Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: usama salah on September 15, 2007, 11:01:16 PM
-
new gravity wheel and turbine theory( free energy)
i found out a new design of a gravity wheel and turbine ,use all its mass at one side of the wheel rotating round its axle and convert 95% from its mass potential energy to generat kinetic energy using less than 5% of its mass power for friction and regenerate or reconstruct its mass.
it's a new working theory , very simple and logical , so we can prove it, and calculate its output energy , just by its design
it's a perpetual motion and gravity as a new sorse of energy that using newton law not against it or violent it.
and now why we don't use gravity power as a renewable and clean energy?
i see a lot of this gravity wheel and motor at the following sites
http://www.fuellesspower.com/6_Gravity2.htm
http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Gravity_Motors
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6817180-claims.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/11/328724.html?c=on#c136644
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=5637
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/
http://www.guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/conference/Weinfelden/
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hfrnrgen.htm
http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm
http://www.rexresearch.com/tewari/tewari.htm
http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/gravity.htm
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2006107313
http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/gravity.htm
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7134283.html
http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/2depalma.html
http://www.etheric.com/GalacticCenter/Gravity.html
http://www.free-energy.ws/
http://www.eagle-research.com/fenergy/gravity.html
http://64.233.183.104/search
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lD_65ggChs
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLJ_enEG232EG232&q=gravity+motor
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Andy_Gravity-Magnet_Motor
http://www.fuellesspower.com/gravity2.html
http://www.evert.de/eft786e.htm
http://www.gravitymotor.net/
http://www.skdynamics.com/gravitymotor/index.htm
i think most of those designs are very good but not complete , and the one who do that must catch the my opinion true theory of how to get energy from gravity ,or most of them must catch my design wheel from a long time ago!
but i don't know why they didn't? why there isn't uses of a working gravity turbine until now?
if we have a good design for a perpetual motion and already we have the gravity power , then we must use them to generat energy.
maybe i'm the lucky one !
ok, no problem of whatever i think about . my new design is not like any of what i found in those sites it is completly different , and powerfull .
it is a new source of renewable energy.that use whatever amount of mass you need at only one side and one position of the wheel in a perpetual motion design.the same as what used with water and wind wheel and turbine ( one amount of force at one side maybe one position of the wheel) . it's a relation between potential power , and in the other side the power that effect the mass to make it as a potential power.
i think that ,
what was a dream before, today become a true.
how can i put my invention at the right way for common use ,
at last i 'm sure there is no mistake in my wheel and it's logicaly as the same like water turbine or wind turbine.
i keep searching for my new theory and design at net sites from 4 months without any positive similar design , what it means!!!!?
thank you ,and sorry for my bore language ,
usama mohamed salah
-
Welcome to the forum, Usama.
It sounds as if you have only a theory on paper, and no actual working prototype. Or, do you have a working model?
Are you willing to share more information? Or are you keeping it all secret, unless one is willing to invest?
j
-
that is right i don't have an actual working prototype , becuase it is more simple to understand for anyone even who is unscientific but have the minimum knowledge of high school and good logical mind.the same like if i show you a design for a water wheel or turbine you don't need a prototype to understand or prove it ,
i know it's very important to make a working one to prove what you said, but with my very simple portotype for my new theory ,i understood that i don't need to make a complete one .
i can't believe that no one know or catch my design before with all our technology.
so i don't keep it as a secrit, and i will puplish it after 3 or 4 month until i got my patent paper to keep my right , and within this months i will looking for an investor ,
and believe my , there is no investor for a simple reason ,this invention will effect the other investment of the energy industry.
again sorry for my bore language
that is my opinion
-
that is right i don't have an actual working prototype , becuase it is more simple to understand for anyone even who is unscientific but have the minimum knowledge of high school and good logical mind.the same like if i show you a design for a water wheel or turbine you don't need a prototype to understand or prove it ,
i know it's very important to make a working one to prove what you said, but with my very simple portotype for my new theory ,i understood that i don't need to make a complete one .
i can't believe that no one know or catch my design before with all our technology.
so i don't keep it as a secrit, and i will puplish it after 3 or 4 month until i got my patent paper to keep my right , and within this months i will looking for an investor ,
and believe my , there is no investor for a simple reason ,this invention will effect the other investment of the energy industry.
again sorry for my bore language
that is my opinion
You may not be able to file a patent on a perpetual motion device unless you have a working prototype.
-
that is right i don't have an actual working prototype , becuase it is more simple to understand for anyone even who is unscientific but have the minimum knowledge of high school and good logical mind.the same like if i show you a design for a water wheel or turbine you don't need a prototype to understand or prove it ,
i know it's very important to make a working one to prove what you said, but with my very simple portotype for my new theory ,i understood that i don't need to make a complete one .
i can't believe that no one know or catch my design before with all our technology.
so i don't keep it as a secrit, and i will puplish it after 3 or 4 month until i got my patent paper to keep my right , and within this months i will looking for an investor ,
and believe my , there is no investor for a simple reason ,this invention will effect the other investment of the energy industry.
again sorry for my bore language
that is my opinion
If your idea has true merit and will indeed effect the energy industry, then like those who came before you, you will likely be silenced by whatever means deemed necessary, and your idea will never see the light of day.
