Impact is the Key

[11Turion]

I haven't built it yet, so I don't know, but it would depend on the amount of weight on either side of the fulcrum, and the length of the fulcrum arms. I'm sure you can get less weight to lift a larger weight by changing the length of the two arms on each side of the fulcrum point.

The idea is to have weight on one side out close to the rim and the same weight on the opposite side in close to the hub so that the wheel is overbalanced.

[Tarsier79]

The question was intended to get you to examine the theoretical motive force of your design.

I'm sure you can get less weight to lift a larger weight by changing the length of the two arms on each side of the fulcrum point.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 0053#90053

[11Turion]

Since a wheel is nothing more than a circular lever whose fulcrum has become an axle, that would be the theoretical motive force of this design. A weight on one side of the axle that is closer to the rim will move a larger weight on the opposite side of the axle that is closer to the hub (fulcrum). At least that is my understanding. I haven't had physics since high school, and that was back when dinosaurs ruled the earth. What little I actually learned (it WAS right before lunch after all) I have forgotten through lack of use over the years, but I do remember that the only two machines are the lever and the inclined plane and all others are modifications of these two. By (A) using two weights that slide up and down, and two fulcrums (three counting the axle), I can lift a (second set of weights) larger weight out to the rim and move one in from the rim. The (B) rotation of the wheel causes the first set of weights to slide (gravity) and the movement of the second set of weights away from the rim and out to the rim cause the out of balance "lever" (two equal weights at different distances from the fulcrum) to move the wheel, or rotate it. One causes the other in this design. A causes B and/or B causes A. Once you start it turning by hand, it SHOULD turn. I SHOULD be rich, famous and handsome too, but that is another story. The masses on both sides of the hub (fulcrum) are equal. The weights on both sides of the hub (fulcrum) are equal, but the relationship to the rim changes, which is why the wheel would rotate. I think. LOL

[path_finder]

Dear 11Turion,
All static systems in the nature tends to reach the minimum level of energy (see the entropy concept).
This is the reason why the earth is spherical (about only, because the day rotation).
This is the reason why an unbalanced wheel reaches its keeling position.
If you have two identical parts with the same potential energy, the whole assembly will rest in the standby position whatever the previous geometry.
Your concept is often named 'the Maxwell daemon', where one part exchange selectively some energy with the other part.
Unfortunately any Maxwell daemon is an energy consumer.
This is the reason why today nobody has been successful in the creation of such as daemon.

As explained here on this forum so many times a working wheel designed on the simple unbalance principle, cannot work.
The combination of two different sources of energy are needed, the second in charge to assume the perenity of the first one.
But the first one alone cannot do the job.

It is the case of the Jaeger Le Coultre Atmos Clock 528, see here:
http://www.abbeyclock.com/lecoultre.html
which uses the variations of temperature for rewinding the spring.

It is also the case for the Athanasius Kircher's Magnetic clock, see here:
http://hotgates.stanford.edu/Eyes/kircher/intro.html
supposed to be driven by a magnetic force (instead may be a waterclock?)

At a certain level this is perhaps the case for the Ignatz clock, see here:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTxnFPDeb2U
where the centrifugal energy is used for slow down the force of the weight.

Now,
What can be used by Bessler? I have no idea.
May be a substance with a density modified by the shock?
or a clicker flipping under some temperature variation?
and an adiabatic compression/decompression (made by the bellows) like in the refrigerator?
etc.

IMHO Bessler did NOT discover something extraordinary.
At his time the centrifugal force has not yet explained (see Coriolis, later).
This is the reason why I'm focusing on all designs combining the gravity field with the centrifugal force.
The kinetic energy is used here for maintain the weight outside of his keeling axis, the potential energy of the wheel staying at the same level.
By the way in these situation, it is like the wheel falling without end.

[daxwc]

PF quote:

What can be used by Bessler? I have no idea.
May be a substance with a density modified by the shock?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7zHeyoYZTw

[path_finder]

The sublimation phenomenon: direct path from solid to volatil state.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbXNQfHnI3w

More interesting: the fulminated mercury. See here: http://www.physorg.com/news107176552.html

The alchemists of the seventeenth century were already aware that mixtures of “spiritus vini� (ethanol) and mercury in “aqua fortis� (nitric acid) made for an explosive brew. In his book Laboratorium Chymicum, Johann Kunckel von Löwenstern describes the vigorous reaction of mercury nitrate with alcohol to form mercury fulminate (Hg(CNO)2)

[iacob alex]

.....as you can see the animation of a gravity wheel , at :
https://youtu.be/fviYBY-uAQQ
If the "free falling stone" can blow out the lamp of the mind ...let's imagine a "different key" (not a collision and ...not a menuet musical scenario ) , so to use the gravity free fall.
Al_ex

[Grimer]

This thread, long since defunct (if we exclude iacob who's alway digging up dead bodies) is where I came in.

Now I have reached the end of my journey, or at least "the end of the beginning" and thrown Rommel back on his heels I thought I'd revisit it for old time's sake.

I see now I should have chosen the word Impulse, Force x time, rather than impact for impulse as manifest by that humble child's toy is indeed the key.

"He has put down the mighty from their seat. He has exalted the humble."

[spinner361]

Collisions are bad.

[Grimer]

But impulses can be good. :-)

[JGarriga]

Collisions are bad.

and impulsions are good.
Ok

But the point is that impacts, when correctly used can cancel gravity.

[raj]

The wheel impacts the pendulum.
Then pendulum turns the wheel.

And the wheel goes on.

Raj

[Georg Künstler]

Raj,

The wheel impacts the pendulum.
Then pendulum turns the wheel.

And the wheel goes on.

Wow for this sentences !!
This is the perfect description.

[Andyb]

I will go with that Raj

[IamAllergicToEntropy]

Jerk/Jounces + heat is never good :(