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

## Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: santiagopanduro on December 28, 2017, 02:23:28 AM

Title: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: santiagopanduro on December 28, 2017, 02:23:28 AM

Mechanical toroid
The device behaves like a mechanical toroid whose driving force is generated through an unbalanced weight pulley with lever system whose design allows to reduce the opposing forces to the direction of rotation and create a potential zone (area of ​​the extended arms) which has sufficient force to enable the next lever arm to move to the power generating zone.
In itself, all the power or torque of the device is designed to enable a single lever arm which creates a chain reaction and the consequent movement of the mechanism.
Even using the formulas applicable to the mechanism of lever of first genre will see the feasibility of the mechanism.
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: Ferisoda on January 30, 2018, 11:50:42 AM
I want to know where to find this information and to publish it.
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: norman6538 on February 02, 2018, 11:10:59 PM
I'm surprised no one commented on this since Jan 28 2017 so.

My observations - most wheels keel like a boat and I call that bottom heavy.

first draw an axle in the center then.
draw a line around the weights
observe the area between the circle and the line drawn around the
weights.

1. is that area bottom heavy or left heavy ?... probably bottom heavy
2. is it bottom heavy?? count the weights below axle and how far below
3. how many weights does it take to lift the 1 oclock weight??
how many degrees??/distance to lift it also
4. with 8 weights  then noon and 6 balance each other out
5. 10:30 and 4:30 looks left heavy
6. 9 and 3 left heavy
7. 7:30 and 1:30 left heavy
8. due to leverage only the 3 weights on the left can really turn the wheel.
looks promising...

9. make a crude mockup to see if it wants to turn or just sit...

Norman
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 03, 2018, 05:08:58 AM
Hmmm

Archer Quinn device,

Build one and test it :)
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: norman6538 on February 03, 2018, 02:48:37 PM
Using a crude setup with one weight at 10:30 and opposite that at 4:30 the wheel
truns counterclockwise about 110 degrees and stops. So I don't see this idea as
workable.  Then you have to apply work to lift and reset the weight at 1:30 to noon.
Prove me wrong by making it work. I'd love to be wrong.

I do not build big expensive devices until I see the basic principle in a crude
rapid prototype work. That is my style. It has saved me a lot of money and time
and embarassment.

Norman
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: iacob alex on February 03, 2018, 10:30:50 PM
Hi !
Related to the same approach ( wheel concept ) , take a look at :
https://youtu.be/SA7nol8sHL8
It's a very old approach (Middle Ages...Leonardo da Vinci,Bessler's MT13...) seemingly unworkable...due to the starting concept,in my opinion.
So , if we apply the redundancy / unnecessary repetition in this wheel design /...we can evolve and hope for a successfully test...simply, a lever(age) but not a wheel.
Al_ex
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: norman6538 on February 03, 2018, 10:41:16 PM
Hi !
Related to the same approach ( wheel concept ) , take a look at :
https://youtu.be/SA7noI8sHL8 (https://youtu.be/SA7nol8sHL8)
It's a very old approach (Middle Ages...Leonardo da Vinci,Bessler's MT13...) seemingly unworkable...due to the starting concept,in my opinion.
So , if we apply the redundancy / unnecessary repetition in this wheel design /...we can evolve and hope for a successfully test...simply, a lever(age) but not a wheel.
Al_ex

Norman
Post by: norman6538 on February 03, 2018, 10:50:40 PM
Many many very fine folks have worked very very hard for many years and have
not cracked it.  But then comes along the guys who say they have it figured out and
all have come to nothing....

So the problem as I see it is with either permanent magnets or gravity power you have
to set something up to do some work and that is easy then the power is there but
it then has to be set up again to repeat that. I call that the "reset problem". It takes
some work to reset for the repeat. I had one wheel that would reset itself by gravity
and it would turn a bit but it did not continue on far enough.

In Bessler's case his 1st wheel always wanted to turn and it had to have a brake to
hold it still. Pull the brake and off it went....

Bessler and Tesla and Moray and Stan Meyer and Skinner took some great stuff to their graves.

I really wish it were otherwise.

Norman

Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: iacob alex on February 03, 2018, 10:54:26 PM
Hi !
If so...type on youtube "Evolution of Perpetual Motion.WORK of Gravitational Power!",then search...
Al_ex
Post by: Les Banki on February 04, 2018, 01:45:49 AM

Bessler and Tesla and Moray and Stan Meyer and Skinner took some great stuff to their graves.

I really wish it were otherwise.

Norman

Norman,

The trouble with you is that when you are given information, you IGNORE it and you continue THEORIZING, instead of doing REAL work!
May I suggest that you get onto Facebook and check out Kevin Hay and his work.  Make sure you get the right Kevin Hay.  He is in British Columbia and he owns and operates 'Vancouver Island Ormus'.

He has EVERYTHING worked out to PERFECTION and he also explains EVERYTHING you need to know!

