, managing people and businesses, fighting in courts etc etc.

I for one, see the commercialisation of a PM wheel as fraught with problems precisely because it is allegedly so simple.

What do you think ? Is this what Abling is encountering ? Are there better ways to protect the inventors interests so that he/Abling can get a financial return on his invention ?

I'd say Abling and his investors are having a few sleepless nights. Either because they don't know how to protect the technology adequately, or the technology doesn't work and isn't free-energy. They want to be first up best dressed and have their supply chains, but that sounds a poor risk reward scenario given that a cheap and easy to build free-energy generator knock-off could well race to market ahead of you.

What other models are there they, or you, might consider ?

[Senax]

What do I think?

I think you're much better than me at analysing the problem - and you are
most likely to be correct. Still, I don't regret my optimism. Better to be wrong
a hundred times (it doesn't cost anything) and to be right when the real
thing comes along.

Anyone who believes and publishes papers claiming that materials are held
together from without and not from within - no suck...only blow - has to be
an optimist. 😀

[agor95]

The only thing I can think of is a Black-Box method were you rent out a device that supplies power but is closed to inspection.

You will need to safe guard the devise internally if tampering were to happen.

That is another story.

[WaltzCee]

https://images.app.goo.gl/Gn3EdLrb7kREHMqn9

https://www.mooie-energie-italia.it/en/

On 5th August 2019 Mooie Energie Italia was
founded in Trieste, Italy, with the aim of industrialising a system of electricity generation
with zero emissions. Values have key roles in social cohesion and respect for the
environment is, nowadays, one of the socio-economic values most representative of the
Western world.

I just can't imagine this is a fraud.

The video at the Italian site reminds me of Apologia wheel. 3 1&1/2 ton chunks of mass.
If their idea is true, it shouldn't take long for this to become a commodity. They can sell
parts and franchise installers. That's what I think.

[Senax]

Good find. Well done Walter. 👍

[Fletcher]

Electricity is generated by a system, patented as invention, called MHS (Mechanical Hinge System) which, through a targeted use of compressed air, changes the position of every mass attached to its core during its rotation.

The system is made of 3 masses of 1.5 tons each. For each mass, the MHS is activated at a specific moment in their journey, in order to have them reach a position that always allows a complete rotation.

The kinetic energy of the system is then transferred to a generator in order to produce electricity, 4% thereof used for in-house consumption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... aTo5PdAZ2g

Only 4% of the RKE is used to compress the gas and overcome all frictional losses etc i.e. to do Work on the system ! 96% available for external Work.

This is slightly different from the Warranic Wheel which also used compressed air - it shot a projectile across the wheel to cause Excess Torque.

I've looked at the vid a couple of times. I must be missing something ? I can't see the top most 1.5 ton mass either being lifted to a greater radius (i.e. increase its GPE), or see it being advanced or retarded positionally around the rim (at the same radius) to cause Excess Torque.

These would be the usual two methods to maintain weight imbalance. Does anyone have a better idea how the mass is "shifted" by the gas to cause the torque effect ?

[Senax]

[Senax]

Electricity is generated by a system, patented as invention, called MHS (Mechanical Hinge System) which, through a targeted use of compressed air, changes the position of every mass attached to its core during its rotation.

The system is made of 3 masses of 1.5 tons each. For each mass, the MHS is activated at a specific moment in their journey, in order to have them reach a position that always allows a complete rotation.

The kinetic energy of the system is then transferred to a generator in order to produce electricity, 4% thereof used for in-house consumption.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... aTo5PdAZ2g

Only 4% of the RKE is used to compress the gas and overcome all frictional losses etc i.e. to do Work on the system ! 96% available for external Work.

This is slightly different from the Warranic Wheel which also used compressed air - it shot a projectile across the wheel to cause Excess Torque.

