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 Members: 83955
  • *Latest: serials

  • *Total Posts: 525628
  • *Total Topics: 15646
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: Chas Campbell free power motor  (Read 611172 times)

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #825 on: September 17, 2007, 08:29:17 AM »
Dear RoadRunner,

Please read my post carefully.  You are supposed to have a magnet as your pendulum bob...

...Please do the above Forever Yuen experiment and tell us the result.


Ni hao, Tseung Xiansheng,
I cannot see how having a magnet as the bob will make any difference, but of course, it would be remiss of me to neglect to do the experiment as described.

I just want to find a piece of thread which is not quite so elastic as the one I am using.
My neos are stretching the thread at bottom-dead-centre and ending the experiment prematurely.

Once I have managed to locate some suitable thread, I will perform the experiment once more as per your directions and report my results.

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #825 on: September 17, 2007, 08:29:17 AM »

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #826 on: September 17, 2007, 08:40:35 AM »
i used monofilament (30 lb test fishing line), didnt stretch much at all

Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7973
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #827 on: September 17, 2007, 08:40:55 AM »


I guess we are all cheap and disabled in our own perverted ways. Maybe we should all patch in and build the worlds biggest smot device? One of the drawbacks of the smot is that the height of the ramp is limited by the size of the ball? lol?

If we bother him enough I bet we can get Finsrud himself to build it for us. Then we get Richard Brandston to roll the balls up the ramp. Attaching a wheel to our big smot should be easy for us profesional free energy research nerds. We have all the arguments insertion height complications right here in the topic already.

I think 50 Euros per participant would be good to get rid of this cheap feeling. It will bring us closer together like in a cult.

But it would still take a lot of people to buy our own custom made Finstrud-mobile.

I even made a construction drawing.

(http://img.go-here.nl/chas-is-cool.png)

I think it's very artistic already? no?

But doesn't this fix the complications with Chas device already?

There could be a second SMOT at the lower end?

Hi Gaby,
I still like your idea very much with the integrated SMOT ramp,
as in this case you don?t need to fiddle with the "blue hole", but just let the ball
drop into the wheel after the ramp.

But I think your spiral inward thing is not a good idea,
as it makes the torque arm smaller and thus
deminishes the useable torque to lift the other balls.

But Chas should really look into this design, if he
wants to get his big wheel working.

Regards, Stefan.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #827 on: September 17, 2007, 08:40:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7973
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #828 on: September 17, 2007, 08:47:44 AM »
Iear Stephan,
I am shocked and horrified at Humbuggers removal.
Mark

Hi Mark and all,
please reread my decision over here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2487.msg50036.html#msg50036

I was also asked privately by some other users to ban him,
cause he was too abusive.

I don?t like to ban people from over here,
but sometimes if some people over here use
this space to make up their own agenda
and try to harrass other people, it is just too much.

And he was warned already before,
but did continue.
Hope you understand.

Regards, Stefan.
P.S: I am still pointing out myself measurement
errors and wrong claims, so this over here is
no dreamland about overunity and free energy,
but a real scientific research forum.
But sometimes you have to give the inventors
some time to put all their
documentation together and we have to be patient.

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #829 on: September 17, 2007, 09:10:14 AM »
Aaaaaarghghghg !!!

I just broke a neo !!!

I hate it when that happens.

This is a new set of neos too !! I've only had them a few days. They seem to be a lot stronger than previous sets. The darned thing jumped off the floor before I could tape it down and shattered itself on the one I was using as a bob !!!

The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #829 on: September 17, 2007, 09:10:14 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #830 on: September 17, 2007, 09:14:38 AM »
A word of caution when doing these experiments with attracting polarities:::

secure both magnets so that they do not fly towards one another!!!

Offline markdansie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1471
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #831 on: September 17, 2007, 09:24:34 AM »
Dear Ash,
thanks for your efforts in filming.
I was trying to make sense of your post.
perhaps a couple of questions will clarify things for me so i can report back to the NEC.

1. Was there any evidence of OU ?

2. Did any of the tests (pulse and non pulse) run for any longer for a few seconds? It is important to do so so any energy that might be stored in the fly wheel is not confused as anything else other than stored energy.

3. Was there any evidence that supported Chas's previous claims (statements on TV interview and posts here) re power in power out? If not...why is this not repeatable?

By asking questions like this I am not attacking you or Chas. Its just important that all technology is tested on a level playing field.

Kind Regards
Mark

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #831 on: September 17, 2007, 09:24:34 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #832 on: September 17, 2007, 10:28:34 AM »
A word of caution when doing these experiments with attracting polarities:::

secure both magnets so that they do not fly towards one another!!!

Yes, yes, yes. I know, I'm a dumbass, completely deserving of ridicule !!!

