How many times is it necessary to remind you folks that in a mechanical device there are certain environmental constants that must be in place for the device to work, and how many times must you folks be reminded that in some systems at least one of those requirements can be replaced with gravity.

Yes. Replace the water column with one kg gravity on the lever to the left of the upper knob. Then replace the rod under the mainframe with some iron powder and look at it for 40 years. Maybe you start to see something moving.


What exactly did you mean with "replaced with gravity"? Isn't gravity everywhere in the first place?


Vidar

www.squidoo.com/pinwheelgenerator   This generator produces at least seven times the energy than it needs to run.
                Thank you, Russell Lee

  Again with one PMD at the top of the chain, and one located at every 30 second interval on a 3 minute descent/30 second ascent cycle, you have seven PMBS on the chain. This means when there is one ascending, there will always be six descending. Six full charges going into the battery, and one charge (without subtracting the energy being generated during the ascent) being drawn out.  Where is there a problem with seeing the excess energy being produced?
 With 10/60, 100/600, one zillion/6 zillion.

 

Tinsel,  on the last entry I meant to say that with seven independent PMDs, each spaced on it's own chain so that they are 30 seconds apart from eachother respectively, there would be six descending for every one ascending. The ascending one would be also charging an amount of energy back into the battery just by it's weight hanging on the chain.  As far as a prototype is concerned, I don't have one because at present I lack the resources to put seven PMDs together.  I hope to be able to some day. An unfortunate thing has happened in that the Squidoo site I had this information published on has fallen to corporate pressure and pulled my lens. Since it was out for over three years this is probable not serious for the design.  If it is authentic it will take off, if not, it won't, but with six PMDs charging into the battery, and only one drawing out, how could this not work? Russ

Where is your working prototype?
 

Interesting comment. Having another matter consuming all of my current resources and time at present I have none for this future project.  I will attempt another explanation of this mechanism. One PMD generator unit consists of the PMD, the chain and main sprockets, the transmission, and the generator.  This all generates energy into the battery. The example I gave was with 7 PMD units. If the descend time for the PMD is 3 minutes, and the ascend time is 30 seconds, there are six 30 second periods in the 3 minute descend time. One PMD unit at each 30 second position, and one at the bottom (to begin it's ascending) equals 7 PMD units. When the bottom one reaches the top in 30 seconds, the next PMD unit has reached the bottom to begin ascending.  In this scenario there will always be 6 PMD units on the decending/generating side of their individual cycles, and one on it's ascending side of it's cycle.  Fairly simple to understand.  If there is continually a situation where 6 full charges are entering the battery, and only one full charge being drawn out of the battery, 6-1= 5 full charges of energy being stored in the battery in excess of the needs for the functioning of the whole sytem. Cardboard or not.? Visualize seven PMD units in a row having each of their cables running to the same common battery. All of the individual PMDs charging into the same battery. I cannot explain the functioning of this mechanism more simply than this. Russell Lee

You have no prototype. The "overt" reason doesn't matter. I've made prototypes of moving-- and not moving-- devices out of cardboard and tape, for example, or in software which costs nothing but time. Your "resources" depend only on your ingenuity.
This "could not work" because it violates Conservation of Energy, and in addition.... I think your mechanical conception is impossible. "Six descending for every one ascending" with seven units?  In some kind of looping cycle? I don't think so, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding your description.
Use a simple motion simulator like Phun / Algodoo to put together an animated sketch of this system and see if you can even make it move like you think it will. If you can at least do that much on your own, then you might be able to generate some interest from builders with skills and "resources".

I am sure you cannot. But can you do what I suggested, and simulate it in a simple physics simulator?
You really should try this. It costs you nothing but your time, you will have a powerful aid when you try to explain your system to... whomever...  and who knows.... you just might learn something.

