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: Chas Campbell free power motor  (Read 721667 times)

rMuD

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #510 on: September 08, 2007, 06:12:16 PM »
Son of a gun Chas, how many decades did you work on this wheel?


I have provided an alternative design based on Chas' Wheel. This is fully inspired by Chas' idea of transfering balls but I have used two small wheels, the left turning faster than the right, the right holding two balls per angle set, the left only one ball per angle set. Also the top and bottom ball groups act like an automatic energy transfer mechanism. One ball hits a group of balls and the end ball is projected outwards immediately saving the travel time. It's like teleportation of mass. Billiards anyone? Actually Chas could use this onhis wheel.

The left wheel lifts the balls from the inside, thus shortening the total lenght of travel of the balls going up.

This type of project could be done in smaller scale.
Calculate the diameters of the left wheel 10", right wheel 20" to start.


2:1 gear ratio so you have to multiply your weight going up by 2?
also you have to have the ball slots at the same angle offset or you will run out of balls at the top, well for your design, the left side would have to be 1/2 the angle of the big wheel, as you are passing 2 balls down on the right

funny thing about all of this, is that the video showed the gravity where, when we were interested in the other device..  the Gravity wheel was something I think he said he enjoyed building.... and very well engineered.. 

In school your tought that failure is bad, and to avoid it at all costs, in the real world the more mistakes you make the more you learn, and the more successful you become.

hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #511 on: September 08, 2007, 10:14:10 PM »
G'day all,

Patrick Kelly from Panacea has just send me the following diagram, which is his take on the Chas Campbell system.

(http://www.keelytech.com/overunity/chascampbell.bmp)

Forwarded without comment at this stage

Hans von Lieven

helmut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
    • in construction
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #512 on: September 09, 2007, 12:22:30 AM »
@Chas Campbell
I want you to know,that you are a great Carakter.
Because of you many people all over the world start thinking about the horizont.
Some of the coming inventions are caused by you.Because you show the way to do the Impossible thing.

Thanks

helmut

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #513 on: September 09, 2007, 02:26:41 AM »
Chas Campell delivers us 2 lever-steps more than:
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE19936258&F=0
The second describes a closed cycle,probably..... !?

S
  dL

dc2rf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #514 on: September 09, 2007, 02:44:52 AM »
 Alas, no one would like to see a true free energy machine more than I, but I have reservations about most of this genre of devices. BTW, I'm working on FE devices myself (magnetic and ZPE), and have been doing so for many years. I am NOT a so called "debunker", but rather a FE experimenter myself. Having made that clear, let me tell you why I disagree in this case. Feel free to disagree with me, but please do so using easy to understand examples rather than gut feeling if you wish to dispute my post..
  Lets look at the concepts used here and compare them to easily understandable (similar) concepts.
 First of all, I put it to you that it takes the same amount of overall energy to lift a mass (as in balls) "x" number of inches, whether the lift is slow (as in wide circumference), or faster (as in more narrow circumference). I see it as the same old trade off that you get in many areas of mechanical and electrical conversion. A lever does not amplify (overall) power, it simply gains advantage by converting a shorter/faster movement requiring high power/time ratio, to a longer/slower movement of lower power/time ratio (that the human body can more easily provide). That's exactly what I see happening here with the balls, but something else is also being overlooked, IMHO.
 What is overlooked?
1. the machine is being "primed" when the user lifts the first rack of balls against gravity and places them on the top rack. That lift = energy or power that is loaded into the system. That's probably why the unit fails after a short time, IMHO. The energy that was added when the balls were lifted (against gravity) has been used up. Friction and other factors also affect this, but are surely secondary to the above fact.
2. when the balls return (by whatever mechanism) they (IMHO) use the same overall amount of power/energy to do so (plus friction losses).
 Whether it's by the outer loop which is slower but longer, or by the inner loop which is faster but shorter. I put it to you that the actual power/energy  required is basically the same. As I see it, this is simply a form of a lever, as mentioned above.  Going down the balls have gravity aiding them - but going UP  gravity works against them, despite the leverage factor (see above).
 The same sort of principle takes place in an electrical transformer. Example: a step-up  transformer can boost voltage, but only at the cost of losing current (as in Amps) capability. Overall POWER is what matters, since power=volts x  amps (in simple terms). To recap: in a simplified example, as you boost voltage in a transformer you lower current capability (and visa-versa), but (apart from losses), the overall power capability in Watts, remains the same. I see this genre of mechanical devices as being the mechanical analog of the above electrical example.
 Other than possibly precession of the earth (in one direction), I see no other energy source to tap into with such a machine. And, I don't think precession could cause this type of machine to work. Having said all that, I admire the inventors "pluck" and spirit, and don't doubt that he could come up with a workable concept in the future. People with his spirit and determination are what we need, and that's at least half the battle. None of us come up with a solution the first time, myself included. Kudos to the inventor for that reason!

ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #515 on: September 09, 2007, 03:03:00 AM »
Hi Lawrence and all,

Thank you Lawrence we will be attaching that to our presentation of this system, depsite Chas not have a refined system and or a working system ATM, there are still many themes and benefits we can attain from this whole experience, and that data you provided needs to make it to the light and day so does all the other gravity theorems/devices mentioned so far and the response Chas got. Plus How you and Chas need endorsement and investigation /support.

This is what we will be putting into a presentation i order to help the public and faculties 'catch up'
Our production which will have further testing results (we will still post only the results on the board later)

BTW for tinkers here are some private email is got on the subject.

"Hi Ash,

I do not think this system works. There cannot be a simple thing that
hasn't be thought to before. What does the physics say about it?

Lets approximate - outer ring is 2x bigger than the inner.
Thus to raise the ball up takes 2x times longer, that makes the system
energy balanced.

Momentum x time = energy: down = M x R x t
Momentum x time = energy: up   = M x r x 2t = M x R/2 x 2t = M x R x t

Did he show a solid proof that the ball that went down, came up again by
its own momentum without the rotor being touched?

It can only work when there is some rotational gravitational effect or
anomaly.

/
H: OU is transformation. Energy must come from somewhere. Gravity is not
an energy. Earth rotational momentum is the energy that can be tapped but
by normal physics it is very tiny (using big and fast gyros)."

Answer

"wrong...

To raise the ball with inner radius takes exactly the same amount of
time than to drop a ball with outer radius as the wheel is uniform and
all parts of the wheel are moving in synchronicity.
Also, he talked about the experiment with ball and aluminium profile:
if you put a profile's one end to ground and lift the other end few
inches and then put the ball on this elevated end, the ball starts to
roll down the slope and accelerate. He said, that at certain distance
the ball has enough energy, that when it's course is directed properly,
it can come up to the initial level again... (or something like that I
understood).
It is actually quite logical:
1. energy required to lift the ball directly up to certain height Ep=m*g*h
2. now we need to calculate the ball's kinetic energy on the slope at
certain distance from the beginning (hmm, need to dig some old physics
book in order to calculate that). The trick is, that the kinetic energy
grows with the square of velocity, so at certain distance from the
slope's beginning the ball's speed should be sufficient and the
Ek=(m*v*v)/2 should overcome the Ep=m*g*h (the square always grows
faster than the simple multiplication) and we can direct the ball
upwards with certain means and voila... Hehe, hopefully I'm not grossly
mistaken here...

Also, if you take into account the law of conservation of momentum,
things might get even more interesting.
An experiment: sit on a rotatable chair, take two beer sixpacks, one to
your each hand and strech/lift the arms to the side so that you are now
holding the sixpacks 90 deg from your body. Let your wife to rotate you
(or get the cair to rotate with your legs), when you keep the sixpacks
at the same position (now you and streched sixpacks are all rotating
with the chair). Now, while rotating, try to pull the sixpacks towards
your body. Uhh, what happens??? Your rotation speeds up considerably...
Now think about the ball, that has come down some slope and has
considerable kinetic energy. It is always said, that the best way to
utilize such energy is to transform it maximally smoothly (a la tesla
turbine with fluids moving in spiral from perimeter to center opening).
Do the same thing with your ball - direct it onto a circular track, that
is built like cone. At the base the radius should be big and when the
track now rises, the radius should also get smaller and smaller all the
time (the change might not be linear...). Now the ball, as it rises on
the track, is further accelerated by this same conservation of momentum
law and should rise more easily...

