Sjack Abeling's Gravity Wheel.

[Bill_Mothershead]

In regards to Grimer's diagram showing 6 balls going down
lifting 2 balls very quickly...

...a clockmaker would immediately think about a second wheel
geared to make it go twice as fast as the main wheel.

[greendoor]

It's a nice picture - but how could this possibly be sustained? If you want to maintain 6 balls falling down while 2 balls are rising, obviously you need an average speed ratio of 3:1 (3V) or this wouldn't last more than 180 degrees. Momentum is conserved. This means that to accelerate each weight to 3V, you need all the momentum of 3 weights just to break even ... see where this is going?

Bessler said that his wheel obeyed Newtons laws, and I believe this to be true.

Trading hight for distance (leverage) will never create surpus energy.
Trading velocity for distance will never create surplus energy.

And while refering to the texbook spinning skater pulling arms inwards, I would point out that you can't ignore the muscle energy input of the skater. This is a good example of bad science being taught to kids.

[Grimer]

As I see it, if one can alter the balance point gravity will create the surplus energy for you.

I believe I can show how this can be done by exchanging rotational energy for linear energy as takes place in the Carnot cycle.

Three days ago Fletcher mentioned the Stirling. The really interesting thing about the Stirling is the way it can run on a block of ice as easily as on a hot coffee. This points up the fact that it is the difference between speed of descent and speed of ascent which is the key. Slowing down the speed of descent is as valuable as speeding up the speed of ascent. But one is the inverse of the other so its a BOGOF situation.

I'll draw up some diagrams.

[BAR]

My opinion is this will not work.

[Grimer]

The diagram below shows the essence of a quasi Carnot adiabatic exchange of energy between rotation (temperature) and translation (pressure)

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171 ... ssler3.jpg



On the downhill slope the cogged weights move relatively slowly on the smaller red cog compared to frictionless sliding because the gravitational energy is mainly going into rotation. The weights are relatively closely spaced.

On the uphill slope the weights move relatively quickly on the larger blue cog and because they are relatively fast they are more widely spaced.

Translated into a wannabe Bessler wheel this leads to a smaller mass density on the fast transit upside of the axle and a larger mass density on the slow transit downside of the axle. Since this leads to the wheel being out of balance it will start to accelerate and continue to do so until the energy input matches the frictional losses or the wheel self-destructs.

[BAR]

heh slope or not the potential is directionally proportional to height, same total energy. Even the rotation is a part of the total potential. Also you can not directly exchange heat energy with gravitational energy. Gravity can generate heat from kinetic energy but I never heard of the reverse. The Carnot cycle can not be used in this argument.

[Grimer]

heh slope or not the potential is directionally proportional to height, same total energy. Even the rotation is a part of the total potential. Also you can not directly exchange heat energy with gravitational energy. Gravity can generate heat from kinetic energy but I never heard of the reverse. The Carnot cycle can not be used in this argument.

I am, of course, aware that "you can not directly exchange heat energy with gravitational energy". I am also aware that the potential is directly proportional to the height and that rotation is part of the total energy

The Carnot cycle is used as an analogy which is why I used the term quasi Carnot. I note your opinion that it cannot be used but I disagree.

[jim_mich]

Scientific Fact: Heat and motion are basically the same things except that heat is on a molecular lever and motion is on a mass-object level.

Scientific Fact: Motion transfers naturally from faster objects to slower objects just as heat transfers naturally from warmer objects to colder objects.

Since heat and kinetic motion are basically the same thing it would seem logical that if kinetic motion energy could transfer naturally from one object to another object resulting in one of the objects moving faster and the other object moving slower then we would have the makings of a mechanical Maxwell's Demon that sorts the kinetic motion of the two objects into faster and slower velocities. One could then use the inertial momentum of the faster object pulling against the inertial resistance of the slower object to run an engine. Thus one would have the makings of a perpetual motion machine.

[Grimer]

I like the "scientific facts" - but thinking of the Stirling I'd just like to add.

And cold transfers naturally from colder object to warmer objects. Or put in another way order (negative entropy) transfers naturally from ordered objects to disordered objects.

Why should the devil have all the best tunes?

[Grimer]

...

The reason is that am still confused as to the purpose
for the gearing in the guide slots. Is this to produce spin
on the weights, or, to just keep them parallel in their tracks?
Figure 6, as I recall.

