I haven't really been keeping up with this thread. I just wasn't all that impressed with the video and such. I did finally go to the website and do some reading of what this is about. Here is what I think his focus is somewhat about.....
The invention of the "Fall and Lift control system" was done towards the end of 2006. The system transports, controls and transmits mass/weight to (for instance) a drive shaft. This system was the foundation for a machine that can work on weights/mass only, without adding any form of energy. It's purpose is to drive other objects.
Now, this sounds like something that John Collins would put forth....the difference between weight and mass is of course, the force of gravity! So, he is basically implying here that his machine has the ability to lose the force of gravity exerted at some point of the rotation and thus the weight just becomes....mass?
Steve
Finding the right solution...is usually a function of asking the right questions. -A. Einstein
Grimer .. some here for a long time have thought Bessler's wheels might well be a type of Stirling Engine which once set in motion draws its energy from the immediate environment i.e. ambient conditions - the obvious conclusion is that it is some type of thermal gradient driven engine though if this is the case then the method he used to create & exploit the gradient is ingenious, simple & not at all obvious, to get his reported power & performance - it is however likely that he is using known physics in a different or non-obvious way - one we have not made the connection with as yet & your theory would perhaps meet those criteria, as perhaps other less exotic theories do - the more robust the theory the more likely it is to translate into physics fact so I wish you luck breaking out the proof - you seem to have the ability & logical thinking required to do so convincingly but as too whether Abeling's wheel is a Stirling analogue I will have to wait & see ?
Grimer .. some here for a long time have thought Bessler's wheels might well be a type of Stirling Engine which once set in motion draws its energy from the immediate environment i.e. ambient conditions - the obvious conclusion is that it is some type of thermal gradient driven engine though if this is the case then the method he used to create & exploit the gradient is ingenious, simple & not at all obvious, to get his reported power & performance - it is however likely that he is using known physics in a different or non-obvious way - one we have not made the connection with as yet & your theory would perhaps meet those criteria, as perhaps other less exotic theories do - the more robust the theory the more likely it is to translate into physics fact so I wish you luck breaking out the proof - you seem to have the ability & logical thinking required to do so convincingly but as too whether Abeling's wheel is a Stirling analogue I will have to wait & see ?
Nah, don't believe it. That's a cop out. People don't want to mess with the Holy of Holies - Gravity. There's no way that amount of energy is being drawn from other than the gravitational wind - the homely way I like to visualize gravity. Not only that but in Bessler's day they knew b****r all about that kind of stuff.
I'm only using the Carnot cycle as an analogy, as a template. Gravity is the equivalent of the heat input in the Carnot cycle. Motion on the right is the equivalent of the linear motion of the atoms, i.e. the Pressure. Circular motion on the left is the equivalent of the temperature. I'm gradually getting my head around this fascinating problem and will report when I make any significant progress. Now I'd better go and find "Laws of Form" written by someone who's name I can't remember.
That didn't take long. G. Spencer-Brown - Thirty-three quid, the cheapest from Amazon. No way I'm paying that. Fortunately I only needed to quote it as a reference. I can remember the concepts I need. 8-)
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
". . . Now, this sounds like something that John Collins would put forth....
the difference between weight and mass is of course, the force of gravity! . . ."
- Steve
Mightn't it be more precise to state it as 'inertial mass' and 'gravitational mass';
the first being what it is in free space while stationary, and the other, this same
quantity as when being attracted by gravity?
I've now heard two explanations as to how asymmetrical force is
supposedly achieved by the Abeling Gravity Wheel.
The first being, that it is accomplished by impact at the top, when it
(the weight) moves onto the acute angled section.
The second being, that it somehow loses mass because set-to spinning
on the upside.
This last case reminds me of Prof. Laithwaite's famous scandalization
at the Royal Society, when his gyroscope lost weight while going and
thereby somehow offending mightily, the powdered wigs present.
(Perhaps Grimer, by way of a simple explanation, might help here?)