That is why this is an open source forum, where ideas are shared openly and freely that any valid and far reaching ideas will be too widely known and distributed to ever be silenced or hidden. Here, it's about putting the world and environment first, and our wallets second. Also because of the openness, there is a free flow of help and ideas from many very knowledgeable people from various disciplines to help work out the problems and so allow things to come together efficiently and effectively.
Good luck to you.
j
-
If your idea has true merit and will indeed effect the energy industry, then like those who came before you, you will likely be silenced by whatever means deemed necessary, and your idea will never see the light of day.
You mean like they silenced Leonardo DaVinci? I think the only thing that has so far silenced perpetual motion are the laws of physics, as we understand them.
Usama, feel free to keep your invention private, if you so desire. Profit is a great motivator, and hopefully it will cause someone to produce something revolutionary someday in the field of free energy.
-
I have been on the Bessler forum for years and have seen many designs come and go. Hundreds of years ago people tried making a gravity wheel work by making one side heavier or the weights farther from center than the other.
What it all really boils down to is that on a wheel the weight must rise as far as it falls and therefore there is no excess energy.
It might be possible to get some other forces working in your favor like inertia or centrifugal force, but as far as I know Bessler is the only person to ever build a successful gravity wheel and he took the concept with him when he died.
-
G'day Usama and all,
Come back when you have built something. Things that are only in the mind or on paper are often not real, as are Youtube videos. The only way there is to prove (even to yourself) the validity of your theories is to build the thing and study its behaviour.
Hans von Lieven
-
good day
and thanks for all
i will take care of all your recommandations
first let me ask a some questions:
1- if we put 101 books each over other , every book = 1 kg ,
how much weight do the first book from bottom carry up = ????
2- if each book has 10cm then we have 1010 cm in high,
how much force we need to move one book up for 1010 cm at one second by any way of newton law =????
3- to make a perpetual motion ,
if we get the first book from the bottom out, then we have two actions
a- the 100 books will fall down for just 10 cm by gravity power of 100 kg at less than one second
b- we need less than 2 kg to move this free book up and put it on the top ( reconstruct the poiential power of 101 books).
( that is not a wheel but we can put evry book on the one side arms of a wheel ,or like steam wheel )
with comparing between what we gain and what we lose for reconstruct our shape in the meaning of power if we could do that automaticly, we observe that it's possible to make a perpetual motion that generate more power than it used for keep rotating ( it dosn't use all its power) , then the problem is how to desing this automatic motion or perpetual motion.
this is not my invention at all ,this is a facts and i tried to explain it in other view to make somebody believe of gravity energy, and i hope that.
also , when we gain a little amount of power from any gravity wheel, and we use a multi wheel at one axle then we gain more power from this axle as a turbine.
the problem is, how is the good design looks like ? and who can or could do it ?
at last i will give you a very simple design for my gravity wheel as soon as i can , and please make your mind to find out the relation between gravity wheel and flotation wheel , and between gravbity effect and flotation effect. and what is the theory that make you use any power to rotat the same wheel ( wind,fallwater,gravity,magnetic,flotation,.....) with a simple change of some parts.
you can draw it on a paper before any prototype.
i hope my boring english not effect my object meaning
-
G'day Usama,
Never be ashamed of your English, we all had to learn it sometime, it"ll get better with time. I am sure few of us would be competent in your language, whatever that is.
As to your example of a stack of books you must consider the amount of force required to liberate the bottom book and allow the rest of the stack to drop. Don't forget in your calculation that the entire weight of the stack sits on it.
Hans von Lieven
-
good day
and thanks for all
i will take care of all your recommandations
first let me ask a some questions:
1- if we put 101 books each over other , every book = 1 kg ,
how much weight do the first book from bottom carry up = ????
2- if each book has 10cm then we have 1010 cm in high,
how much force we need to move one book up for 1010 cm at one second by any way of newton law =????
3- to make a perpetual motion ,
if we get the first book from the bottom out, then we have two actions
a- the 100 books will fall down for just 10 cm by gravity power of 100 kg at less than one second
b- we need less than 2 kg to move this free book up and put it on the top ( reconstruct the poiential power of 101 books).
What you are describing is a type of perpetually unbalanced system. People have been trying to do this exact thing. The reason it has not worked so far is there is no practical way to keep the heavy side (100 books) from balancing itself by coming over to the light side (1 book). If you have a method of doing this, you are golden. Can't wait to see what you have.
-
The question is;
1) How much power will you consume to "pull" the book from under the weight of 100 books fast enough to make the others fall.
-
G'day all,
I think usama is thinking about this sort of device:
(http://www.lhup.edu/%7Edsimanek/museum/gearcoil.gif)
It has been around since at least the 1950's. No-one has got it to work yet
Hans von Lieven
-
Hi Usama,
first let me ask a some questions:
1- if we put 101 books each over other , every book = 1 kg ,
how much weight do the first book from bottom carry up = ????
