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.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 895775
  • *Total Topics: 15759
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed  (Read 48623 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #90 on: December 10, 2014, 02:21:07 AM »
I have nothing against this explanation except that the work is done by the gravity - by the weight, which is always pushing down. He utilizes this in his patent to increase the dispacement on one branch and decrease it on another branch.
Gravity of the weight is doing the real work. Or I may be too stupid to understand the reasoning...
Regards
Work can be exchanged by increasing or decreasing gravitational potential energy.  In order for a float to rise, a greater (can be only slightly greater) mass has to fall.  Buoyancy schemes are therefore no better than rocks.  Each is passive and does not act as a source of energy:  Lift net mass gain GPE, lower net mass lose GPE.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #91 on: December 10, 2014, 02:43:15 AM »
As the weight increases as does the necessary strength of the mechanism.

Do you mean stresses on the mechanism?
This can be taken care of by using stronger elements using dormulas from the strength of materials/
Regards

Offline telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #92 on: December 10, 2014, 02:48:08 AM »
Work can be exchanged by increasing or decreasing gravitational potential energy.  In order for a float to rise, a greater (can be only slightly greater) mass has to fall.  Buoyancy schemes are therefore no better than rocks.  Each is passive and does not act as a source of energy:  Lift net mass gain GPE, lower net mass lose GPE.

But from the gravitational point of view the whole mechanism is in equilibrium.
However, the work is done within the sealed chambers, within the system which is in equilibrium. The mass is falling,
without changing the balance.
Regards

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #92 on: December 10, 2014, 02:48:08 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline dvy1214

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #93 on: December 10, 2014, 02:48:37 AM »
Im talking about the mechanism that you think the french patent works by which is none existent. Go study the patent and form a better question around the working premise.

Offline dvy1214

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #94 on: December 10, 2014, 03:09:02 AM »
Most likely the chamber of the piston moving inward is connected to the chamber of the piston moving outward
in another branch, so there is no air compression involved - it simply moves back and forth not creating resistance.
As I said, this device works strictly on displacement.
Regards.

And as i will say again the only thing that buoyancy has to do with displacement is the water which an object displaces. that objects ability to become more buoyant is entirely dependent on the compression of its volumes. Yes your  right, buoyancy is dependent on displacement.

And to be more specific because I think you are a little dense, a mechanism linking two sides of this device would incur 1. Mechanical resistance when its shifts 2. Hydrodynamic resistance as the unit revolves

Didn't mean to call you dense just been drinking a little lol.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #94 on: December 10, 2014, 03:09:02 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #95 on: December 10, 2014, 03:25:52 AM »
In the patent weight is moving the piston outward/inward, not the air.Air volume between two chambers doesn't change,
it just flows between them just to maintain a free movement of the pistons.Semanek's machine is not described
completely, it misses important function of the weights.
Regards
Please explain in detail just how the French patent is different from the device described in the Simanek link.

In the diagram from Simanek's site:
The weight of the piston is moving the piston outward/inward.
Air volume between the two connected chambers doesn't change, it just flows between them.

In the diagram from the French patent application:
It is clear that the levered weight does nothing other than pull the piston down or push it up, depending on which side of the apparatus is considered.
It is also clear that the distance from the center of the apparatus to the weights is the same on either side of the apparatus, so the weights themselves do not act in the manner that the  usual "gravity wheel"  weights are supposed to act. So the weights could be dispensed with entirely and just the pistons themselves could be heavier to achieve the same pull or push that comes from the levered weights, as shown in Simanek's drawing.

So please explain, in detail, how the devices differ and just where you believe that Simanek's analysis goes wrong.

Offline telecom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #96 on: December 10, 2014, 03:55:28 AM »
Please explain in detail just how the French patent is different from the device described in the Simanek link.

In the diagram from Simanek's site:
The weight of the piston is moving the piston outward/inward.
Air volume between the two connected chambers doesn't change, it just flows between them.

In the diagram from the French patent application:
It is clear that the levered weight does nothing other than pull the piston down or push it up, depending on which side of the apparatus is considered.
It is also clear that the distance from the center of the apparatus to the weights is the same on either side of the apparatus, so the weights themselves do not act in the manner that the  usual "gravity wheel"  weights are supposed to act. So the weights could be dispensed with entirely and just the pistons themselves could be heavier to achieve the same pull or push that comes from the levered weights, as shown in Simanek's drawing.

So please explain, in detail, how the devices differ and just where you believe that Simanek's analysis goes wrong.

He says:
Now reconsider the full version with piston chambers on a belt over two pulleys. Each pair of pistons gains energy moving on the straight portions of the belt, but loses the same amount of energy going around the pulleys to the other side of the apparatus.

Now we have to count how many pairs are loosing energy, and how many are  gaining energy.
If each branch of the belt is longer than the transition part, we should get a net gain...from the pairs which are gaining energy.
Or I may be wrong because this subject is quite complex.
Regards

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #96 on: December 10, 2014, 03:55:28 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline dvy1214

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #97 on: December 10, 2014, 04:42:22 AM »
The whole unit in Semaneks is supposedly submerged ya?

