Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

### GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

# New Book

Products

WaterMotor kit

### Statistics

• Total Posts: 513903
• Total Topics: 15347
• Online Today: 44
• Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
• Users: 6
• Guests: 7
• Total: 13

### Author Topic: Overbalancing wheel  (Read 128361 times)

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2011, 04:15:02 PM »
Low-Q: forgot to ask, how much static weight it would take to get the same result in both cases?
In order to preserve the same kinetic energy at the impact, the weight must also be equal in both cases. Even if the hammer head goes via the moon and back + 10 feet lower, will in total provide the very same extra kinetic energy at the impact. However all that energy you apply to the hammer head to make it to the moon, will ofcourse make a difference at the impact too. The point is that there is added 10feet x 4lb of kinetic energy at the impact.

Vidar

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2011, 04:15:02 PM »

#### Dr

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 85
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2011, 10:01:38 PM »
Low-Q: forget about going to the moon and back, lets stick to problem at hand, a4lb. weight falling straight down 10 ft. impacts alead ball of .4834 dia. how much will it flatten it? The same 4lb. weight on the end of a 5 ft. lever, but now forced to take a longer path, in a half circle, and again impacts the same dia. lead ball. What is the difference in the impacts???

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2011, 02:43:59 PM »
Low-Q: forget about going to the moon and back, lets stick to problem at hand, a4lb. weight falling straight down 10 ft. impacts alead ball of .4834 dia. how much will it flatten it? The same 4lb. weight on the end of a 5 ft. lever, but now forced to take a longer path, in a half circle, and again impacts the same dia. lead ball. What is the difference in the impacts???
OK. I do not have a 4lb hammer head, nor a 0.4834 diametet lead ball. I cannot test this. I am not able to measure the deformation.
The answer to your question in general. The lead ball will flatten equally in both cases. How much, I do not know. If it flattens 0.20930528604 inches in the first experiment, it will flatten 0.20930528604 inches with the lever experiment.
Do you know why? Well, the 4lb hammer head have the same speed and same kinetic energy at both impacts.

Vidar

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2011, 02:43:59 PM »

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2011, 02:56:19 PM »
The trouble some people put themselves (and others,)
through, (even, providing formulae), to justify their own
personal beliefs ----- beggers belief!  You can have a
personal belief, right, or wrong, about any subject you
like, but it becomes wrong to FOIST your beliefs on to
someone, as if it were a'law'of physics ------ because it
hasn't been done -- yet-- doesn't mean it CAN'T BE
DONE.

BILL.

P.S.  It was 'proven', at one time, that a bee can't fly!
It was never proven. It was an uncomplete theory. A proof need to be confirmd in practice. If a bee can fly in practice, that is the proof we need. The same applies to gravity wheel. Both theories and practical experiments points strongly in the direction of a non working wheel. The theory of a non working gravity wheel is not enough, but we have practical experiments in numbers that proves it doesnt work.
We can still believe that a bee cannot fly, but I honestly think that a bee wouldn't care about what we believe, or what our theories should say. Gravity doesn't care either of what we think it is capable of.

Vidar

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2011, 09:53:21 PM »
Vidar,
I think people like you miss it. Why not go ask someone why climb a mountain ? It's been done before, nothing new there. But still they do it.
But then, even you are in this forum. Maybe you are hoping it is possible ?
People wants to learn. Experience things. Nothing wrong about that. People do things and fail, learn from it, and move on. When people do not understand why a gravity wheel doesn't work, and any explanation does not help. Hundred thousands of experiments fails to work. Still some people want to try again; Yes, I wonder why I am here at all.

Vidar

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2011, 09:53:21 PM »

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2011, 06:53:30 PM »
You might be a skeptic Vidar, but you are curious  :-)
I did get banned from one forum for saying math supported
perpetual motion. There is a different outline I developed.
It's basic algebra. There was also Hans von Lieven who mentioned that from 45 to 135 degrees after top center was the prime area for an overr balanced weight to develop force.
This is because the weights minimum force would be 70.7% of it's weight.
What I like about all of this is it has helped me with my pursuit of Bessler. Engineering guidelines always help.

Jim
The problem is that the weights minimum force applies at 225o and 315o as well. The weights must go back the very same hight to the top in order to repeat the cycle, right? And what have you then gained? If this is not the case, how have you implemented time in the equation?

The basics here is allways the altitude of the weights. Discussing torque or forces isolated from the other factors does not show the whole picture. Force, torque, mass, weight and not least, TIME. Who is considering TIME when constructing gravity wheels? If a torque of 1Nm is applied on one side of the wheel, and 0.5Nm at the other side, doesn't mean that the wheel will run. Time will make sure that the energy on both sides equalize.