2- if each book has 10cm then we have 1010 cm in high,
how much force we need to move one book up for 1010 cm at one second by any way of newton law =????
3- to make a perpetual motion ,
if we get the first book from the bottom out, then we have two actions
a- the 100 books will fall down for just 10 cm by gravity power of 100 kg at less than one second
b- we need less than 2 kg to move this free book up and put it on the top ( reconstruct the poiential power of 101 books).
The energy you get from the 100 1kg books falling 10cm is 100kg * 0.1m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
The energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg * 10m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
Simple calculations like these show why these overbalanced wheel things never work on paper. If they work in practice, it's because there's something about simple mechanics that we don't know.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
-
LOL entropy,
Well said :-)
Simple calculations like these show why these overbalanced wheel things never work on paper. If they work in practice, it's because there's something about simple mechanics that we don't know.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
Hans von Lieven
-
Yes, good call. I figured it was because the heavy side would just slide over, but now I see it would not matter even if it did not. I learn something every day.
-
ok, that is good
let me adjust the question :
suppose we change the bottom book NO:1 and used a water balloon as container of 1kg of water , that balloon linked to another empty one over the 100 books by pipe .
what kind of actions we have here :
 a- 100 book fall down for 10 cm that gain ??? of energy
 b- 1kg of water ( book or water or sand no problem) will pumped up for 1000cm used ???? of energy
 c- we used a mixed force and other properties and one of old simple mechanics .
ÂÂ
i think there is a lot of way to move 1kg up to 1000 cm using less than 98j , also all this ways are depending on gravity.
then i don't think about any sort of device because every one has a verey good idea , that agree with my device
-
i think there is a lot of way to move 1kg up to 1000 cm using less than 98j
Why do you think that?
-
G'day usama and all,
If you know lots of ways in which to move 1kg perpendicularly up 1000 cm (which incidentally is 10 meters) and expend less than 98 J you are the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
Please tell us some of your secrets, for the future cannot do with such a loss in case the baddies get to you. You owe it to the world!
Hans von Lieven
-
If you know lots of ways in which to move 1kg perpendicularly up 1000 cm (which incidentally is 10 meters) and expend less than 98 J you are the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
of course, i know a lot
10 meters means about 4 floors , you can go upstairs to the fourth floor , send a sling down to street , tied the sling to any stake.
go down stair to street , catch the other side of the line and tied 1gk of any material.
go upstairs to the other end of the line and pull the 1gk up.
if you need more ways call me back
while figured it don't forget to calculate the effect of changing time at both sides , and the indirect force of pressure action.
for the future if the goods couldn't figured your puzzle out , then don't wait the baddies .
mr.entoropy
i don't means that, i'm sure ,i said just think like thinking about gravity wheel and flotation wheel
all of us must make our mind and think
and tried the last question using 90 books while the other balloon at the10 meter .
do the same experiment until you figure out how much weight you need to lift 1kg up for 1000cm.
you can also make the pipe more thin or wide it , all that effect your goal.
As to your example of a stack of books you must consider the amount of force required to liberate the bottom book and allow the rest of the stack to drop. Don't forget in your calculation that the entire weight of the stack sits on it.
Hans von Lieven
the idea of the using a balloon solved the problem as i understood.
thanks for all
and good bey
i hope any one gain some new idea
-
G'day usama and all,
If you know lots of ways in which to move 1kg perpendicularly up 1000 cm (which incidentally is 10 meters) and expend less than 98 J you are the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
of course, i know a lot
10 meters means about 4 floors , you can go upstairs to the fourth floor , send a sling down to street , tied the sling to any stake.
go down stair to street , catch the other side of the line and tied 1gk of any material.
go upstairs to the other end of the line and pull the 1gk up.
if you need more ways call me back
while figured it don't forget to calculate the effect of changing time at both sides , and the indirect force of pressure action.
for the future if the goods couldn't figured your puzzle out , then don't wait the baddies .
That is NOT what I was talking about. Most idiots know how to transport 1 kg 10m up.
I said, if you can move 1 kg of mass perpendicularly up 10 meters with expending less than 98 Joules you are the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
I am still standing by that.
You should see the sense in what I am saying, unless you don't know what a Joule is, in which case the Eureka is probably over your head too.
Hans von Lieven
-
Hi Hans....I think I should show you how to hold 45 metric tons in the air by drawing 1.5 amps from a 12 volt battery for one hour....How many joules is that? I can hold the weight for years...and then after all that time I can still get back much of the energy that I used....It's so easy, but too impractical to make full scale.
I can also show mechanical energy from the experiment everyday for as long as I hold the weight.
The experiment itself acts like a generator.... ;D
Cheers mate....
