A Murilo Solution

[Senax]

Since using a spring is common to Bessler, Abeling and bailywick1 I wonder
if it would also be an answer for the Murilo engine.

If weights are allowed to fall under Newtonian Gravity (NG) then for every
second that passes they fall a greater distance. It is always the last second
that kills you because that has the greatest energy.

Now supposing you connect the weights by springs so that they only fall at
0.9 NG, the rest of the energy is in the springs.

Lock the energy at the bottom just before the turn.
On average the space between weights going down will be smaller than the
space between weights going up.

Therefore there will be more weights going down than there will be going up.

Therefore the total NG force going down force will be greater than the total
going up. In effect you are raising strain energy mass equivalent up the
gravity potential gradient without incurring significant cost.

Now I'm only too well aware that it is easy to make a mistake in this kind of
argument.

However, the reason I think it might work is that going down we have
2nd derivative acceleration energy and going up we have 1st derivative
translation energy.

It is interesting to note that Abeling claimed he was using quadratic energy,
2nd derivative energy in other words. Perhaps he is pulling the weights
towards the centre near the zenith and letting them fall away from the centre
near the nadir. This would be using 2nd derivative energy of acceleration
towards the centre.

It would be ironic if deep coal mine shafts were to be used for such an engine.

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Senax,
you are right With your View.
we need only the Speed difference between going up and down.
Besslerwheel showed this in several pictures for example With the archimedes screw.
here the Mass has to Stay longer on One side of the construction.

Give gravity the Time to Act!!!

[ME]

the reason I think it might work is that
going down we have 2nd derivative acceleration energy and
going up we have 1st derivative translation energy

Can you pretty please provide the units of measurement of both these terms so we can all clearly understand what they mean?

[John Collins]

I don’t know why you continue to use these terms that only you seem to understand. I know you’ve explained it before Frank, but for the life of me I can never remember what they mean, and I wish you would use terms we can all understand. For me, my eyes just glaze over and I move on, but I hate to think I’m missing out on your posts simply because your terminology is inexplicable to me, at least. 🤔

JC

[agor95]

the reason I think it might work is that
going down we have 2nd derivative acceleration energy and
going up we have 1st derivative translation energy

Can you pretty please provide the units of measurement of both these terms so we can all clearly understand what they mean?

1st derivative - velocity - Kinetic Energy.
2nd derivative - acceleration - Potential Energy.

Regards

[murilo]

Since using a spring is common to Bessler, Abeling and bailywick1 I wonder
if it would also be an answer for the Murilo engine.

If weights are allowed to fall under Newtonian Gravity (NG) then for every
second that passes they fall a greater distance. It is always the last second
that kills you because that has the greatest energy.

Now supposing you connect the weights by springs so that they only fall at
0.9 NG, the rest of the energy is in the springs.

Lock the energy at the bottom just before the turn.
On average the space between weights going down will be smaller than the
space between weights going up.

Therefore there will be more weights going down than there will be going up.

Therefore the total NG force going down force will be greater than the total
going up. In effect you are raising strain energy mass equivalent up the
gravity potential gradient without incurring significant cost.

Now I'm only too well aware that it is easy to make a mistake in this kind of
argument.

However, the reason I think it might work is that going down we have
2nd derivative acceleration energy and going up we have 1st derivative
translation energy.

It is interesting to note that Abeling claimed he was using quadratic energy,
2nd derivative energy in other words. Perhaps he is pulling the weights
towards the centre near the zenith and letting them fall away from the centre
near the nadir. This would be using 2nd derivative energy of acceleration
towards the centre.

It would be ironic if deep coal mine shafts were to be used for such an engine.

SENAX,
wow!!! You look to be in the understanding-start on my design!!!
'g' acceleration is a plus and even don't needed.
You make me happy! B))))
BTW remember that spring offer counter forces!!!!
Pls go on!
Regs.
Murilo
BTW2: solid piles, even if articulated, are able to form punctual apply!

[ME]

the reason I think it might work is that
going down we have 2nd derivative acceleration energy and
going up we have 1st derivative translation energy

Senax, can you pretty please provide the units of measurement of both these terms so we can all clearly understand what they mean?

