Sjack Abeling's Gravity Wheel.

[primemignonite]

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

The Demon must be summoned, and this is best done "magically"!

James

[Grimer]

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?

I would think that a minute or two of action would be fine. Frankly, I would expect most people on this board wouldn't need a visual aid to understand what will take place with the arrangements described but even for those who believe without seeing, it is nice to get some visual reinforcement especially when the implications are so important.

[Grimer]

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

You can't separate them completely, obviously. The "photo" is meant to represent a limiting case. I'm sure you must be familiar with calculus and the idea of dx tending to zero.

If we have million weights descending very slowly on the red side and one weight ascending a million times quicker on the right side, say, then the mass on the left side would only be one millionth of the mass on the right side and the translation (as opposed to rotation) velocity on the right side would only be one millionth of the velocity on the left side. In other words on the right side the translation motion would be negligible for engineering purposes and on the left side the mass would also be negligible for engineering purposes.

Now please don't tell me that a million weights isn't practical. I know that. It's a thought experiment. The Germans have a word for it, Gedankenversuch.

Perhaps a more homely example will help.

The reason transatlantic airlines like faster planes is that they need less of them to carry the same number of passengers. If they had a plane that could cross the Atlantic in one minute drop off a container full of passengers in one minute, pick up a container full of passenger for the return flight in one minute and return to England in one minute then I doubt that they would need more than a single aircraft to carry all the passengers who wanted to travel.

The speed of their air-fleet would have been increased. The mass of their air fleet would have been reduced. Another Gedankenversuch.

[greendoor]

Now please don't tell me that a million weights isn't practical. I know that. It's a thought experiment. The Germans have a word for it, Gedankenversuch.

Actually, a million tiny balls of lead shot probably isn't completely out of the question ... It's not my current line of inquiry, but I have played with the idea that Bessler may have filled his weights with lead shot, and maybe they were able to 'evaporate' and then 'condense' ...

Much food for thought ...

[Grimer]

An even better illustration of the wheel transferring linear motion to rotational motion is to drop the weight down a vertical rack. To keep it on track it could be mounted on a lightweight carriage with seven other weights.

The Figure below shows the weights falling slowly down the shafts riding on the smaller diameter cogs and storing the gravitational energy as rotational energy rather than translational energy.


and the next Figure shows them riding on the larger diameter cogs and using the flywheel energy stored during the fall to drive fast up a wider spaced set of shafts



The behaviour of the carriage strongly suggests the behviour of a magnet falling slowly down a copper tube under the influence of gravity. Letting magnets fall through a coil would allow the energy to be stored electromagnetically instead of kinetically. Suitable transformation could then drive the magnets up a coil return path at a higher speed. Such a system might be easier to implement and more flexible than an inertial kinetic system.

[BAR]

If we have million weights descending very slowly on the red side and one weight ascending a million times quicker on the right side, say, then the mass on the left side would only be one millionth of the mass on the right side and the translation (as opposed to rotation) velocity on the right side would only be one millionth of the velocity on the left side. In other words on the right side the translation motion would be negligible for engineering purposes and on the left side the mass would also be negligible for engineering purposes.

The problem is HOW do you arrive at that condition without requiring external energy? Then how do you maintain it with no external energy? Then how do you use it as a source of power?

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=56894

These examples you have shows excess energy where?

[Grimer]

The examples are not intended to show excess energy. The energy of a weight going down is the same as the energy of that weight going up but in the limit all of the energy of the weight going down is in the form of rotational energy all the energy of the weight going up is in the form of translational energy.

The examples show how to unbalance the beam on a continuous basis. If one can do that then gravity will provide the energy as surely as night follows day.

[primemignonite]

Grimer,

On the ramp design idea, if there were excess energy present, it would be very easy to observe, no?

For instance, presuming identical angles of inclination, the second one could be made longer, and if the spinning/rotating weight ascended to a greater height than that from which it started, then the lab-coats could rightly begin their shivering, correct?