James
Cynic-In-Chief, BesslerWheel (Ret.); Perpetualist First-Class; Iconoclast. "The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
Grimer wrote:... There's no way that amount of energy is being drawn from other than the gravitational wind - the homely way I like to visualize gravity...
Guess and calculation attempts here over the years suggest Bessler's most powerful wheel could output between about 30 and 130 Watts, depending on who is guessing and calculating. About how much energy do you think was 'being drawn' by Bessler's largest wheel?
Grimer wrote:Not only that but in Bessler's day they knew b****r all about that kind of stuff...
If knowing bugger all about heat prevented Bessler from developing a heat engine then, similarly, wouldn't knowing bugger all about gravity also prevent him from developing a gravity engine?
LOL Mmmm... You sound as though you support the heat theory. Each to his own. Perhaps I should have been more diplomatic.
Interesting info about the output. Thanks for that. It's not a lot of watts is it. Still, its the principle that counts. The rest is merely engineering, eh! Personally I still don't think there is the remotest chance of the Wheel being some kind of heat pump. Sorry.
And if a survey was taken of the membership I'm feel very confident that the overwhelming majority would go for gravity.
As for not knowing about gravity. He knew the essentials. Indeed, if he lived today and had been taught all that relativity bollocks he would be in a far worse position.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
The Abeling Gravity Wheel topic is now up to eighty seven
scroll pages over at overunity.com!
This has grown to such a size only over a period of ten
days, or so. I came in at about the middle with awareness.
Tonight, I determined to start at page one and go through
the entire pile but I did not get very far before,
'LO-AND-BEHOLD!',
WHAT did I soon find, but the very answer to my question
itself put just earlier today, and this from the very words
of the inventing Dutchman himself, as extracted from
Abeling's Dutch language page and quite ably trans-
lated into English by yet another Dutchman, namely one
"Dutchy"!
To me it seems the more complete than the official English
page there available does.
At the risk of offending and/or crossing the ethical line - and
thereby getting myself into Deep Dutch - I will here paste it in
with full accreditation accompanying and with apologies
offered beforehand, for any malfeasance possibly done.
It answered my question fully; and to me it has the ring
of truth about it, and in addition, that it seems in key ways
possibly the very principle used by Bessler, discovered long
before but somehow done more simply by him, according to Die Landgrave Karl's minute, but most revealing revelation.
Consider this: weights going far and near and yet not the
reason itself for it's successful motus, but rather, being
some thing other, which is here, in this new design.
I believe it only fitting that a Dutchman might in the end have
found the secret, given the intense and impassioned involve-
ment of our dear, honest-to-a-fault but devilishly persistent
'sGravesande of Leiden.
(I do believe that I'm beginning to feel my 'Dutch'!)
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #40 on: April 05, 2009, 01:06:57 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
On Abelings website i found a short description of the principle he uses. Seems like is harnessing the centrifugal force that the weights are creating. I've translated the part below.
I hope it helps.
From his website:
V: Waar komt de extra energie vandaan in uw systeem? Q: Where does the excess energy in your system come from?
A: De gewichten worden per twee toegepast, een vallend/duw gewicht en een gewicht dat omhoog gebracht moet worden. Door de vinding van het duo hefkrachtsysteem ondervindt het vallend/duw gewicht nagenoeg geen hinder van het gewicht dat omhooggebracht moet worden. Linksboven in het systeem ontstaat een versnelling van het gewicht (zoals bij kogel stoten). Het gewicht verplaatst zich hier sneller dan het systeem waarin het zich bevind, waardoor het systeem op deze plaats (rechtsboven in het systeem) een duw krijgt, want het systeem vangt het gewicht weer op. De route van de gebruikte gewichten in het systeem wordt vooraf bepaald. Daardoor bevinden de gewichten zich altijd in een vaste positie ten opzichte van elkaar, zodat het gewicht dat omhoog gebracht moet worden minder weerstand uitoefend op het vallend/duw gewicht. Dit zorgt ervoor dat het systeem vanuit iedere stand/positie begint te draaien. De extra kracht wordt linksonder in het systeem gerealiseerd en bovenin het systeem overgebracht op het systeem zelf waardoor versnelling (extra energie) ontstaat. Wanneer het systeem het gewicht niet zou opvangen dan zou het gewicht met hoge snelheid wegvliegen.