You also allowed, Fletcher, ". . . - but most of us know
that when you apply a force to accelerate something you
get an counter productive effect robbing the flywheel of
momentum [equal & opposite reactions no less] - . . .?

Of course this is so, that is, except in two cases, one being
if the vector of force is precisely parallel with the axis of rotation,
and the second, and more important, being if said vector is
precisely toward or away from the center of rotation perpen-
dicularly.

I speculated that this would be case, and as to the second,
confirmed it physically. If the structure be rigid and with good
bearings, then it serves as an 'inertial reference' going to
ground.

The center can be pushed against by something on the wheel
'till the cows come home, and no displacement of the wheel
itself will result.

I assume you already know this, but did not say it for brevity's sake.

James

Thanks James. ;-)

Cos you have put your finger on the essential point of the weights plus axle rolling down the down slope on their axle and up the up slope on their rim, viz,

Consider first the weight rolling down on its axle. Imagine the boundary case where the small red cog, the weight axle, is reduced to an infinitesimal size. Then the reaction of the ground, in this case the down slope "vector is precisely toward ... the center of rotation".

Now consider the weight rolling up on its rim. Here more obviously the ground reaction, the immovable object, the inertial reference, switches from the centre to the rim.

Have you ever wondered why atoms have that most peculiar structure with nearly all the weight concentrated into a tiny three dimensional axle?

More later.

[BAR]

Ok then how many Joules or BTU's creates how much gravitational force? The problem is that material things like entitys of mass are 3 dimensional. They occupy a volume of space and change position in space when acquiring kinetic energy. Kinetic energy is indeed identicle to heat. However you are treating the gravitational field as if it is a 3 dimensional entity where it is absolutely not. Gravity is 4th dimensional. It is like the 3 dimensional object occupying all points in space simultanously. Since time is that 4th dimension it has for all intents infinite energy. Gravitation is irreversible unlike material things in a Carnot cycle.

[Grimer]

And now we get to the Heart of the matter



In the limit the right hand side of the wheel is all mass and the left hand side all motion. Gravity acts on the mass not on the motion.

He that hath ..........



The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
'T is mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown;
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty,
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;
But mercy is above this sceptred sway,
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest God's,
When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,
Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
That in the course of justice none of us
Should see salvation: we do pray for mercy;
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy.

William Shakespeare, "The Merchant of Venice", Act 4 scene 1
Greatest English dramatist & poet (1564 - 1616)

[Grimer]

The interesting thing about the Abeling is that he didn't need to have the complexity of moving the circulating weights towards the wheel axle.

If the weights travelled all the way around the circumference, slow on the red blood side, fast on the blue blood side, the differential mass density would lead to a out of balance torque anyway.

The change from running on the axle to running on the rim and the huge change in forward speed is simply a gear box problem. This will be most intense at the bottom dead centre than at the top where ideally the translation and rotation energies will be both be zero.

Funnily enough the slow descent of a weight running on its axle reminds me of the modern children's cars which have an internal flywheel giving them a slow but very deliberate forward speed and an energy sufficient to carry them right across a room.

It would be nice to have film of a weight descending a slope slowly on its axle and then ascending a slope quickly on its rim. Does anyone have the necessary racks and cogs to make a video?

[BAR]

So in the photo how exactly do you separate mass and motion in a wheel without summoning Maxwell's Demon? :)

[primemignonite]

Grimer and BAR,

This is a really great discussion going on between you both.

It reminds me somewhat of the movie "Clash Of The Titans!".

If carried forth long enough - all non-working concepts being
pared-away without mercy - THE SECRET itself might come
popping out, as that which remains.

Grimer, such a dual ramp/roller would not be too hard to build.

What would be needed is your idea of the length and angle of
the ramps and rack, the diameter of the pinions, and the material
and diameter for the roller. (Best, it would be for me, if the mighty
demo were on the smaller rather than larger side.)

Also, ideally, what would we be expecting to observe in terms
of action? Maybe the little runner launching-off the up ramp at
high speed?

If so, would that not be "way cool!", as they say? (Also and
even more deliciously, the physicists would NOT be amused!)

James

PS I am 'light' in the visual motion recording area. I have a still camera
that does record a minute or two of action. Might that do 'er?