Play seesaw...

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

Post Reply
rasselasss
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 918
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:19 pm
Location: northern ireland

re: Play seesaw...

Post by rasselasss »

Alex.just a thought for thought's sake,if the copper pipe was coiled,using roughly twice the length of the straight pipe as used in the youtube demo.but equaling exactly the same vertical drop distance and using a strong Neo.round ball magnet ......would the ball magnet take twice the time to exit the bottom end....thus slowing the gravity drop time further....Good Luck.
iacob alex
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2413
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:37 am
Location: costa mesa /CA/US
Contact:

re: Play seesaw...

Post by iacob alex »

Hi Rasselasss!
You can find on youtube a lot of movies regarding neodymium magnets moving inside conductive tubes , due to gravity fall.

Tube's shape can be so diverse...I have no idea about your question ,sorry.

About gravity and magnets , take a look at :

www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7_Pg_5Vmus

Again sorry , I am involved about a gravity power collector as a "pure" mechanical arrangement...the next step can be to "add" magnets in some way.

Al_ex
Simplicity is the first step to knowledge.
iacob alex
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2413
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:37 am
Location: costa mesa /CA/US
Contact:

re: Play seesaw...

Post by iacob alex »

Hi Rasselasss!
I think that this new game (moving magnets inside conductive tubes) , can evolve into some interesting domains...between others the flotability of neo-magnets inside tube (as a "magnetic bay") , can be a solution for cetains designs (so called Murilo's "avalanche drive").

For the moment this "image" it's a little "misty" ...

Al_ex
Simplicity is the first step to knowledge.
Trevor Lyn Whatford
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
Location: England

re: Play seesaw...

Post by Trevor Lyn Whatford »

Hi all,

Dropping a magnet down a copper tube would make the tube heaver, as the resistance of the flux drag would put a percentage of the magnets weight onto the tube, the slower the fall the more weight on the tube!

Edit, also levitating a magnet on a superconductor (or repelling magnets ) is not antigravity as the floating magnets weight would be on the superconductor!Edit, transferring the weight through the repelling flux.

Regards Trevor
Last edited by Trevor Lyn Whatford on Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
User avatar
murilo
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3199
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:49 pm
Location: sp - brazil
Contact:

re: Play seesaw...

Post by murilo »

Trevor,
if at straight position of device mechanisms one could 'discharge', or rest, a weight for an instant, against ground, it should be good. ( I'm talking about any kind of 'g' powered set, not only avalanchedrive.)
TC!
M
Trevor Lyn Whatford
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 12:13 pm
Location: England

re: Play seesaw...

Post by Trevor Lyn Whatford »

Yes Murilo,

That is just one of the tools in our tool box, but I would not only say ground, I would say grounded parts ( Frame mounted ), this can give the advantage of decreasing weight on the ascending side of the wheel, but it has to be in the right place. I would prefer a free moving wheel and weight rollers instead of ramps and weight rollers, This tool is very limited though, and would only benefit some designs, it would harm more designs than it would benefit!

With the Avalanchedrive though it is best to use the inside of a large outer wheel, linking the weights to it on the double linked chain on the descending side, this gives you a third wheels torque input back into the system.

With much respect, Trevor
I have been wrong before!
I have been right before!
Hindsight will tell us!
User avatar
murilo
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3199
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:49 pm
Location: sp - brazil
Contact:

re: Play seesaw...

Post by murilo »

Trevor,
in clear words, my project avalanchedrive will work without the need of additional assistance but the set diagram - or near to - I have already shown.

What I need are SKILLS to make a new good working wheel for the chain I got.

When/if you come to SP you'll evaluate this by yourself.

When/if you get news about your huge building in your site, pls advise!

TC!!
M
User avatar
jim_mich
Addict
Addict
Posts: 7467
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:02 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by jim_mich »

Murilo, don't waist your time and money. Don't waist other people's time and money on your avalanche drive. It will never work regardless of how good you make the wheels. Your concept is flawed. I'm sorry you cannot understand why it will never work. Heaven knows I've explained it to you every way I know how. Stated simply, your weights fall slow and rise fast. This gives many falling weight and few rising weights. On the rising side, your chain extends the radius of the wheel. Wheels are simply fancy levers. So you have weight pushing down on a short lever and weight lifted upward by a long lever. The mathematical law of levers causes both sides to balance. The same number of weights rise from the bottom pulley as fall from the top pulley. There is no unbalanced forces on the pulleys. Your avalanche drive is simply an optical illusion that looks like it should unbalance. But the truth, which you refuse to to see or understand, is that the two sides balance because of leveraging. No amount of changing dimensions or making good working wheels will ever cause your avalanche drive to work.