A:The weights are applied in pairs, one falling/pushing weight and a weight that has to be lifted. Because of the invention of the "twin liftingsystem" the falling/pushing weight is hardly hindered by the weight that has to be lifted. In the upper left of the system an acceleration of the weight is created (like with shot put). At this point the weight moves faster than the system it is part of. The system gets pushed in this area (upper right area) because it has to 'catch' the accelerated weight. The route the weights take in the system is predetermined, that way the weights are always aligned with eachother in a way that the weight that has to be raised, puts less resistance onto the falling/pushing weight. This accomplishes that the system starts rotating from any position. The excess power is realised in the bottom left end of the system and in the top system transferred to the system itself, by which acceleration (= excess energy) is created. If the system wouldn't 'catch' the weight it would leave the system at high velocity.
Regards,
Dutchy (and yes... I'm Dutch. )
« Last Edit: April 05, 2009, 01:30:57 PM by dutchy1966 »
Cynic-In-Chief, BesslerWheel (Ret.); Perpetualist First-Class; Iconoclast. "The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
.........
This is the Carnot diagram I will be using as a template for analysing the action of the Abeling.
Normally the Carnot diagram is presented with the adiabatic condition resulting from insulation so that no heat enters or leaves the gas during those legs. With the Abeling there is no insulation so any quasi-adiabatic change has to be brought about by speed.
Insulation may be thought of as slowing down the rate of entry of heat during the passage of the piston along the adiabatic legs. Increasing piston velocity is the inverse and restricts the time the heat has to enter the adiabatic leg.
There are always two ways of changing a variable, the open way, changing the numerator, and the underhand way, changing the denominator. If a common thief wants to steal you money he has to decrease the numerator. He has to take the fiat money out of you pocket, which is difficult cos you'll probably notice. The government however can steal your money the underhand way by increasing the denominator. Since this doesn't change the pound in your pocket the government hope you won't notice and it is usually a long time before you do.
Newton failed to realise that sound transmission was an adiabatic phenomena and by using the isothermal equation instead of the adiabatic was out somewhat in his calculation for sound's speed.
Light is another example of adiabatic change [that's probably heresy but this is the Bessler forum after all ;-) ]
I have exaggerated the slope of the adiabatic to make the diagram clearer.
Attachments
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
Joined: 05 Nov 2003
Last Visit: 17th April 2009, 1:15 pm
Total posts: 2754
[4.92% of total / 1.38 posts per day]
Find all posts by ovyyus
Word Count: 168,274
61.1 average words per post
Location: Australia
Website: http://www.orffyre.com
Occupation: Bill McMurtry
Interests: obvious
Blog:
I think you must be trying to break your addiction, Bill. ;-)
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
Yeah James .. I read that passage on overunity.com a few days ago too - what struck me was how very neatly it tied in with Bessler's words of description [a little too neatly perhaps] - a part that has always fascinated me was a simple line from AP "the shotgun shoots - the bow twangs" - sounds awfully like JB was launching a weight & moving it higher by acceleration force, rather than the mundane principle of applied leverage where weights move in a controlled & fastidious manner - this also seems to be echoed in the Abeling wheel - 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] - so in my estimation [if Abeling is for real] he has a lifting system that sidesteps the full quotient of debilitating back torque that usually arises from applying forces inside a wheel [that is, if he is using Cf's & inertia for his acceleration].
I'd really like someone to get to the bottom of this & show the physics that leads to excess energy ? - meantime I'm a tad suspicious of the convenient similarities to JB, IMO - either he's for real, in which case the simlarities are justified, or he is not !
Are we ever going to be able to see a video of the wheel? If it is patented and a great breakthrough, there is nothing to stop it. Unless it still don't work. IMO
BTW did you get that design I sent you. PM or email me.
Thanks
"Our education can be the limitation to our imagination, and our dreams"