I've looked at the vid a couple of times. I must be missing something ? I can't see the top most 1.5 ton mass either being lifted to a greater radius (i.e. increase its GPE), or see it being advanced or retarded positionally around the rim (at the same radius) to cause Excess Torque.

These would be the usual two methods to maintain weight imbalance. Does anyone have a better idea how the mass is "shifted" by the gas to cause the torque effect ?

It's interesting that this figure is the same as Bessler's "Mercedes Benz" fig.
Looking back through the posts I think Clarkson calls this the Apologia Wheel.
I didn't realise the illustration came from there.

[Fletcher]

The number of 'arms' doesn't make any difference, imo.

There may be some resemblance to the Apologia Drawing in that 3 sectors are created but its just a simple form and number to test with little complexity.

If one were so inclined I guess they could work backwards. 1.5 tons being lifted at some point x distance. That gives so much GPE in Joules. Then work out how much work must be done by a compressor to potentialize a volume of gas to then lift one mass the required distance.

Then compare this to the 4% stated as required for internal use of the 100% available.

Not coming close to stacking up for me I'm afraid - tho I'd love to be proved wrong.

I figure they are looking to extract environmental heat from air as the free energy source, much like a electric heat pump does, with its compressor. A heat pump is efficient but it's not OU afaik.

[Senax]

We know there's 3rd derivative energy available in a 360° pendulum.
It's just a matter of transferring it from the nadir to the zenith by means of
a spring so as to get smooth circular 2nd derivative motion with the
third derivative energy all used up.

It seems to me that the air bottles are being used as a pneumatic
spring. Presumably it must be superior to a mechanical spring. Probably a
matter of how the energy generation and release is more controllable. The
process is probably so fast that the compression and expansion are adiabatic
so no heat losses then.

I imagine that the three "cylinder" system gives smoother running than a
one cylinder system, as it does in an internal combustion energy for example.

The angle X° must be the "flop" allowed to the weights. The pneumatic blast
flops the weight over top dead centre.

Seems OK to me. I'll start modifying my Vimmy wheel to illustrate the
mechanism. 😎

[ovyyus]

The process is probably so fast that the compression and expansion are adiabatic so no heat losses then.

An opposite approach might be a slower diabatic process with potential to exchange energy with its surroundings.

[Senax]

Bessler has turned the image upside down so as to hide in plain view.
Being a satanic Mason he would do that wouldn't he.

Rasselasss is a good example. He has modified the snake at the end of
his name by adding two more.

S is the 19th letter of the alphabet. 19 upside down is 61 so we have 616161.
What do the ones stand for?

Tree of life in the Garden of Eden perhaps.
May be a masons plumb bob representing truth (true vertical).

If you eat this apple you will know the truth.

[Senax]

Here's a "print screen" of my version of the Italian mooie energy




Here is the mp4 from which the image was taken:
https://frankgrimer.uk/mooie_energia_italia.mp4

[WaltzCee]

Fletcher once made the point eventually this is going to be solved. Then what do we do?
Where do we go from here? A footnote?

Address
Via del Roncheto 26 - 34145 Trieste
Email
info@mooie-energie-italia.it
Phone #
+39 340 11 43 858

I want to send a congratulatory email, on behalf of all you Screwballs, but I don't believe it's
my place to do that. That's never stopped me before.

However this could be an historic moment, so I don't want to screw things up. Again.
I'm going to flag this post and get Scott into the discussion. Maybe everyone could put their
thoughts down to give him some ideas to formulate the congratulatory email.

I'll start it off.

You bastards, that's my idea! I'm going to sue you for everything
you're worth and then some!

or

We are very pleased that someone has managed to accomplish
what we've been trying to do for a very long time. All the best.

It will not let me flag my own post. Are you kidding me. Next thing you know it's going to tell
me I can't ignore myself. Stupid software. I'm just going to flag Frank's post on top of mine.
It's nothing personal Frank.

[ovyyus]

or

Are you a bunch of satanic masons?

That should shake the tree.