Scotty
-
hi , Lieven
don't forget most idiots know that if you change the velocity to 10m/s or 1 m/s ,you will use less joules
The energy you get from the 100 1kg books falling 10cm is 100kg * 0.1m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
The energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg * 10m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
the energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg* 10m* 1 m/s2 = 10J
then you can gain 88 J by mechanic transport 1kg up and falldown 100kg at its gravity speed.
dear
idon' said throw the book up at your maximum speed or use the 100 books to move 1 book at the same time ,
also,who said that i tried to be the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
i know myself , i'm just a one found out a new way to get free energy by good luck ,not more and tried to do his best to understand and learn what is happen around ?
thanks p.motion for stoping
i hope you will be the one who can gain a true new idea to generat a free energe but don't forget me
-
hi , Lieven
don't forget most idiots know that if you change the velocity to 10m/s or 1 m/s ,you will use less joules
The energy you get from the 100 1kg books falling 10cm is 100kg * 0.1m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
The energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg * 10m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
the energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg* 10m* 1 m/s2 = 10J
then you can gain 88 J by mechanic transport 1kg up and falldown 100kg at its gravity speed.
dear
idon' said throw the book up at your maximum speed or use the 100 books to move 1 book at the same time ,
also,who said that i tried to be the greatest sensation on this planet since the famous Eureka.
i know myself , i'm just a one found out a new way to get free energy by good luck ,not more and tried to do his best to understand and learn what is happen around ?
thanks p.motion for stoping
i hope you will be the one who can gain a true new idea to generat a free energe but don't forget me
I think you missed something. The 9.8 m/s2 is part of the equation because that is the acceleration speed of objects in Earth's gravity. To change the equation using 1 m/s2 means that you are on a planet with roughly 1/10th of the earth's gravity. This has nothing to do with how fast you lift the book.
Maybe that is the secret to making your device work. Keep one half on earth and the other on the moon?
-
G'day Scotty and all,
I trust we are talking here of a device like Ed Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder. Though this is a fascinating device, I don't know if we can talk in terms of Joules here. If you take a permanent magnet and stick it 10 feet up a perpendicular steel beam the 10 meter drop is not even potential energy as long as it sticks there.
Hans von Lieven
-
that is right , i'm sorry
but i think about using other force to change the velocity at the two side or
do one action at the moment , first use the fall down of the weight under gravity power ( to gain energy),second use the same weight to get out and lift up 1kg to reconstruct the motion and the mass . there must be a gap between every time you gain energy .
that motion will done at gravity power but not at the meaning fo fall down under velocity , it is under speed control .
then the velocity will change !!!!! i don't know what i call it.i just tried to describe and understand what i have.
so forgive me .
also P. hans
-
ok
to end this conversation whit a good results
i will post a simple design for my action wheel
and let you describe it at the meaning of joules and equations and stop my puzzles
that is a good decision
let my one day over
-
G'day usama,
Now you are talking. I for one am looking forward to what you have come up with.
Hans von Lieven
-
G'day all,
I think usama is thinking about this sort of device:
(http://www.lhup.edu/%7Edsimanek/museum/gearcoil.gif)
It has been around since at least the 1950's. No-one has got it to work yet
Hans von Lieven
What's the problem? Why won't it work?
-
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3264.0;attach=12633
-
thanks freeEnergy
you solved my great problem .
that exact what i mean but with another less complex technic and more simultaneity.
thanks again
-
G'day Gravitar,
The reason why the device does not work is because the forces on both sides are equal. Entropy explains it here so I just quote him.
Hans von Lieven
Hi Usama,
first let me ask a some questions:
1- if we put 101 books each over other , every book = 1 kg ,
how much weight do the first book from bottom carry up = ????
2- if each book has 10cm then we have 1010 cm in high,
how much force we need to move one book up for 1010 cm at one second by any way of newton law =????
3- to make a perpetual motion ,
if we get the first book from the bottom out, then we have two actions
a- the 100 books will fall down for just 10 cm by gravity power of 100 kg at less than one second
b- we need less than 2 kg to move this free book up and put it on the top ( reconstruct the poiential power of 101 books).
The energy you get from the 100 1kg books falling 10cm is 100kg * 0.1m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
The energy required to lift one book up 1000 cm is 1kg * 10m * 9.8 m/s2 = 98J.
Simple calculations like these show why these overbalanced wheel things never work on paper. If they work in practice, it's because there's something about simple mechanics that we don't know.
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
-
Hello all:
First post on here. I have been experimenting in this field for over 20 years. I can't believe there are others out there thinking about these types of devices. I just enjoy playing with magnets and discovering new things, well, things that are new to me anyway.
Usama, I am afraid that Hans and the others are correct in their analysis but, that does not mean don't try. Everything great that was discovered was done by those who ignored the accepted principles and succeeded anyway. Like my Dad told me after we had invented and produced the first fully functional ceramic coil spring, he said we didn't know enough about it to know it could not be done, so we did it. Best of luck to you and all of the others on here.
Bill
-
Like my Dad told me after we had invented and produced the first fully functional ceramic coil spring, he said we didn't know enough about it to know it could not be done, so we did it.
A ceramic spring? That's amazing! Is there any information about it on the Web?
Cheers,
Mr. Entropy
-
Probably not. This was done in the early 80's. We machined many of them in different configurations for the aerospace and defense industries. They have even flown on 2 shuttle missions. No metal fatigue, very low coefficient of expansion so in space, the spring rate remains near constant. Not affected by acid and non-metalic or magnetic so does not interfere with electrical fields. We had a full page ad in the Thomas register for a few years that featured one of the springs. I don't think that would be on the web anywhere. I lost my company in my divorce so I can no longer produce them. I never looked on the net for this, I will try some searches.