This is just an idea and needs to be checked out with suitably rigid
tube and nice heavy steel balls."

Answer two

"what you are saying has much merit.
There are more forces and actions going on, where a person needs to look at the full picture.
Not only is there a lever action from the balls pulling the wheel around, BUT these have also gained kinetic energy where if they were to slip off, or I should say be released from the wheel they would fly out with velocity.!
The balls are not just dead weights. There weight is used to cause rotation but at the same time there is energy now stored in there mass from centrifugal force.
So from my perspective, I can see that we use gravity which is an ever increasing acceleration to create work, then at the right time using the energy stored in this mass to bring it back to the beginning of the cycle, all makes sense.
 
 Put it this way.
What goes up must come down. So lets say we drop a ball from 10feet high, well it falls down and then bounces back up say 9feet.
Now think about this, where the ball drops 10feet but we tapped into this to create work, well that's great but don't forget we have also put the ball now into a centrifugal force at the same time.
What I am trying to say is this effect is the same thing where they fling satellites around planets, to gain kinetic energy for greater acceleration.
 
http://www.astrosociety.org/education/publications/tnl/34/space3.html
 
 Maybe my imagination is way out there, but I am able to visualize gravity forces in conjunction with centrifugal forces where it must be possible to use gravity for one part of the cycle but use the generated centrifugal force for the net gains.
I mean if all was perfect and the energy gained as the ball drops was the same energy needed to take it back to the top again was needed,,, hey what about the fact we made this ball fall through a swing so it gained a bonus centrifugal force for free?"

Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #516 on: September 09, 2007, 03:24:53 AM »
HI Jim the video is PUBLIC knowledge feel free to upload it to where ever, i couldn't upload to google video as it times out ???

We will soon be uploading our water fuel cell replication and self running neon switching RV demosall open sourced [plans and videos]
 

I guess I must be the only one who noticed this.  You have a self-running RV?  Holy Moses man!  Why in the world would you be fooling around with gravity wheels that don't quite work and non self-runner electrical machines that bog down if you have a self-running RV?  You should focus on what works!

HEY!  EVERYBODY!  ASHTWETH HAS QUIETLY ANNOUNCED HE HAS A SELF-RUNNING RV SYSTEM!  GATHER ROUND!  HE'S UPLOADING THE PLANS AND VIDEO SOON!

How much free energy does it produce?  Wow!  You are the master of understatement, dude!   I never knew you had a working self-runner!  What a surprise!  You must now disclose all the details of course.  I want to build a nice big one immediately!

Humbugger
« Last Edit: September 09, 2007, 04:10:07 AM by Humbugger »

ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #517 on: September 09, 2007, 03:35:50 AM »
Just to clarify for the Board as Hum you all know is talking to him self from now on when addressing me.


The self running Neon circuit has been reported by David Kou in France as working and is on the RV page, we have replicated the circuit and will be testing it on our RV next week. Attached is the circuit for those interested in it.

Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #518 on: September 09, 2007, 04:30:11 AM »
The self running Neon circuit has been reported by David Kou in France as working and is on the RV page, we have replicated the circuit and will be testing it on our RV next week. Attached is the circuit for those interested in it.

Is he saying that someone in France has reportedly put together a working self-runner energy-producing system (where are the videos and reports on that?) or is it just some new electronic circuit that "works" which he and others are hoping  might make self-running possible?  I can never quite tell what is really being said except when Ashtweth is hurling insults and accusing skeptics of being "oil men".

I assume it's just another hopeful magic circuit but it sure seems that efforts are being consciously made to make it sound like self-running has been achieved.  I keep hearing claims, or what surely sound like claims, of self-running RV setups by Hector and this Kou fellow and these are reported to be folks who Ashtweth works with very closely and has for quite some time. 

Why have we seen no video demonstration about these astonishing reports of self-running machines?  Wouldn't that be far more worthy of Ashtweth's time than chasing after gravity wheels that don't turn and non-self-runners that can't stand a steady load for ten seconds?  To be accused of wasting Ashtweth's time, which I have been on several recent occasions, seems rather unjustified in light of all this.   

I prefer my information about major world-shaking scientific developments to be stated in unambiguous terms so that I know what is actually being said.

Humbugger
« Last Edit: September 09, 2007, 05:12:01 AM by Humbugger »

b0rg13

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 651
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #519 on: September 09, 2007, 05:13:57 AM »
hi all , first of all please excuse my very bad edit of some one elses pic, but would this work ?.

ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #520 on: September 09, 2007, 05:26:17 AM »
Hi Lawrence and all,

Thank you Lawrence we will be attaching that to our presentation of this system, depsite Chas not have a refined system and or a working system ATM, there are still many themes and benefits we can attain from this whole experience, and that data you provided needs to make it to the light and day so does all the other gravity theorems/devices mentioned so far and the response Chas got. Plus How you and Chas need endorsement and investigation /support.


Dear Ash,

You and your team have done an excellent job.  I have seen the Chas Campbell gravity wheel video and I also have the dimensions of his Electricity Magnifier.

After careful review and discussions with others in China, we are very confident that we can improve both the Chas Campbell devices.  I shall prepare a full, detailed theoretical explanation of why his two devices are theoretically possible.  We shall then outline the many improvements  that are possible under the prediction of the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory.

The Chas Campbell Electricity Magnifier is actually easier to implement and demonstrate.  I have the unfair advantage of knowing the superior Tsing Hua Electricity Generator using cylinders.  Lee and I already presented the theory at Tsing Hua University multiple times in late 2006.  In one sentence, it is Pulsed Rotation Leading Out Gravitational Energy.

Lee Cheung Kin and I shall meet some Chinese Officials next week.  As you may know already, China and Japan are extremely interested in alternative energy projects.  If you do not object, I shall present the Chas Campbell devices to them.  (We did that for Wang Shum Ho with good success.)

Keep up the good work.  I am interested in your RV invention too.

Lawrence Tseung
International Cooperation Leads Out a better World for all.

shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #521 on: September 09, 2007, 05:30:53 AM »
hi all , first of all please excuse my very bad edit of some one elses pic, but would this work ?.

Unfortunately, no.  Many have tried this design, and it is pretty much established that this cannot work.  No matter how you design it, the balls on the left will always outweigh the balls on the right, even given the advantage of leverage.  The wheel will not turn.

hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #522 on: September 09, 2007, 05:33:51 AM »
For crying out loud Lawrence, do you ever give up with this complete and utter bullshit of yours? Why don't you stick that the superior Tsing Hua Electricity Generator of yours where it may or may not cause an obstruction. I am tired of your arrogant attitude and superiorist (new word??) manner. I am certain I am not the only one.

Hans von Lieven

ashtweth_nihilisti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
    • Panacea-BOCAF
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #523 on: September 09, 2007, 07:22:22 AM »
Hi Lawrence and Hans,

@ Han hang on a tick mate, lets see what we can make of this ;)

@ Lawrence

this i feel is objective as we want to assimilate R and D conditions towards an educational  testing facility. The minster for energy here in Queensland will be going on record soon acknowledging yours and all these systems here, http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/RandDprinciples.htm this we will be presenting to the public.

Yes, not much luck with the COP+1 system so far, but we got allot out of it, the letter on the Chas page is being updated and utilized plus the web page themes and the promotion have helped also. So all in all we have made some thing from it. Much more testing and understanding is still possible , plus further tests and improvements. The pulsed extraction circuits can come from this. Dont forget every thing is open sourced from US.

Plus the final production of the testing will be filmed soon with the needed themes and the reported working gravity machines (the yours, Milkovics and the new energy machine one) will be added with the Chas' R and D wheel. This is needed long with your R and D you mentioned, all theorems and current demonstrative gravity devices will be presented as a huge education political /themes presentation , to the faculties and the public.

Dont worry we dont let any interference intervene , 2000 people/oil men could of posted here with insults or skepticism mindless drivel, it wouldn't deter the logistics of the non profit organization i am working for.

@ all, am impressed with your spirits and R and D keep going, Chas is still working on improvements and appreciates his supporters, so you guys are doing great.

sevich

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #524 on: September 09, 2007, 09:51:51 AM »
@ Ashtweth

You may be tarnishing your reputation and image here on the forum when you continually acknowledge and rub shoulders with Lawrence (Itseung888) ???  ???  ???