No ifs, no buts, no maybe's.
STOP arguing and just follow his directions!

Cheers,
Les Banki
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: norman6538 on February 04, 2018, 02:03:07 AM

I didn't find anything relevant there

Can you possibly get that info over here where I can trust it?
Or since you seem to know all about it can you update us a little.

Does he show a working machine?
Norman
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: citfta on February 04, 2018, 02:49:43 AM
Hi Norman,

Here is a link to a discussion of a build someone attempted to do of Kevin Hay's device.  The discussion starts with post number 984 and continues through post 1060.  There are some videos included.  Maybe after you have reviewed all that you can come up with a way to actually make it work.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11933-open-discussion-projects-forum-33.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11933-open-discussion-projects-forum-33.html)

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: Les Banki on February 04, 2018, 04:32:03 AM

I didn't find anything relevant there

Can you possibly get that info over here where I can trust it?
Or since you seem to know all about it can you update us a little.

Does he show a working machine?
Norman

Norman,

Understand that I could have emailed you the info in my post but I choose to post it here, hoping that others would take it seriously enough to check
out the info in its original form on Facebook!

Look, I don't "do" Facebook either but used my wife's account just to check out Kevin Hay's page!
I have been "at it" for over a month now, every day and I am still saving Kevin's input.
Thus, I now have 50 files in my Kevin Hay Folder!
As you already know, I have my own design but not as simple as Kevin's designs.  (He has at least 70 of them!!)

As for him "showing" a working machine, NO, he does NOT, for the same reason I don't display mine either!
Why?
Simply because supplying it on a "silver platter" defeats the purpose.

Over the years I have seen this happening many, many times on ALL Forums.
Endless arguments, attempts to discredit, ridicule, name calling, claims  that "it is a fake" etc., etc., etc, "ad nauseam".

Learning and understanding the working principle is essential which is NOT learned by COPYING the work of others!
Period.

I have said this before and I repeat it again: skepticism and disbelief are caused by the inability to COMPREHEND.

A word of warning about the thread 'citfta' suggested in his post below.
At his suggestion, I supplied the info (a tiny bit of what is available!) for those without access to Facebook.
Look what has happened!

Be aware that the man (Ron) who had the opportunity to visit Kevin, BLEW it!  Completely and utterly!
Presented something COMPLETELY different in his video and has proven that he has ZERO understanding of Kevin's designs!
If you care to READ Kevin's comments under Ron's youtube video, you will see what I mean.
(I have it all on FILE, in case they are removed.)

However, having said all that, I wish to add that (again) in order to get free electricity, you need to pull your fingers out of from you know where
and DO some REAL work.  THEORIZING only will never give you free electricity!
End of story!

Cheers,
Les Banki
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: TinselKoala on February 04, 2018, 10:30:23 AM

Kevin Hay does not have any kind of _actual_ overunity device. His claims of "COP 400" are simply false.

Quote
As for him "showing" a working machine, NO, he does NOT, for the same reason I don't display mine either!
Why?

Why? The real reason is quite simple. It is because neither YOU Les, nor Kevin Hay, actually has a "working machine" that produces more energy out than it takes to run it.

Go ahead and PROVE ME WRONG by demonstrating your device IN A BLACK BOX if you don't want to serve it up "on a silver platter." Just provide valid input and output measurements, or show it running your home, shop, or marijuana greenhouses while it also runs itself.

You cannot. And neither can your current hero Kevin Hay.

Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 04, 2018, 11:29:48 AM
A series of crude hand-sketched drawings, a bunch of useless rhetoric,
and a curiously placed schematic of John Searl’s 1972 flying saucer......

Where are the “working models” he has built?

Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: citfta on February 04, 2018, 12:23:25 PM

I have said this before and I repeat it again: skepticism and disbelief are caused by the inability to COMPREHEND.

A word of warning about the thread 'citfta' suggested in his post below.
At his suggestion, I supplied the info (a tiny bit of what is available!) for those without access to Facebook.
Look what has happened!

Be aware that the man (Ron) who had the opportunity to visit Kevin, BLEW it!  Completely and utterly!
Presented something COMPLETELY different in his video and has proven that he has ZERO understanding of Kevin's designs!
If you care to READ Kevin's comments under Ron's youtube video, you will see what I mean.
(I have it all on FILE, in case they are removed.)

However, having said all that, I wish to add that (again) in order to get free electricity, you need to pull your fingers out of from you know where
and DO some REAL work.  THEORIZING only will never give you free electricity!
End of story!

Cheers,
Les Banki

Ron did the real work.  He and I conversed by email several times while he tried to get this device to work.  He built it with the hopes of seeing something that actually did what the designer claimed.  What Kevin Hay has overlooked completely is that any load you try to put on the output does greatly affect the input.  The two are not separate.  All the measurements proved this.