-
G'day Pirate,
Are we talking about some un-patented device then?? I'd LOVE to know more about this!
Hans von Lieven
-
Hans:
We attempted to obtain a patent in the very early 80's. After a cost of over $10,000, our attorneys informed us that the Patent Office said it is not a "significant improvement" over the standard coil spring and could not be patented. This was, of course, ridiculous. In 1993 my company was contacted by attorneys for a large corporation who actually did obtain a patent on the ceramic coil springs (1992 I think issued) and we were told to cease and desist making ours. Our attorney pointed out to them that since we did it first many years before they applied for their patent, and our springs were published in advertisements and articles for many years prior, they could not make us comply. Also, since, to obtain a patent you have to be the inventor, and we had actually made the samples for them that they submitted to the patent office, their patent was null and void. Too bad for them.
All this, of course, has nothing to do with overunity. I was just trying to give Osama some encouragement about continuing his explorations no matter what the nayayers might say. I am really enjoying this site.
Bill
-
The laws of thermodynamics where writen by ignorant idiots. They just got out of bed one day and decided that the best thing to do is to keep telling people they are going to fail mizzerably. But never looked at any of the evidence.
Outside religion there is no "just because". I should note that 99% of the sientists in history had strong affiliation with some church. Only the last few 100 years they started accepting people's mindess drivel for facts in religion. Before those days the church tried to figure things out. Not for the public but for their own library.
Either we will find a good alternative power source or we all die? there is no option 3. If that means we are already dead on paper we need to figure out a new way to write things down. no?
(http://dieoff.org/Crash1.GIF)
That's the part that will never work! Seems one hell of a lot more convincing as to claim gravity engines cant work because some idiot preaching nonsense dogmas. Kelvin said heat engines didn't work either. I don't see why we are so attached to the rest of his denial. He was a liar, a thief and a cheat?
new gravity wheel and turbine theory( free energy)
i found out a new design of a gravity wheel and turbine ,use all its mass at one side of the wheel rotating round its axle and convert 95% from its mass potential energy to generat kinetic energy using less than 5% of its mass power for friction and regenerate or reconstruct its mass.
it's a new working theory , very simple and logical , so we can prove it, and calculate its output energy , just by its design
it's a perpetual motion and gravity as a new sorse of energy that using newton law not against it or violent it.
and now why we don't use gravity power as a renewable and clean energy?
i see a lot of this gravity wheel and motor at the following sites
http://www.fuellesspower.com/6_Gravity2.htm
This engine is using electrical pulses. They are mostly focused on marketing but they show no video.
...At that point a very high efficient / free energy solenoid coil kicks in and pushes the arms back up into a perfect balanced position and they continue to rotate back to the 12:00 position....
This is an interesting trick. It means the device indeed uses gravity to spin but it uses a coil to build up the gravitational potential. This is good enough to put it in a store and sell it as-if gravity powered. The pulse system is interesting but not using gravity as it's source.
http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Gravity_Motors
I like Bob Kostoff's machine, he is using compressed air, he does claim the device makes it's own air pressure.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6817180-claims.html
Most complicated explanation. I don't think it was his intention to explain how it worked. I think he patented the construction. The device mimics natural circulation. Very Schauberger. :-)
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/11/328724.html?c=on#c136644
This seems like the patent above, a heat engine making it's own heat.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=5637
Interesting forum. This is the link to the innovation.
http://www.lonympics.co.uk/new/aaaaBBBAACAAAa.htm
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/
http://www.guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/conference/Weinfelden/
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hfrnrgen.htm
Hamel is my favorite :)
http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm
ah, ?ther magic. :D
http://www.rexresearch.com/tewari/tewari.htm
http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/gravity.htm
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2006107313
http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/gravity.htm
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7134283.html
http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/2depalma.html
http://www.etheric.com/GalacticCenter/Gravity.html
http://www.free-energy.ws/
http://www.eagle-research.com/fenergy/gravity.html
http://64.233.183.104/search
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lD_65ggChs
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLJ_enEG232EG232&q=gravity+motor
http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Andy_Gravity-Magnet_Motor
http://www.evert.de/eft786e.htm
http://www.gravitymotor.net/
http://www.skdynamics.com/gravitymotor/index.htm
i think most of those designs are very good but not complete , and the one who do that must catch the my opinion true theory of how to get energy from gravity ,or most of them must catch my design wheel from a long time ago!
but i don't know why they didn't? why there isn't uses of a working gravity turbine until now?
if we have a good design for a perpetual motion and already we have the gravity power , then we must use them to generat energy.
maybe i'm the lucky one !
ok, no problem of whatever i think about . my new design is not like any of what i found in those sites it is completly different , and powerfull .
it is a new source of renewable energy.that use whatever amount of mass you need at only one side and one position of the wheel in a perpetual motion design.the same as what used with water and wind wheel and turbine ( one amount of force at one side maybe one position of the wheel) . it's a relation between potential power , and in the other side the power that effect the mass to make it as a potential power.