(Would that not be a marvelous moment to savor for ever-and-all-time? The "beginning of the end" for the Laws of Thermodynamics as perversely understood, and . . . the tiny windbag physician from Potsdam! A miracle come down from on-high, this would be.)

James

[Grimer]

@ James

I fear you have misunderstood. There is no excess energy gained from the weight going down slowly and rising quickly. Neglecting friction, air resistance, etc. the height fallen and the height risen for an individual weight will be exactly the same.

The purpose of the exercise is to reduce the number of weights on the left hand side at any given moment compared to the number of weights on the right hand side. This will cause an out of balance moment which in turn will result in gravity turning the wheel.

If you don't mind my asking, are you a professional engineer?

[primemignonite]

Grimer,

You say "I fear you have misunderstood. . . ."

Yes, apparently, but now no longer.

I did inqiure as to it.

"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?" - primemignonite

No problem here.

So, it is the excess to one side for longer (dwell period), that is sup-
posed to do the trick? Well, this seems more plausible than the first
notion. It would handily explain why it could self-start. I like it.

I am even more encouraged as to it's ultimate success.

No, I don't mind your inquiry. Sorry to say that I am not. Perhaps I
am an amateur one. An autodidact in most everything, though I enjoyed
much groundwork on which to place the latter for having been a real
organ builder (to journeyman) and later (and earlier), a piano turner/tech.

I taught myself machining to a needed degree and now work in the area
of wax cylinder phonographs. That's about it. Now, you know as much
as I do about me! :-)

One thing about the Abeling configuration, is that it has been said that
energy is transferred by impact at above right. I really wonder about that.
Ke does not take kindly to it's transference by that ruse, though Dutch-
man 'sGravesande felt strongly otherwise.

Grimer, if you look for the Topic "A Rogue's Gallery" by John Collins, you
will find many of the characters who inhabit this bailiwick. Most of the
main ones are there.

It is traditional (though not mandatory) for newcomers to post their visages
there for other members to see. (It is closed to the unwashed public rabble,
being in the Community Buzz section.) In two too ideal versions, I am present
there. Hope to see you.

James

[Grimer]

@ James

Thanks for your reply. I have done as you suggested and posted my pic in the rogues gallery. I must say you looked much younger than I imagined.

(that's meant to be a compliment. )

[Grimer]

As an alternative to the arrangement of discs shown in this post on could have the disc weights with their axes in line with the gravitational acceleration instead of perpendicular to it.

The diagram below shows the discs gathering angular momentum as they fall down a low incline internal shaft and converting this momentum into velocity and the drive up an high incline external shaft.



If the shafts have 3 start threads and the discs have three single shaft interactions then the shaft spirals could be staggered so that the discs are always at the same minimum spacing on the descent ant the same maximum spacing on the ascent.

[silverfox]

Greetings my Fellow "Prisoners of Gravity..."

I've only just recently become interested in Bessler and the altogether intriguing topic of gravity wheels in general so you'll have to pardon any lack of sophistication or clumsiness in my own humble and well intentioned if not particularly well informed musings.

I was trying to find some additional input and information on what Abeling might be up to and what others who enjoy dwelling and speculating on such weighty matters might happen to think about it. According to the Great Google this place is right at the top ... so I figured I'd come here and maybe unload a bit and see which way things turn from there...hmmm?

It seems I have a slightly different and perhaps simpler take on Abeling's wheel that in all liklihood is probably just as useless as all the rest but "nothing ventured, nothing gained" as the old saying goes and any new bits to try and fit into any unsolved puzzle can at least help to more clearly focus on some of the edges and angles that do have to be eventually matched.

From my own primitive understanding of Abeling's version the weights are only "on the wheel" when they are in the notch at the end of their hcokey stick shaped slots on the outer edge of the wheel, which is roughly somewhere between 1 and 5 o'clock and pointed in the direction of the wheel's transit.