I also suggest you read Kevin's comments.  They reveal a lot more about his character than his device.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: norman6538 on February 04, 2018, 01:35:10 PM

Hi Norman,

Here is a link to a discussion of a build someone attempted to do of Kevin Hay's device.  The discussion starts with post number 984 and continues through post 1060.  There are some videos included.  Maybe after you have reviewed all that you can come up with a way to actually make it work.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11933-open-discussion-projects-forum-33.html (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11933-open-discussion-projects-forum-33.html)

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: TinselKoala on February 04, 2018, 03:49:43 PM
Quote from: Les Banki
Be aware that the man (Ron) who had the opportunity to visit Kevin, BLEW it!  Completely and utterly!

Actually Les AS YOU WELL KNOW, it was Kevin Hay who "BLEW IT" completely and utterly, by being UNABLE to demonstrate anything to Ron when he visited which supported Hay's claim of a sustained COP 400 device, or a device that sustained an output of 30 amps at some unspecified voltage "on a dynamo" with only 12 volts at 0.1 amp input. Why do you think Hay didn't show Ron anything like that? I know why... and so do you, if you look deep into your heart. It is because Hay cannot support those claims at all, since they are false claims. Now I don't know whether the false claims were made out of ignorance or deliberately in an attempt to bamboozle the hopeful, but from looking at his Facebook posts and his replies to Ron I can make a pretty good guess.

What is the moral position of someone who might actually have such a COP 400 device, but who withholds it from the public, while children all over the world starve to death and die of dysentery, and immoral wars are being fought with huge civilian casualties, all over access to petroleum deposits? No, Hay doesn't have anything useful to offer (except maybe his medicinal cannabis, which is being grown under lights that are powered from his local municipal electric grid).

You want to take his ORMUS to "raise your frequency"? Well remember that a century ago, snake oil salesmen made all kinds of health claims for preparations containing massive amounts of cocaine, morphine and heroin, and sold syphilis cures made from mercury. At least those preparations actually did something! So now you are eating some very weak plant fertilizer sold at enormous profits by more modern snake oil salesmen in the hope of feeling better. Well, if it makes you feel better, go ahead and do it... but stay away from placebo-controlled double blind clinical trials because you might be disappointed.
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: citfta on February 04, 2018, 07:03:59 PM
Hi TK,

If you follow the reasoning that we should take ormus because it makes the POT plants grow well, then I guess we should all be eating cow manure also.  It really makes plants grow well.  No Thanks.  I am not a plant.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: AlienGrey on February 05, 2018, 08:30:11 AM
Yeah if SH was wit we could have a good laugh! but as it is we will soon be up to our necks in SH
If Tump is related to Godre'el as is calmed I just wonder how many other old fellers are too, thousands
I would guess. So at the end of the day the  American administration must be full of the stuff  ;D ;D ;D ;D
PS watch out for skiers  ;D ;D ;D 8) 8) 8)
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: iacob alex on February 05, 2018, 11:55:06 AM
Hi !
The history of perpetual motion machines dates back to the Middle Ages ,including the most common design ( "self" overbalanced wheel concept with hinged arms ) , as :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#/media/File%3APerpetuum1.png (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#/media/File%3APerpetuum1.png)
So, what can be the "new approach" if we apply the redundancy rule (minimum minimorum) regarding a possible continuous gravity overbalance ( "self" motion due to a continuous torque difference on the same side of the fulcrum ) ?
As you know : no flow,no power .Let's "free" the gravity full motion , if you intend really to draw out "motion from the natural ( free... ) motion "...
Simply : use the gravity acceleration "via" the increasing velocity.
Al_ex
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: citfta on February 06, 2018, 05:34:57 PM
Hi !
If so...type on youtube "Evolution of Perpetual Motion.WORK of Gravitational Power!",then search...
Al_ex

That video is very suspicious because he does not let it continue to spin and make a full revolution.  There is probably a hidden weight that is causing the wheel to turn.  If you watch closely he always stops it at the same point and then turns it backwards.  If it really worked he could stop it anywhere and then let it go and it would start again without him having to  turn it backwards first.  Most likely a fake.

Respectfully,
Carroll
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 06, 2018, 07:00:47 PM
His spokes are out of adjustment
Tighten them up and it will balance
and be perfectly motionless
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: iacob alex on February 06, 2018, 10:33:10 PM
Hi !
Try to play the same youtube wheel concept , as a "minimal" design : two opposite hinged spokes ,only.This can  be a simple variable lever , intended to maintain a continuous gravity unbalance ( due to a torque difference on the same side of the fulcrum ).
Al_ex
Title: Re: new approach on a gravitational engine
Post by: iacob alex on February 08, 2018, 04:11:51 PM
Hi !
A "minimal" design (easy to be tested...) , can be expressed as :
http://www.geocities.ws/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text028.JPG (http://www.geocities.ws/iacob_alex/Some_Drafts/text028.JPG)
The main point is to "tumble", to roll end over end the torque difference on the same side of the fulcrum.
Simply , the wheel becomes a lever...
Al_ex