i think that ,
what was a dream before, today become a true.
how can i put my invention at the right way for common use ,
I don't think there is a good way, every marketing approach has been tried with the most ridiculous results. I would try emailing a few people for second opinions and get some help to try build something.
at last i 'm sure there is no mistake in my wheel and it's logicaly as the same like water turbine or wind turbine.
i keep searching for my new theory and design at net sites from 4 months without any positive similar design , what it means!!!!?
thank you ,and sorry for my bore language ,
usama mohamed salah
I have a few gravityengine research projects (ducktape popsicle sticks and paperclips etc). So far it looks to me like lifting an object costs only a fraction of the energy available when dropping it. You get no guarantee however and no thought police licence.
I got optimistic long after discarding the whole gravity engine concept. My website is about magnetmotors [link] (http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/), I tried to ignore all the gravity claimants. But it's much to interesting to ignore. It's practically the same thing as using permanent magnets only gravity doesn't have as much complicated features as magnetism.
I've only managed to run one prototype for a few hours one time, I never got it to resonate like that again. It was quite funny to see it run down in 15 min the second time. lol
But my best concept is not based on a resonant system. I could give you the details but I'm not 100% sure and people will flame me while not saying anything I can use. After over a year of getting flamed for my ideas this sounds like a much more workable approach. I've had enough, I'm turning into a whining crybaby myself from interacting with whining crybabies. :D
I do want to encurage everyone to look much deeper into gravity. Below is the general theory, it's very different from my 2 devices.
A balanced beam
o-----------------/\----------------o
We move 1 of the weights.
----o-------------/\----------------o
And we get rotation for this horizontal motion. It will almost reach this postion.
o-----------------/\------------o----
Before the beam is horizontal the angular momentum may assist shifting the weight back to the edge.
We apply a force to shift the weight sidewards it resists like it's horizontal but, but it's angularly moving upwards.
o-----------------/\----------------o
It may thus drop upwards!
The amount of angular momentum of course depends on the speed of the device.
The device needs to slowdown close to standstill when gravity is doing the work, then it needs to accerate to make the angular momentum take over. We then add some wings and use the air drag to move the weight.
This device shows the principal, it's (obviously) also a windmill.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=2OwSAAAAEBAJ
Patent number: X247
Issue date: Apr 30, 1799
I'm not saying it is not going to work if you put some effort in it. If you don't, yes then it will never work.
Not doing anything => no results
It's impossible to have results before effort. And if you do obtain them they don't mean anything to you.
Or are people in the 17th century so much more intelligent as we are today? eh? For starters, his handwriting is like 1000 times more pretty as mine. That part I'm sure I will never learn. :D
-
G'day Bill and all,
Thanks for telling me the story of your ceramic spring. It is funny how arbitrary the USPTO is at times. Hare brained ideas with outrageous unproven claims get a patent where something that works in the real world goes begging for protection.
Hans von Lieven
-
Hans:
Yes, I agree. I don't believe in our patent system for many reasons. I did learn a lot during that experience. I also learned that if you are actually granted a patent, you have to defend it. Sounds reasonable but suppose 100 people jump your patent and you only have the financial resources to sue 10 of them. your patent then goes...Poof. You have to defend ALL cases of infringement or you lose your patent rights. This was all explained to me by my attorney. I like the idea of sharing any break-through events with the world. Anyone with a workable idea will have a headstart on it anyway and would make enough money to make it worth while. I am still in the process of reading the back posts on here and I am learning a lot. Thanks to all that have posted and who are adding to my education in this most interesting of fields.
Bill
-
G'day all,
Whatever happened to usama and his promised drawing??
Hans von Lieven
-
nothing happen
i just still worked on it , sooner i will post it
thanks for aske
-
G'day usama,
I hope you did not take my question as an implied criticism, it was not that.
I am simply interested in your ideas and I am looking forward to your drawing.
Hans von Lieven
-
Hans:
Yes, I agree. I don't believe in our patent system for many reasons. I did learn a lot during that experience. I also learned that if you are actually granted a patent, you have to defend it. Sounds reasonable but suppose 100 people jump your patent and you only have the financial resources to sue 10 of them. your patent then goes...Poof. You have to defend ALL cases of infringement or you lose your patent rights. This was all explained to me by my attorney. I like the idea of sharing any break-through events with the world. Anyone with a workable idea will have a headstart on it anyway and would make enough money to make it worth while. I am still in the process of reading the back posts on here and I am learning a lot. Thanks to all that have posted and who are adding to my education in this most interesting of fields.