The rest of the time they are completely "off" and simply being pushed along the curving inclines of an outer track that is actually bearing the bulk of their weight while the general movement of the overall slot simply becomes a mechanism to apply the full force of the wheel and any weights currently dropping on it into assisting and maintainiing that weigh's own forward momentum as it rolls along that outside and somewhat eliptical track and forcefully back into to it's starting notch for another go.

So the weights aren't actually being "lifted" by the wheel in any way. That's only logical because it takes less enrgy to move them in that fashion as opposed to any other. As for the individual weights hopping on at 1 o'clock, that too seems be a far better spot to beigin the overbalancing than 12 or slightly after which is essentially a neutral position and actually creates more work for the wheel to turn them untill they get at least that far along to begin actually overbalancing the wheel.

Hopping off as it approaches 5 similarly reduces a drag that would otherwise begin there as the weight's own gravity is diverging from the wheel's own direction of travel and instead uses it for some useful momentum to help propel the weight on it's way as it rolls along it's own eliptical path rather than taking anything away from the wheel besides it's own weight and improving the wheel's trust from behind it, if anything.

It might actually be wiser to have another weight beginning to drop at exactly that point to make full use of that particular opportunity while helping the whell to more efficiently absorb whatever residual energy might otherwise be lost in it's impact.

Both of those features also greatly reduce the amount of vertical travel and distance the individual weights have to cover in order to return to their jumping-off point again.

As for how workable the idea actually is, I think it's important to consider the mass, motion, and momentum of the wheel with whatever weights are on it at any given moment vs. the mass, motion, and momentum of whatever rolling weights have to be pushed up and around their own outside track in order to hop back onto it as two very separate yet complimentary processes to get the real gyst of what's likely going to make it work if it can work at all.

Sort of like a "Drop Zone" ride at the amusement park that suddenly detaches before it hits the bottom and smoothly slides off onto a roller-coaster track almost straight down at first and then up through a looping hook that only requires a good crank from it's dropping counter-weight at the right moment and have the centrifical force it's path is forcing it into sling it the rest of the way round and back with a smack onto it's notch on the wheel to cycle once again.

Does any of that possibly make any sense to anyone?

Now Charles Campbell created an 8' wheel using ball weights that were either billiard balls or ball bearings about the same size as them that could, in fact, run under it's very own power based on pretty much the same idea of "on" and "off-loading" the balls around the same 1 and 5 o'clock positions as well, but his device was simply too unwieldy and with so many small balls in play over such large dimensions to turn it that after more than few minutes of steady operation the balls would be jumping and flying off at odd angles and points from their increasing spin just as soon as the wheel started to pick-up even the slightest bit of speed.

Mind you he still managed to get a respectable number of complete revolutions to prove the point that it could be done but had to abandon it to find some better set-up and way to apply it.

There are a number of critical ingredients as I see it but the more significant ones strike me as being that the slot has to be designed in such a way that it is only a contact point for pushing the weight from behind without unecessarily interfering or absorbing any of it's weight or energy while as large a portion of that weight and energy are being translated directly to carrying it along on that outside track and back to it's starting point.

The vids of an attempted replication of what Abeling's wheel can only be imagined to be along those lines and done working entirely from scratch, guesswork and what little information can be trusted at the moment looks reasonably promising.

Without a great deal of tinkering it's already capable of moving one very crudely mounted and slim, single rod shaped weight, well up over the wheel's centre solely from the pull of gravity on it's counterweight being gently released already in it's slot from the top. You can see the updates on that as it's being pursued here if you haven't already or recently...

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory: ... ower_Plant

Now whether that weight would have fared better if either it or the wheel or possibly both were heavier, or it rolled with a smoother action, a better optimized curve, or just possibly with some additional help from the either the wheel or maybe just a damn good shove to help overcome the wheel's latent inertia and get it to some kind of "take-off speed" which it most likly has, all remain to be seen.

