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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Big try at gravity wheel  (Read 716121 times)

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #405 on: January 21, 2014, 06:55:00 AM »
Marsing, I don't know why Grimer finds that dim video of a motor demonstration so fascinating.  The narrator showed the motor starting up and running.  I didn't hear the narrator saying anything like the motor didn't need a power source.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #406 on: January 21, 2014, 07:11:24 AM »
Grimer is fascinated by that video because he believed (and may still believe) things about the device shown that were flatly contradicted by the builder. Grimer engaged in many long discussions where he, Grimer, would not accept the builder's clear statements that the device was not OU in any way, that its performance was perfectly in line with ordinary physics, and etc.  Now he seeks to use that video in some manner to criticize me.... when in reality, every time he posts a link to it, he is linking to his own naivete and hopeful ignorance. Notice that he does NOT post any of the discussions he had about the device with its builder. Not only is the device off-topic, since it has nothing to do with gravity wheels or Bessler, but also, Grimer is simply trolling. He has no point to make and no evidence to make it with.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #407 on: January 21, 2014, 07:15:44 AM »
TinselKoala if those discussions happened the way that you say they did then it is hard to understand what Grimer thinks he might achieve by bringing it up.  Did the builder ever say that motor did anything remarkable?

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #408 on: January 21, 2014, 07:41:40 AM »
TinselKoala if those discussions happened the way that you say they did then it is hard to understand what Grimer thinks he might achieve by bringing it up.  Did the builder ever say that motor did anything remarkable?

Grimer is seeking to discredit someone by posting the video. He is displaying his frustrations. He is in the same position as a child is, looking at the "disembodied head" sitting on a table in a circus booth. Everybody around him knows that the head isn't really disembodied, that it only looks that way because of the carefully positioned mirrors that make the table look like there's nothing underneath it. But he persists in exclaiming that the head is in fact disembodied, and proceeds to construct all kinds of theories and explanations for how the disembodied head came to be and why it can still talk. Even when the carny builder of the table tells the child that it is just a trick, the child persists in his fantasy belief, and tells his friends about the disembodied head that could talk. For years, the child continues to reject sensible explanations and his own common sense, and thinks he saw a talking disembodied head. Years pass and memories are plastic; eventually the child might realize his silliness.... or maybe he never does.

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #409 on: January 21, 2014, 08:12:45 AM »
I see a video of an electric motor in dim lighting.  What's special? 
MarkE,
Nothing, just interesting sideline distractions, like Sheep flocks, moisture absorption, high capacity lite batteries, pendulum acceleration curves, a 150yr old references that prevent an answer,  Koala’a mag motor... no problem!
Let me side step all this, for a quick note on the matter at hand.

An alternate theoretical view,
This summary addresses a flow of energy in Grimer’s proposal that bothers me, due too possible impact of the cycloid modification. The pendulum is of hypothetical construction for the purpose of analysis.

The downswing energy absorption is proportional to the cosine, the initial half absorbs the most energy per degr (radian) and lessens towards -90dgr.

The upswing energy reduction (attenuation) would follow opposite pattern, with least attenuation in the first 45dgr and greatest attenuation in the last 45dgr of travel.  The attenuation experienced also follows a cosine function and the angular energy release is proportionate to the sine.

The upswing is modified to follow a cycloid path, this introduces a complete different proportioned sub-pendulum using chops that effectively shortens the radius of the swing arm and repositions the axis.
After the point the arm engages the chop, the string arm angle increases more rapidly than it would have without chops, (the reason for radian speed increase) therewith also the change of the sin/cos values that affect attenuation and energy release. 
Without going into calculations, The blob travel will be attenuated faster but so will be the energy release with chops engaged.

Summary;
I theorize  that as the chops engage, due to alteration of swing angle , the energy gets consumed faster (cos) which is compensated for by faster energy release(sin).  This creates the possibility of balancing out to the same swing height than if we maintained the circular path. (ideal view, ignoring losses)

Your opinion?,
Red_Sunset

Marsing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #410 on: January 21, 2014, 08:41:43 AM »
@markE

I think I found it,

Marsing, I don't know why Grimer finds that dim video of a motor demonstration so fascinating.  The narrator showed the motor starting up and running.  I didn't hear the narrator saying anything like the motor didn't need a power source.

you are joking,  din't find something interesting.
pay attention to  the motor not narrator.

Did the builder ever say that motor did anything remarkable?

narrator said something that should be Noticed, "  now, i gonna stop ....".

(just my opinion).
« Last Edit: January 21, 2014, 11:18:48 AM by Marsing »

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #411 on: January 21, 2014, 08:50:42 AM »
@TinselKoala, that sounds sad.

@Red_Sunset, I see.  He's made it very clear that he doesn't want to state a hypothesis, and he's contradicted the best effort I could make to state one from what he's said.  So maybe Plan D is best all around.

On the cycloid chop thing, the original idea from Grimer was that the circular path had more energy at its apogee than the cycloid at the same height.  Whether one or the other has more energy we could determine by finding the maximum velocity at the bottom of the travel.  Both types of pendula swing freely at the bottom and no one has suggested some alternate energy source, sink, or store at that point of the travel.  So, we could do several things:  We could construct pendula experiments using our best approximation for a point mass and a perfectly flexible and mass-less arm.  Then we could see if there is any detectable difference in maximum speed at the bottom of the travel.  Or we could go through the math and calculate the expected velocity and energy at each point of the swing.  I don't have time to do that for the cycloid tonight, but it does not seem a particularly difficult task.  Of the several issues that I found with Grimer's idea that there is some "ersatz energy" captured and released by the circular pendulum is that Grimer seemed to ignore that tension in the arm goes to zero as the bob reaches its apogee.  He seemed to talk as though he thought the "ersatz energy" was associated with centripetal / centrifugal force on the arm, when at the instant the bob reaches apogee there isn't any radial force.

To answer your question:  the cycloid path is steeper than a circular path so the acceleration / deceleration is more pronounced away from the center.  That accounts for the cycloid having a shorter period than the circular pendulum of equal apogee.  An alternate way to look at this is use low friction tracks and rolling balls.  If we arrange various tracks with equal maximum heights, we turn the child's swing / pendulum into a roller coaster.  If we arrange these tracks with different curves then we can observe several things:

1) There is no curve that we can design where the ball released from one side will top the release height at the other side.
2) There will be at least one curve that results in minimum transit time from one end to the other.  300 year old math says that will be a cycloid path.
3) A track made with a cycloid path will result in the same oscillation period independent of the starting point.

3) is the fascinating property of cycloid paths.  It makes me think that the fairest pinewood derby track is one laid out as a cycloid as that would eliminate any advantage / disadvantage from slight misalignments at that starting gate.  Some parallel cycloid tracks arranged to simultaneously release balls from different starting heights in each track could make some interesting physical art.

Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #412 on: January 21, 2014, 09:04:59 AM »
Grimer is seeking to discredit someone by posting the video. He is displaying his frustrations. He is in the same position as a child is, looking at the "disembodied head" sitting on a table in a circus booth. Everybody around him knows that the head isn't really disembodied, that it only looks that way because of the carefully positioned mirrors that make the table look like there's nothing underneath it. But he persists in exclaiming that the head is in fact disembodied, and proceeds to construct all kinds of theories and explanations for how the disembodied head came to be and why it can still talk. Even when the carny builder of the table tells the child that it is just a trick, the child persists in his fantasy belief, and tells his friends about the disembodied head that could talk. For years, the child continues to reject sensible explanations and his own common sense, and thinks he saw a talking disembodied head. Years pass and memories are plastic; eventually the child might realize his silliness.... or maybe he never does.


Are you claiming that you committed a fraud, Al. If so you are much worse than Mylow whose fraud you took such pride in uncovering.


But you won't answer my question will you. You never have in the past. You won't admit it and you are not prepared to lie. You just resort to some childish insult.


And please stop all this nonsense by referring to the builder of the WhipMag as though he is someone other than you. Readers of this forum are not that stupid. If you keep talking as though Jekyll and Hyde are two different people then members of the forum will begin to realise they are dealing with a schizo.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #413 on: January 21, 2014, 09:16:02 AM »
Grimer would you please calm yourself down?  Where is this fraud you keep alleging?

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #414 on: January 21, 2014, 10:03:03 AM »
....................................................................
  Some parallel cycloid tracks arranged to simultaneously release balls from different starting heights in each track could make some interesting physical art.

A pretty good animation that does that can be found here,
http://www.myphysicslab.com/beta/Brachistochrone.html

Click on the curve to mark the ball on that curve in comparison to the others, since they all will launch at the same time.
Red_sunset

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #415 on: January 21, 2014, 10:11:43 AM »
Hi,
   if somebody can explain how, with the diagram on post 395, you could use this extra height
to do more cycles with a fixed point of reference then I'll go away.
              John.
Red sky at night shepherd's delight!

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #416 on: January 21, 2014, 10:36:49 AM »
Grimer would you please calm yourself down?  Where is this fraud you keep alleging?

Yes, Frank, please explain how someone telling you that a device is NOT OU IN ANY WAY, that it is perfectly ordinary and everything it does is in accord with normal physics, someone who actually REFUSED your cynical offer of money for the device .... is a "fraud", or how it compares to Mylow, who told everyone he had a working Free Energy Magnet Motor and took money and materials from people under those false pretenses. Let's see you reproduce some of the conversations you held, where YOU were arguing that it was OU when the builder kept telling you it wasn't. Those were a real hoot to read at the time.

Frank Grimer, like one or two others, was utterly fooled by a simple child's toy, in spite of everything he was told by the builder, in spite of physics, and now he's bitter about it. He _saw something_ and chose to interpret it through his rose-tinted glasses, and would not accept other interpretations as possible or real.  He also has funny ideas about internet identities.


TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #417 on: January 21, 2014, 10:52:20 AM »
Hi,
   if somebody can explain how, with the diagram on post 395, you could use this extra height
to do more cycles with a fixed point of reference then I'll go away.
              John.
Red sky at night shepherd's delight!

There is NO extra height! You can put whatever "blocks" you like on one side of a pendulum's swing, and the bob will NOT rise above its initial release height -- unless it is 'released' with a push in the first place. No fiddling with flexibility of the support, fulcrum point or anything else that does not add energy, will cause the bob to rise higher than its initial release.

Imagine a pendulum with the first quadrant unconstrained and the second quadrant fitted with a cycloidal block. IF the pendulum bob reached a higher point than its initial release, you could simply swing the cycloidal block over to the other side (rotating around a vertical hingeline) at very little cost in energy, and let the bob fall, now from its higher initial height in the second quadrant, down its unconstrained arc and up over the cycloidal block which is now in the first quadrant.... where the bob would go even higher.... so you swing the block back to the first side, let the bob descend its circular arc and climb up the cycloidal block, getting even higher.....

I expect to see Frank's prototype swinging away, gaining height with each swing...... soon? No... Frank is not an experimentalist, he just has pipe dreams and berates people who DO build things and who tell him his ideas are FOS.

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #418 on: January 21, 2014, 12:21:02 PM »
There is NO extra height! You can put whatever "blocks" you like on one side of a pendulum's swing, and the bob will NOT rise above its initial release height -- unless it is 'released' with a push in the first place. No fiddling with flexibility of the support, fulcrum point or anything else that does not add energy, will cause the bob to rise higher than its initial release.

Imagine a pendulum with the first quadrant unconstrained and the second quadrant fitted with a cycloidal block. IF the pendulum bob reached a higher point than its initial release, you could simply swing the cycloidal block over to the other side (rotating around a vertical hingeline) at very little cost in energy, and let the bob fall, now from its higher initial height in the second quadrant, down its unconstrained arc and up over the cycloidal block which is now in the first quadrant.... where the bob would go even higher.... so you swing the block back to the first side, let the bob descend its circular arc and climb up the cycloidal block, getting even higher.....

I expect to see Frank's prototype swinging away, gaining height with each swing...... soon? No... Frank is not an experimentalist, he just has pipe dreams and berates people who DO build things and who tell him his ideas are FOS.
TinselKoala,
I am not disagreeing with you on the principle point that the Grimer's idea has some issues.
But I am not impressed with,  neither your logical, neither your scientific analysis method used here.  The very graphical picture portrayed is even more unrealistic and further from a possible truth than the system you trying to disprove.
Red_Sunset

powercat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #419 on: January 21, 2014, 01:45:22 PM »
TinselKoala,
I am not disagreeing with you on the principle point that the Grimer's idea has some issues.
But I am not impressed with,  neither your logical, neither your scientific analysis method used here.  The very graphical picture portrayed is even more unrealistic and further from a possible truth than the system you trying to disprove.
Red_Sunset

Yeah right, you know all about scientific analysis, remember you were the one totally convinced that Wayne Travis had a working OU device, when most people could see the BS.