In that case the whole thing barely make sense due to the fact that the air pressure will desire to move to the highest point. No matter how many belts and pulleys there are it would be fighting itself the whole time unless the weights of the pistons changes corresponding to their location on the track. Which, would be tasky and have its own issues in efficiency. Otherwise each piston moving over the top would want to keep it's air until equilibrium with those moving up the left leg fighting the forward progress.

Have had more to drink at this point so please correct as needed.

- David

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #98 on: December 10, 2014, 05:30:11 AM »
He says:
Now reconsider the full version with piston chambers on a belt over two pulleys. Each pair of pistons gains energy moving on the straight portions of the belt, but loses the same amount of energy going around the pulleys to the other side of the apparatus.

Now we have to count how many pairs are loosing energy, and how many are  gaining energy.
If each branch of the belt is longer than the transition part, we should get a net gain...from the pairs which are gaining energy.
Or I may be wrong because this subject is quite complex.
Regards
The whole thing is quite simple:  Buoyancy is the result of gravity acting on a fluid mass into which another mass or masses have been inserted.  Gravity is conservative.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #98 on: December 10, 2014, 05:30:11 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline dvy1214

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #99 on: December 10, 2014, 06:48:11 AM »
Please explain in detail just how the French patent is different from the device described in the Simanek link.

In the diagram from Simanek's site:
The weight of the piston is moving the piston outward/inward.
Air volume between the two connected chambers doesn't change, it just flows between them.

In the diagram from the French patent application:
It is clear that the levered weight does nothing other than pull the piston down or push it up, depending on which side of the apparatus is considered.
It is also clear that the distance from the center of the apparatus to the weights is the same on either side of the apparatus, so the weights themselves do not act in the manner that the  usual "gravity wheel"  weights are supposed to act. So the weights could be dispensed with entirely and just the pistons themselves could be heavier to achieve the same pull or push that comes from the levered weights, as shown in Simanek's drawing.

So please explain, in detail, how the devices differ and just where you believe that Simanek's analysis goes wrong.

@TinselKoala you get my PM?

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #100 on: December 10, 2014, 09:58:57 AM »
Yes, I just sent you a reply with a lot of information. I can't attach anything to a PM but the zipped powerpoint file below belongs with it:

And just for fun, my Overunity U-Tube:



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #100 on: December 10, 2014, 09:58:57 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #101 on: December 10, 2014, 10:33:18 AM »
That's amazing!  We need an Indiegogo campaign for the "Fix Inherent Buoyancy" movement.

Offline The Eskimo Quinn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
    • Archurian
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #102 on: December 15, 2014, 02:06:40 AM »
the full sequence of events is listed, rough drawings and a basic cad drawing shows you why the water never leaves the tower. The cad guy is a bit slower than i have hoped. but everything is pretty much there except fall and generator which is not contested as producing power. simply whether someone could get a buoyant object in through the bottom and still leave the water in the tower.

Naturally any water loses from adherence etc are replaced by using a hollow block filled 80 percent with water, float up as per normal, lifter grabs it, it is emptied and empty container sent down outside.

TMQ

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #103 on: December 15, 2014, 02:18:37 AM »
"The actual ram"   No, Quinn, that is a photo of someone else's ram for a different purpose. But we are used to hearing and seeing your lies.
What happened to your video "demonstration" that demonstrated only that you can't build anything that works?

Hey, maybe Captain Zero can help you get a Canadian patent. They'll patent anything in Canada.

How's that "Sword of God" magnet wheel coming along?  You should be running your house on it by now... shouldn't you?  But of course it did not work then and does not work now, in spite of all the claims you made to get people to send you cigarette money and magnets.

You think you've got something? Build a "working" model and show it. Of course you cannot. You're all wet. Magic tubes and valves, objects that float but don't displace any volume, things that can be lifted without doing any work, towers that magically fill themselves without anyone pumping the water. You live in a fantasy world and if you weren't so obnoxious I'd almost feel sorry for you.

Offline Cap-Z-ro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3545
Re: 3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed
« Reply #104 on: December 15, 2014, 03:12:58 AM »
Tinsh!tTrolla quote:

" Hey, maybe Captain Zero can help you get a Canadian patent. They'll patent anything in Canada. "




Yeah Quinn...and if you ever feel you're fighting a losing battle in a forum exchange/debate Tinsh!t will gladly give you tips on how to discredit your unlucky opponent/victim by posting sh!t which implies they are a convicted criminal.

Kinda like how he implied that I do not own a US Patent, in order to make it possible for him to make an attempt to ridicule me...simply because he's just too dimwitted to come up with something imaginative.

But, as I have said, neither he nor the other dimwitt has ever had a thought or idea to call their own.

Regards...

 

OneLink