Take TK's advice, it is very liberating. I remember I had this buoyancy puzzle that had me stumped for months. It also had some respected scientists puzzled. It was not until Zero did a test, and a few weeks latter I built a proof of concept that we realized why I was such a dumb ass.
Something basic and simple principles had escaped us all. Although sad it was over , the mystery was solved and I learned a lot along the way.
That is why i has so much respect for TK, Zero and many others who build and test. Experience is invaluable.
Kind Regards

There are two kinds of people in the world, those that contribute, and those that comment on the contributions of others. I have been blessed to contribute two free energy generator designs (Pinwheel Generator, Power Multiplier Device), and the Grow-Live Tower that is a greenhousing structure that houses and feeds it's inhabitants.  Together they both would end world hunger, provide free energy to the world, end famine, reduce global disease by 85% due to improved living conditions, etc.. I don't really listen to professional comment people. They say a lot but actually contribute little.  This design of the PMD is too simple not to understand.  Too obvious in it's excess energy production to need extra measures.  Most have no problem with this, few do.  Comment people will always have problems with the designs of others, that is why they comment so much, it is their existence. Russ

Take TK's advice, it is very liberating. I remember I had this buoyancy puzzle that had me stumped for months. It also had some respected scientists puzzled. It was not until Zero did a test, and a few weeks latter I built a proof of concept that we realized why I was such a dumb ass.
Something basic and simple principles had escaped us all. Although sad it was over , the mystery was solved and I learned a lot along the way.
That is why i has so much respect for TK, Zero and many others who build and test. Experience is invaluable.
Kind Regards

Interesting comment. Having another matter consuming all of my current resources and time at present I have none for this future project.  I will attempt another explanation of this mechanism. One PMD generator unit consists of the PMD, the chain and main sprockets, the transmission, and the generator.  This all generates energy into the battery. The example I gave was with 7 PMD units. If the descend time for the PMD is 3 minutes, and the ascend time is 30 seconds, there are six 30 second periods in the 3 minute descend time. One PMD unit at each 30 second position, and one at the bottom (to begin it's ascending) equals 7 PMD units. When the bottom one reaches the top in 30 seconds, the next PMD unit has reached the bottom to begin ascending.  In this scenario there will always be 6 PMD units on the decending/generating side of their individual cycles, and one on it's ascending side of it's cycle.  Fairly simple to understand.  If there is continually a situation where 6 full charges are entering the battery, and only one full charge being drawn out of the battery, 6-1= 5 full charges of energy being stored in the battery in excess of the needs for the functioning of the whole sytem. Cardboard or not.? Visualize seven PMD units in a row having each of their cables running to the same common battery. All of the individual PMDs charging into the same battery. I cannot explain the functioning of this mechanism more simply than this. Russell Lee

I find it astonishing that anyone could look at such a concept and come to the conclusion that it has any possibility of generating energy. It should be intuitively obvious that the cyclic movement of masses in a gravitational field results in zero net energy production.

To the specifics of this machine, while the 6 generators are descending they would certainly be able to convert enough gravitational potential energy to electrical energy to allow one generator to be lifted back to the starting position. If you stop the analysis there then you might be fooled into thinking it is feasible and that this process could be made to run continuously.

In fact,  if the energy losses in the generation and consumption of electrical energy were small it might be able to cycle for quite a while. Eventually,  it will stop once those losses equal the energy given to the device at the start, such as having a pre-charged battery or having all the generators at the top.

 I have challenged anyone to, by using engineering principles, prove that either the Pinwheel Generator, or the Power Multiplier Device are not authentic free energy generators. Thus far there have only been egg throwers targeting me and not the designs. They cannot challenge the designs so they throw eggs at me.
  You cannot show me where the PMD design is flawed so you attack me. You cannot show me where the Pinwheel Generator design is flawed so you attack me. There are many that believe they qualify as design engineers simply because they have seen every Star Trek movie ever made-they don't.
  If you have sound reasoning for believing either design is flawed I would like to hear it, that is what this website is about-information exchange, but you don't.
  Both are authentic free (excess) energy generators, if they weren't there would have been a valid challenge agains't the Pinwheel Generator in the decade since it's release, or the PMD in the months it has been out. You cannot challenge these designs because they are valid. You can only throw eggs.
  This is the challenge to ALL-AGAIN-SHOW ME THE REASON WHY THESE DESIGNS ARE INVALID-OR GO BACK TO STAR TREK FANTASY LAND WHERE YOU BELONG.
 "There is not evidence to support your claim", GREAT! Why not? What has not been thoroughly explained over and over? Where is the grey area? What is it about these simple designs that is too difficult to understand?  Enough eggs, explain your challange to these designs, as an engineer would, or be quiet.  Russell Lee
 
 
 

Dear Russell
I am sad you believed you have contributed to two free energy machines. Your ambitions are noble but unfortunately there is not evidence to support your claim. i wish you all the best in your endevour.
Kind Regards