My question is whether or not any of those tantalizing propositions could be the answer or enhanced sufficiently to do what what I've suggested or does they stimulate any sparks towards some alternative propositions that might also be able to make some use of any of them?

[primemignonite]

silverfox,

Welcome to The Corridor of Mediocrities.

One thousand two hundred and one words for your first post!

It would seem that you will be another like our own greendoor.

I hope and trust though, that you will be the more attentive to those of us who might ask you a question, or two?

"James! Just as it is with details, manners count!"

As to the Abeling enchantment of present, let us see the animated creature itself appear before too much energy might be misspent on divining it's "operative" "secrets"?

Again, welcome . . .

James (D.D.G.)

[silverfox]

Well James...

thank-you for those most succinct and compact 70 odd words in your first exchange with me, not that I actually counted or ever bother with such numerical mysteries myself or I might have simply added another five hundred and forty three to match the year that Bessler was born strictly for effect...hmmm? lol

"Words are the tools of thought..." as Rushkin so aptly put it, and both of those come quite readily to hand for me so it's more the case that I didn't want anyone to think that I'm some miserable old skinflint in either of those or any other departments, especially when I've only just walked in the door, so to speak.

So you and anyone else may feel quite free and comfortable in asking me anything you like and I'd be only to happy to give you whatever I honestly can in return, in as an intelligent, civilized, and entirely friendly a fashion as I can.

I would have hoped that in a forum like this that would simply go without saying but I can appreciate the fact that there are very few places left on the web that haven't had their fair share of spoilers and mischief makers to make people apprehensive before, rather than after having some reason to be that way with anyone new arriving in their midst.

As for speculations wild, idle, or otherwise, each of us must be willing to trust and follow their own intuition in whatever way it leads them. There is precious little in "the obvious" that ever turns out to simply be that way. What goes up must certainly come down, but obeying any of the artificial rules we've concocted and accepted more out of convenience or by merely not having anything better at hand is another matter altogether. Reality is far more flexible than most understand it to be and so too are the rules it happens to play by.

A ball that is spinning and launched straight-up will travel higher than an identical one that isn't spinning, even and most particularly when that test is conducted in the strictest of vacuums, as it has been.

What's more, it also comes down faster to arrive in the very same amount of elapsed time. There's a certain sense to that in regards to the presence of additional energy or possibly even some form of induced magnetism owing to that spin but what about it explains gravity itself being stretched like a rubber band and then snapping right back just exactly as if it were?

There are obviously some holes in our theories that may be far bigger than those theories themselves. Our imagination is far too preoccupied with blowing our fears of what might happen without them out of any and all proportion rather than creatively seeking some entirely new and less limiting ones from which to intellligently consider such things even when we know only too well we can't possibly take another step without falling flat on faces if we don't.

None of us are free to any extent from grappling with that problem in some form or fashion. I am surrounded by and even communicating right now with devices that were nothing but "impossible" and pure unadulterated fantasy when I was a boy. By that same token there have been innumerable practicalities everyone was so absolutely certain were imminent that haven't budged so much as an inch closer to reality in more than the half a century since then that they can hardly be considered anything else but "impossible" at this point, and so it very much goes.

My interest in this forum is atributable to a longstanding recognition of that basic fact of life as well as some as unexplored potential of my own that is trying to surface that seems to have drawn me here at the moment. It has also broken a rather long spell of not actually wanting to write, which I've generally done as much to more clearly see and examine my own thoughts and feelings about topics I consider important as comminicate them to others.

I'm sorry if that's overloaded the boards a bit at the moment but this topic has turned out to be one of those important ones though I'm unable to put my finger on exactly "why?" it is or should be in any more definitive terms than that. Let's just say that's what I'm here to discover if I can or perhaps some more serendipitous find that may prove even better in the long run.