[WaltzCee]

It might be thought of in terms of the water cycle. But rather than the Sun over a large area
and time bringing the water moisture back to the top, rain does that job, the rain being the
mass moving from the top to the bottom.

Stating the obvious, the rain coming down is denser than the moisture going up.

Also missing or different in this model is how do the clouds form?
Obvious questions, 1)why is the sky blue Mommy?
2) ?

[Senax]

the reason I think it might work is that
going down we have 2nd derivative acceleration energy and
going up we have 1st derivative translation energy

Senax, can you pretty please provide the units of measurement of both these terms so we can all clearly understand what they mean?

With all respect I don't think maths will be useful at this stage.

[Senax]

the reason I think it might work is that
going down we have 2nd derivative acceleration energy and
going up we have 1st derivative translation energy

Senax, can you pretty please provide the units of measurement of both these terms so we can all clearly understand what they mean?

With all respect I don't think maths will be useful at this stage.

[Senax]

I don’t know why you continue to use these terms that only you seem to understand. I know you’ve explained it before Frank, but for the life of me I can never remember what they mean, and I wish you would use terms we can all understand. For me, my eyes just glaze over and I move on, but I hate to think I’m missing out on your posts simply because your terminology is inexplicable to me, at least. 🤔

JC

New wine 🍷 - old bottles. 🍾🍾🍾

[ME]

With all respect (?) I don't think maths will be useful at this stage.

When you introduce math-sounding words that only seem to relate to physics while actually saying nothing, then I actually agree this whole topic is useless.

With all your words that aren't useful, when we remove anything related then there's nothing left.

If weights are allowed to fall under Newtonian Gravity (NG) then for every
second that passes they fall a greater distance. It is always the last second that kills you because that has the greatest energy.

Now supposing you connect the weights by springs so that they only fall at
0.9 NG, the rest of the energy is in the springs.

[etc...]

When I follow Agor's argument, then the unit of measurement would be simply the Joule in both cases.

By the looks of your "argument" about the space between weights, then it seems you talk about only momentum that's going up.
The other argument where "Abeling claimed he was using quadratic energy, 2nd derivative energy in other words." may imply Joules-squared?
Hence to avoid any guesses and lengthy discussions about your "working principle" we have to know what you mean.
As it is stated you come across as like you can just write it down easily, hence the simple question, and hence I skipped Agor (sorry for that Agor).

Your talk was ALL about math-like things.
Except you misused Murillo's bottle for selling your own ditchwater.

[agor95]

No problem, I skip posts myself.

However members do not have 'arguments'.

Ho yes they do - Ho no they don't.

We just have Alternative Understanding on the same point.

Some can be converted one to the others.

However some A.U.s are incompatible with life as we know it.

Regards

[Senax]

With all respect (?) I don't think maths will be useful at this stage.

When you introduce math-sounding words that only seem to relate to physics while actually saying nothing, then I actually agree this whole topic is useless.

With all your words that aren't useful, when we remove anything related then there's nothing left.

If weights are allowed to fall under Newtonian Gravity (NG) then for every
second that passes they fall a greater distance. It is always the last second that kills you because that has the greatest energy.

Now supposing you connect the weights by springs so that they only fall at
0.9 NG, the rest of the energy is in the springs.

[etc...]

When I follow Agor's argument, then the unit of measurement would be simply the Joule in both cases.

By the looks of your "argument" about the space between weights, then it seems you talk about only momentum that's going up.
The other argument where "Abeling claimed he was using quadratic energy, 2nd derivative energy in other words." may imply Joules-squared?
Hence to avoid any guesses and lengthy discussions about your "working principle" we have to know what you mean.
As it is stated you come across as like you can just write it down easily, hence the simple question, and hence I skipped Agor (sorry for that Agor).

Your talk was ALL about math-like things.
Except you misused Murillo's bottle for selling your own ditchwater.

................. 😁

[ovyyus]

Argument has been replaced with a smiley now? I'm sure some will be happy to see the bar pushed so low.

Agor95, you seem to be confusing argument with opinion?