Image
rlortie
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8475
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: Stanfield Or.

re: Play seesaw...

Post by rlortie »

Jim wrote: "The same number of weights rise from the bottom pulley as fall from the top pulley".

This hast been my contention all-along! look at the descending side of the top pulley, note that there is one weight hanging "over the top", descending, this one weight is required to pull up the gross load of the ascending.

Murillo says that is not what happens, but I fail to see any other force to turn the top sprocket.

Ralph
User avatar
jim_mich
Addict
Addict
Posts: 7467
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:02 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by jim_mich »

Ralph wrote: look at the descending side of the top pulley, note that there is one weight hanging "over the top", descending, this one weight is required to pull up the gross load of the ascending.

Murillo says that is not what happens
Ralph, in that respect, Murilo is right. There is no weight being pulled upward. All of the weight rests on the bottom pulley. Each link of Murilo's unique chain contains a latching mechanism that falls into place as the chain goes around the bottom pulley. The latch holds the chain in it spread-out spacing. The chain is then pushed upward. As the chain goes around the bottom pulley then its spread-out structure adds to the pulley radius and the combination of pulley and spread-out chain causes the chain to rotate around the bottom pulley at the more outward extended radius. It is as if the bottom pulley were a compound pulley consisting of two pulleys of two diameters. And the chain must expands at an exact same ratio as the ratio between these two pulley diameters.

Murilo once told me (a long time ago) to just change the dimensions and it will all work. And therein is the problem. No matter what dimension are used, the system will always balance. The concept is flawed. Changing dimensions or changing to a new good wheel will never make any difference.

You can look at it from the point of view that for every weight that fall, only one weight rises. The whole system acts like a very fancy lever.


Image
User avatar
murilo
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3199
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:49 pm
Location: sp - brazil
Contact:

re: Play seesaw...

Post by murilo »

Guys,
it's a deep unexplained mystery inside myself!

I still don't know WHY I respond and read your msg about my design, even I know that you are not going to read and reach my words! Truly!

Jim, you have nor a minimum commitment with originality and keeps with the same distorted view for all these YEARS... I said YEARS!

Jim, the comprehension of my conception is beyond your 'way of thinking' and/or intelligence, but anyhow, I still have serious doubts about the good and honest intention you keep to show in this forum.

You see? Up to now Jim and Ralph show different visions on the matter!!!! 8)

Ralph, that sprocket, or wheel, at the top turns 100% free and passively, since the rising assembled chain forces it to turn. This sprocket may even be replaced by a RAMP! Not a big deal! '\'

If the problem you see is only this, the stuff will turn, suspended and hold and managed on the under set sprocket/axle.

BAM and repeating, I look for appreciations on the basic conception but not upon small details of mechanic fails.

TC!
M
ovyyus
Addict
Addict
Posts: 6543
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:41 am

re: Play seesaw...

Post by ovyyus »

Jim, why waste time on deaf ears?
rlortie
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8475
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: Stanfield Or.

re: Play seesaw...

Post by rlortie »

Jim,

I did not say that the weight was being "pulled upward", I stated that it was hanging there, held by the ascending weights plying on the top sprocket.

All this aside, I agree the design is not worth pursuing, but I do not mind discussing it, Some day innovation may rear its head with a remedy.

Ralph
User avatar
jim_mich
Addict
Addict
Posts: 7467
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:02 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by jim_mich »

Ralph wrote:I stated that it was hanging there, held by the ascending weights plying on the top sprocket.
Ralph, I'm sorry. My bad choice of words. "Pulled up" implies the weights are moving upward. "Hanging there" implies the same thing except that they are not moving. What I was trying to say or imply was that the weights do not hang from the top pulley. The are supported from the bottom.


I agree with Bill, why waste time on deaf ears. My main reason in stating the obvious failure of Murilo's concept: there are constantly new people visiting the forum, and they sometimes think Murilo's idea will work.


Image
ovyyus
Addict
Addict
Posts: 6543
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:41 am

re: Play seesaw...

Post by ovyyus »

Jim, if someone thinks Murilo's idea works then that is probably going to be the least of their problems.
Post Reply