Gravity applies vertically to any object in its field. So vertical (altitude) factors are the only interesting to discuss. How a weight tumbles around in a impressive fasion, isn't interesting. It is all about the vertical axis.

So, what we now need is an alternating gravity field.

Vidar

#### Dr

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 85
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2011, 11:35:56 PM »
Low- Q: you were supposed to use your superior math skills to solve the problem, I have already done the experiment! You should have been a politician!!

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2011, 11:35:56 PM »

#### SPANG

• Full Member
• Posts: 174
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2011, 06:38:26 PM »
Whilst a lot of you are arguing the 'toss' about whether gravity wheels could work or not---------------------- the answer to MY gravity wheel, would be by studying the drawing/notes, that way you could make
My thanks to Vidar, for vouching for my integrity!  (We've been 'in touch', many times before.)
As far as Stephan Harti is concerened ----- 'one day, old son, one day'.  Right now, it's just an idea!

SPANG.     (BILL.)

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2011, 08:11:53 PM »
Hi Vidar,
I agree with you completely.
>>  So, what we now need is an alternating gravity field.  <<

I like the way you ph(r)ased that  :-)
Since a wheel does rotate, at some point torque would need to be considered.

Jim
Torque must be considered. I agreed. But torque isn't more than a tagential force on a lever. Gravity will take care of the torque if we by hand spend energy to position the weight in advance.

Torque alone is not energy. You can have trillions of Nm, but that does not help if the torque isn't making anything to move.

God bless the one who makes the gravity-alternator

Vidar

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2011, 08:11:53 PM »

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2011, 08:28:34 PM »
Low- Q: you were supposed to use your superior math skills to solve the problem, I have already done the experiment! You should have been a politician!!
I couldn't care less about politics As far as my suprior math skills conserns, I have no higher education than most of you guys. Frankly, I am pretty average (I think).
Maybe you could show me the experiment of yours?

Vidar

#### SPANG

• Full Member
• Posts: 174
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2011, 05:08:00 PM »
Unortunately, I've come to the conclusion, that very few (if ANY) are interested in my design.
I've sent out a few designs --------- but I've yet to recieve a reply. Loads of promises -----
but as yet ----- zilch!   I wonder if anyone is to blame?  It can't be me, 'cause I'm looking for

SPANG.     (BILL.)

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2011, 05:08:00 PM »

#### Low-Q

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2828
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2011, 06:25:45 PM »
Unortunately, I've come to the conclusion, that very few (if ANY) are interested in my design.
I've sent out a few designs --------- but I've yet to recieve a reply. Loads of promises -----
but as yet ----- zilch!   I wonder if anyone is to blame?  It can't be me, 'cause I'm looking for

SPANG.     (BILL.)
The conclusion is pretty simple when it comes to your design, or any design regarding gravity powered devices: You cannot get more potential energy from a system which rises and lowers weights in a rotary fashion versus stright vertical fashion. It is the altitude which is interesting, because gravity happens to be aligned vertically to any horizontal surface.

Vidar

#### SPANG

• Full Member
• Posts: 174
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #27 on: May 19, 2011, 01:40:09 AM »
I'm affraid you have misunderstood my design completely, Vidar!
My design does NOT work on the principle that an extra weight causes the overbalancing in the first place.
The device ALREADY overbalances ------------------- I use the'movement' of the weights ------------ TO KEEP IT OVERBALANCED.  Also note please, that TWO weights are moved at the same time ----------- one
at the top, and one at the bottom! Perhaps you think the weight at the top is heavier than the weight at
the bottom ---------------- WRONG ------------- they both weigh the same!  In fact, ALL the weights,
'weigh' the same!  Sorry!

SPANG.       (BILL.)

#### SPANG

• Full Member
• Posts: 174
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #28 on: May 19, 2011, 01:46:38 AM »
I think that there IS a 'lull' right now.

SPANG.         (BILL.)

#### onthecuttingedge2010

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 88
##### Re: Overbalancing wheel
« Reply #29 on: May 19, 2011, 02:52:45 AM »
Gravity stores kinetic energy until it hits rock bottom then it equalizes with all other objects that fell to the same state, rock bottom until a gravitational argument is completely 'settled'. using gravity alone as an answer in an argument that will never be settled unless you conform to all the fundamental forces that are required to create what you want to achieve. a force is a pressure of some variant, a force can not have energy without an input(in History) to give it force.