Bill
all you have to do is win the first one, then the legal system rarely overturns anything that follows.. yes you have to defend against all of them, but only the first one is difficult. I learned this from Symbol Technologies patents on the hand held laser scanner gun, they set up a mock company that copied their patents, then sued them, and with the mock company not defending their claims that they weren't infringing... symbols patented things like the trigger switch that had been around for 50+ years that is nearly impossible to overturn now
-
no at all
i know a lot of the reader looking forward to see what this man need to draw ,
it is the same like me ,i need to know if my design is new or it is an old and not work for some reasons like others.
don't worry
-
hello all,
how are you prof
sorry for late.
next link is my book of the ( wheel searching for balance to generate energy at perpetual motion)
it describe a new way to generate energy from gravity not from nothing and it is completely agree with newton laws and physics law .it will contain the designs and a guide to make own one,
so until now i don't post the drawing and design parts because my blog site is disappear from google search list once , but still worked.
this site or plog write in arabic language but there is no problems of understanding the draw
if anyone can translate it to english, it will be good
prof hans, and all
this one is differant than all we got before
what i need from all of you that repost what you find on it as quick as you can , ofcourse if it is true and good and powerful and new
and no one could stop this wheel from self running ,
http://www.usamasalah.blogspot.com
http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/qbDL
now i try to translate my book to english with a help of a good translator and two engineers carry out the part of calculations , definations and equations.
to posted it in english but it will take some time
thank you
-
can i post in arabic language at this forum i think no!!!
-
another mad one at this link
read it carefuly
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy/browse_thread/thread/9aac608f8bff75d3/542f9819ae8bdc31
-
sometime a little idia destroies a big theory , so there muse be a nuts who can upsets the apple cart.
is that a true?
-
Sorry usama,
The pictures on your blog don't seem to come through. The Arabic writing reproduces well but sadly, no illustrations, only blank spots.
Hans von Lieven
-
that is good
i don't post an illustrations yet , this is just a link to some site which talk about perpetual motion including this site
i wait until catch my plog name and some of its contains part at google searching list then i will post the important part and all illustrations .
thank you
-
good day all
i hope nobody forgot my strange patent or me
whatever , today i come with a good news , that i received the international search report which inform me that no body claimed it before and their opinion is the claims is impossible because the law of conservation energy hence they need the detailes to prove the claim before moveing to the examine phase .
some body think that is not good news,
but for me i don't need from this searching office except this answer hence i can publish all the designs any where i want without any doubt of other to stolen it.
so now i can post my design of the wheel searching for balance at perpetual motion at this forum at any time.
now i gather a lot of forum sit address to publish on it at the same time for the purpose of security.
in shaa allah
i will be ready by 3 day
thanks for all, specially prof. hans
how is he , i don't see him here for long time , i hope he is good
-
http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/qbDL
http://usamasalah.blogspot.com/
http://www.arab-eng.org/vb/f46.html
sorry, the language of this sites is arabic, and no way for me to translate it
this patent for
usama mohamed salah from Egypt , and it has a protection patent
what is posted less than the true but it will be enough for know how we can use gravity as a source of energy + how we can get the true perpetual motion without any violate of conservation law of energy
so now we are at graviry energy and true perpetual motion design
-
usama salah
It seem like after looking at you page that you are using only a slight difference from Bessler's MT 67 drawing.
-
no , my friend
maybe it seem like that, and also seem like the normal water wheel , also it seem like a lot of wheel what i saw at this forum and other sites.
that is true because as i said before it is very very simple, but the important point is how it do its work
forget its shape and think with the first drawing that explain the theory,
thanks for u
and please just wait with me until i post the complete drawings and believe me it is completlly differant than other and work one , and the special thing is you can control its output to increase it but not more than the effects of gravity on its one side mass and you can increase or use what ever amounts of mass weight you need
dear friend and friends just watch and do nothing and we don't loss any thing if i fail but if i success all of us will be win it is simple equation.
-
Hi usama salah
Well done on getting a Patent.
Look forward to seeing the diagrams over the next few days.
Cheers
Sean.
-
hi
in fact i don't care with that patent or i didn't post ro wrote any thing at all.
but this patent is also very important as a documents inform other that this wheel and this energy invention is belong to me not to other , nothing more , especialy i 'm not an academic engineer or physics, that mean it is impossible to prove that after publish it without that searching paper .so it will be easy for other
i hope you understand my english, it's too bad but the wleel is very powerful
thank you
-
http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/qbDL
http://usamasalah.blogspot.com/
http://www.arab-eng.org/vb/f46.html
sorry, the language of this sites is arabic, and no way for me to translate it
@Usama,
Use the Google translator to translate Arabic sites:
http:/feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/qbDL
.. Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2Fblogspot%2FqbDL&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http:/usamasalah.blogspot.com/
.. Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fusamasalah.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http:/www.arab-eng.org/vb/f46.html
.. Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arab-eng.org%2Fvb%2Ff46.html&langpair=ar%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Magic! Great work and congratulations, by the way.
Cheers :)
Yada ..
-
thanks yadaraf
my friend
i'm ready know arabic and even if i use this translator it dosn't give you the all meaning
it need another one who knew both languages
i hope hearing this congratulations after i prove what i claim for so this congratulations will be for all the world me and you and other
thank you i pray for that
-
thanks yadaraf
my friend
i'm ready know arabic and even if i use this translator it dosn't give you the all meaning
it need another one who knew both languages
i hope hearing this congratulations after i prove what i claim for so this congratulations will be for all the world me and you and other
thank you i pray for that
@usama,
Your motives are very compassionate. The world -- especially Africa -- could use such technology.
Best wishes and prayers for you.
Cheers :)
Yada..
-
hi P.Motion
i regreet your help .
but it seem to work powerful and every day you can discover a new things at it and you can easely improve it.
however , this design is not my wheel it just a part of the mechanical theory and not complete so it seem like strange for somebody, but if you study it well as a engineer or by logic you will find it out.
and for sure if i don't believe it , i don't payed for the patent and i don't care about writing all my site and waste time and money for nothing ,
last, nothing is 100% true , all time we can find a mistake.
thanks again
-
good luck, P.Motion
i think this site own to me 5000$
so it is very important don't forget to mention to the source or the referance of this new nobel engineer
have a nice time with new and true working overunity,
what you said is true with some differant but not enough to make a motor
i hope not confused you
but i said before you will do it
-
it is not easy like that .it need a lot of work and complete teamwork to such thing , so you have to work for months also the first one maybe not work and the second , don't worry you will got it at the end
have a nice time with good work
-
so , nobody need me after that
and all got his overunity
and no problem with energy in the future .
GOOD BY
DON'T 4 GET ME
USAMA SALAH ELDIN - EGYPT
AND PLEASE TRY TO READ MY BOOK AND YOU WILL FIND MORE ENERGY AND NEW NEWTON'S LAW
-
who can stop this simple wheel at its perepetual motion ? and why
go to this link
http://usamasalah.blogspot.com/
-
who can stop this simple wheel at its perepetual motion ? and why
go to this link
http://usamasalah.blogspot.com/
The better question would be: Who can START this wheel to rotate?
Hans von lieven
-
this wheel not have only 4 arm
and between 6 clock and 12 there are a number of mass enough to start its rotat for balance position , also the other side is avoid of mass , how we keep it avoid of mass maybe the quiation
-
Greetings Hans
Nice to see you back, of course I am one to be talking. LOL
I find what usama salah has been posting intreaging, I think it is still a modified MT67 but with with a ramp to help push the water/fluid. Nothing really new from my outlook, but I see problems, like jamming of the plunger from angular forces caused by the ramp. And if it did run at all it would wear out fast and not go at any real speed due to friction. I have to look at it as problematic. But I will give his project a good start.
-
G'day all,
The problem with Usama's designs, the modified MT87 and the current one is that there in not enough power in either system to force the liquid to the top.
Take the MT87, the plunger that has to come down in order to force the liquid up has to be HEAVIER than the liquid it displaces or it would float. Which means you now have even have MORE weight where you don't want it.
The current design relies on the assumption that in takes less energy to push water uphill than it generates going downhill, a ludicrous proposition.
Study it. Usama would be well served to study a book on elementary physics. He has NO idea.
Hans von Lieven
-
Study it. Usama would be well served to study a book on elementary physics. He has NO idea
that is right prof , i don't said before that i'm a scientific teacher or specialist, also maybe i don't have enough physics knowledge but with all that , I HAVE A GOOD IDEA.
if you as a scientific teacher can't see or understund the new mechanical IDEA for doing this work and said there is no IDEA , THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH YOUR STUDENTS NOT FOR ME , you see no idea other see good idea ,right or wrong but the fact there is an IDEA, OK
TO make you maybe understand, because of my differant language,
1- any mechanical work as a piston need specific amount of force to do its job whatever its job is = x
2- if you put enough weight at one side of any wheel antil the torque = x , and use some more weight at the same side , then you can use this torque or force of axis to do the work you need for the piston,
so after doing whatever the piston job with this force you will find yourself at the same position
3- then the problem is how to put enough weight at one side to gain the force you need to do the piston job , how to keep the other side avoid of the additional weight and how we can gain extra energy from that if it is true.
4- the problem is not if we violate the law or not , our problem is HOW WE CAN USE THE PHYSIC LAW to do such perpetual motion in respect of this law.
5- THE NEW IDEA HERE IS THAT WHEEL IS RESPECT ALL THE PHYSICS LAW AND NO CLAIM OF VIOLAT IT
now i'm verey sorry that i came or visited this forum because there is no differant between it AND other forum just labe labe la
and i agree with hans , THERE IS NO IDEA OF WHAT WE TALK ABOUT
AND KEEP IN TOUCH AT MY SITE
-
@ usama salah
I agree with you on the laws of physics. But this is how I like to put it. When a gravity wheel (perpetual motion) is proved, we will then learn that it does not break the laws of physics but will help bring a new understanding of them, and it is just a cleaver manipulation of gravity.
-
@Usama,
You say: THE NEW IDEA HERE IS THAT WHEEL IS RESPECT ALL THE PHYSICS LAW AND NO CLAIM OF VIOLAT IT
That is my point. If you understood the laws of physics you would see that your devices cannot possibly work as depicted. If you studied some physics you would be in a better position to design a device that has a chance. The ideas behind your designs are not new. They have been tried in a number of variations hundreds of times and have been found not to work.
Hans von Lieven
-
that is good news,
but ,
try to find out the truth. and answer the question
where am i ?
congratulations