Well, I attempted to check the field-strength of the neos with my Tricorder as it's the only gauss-meter I have to hand at the moment... No... I'm not joking... or deluded !!! However, I think the Tricorder doesn't handle static fields very well, it handles fluctuating fields but static fields don't seem to register properly. I think it has something to do with the type of hall-effect tranny it uses... I was hoping to report the strength of the magnets in use but that idea went to the wind !!

Distance between magnets = 5cm
Stationary magnet placed at bottom-dead-centre (I assume that's where it's supposed to be).
The bob was released from the same point each time. (approx 85 deg from BDC)

I was obtaining a consistent 42 (and a bit) swings.
Without magnet = 42 and a bit.
Magnets in attraction = 42 and a bit.
Magnets in repulsion = 42 and a bit.

The only differences were that with the magnet, the pendulum would sometimes go off course, bounce into something (usually the nearby armchair) and void that run.
and...
That with the magnets in attraction, the swinging would stop much sooner.

I have no reason to suspect that two (or more) people are lying to me so the fact that we are obtaining conflicting results is interesting.

I need to go and do some other things for a while but I intend to come back to this.

My intermediate hypothesis is that I am using a much longer pendulum than Forever Yuen (as evidenced by her count of ~100 and my count of ~40 over a minute) and this may have some bearing on the results. My magnets are likely to be in proximity for a smaller proportion of the entire swing than hers and this may cause the differences in runs to be less dramatic.
After all... 42 and a bit each run... That 'bit' is certainly not a complete swing but it is unmeasured.
It could be a big bit or a small bit and without measurement, the differences could be less than my margin for error.

Results:
Inconclusive - Further experimentation needed.

(Attached picture - Attempting to measure the field-strength of the neo - before it comitted suicide)

The RoadRunner..

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #833 on: September 17, 2007, 10:34:24 AM »
Dear Ash,

Welcome back.  I have updated the campbell document at

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2487.msg48484.html#msg48484

to version 1.5.  I included some highlights of our meetings with the Chinese Officials from 3 Cities.  I am reproducing the latest edit from today here.

Latest Edit on September 17, 2006:

Expert A: ?I want to let you know that we have invested some seed money in your friend Sun  et al.  They have a working Pulse Motor Prototype.  It cannot produce CoP greater than 1.0 yet.  However, we feel that it has more potential than the Chas Campbell Device.?

Tseung: ?I know.  Sun called me.  He is providing you a prototype that can be driven from a battery or from a solar panel.  The prototype had two Drive Coils at present.  They intend to fill in the whole disc with at least Eight Drive/Pickup Coils. That could simulate the Newman and Bedini setup with the same Coil used for Drive and Pickup.  They also plan to add the programming  elements?

Expert A: ?Nothing escapes you in this Cosmic Energy Machine Development.  We have not rejected the Chas Campbell Project yet.  Funding and Support for him from our City is still possible.  We want him to have the credit.  International Cooperation will raise the status of our City.  As you had repeated many times, let others shine.?

Lawrence Tseung
Talk of Pulse Motor Leads Out seed money for that project.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #833 on: September 17, 2007, 10:34:24 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #834 on: September 17, 2007, 10:49:19 AM »
here is the reasoning behind this, in reuplsion mode the magnet has to swing around in a circular fashion.
in attracting mode the magnet is allowed to swing back and forth, shorter path less time.

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #835 on: September 17, 2007, 11:11:37 AM »
here is the reasoning behind this, in reuplsion mode the magnet has to swing around in a circular fashion.
in attracting mode the magnet is allowed to swing back and forth, shorter path less time.

I would certainly agree with your reasoning, but that would not explain a difference between 'attraction' and 'no magnet' because both swings should take the same path.
The comparison which really interests me is the comparison between 'no magnet' and 'attraction'.

Anyway, this is somewhat offtopic as it has drifted beyond the realms of Chas Campbell's rotating pool-table.
If there's a thread where this magnet-pendulum idea has been discussed, we can take it there.


The RoadRunner..

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #835 on: September 17, 2007, 11:11:37 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ltseung888

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #836 on: September 17, 2007, 11:18:17 AM »
A word of caution when doing these experiments with attracting polarities:::

secure both magnets so that they do not fly towards one another!!!

Distance between magnets = 5cm
Stationary magnet placed at bottom-dead-centre (I assume that's where it's supposed to be).
The bob was released from the same point each time. (approx 85 deg from BDC)

I was obtaining a consistent 42 (and a bit) swings.
Without magnet = 42 and a bit.
Magnets in attraction = 42 and a bit.
Magnets in repulsion = 42 and a bit.

The only differences were that with the magnet, the pendulum would sometimes go off course, bounce into something (usually the nearby armchair) and void that run.
and...
That with the magnets in attraction, the swinging would stop much sooner.

I have no reason to suspect that two (or more) people are lying to me so the fact that we are obtaining conflicting results is interesting.

I need to go and do some other things for a while but I intend to come back to this.

My intermediate hypothesis is that I am using a much longer pendulum than Forever Yuen (as evidenced by her count of ~100 and my count of ~40 over a minute) and this may have some bearing on the results. My magnets are likely to be in proximity for a smaller proportion of the entire swing than hers and this may cause the differences in runs to be less dramatic.
After all... 42 and a bit each run... That 'bit' is certainly not a complete swing but it is unmeasured.
It could be a big bit or a small bit and without measurement, the differences could be less than my margin for error.

Results:
Inconclusive - Further experimentation needed.

The RoadRunner..

Dear RoadRunner,

Try to use shorter length (approximately 30 cm).   Forever Yuen used disc magnets with hole in the middle costing USD0.5.  I believe your magnets are much stronger.  The magnetic attraction or repulsion do not need to be too strong.  If the magnetic bob moves slightly at a distance of about 5 cm, the force is sufficient.

The shorter string and keeping the pendulum away from other objects will help.  Since you are using fishing lines, you can put a fishing pole on top of two Chairs.  The Chairs can be one or two meters apart.  There should not be other objects (especially magnetic or iron) to upset the experiment. (I believe Forever used non-stretchable strings.)

I shall wait for you and others  to repeat the experiment.  If the results were still inconclusive, I would ask Ms. Forever Yuen to repeat and video the experiment next Sunday  (or during her holidays).

Quote
Anyway, this is somewhat offtopic as it has drifted beyond the realms of Chas Campbell's rotating pool-table.
If there's a thread where this magnet-pendulum idea has been discussed, we can take it there.

Good Idea.  We can continue at my Lee-Tseung Theory thread at:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg49950.html#msg49950

Lawrence Tseung
Friendly Experimenters Lead Out lower Pulse Rate for Tseung.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2007, 11:53:00 AM by ltseung888 »

Offline RoadRunner

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #837 on: September 17, 2007, 12:02:27 PM »
Good Idea.  We can continue at my Lee-Tseung Theory thread at:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.msg49950.html#msg49950

Continued there...

The RoadRunner..

Offline gaby de wilde

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 470
    • http://blog.360.yahoo.com/Factuurexpress
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #838 on: September 17, 2007, 04:30:07 PM »


I guess we are all cheap and disabled in our own perverted ways. Maybe we should all patch in and build the worlds biggest smot device? One of the drawbacks of the smot is that the height of the ramp is limited by the size of the ball? lol?

If we bother him enough I bet we can get Finsrud himself to build it for us. Then we get Richard Brandston to roll the balls up the ramp. Attaching a wheel to our big smot should be easy for us profesional free energy research nerds. We have all the arguments insertion height complications right here in the topic already.

I think 50 Euros per participant would be good to get rid of this cheap feeling. It will bring us closer together like in a cult.

But it would still take a lot of people to buy our own custom made Finstrud-mobile.

I even made a construction drawing.

(http://img.go-here.nl/chas-is-cool.png)

I think it's very artistic already? no?

But doesn't this fix the complications with Chas device already?

There could be a second SMOT at the lower end?

Hi Gaby,
I still like your idea very much with the integrated SMOT ramp,
as in this case you don?t need to fiddle with the "blue hole", but just let the ball
drop into the wheel after the ramp.

But I think your spiral inward thing is not a good idea,
as it makes the torque arm smaller and thus
deminishes the useable torque to lift the other balls.

Lets say there are 4 kinds of torque:

1- Ball on inside

2- Ball on outside

3- Ball moving towards axle (while still on the wheel)

4- ball moving towards rim (while still on the wheel)

Here 2 obviously makes more momentum as 1. This was the whole discovery.  But in 3 like a ballerina pulling in her arms the rpms will go up even further as in 2. Just like 4 will slow the wheel down most dramatically. You must know what a governor is? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_(device)
When accelerated the mass moves outwards making it rotate at a steady speed. Pulling mass inwards on a wheel will accelerate it.

I guess the big question is: where are all the closed loop smot devices? hummm

I thought this video makes Chas innovation a bit more obvious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e77eOgylsBc


Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: Chas Campbell free power motor
« Reply #839 on: September 17, 2007, 05:00:38 PM »

I guess the big question is: where are all the closed loop smot devices? hummm


I think the problem we will run into is that the SMOT robs the ball of more of its gravitational force after the ball drops off the SMOT than the benefit gained from elevating the ball.  This is why there are no closed loop SMOTs yet.

 

OneLink