Posted by Joel L. Lewis (24.197.38.131) on May 27, 2003 at 14:40:19:
In Reply to: Re: Yet ANOTHER idea(I THINK this is a good one, though!:-D :-)) posted by Mike on May 27, 2003 at 13:35:23:
I'll try to clarify.:-) Take that same lever, and hang one of the weight's from it's position. The lever remains level, because, as I recently discovered to my embarrassment, the weight's still counterballance. So the lever remains level, but now the weights THEMSELVES are deffinitely NOT level. The weight that's hanging from one end is obviously lower.
Still with me? Easy enough so far, right?
Okay, now imagine tilting the lever until the two weights themselves are level with each other. What happens then when the lever moves to regain equilibrium by leveling? Keeping in mind that the end with the weight hanging from it is pointing up, and the end with the weight attached is pointing down, the end of the lever with the weight directly attached will move UP, corret? And the end from which the other weight hangs will move down, correct? Therefore, the weight directly attached to the lever will move up, and the weight hanging from the other end will move down, the same distance-and therefore, in finding equilibrium and leveling itself, the lever has also moved the weight's APART, and what is there then but to allow the weights to dissengage the lever(or sides of a wheel, if you will), and directly engage a seperate wheel to level themselves and start the cycle again?
Were you able to follow me that time, I hope?
: So the lever is self-leveling.. now, If I could make different things happen just from drawing a line, I'd be set! Or some magic string.. Maybe I'm the one lost..
: