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: Gravity CAN do Work  (Read 57933 times)

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Gravity CAN do Work
« on: July 19, 2013, 06:36:42 PM »

Rafael Ti

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 83
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2013, 07:48:00 PM »
Nice work!!!
There is many possibilities the Roberval balance offers together with it's modifications. Always believed it.
 ;)


lumen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1388
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2013, 09:35:12 PM »
That makes my eyes hurt trying to figure out what's connected to what.
In the iso view, I can't tell which way is up! Or what parts are higher to start with.
 

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2013, 09:57:49 PM »
Thanks Rafael.
 
Sorry lumen.  Not sure what I can do to make it easier to understand.  Most of the model is only links and pivot pins (axles).  There are also two rollers, one static counterweight, and one weight (blue) that is moved laterally (no work) to cause the construction to torque CW or CCW.
 
M.

broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2013, 10:54:00 PM »
Attached is a similar model I presume, however doesn't show the behavior you showed case. Are you sure it's not an anomaly due to inaccuracies of the model?

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2013, 11:10:00 PM »
broli,
 
The simulation was based on physical testing of a build by someone else.  The system that they shared with me, along with the behavior they reported, led me to do the simulation.  It worked.  And a bit better than the real world construction of the "inventor" since I was able to optimize a few minor details in the build of the sim.  The real world build took several days, if not weeks, while I was able to sim it up in a day and a half.
 
To clarify, the first sim did not work and I could not understand why.  But after sleeping on it I figured out a less complex way to sim it in WM2D and was able to get that up and running in about an hour.  As you know, WM2D has some "peculiarities," so I do not know if my original build attempt broke some boundaries (too many interactions?) or what.  But once I simplified it the sim worked not only as the real world build predicted, but what I logically thought should happen.
 
My take on the system is this:  A mass in a gravity field can be used to exert two simultaneous effects:  A direct downward force (weight) and a torque.  This unique construction utilizes both.  So possibly "dropping the weight twice?"  Or if Bessler was right, maybe it is a 4 to 1 relationship?
 
What I have shown in the sim is just a PoC and not intended to be an optimized embodiment of this idea.  We just wanted to get it out there so the greater minds could begin working on it.
 
M.
 
edited to add:  I see I did not actually answer your direct question...  The geometry was drawn in AutoCAD 2010 (I think) to whatever level of precision that can handle.  It was imported to WM2D as an AutoCAD 2004 level DXF file.  The precision in WM2D was set to default of 7 decimal places.

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2013, 12:41:18 AM »
What I've been shown.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2013, 12:42:27 AM »
Face PALM.

A rock falls once. A pendulum rocks back and forth, losing a bit of energy with each cycle.

You are wasting your valuable time, and after pages and pages of argument, the facts will still remain: A rock falls, once, and you are wasting your time.

I have two different simulation models that run perpetually in a physics simulator. One is a water-weight powered gravity wheel and the other is an overcenter spring-powered design. Should I open a thread and try to get people to build them?

Why... or WHY NOT?

Now... carry on, I won't bother you, I'll just be watching and chuckling to myself.


But I wonder why something like this is even needed.... when Wayne Travis has found the secret, uncovered the jewels, has patents pending and engineers working round the clock on his Hydro Energy Revolution. And Mondrasek helped!

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2013, 12:51:33 AM »
TK, sorry that I have disappointed you.
 
Webby1, I know no more that what I have shown.  The sim appears to create a usable output torque at the pivot joints while requiring only a lateral shift in the mass on the right side of the device.  That shift should not require any Work (as defined by Physics) that I can tell.  So I am as curious as anyone else.
 
M.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2013, 01:15:14 AM »
Oh, you haven't disappointed me! I am highly amused, in fact.

In further fact, let me point out that _when_ you do succeed in showing an actual physical system that demonstrates that "gravity CAN do Work" you will make ME, and all your other detractors and naysayers all over the world, look completely silly and stupid and we will all have to apologize and eat our collective hats.

So redouble your efforts, get some decent plywood and a router table, and get to work! What, has it got seven whole parts? Take your design to a machine shop and pay them a couple hundred dollars to build it exactly, with lowfriction bearings and proper materials, if you don't have the tooling at home.

Note well: I am ENCOURAGING YOU TO BUILD AND DEMONSTRATE A REAL OBJECT. So you can't accuse me of being a "nay-sayer".... can you.

Meanwhile I note that you do not bother to take my question seriously.  I have two simulations that run perpetually in a physics simulator. Both are very simple and appear to violate simple conservation laws. Should I open a couple of threads entitled "Springs CAN do Work" or perhaps "Falling Water CAN do Work" and present these sims as proof, and encouragement to builders? Or would it be a waste of time?

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2013, 01:34:27 AM »
TK,
 
I respect the fact that simulation software can produce non-real world results.  And thus I build sims as carefully as I can. 
 
Right now I have shown a sim of a device (not of my own design) that appears to mimic the results of a real world build (also not mine).
 
So I post this all on OU.com to look for critique of the builder's and my efforts.
 
Not ridicule.
 
I am totally open to any counter arguments of the way I have simed this device.  If you have any suggestions about what I should test I would do the best that I can.
 
I am not RA.
 
Please help me/us out on this one.
 
M.
 
 

onthecuttingedge2005

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2013, 02:46:43 AM »
in a zero G environment kinetic energy is stored very efficiently do to the lack of gravity and as you approach a gravitational horizon the efficiency of holding onto that stored kinetic energy becomes less efficient and eventually the object gets caught in the higher gravitational tensor field and is pulled to the planet and or heavenly body. there can be no unassisted gravity motor without adding more kinetic energy back into the system. this is why when satellites run out of fuel to stay in orbit they fall back to earth and smash to bits.

if you understood that gravity is a carrier tensor field for kinetic energy/mass you wouldn't even bother trying to make a gravity motor. you would be better off making a hydroelectric dam that is made friendly for the environment. now that's a real gravity motor.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2013, 05:15:18 AM »
Mond: What is the title of your thread? You are making a claim. You present your sim data, presumably in support for your claim. I challenge the idea that your sim can support your claim.... and you have to admit, the apparatus you show is pretty crude and certainly doesn't support the claim.

Now you appear to be backing off from that claim. Why? Koalas aren't that mean, as long as you respect them. Continue trying to support the claim you made in the title of this thread, and get off my case.

Or.... you could always retract or modify the claim, so that it represents the true state of your knowledge and investigations.

onthecuttingedge2005

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2013, 06:13:34 AM »
i back up TK 100% when it comes to this project, he knows what he's talking about.

onthecuttingedge2005

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
Re: Gravity CAN do Work
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2013, 06:29:15 AM »
another thing, gravity is so miniscule in return why do you even bother?