Yes, you're right.
These are just my personal opinions. Expressed by answers to your questions addressed to me.

Now, please, read again this last post of yours, and try to understand what you're saying.
Do you see anything which could be related with your own posts/opinions, too?
 

No, the last sentence applies to you, not to me. Restrain from uttering trivial negative opinions which are hardly of anybody's interest and don't try to be too funny.

No, the last sentence applies to you, not to me. Restrain from uttering trivial negative opinions which are hardly of anybody's interest and don't try to be too funny.

Don't flatter me  ... I know my Engrish sucks, so why would I want to sound funny?

After all, we're not talking about "pig's excrement here"...

Omnibus, I'm not interested in trying to debunk anything....

So please, forgive me!.
I can easily stop posting in this "thread of yours", if it really bothers you so much..

Cheers!

According the patent this is how it works ?!

My main point was - if the authority, the "commercial...."  (I don't exactly remember the official name of that Netherlands authority) would confirm that they really gave him a permission to build "weight/gravity" power plants all over the Netherland, that would be something else entirely....

I filed an official information request at the VROM site about a week ago. All RFI´s towards the dutch government are handled by an entity called "Postbus 51" or P.O. Box 51. They claim to usually respond within 48 hours. In this case I think they may have some trouble finding the information. Sjack Abeling confirmed to me over the phone they had an agreement with the Ministery of Economic affairs to build at least a prototype factory which may use the current infrastructure managed by the government. This does not sound all to alien to me.

He will not have permission to build plants all over the netherlands just yet, I must assume the trial project must be assessed before VROM gives the go ahead for a full scale production environment in the netherlands and maybe even outside.

Interesting still.

This is the same idea with a different control mechanism.Of course it doesn't work.

Hans von Lieven

Patent is online now, thank you Espacenet.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=item265

 

All hail TINK!!!

I have read most of it and it is great to be (almost) right

Guiding rails on the side!
Dumbbells!
Guiding "kidney" on the inside

But there is more to it than we thought...

I´ll read up on this thread to see if there are volunteers to translate into English, if not I will do it TODAY

Halleluja TINK.

Tink!
Tink!
Tink!

Everybody! 

All

WM2D CONCERNS

#1 SIZE MATTERS!

The unit for size in WM2D is meters.  This is very important!  Some forces and movements are very dependent on the size of an object.  In our case, the critical force being effected by size is Centrifugal Force.  CF is proportional to the distance of a mass from the axle (radius) on which it is spinning.  So a mass spinning close to the axle has less CF than an equal mass spinning further out at the same RPM.  Look at the KAD10 sim.  The wheel is 320 meters across!  The CF at the rim of such a wheel even rotating only once per sec will be so much greater than the effects of gravity that gravity will hardly play a part.

Try and keep things to a scale where CF and the force due to gravity (F=ma or F=9.8m) are relative.  If you look at the post I made here http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7150.msg169128#msg169128 you can see the combined gravity and CF accelerations for 12 ft. wheel at 26 rpm (mimicking a Bessler design).  Changing the size and/or RPM would change the acceleration map.

Side note:  Size is also very important when systems involve a pendulum.  The period of a pendulum (time it takes to swing back and forth) is dependent on the length only.

#2  SIM ARE APPROXIMATIONS

And can only calculate interactions one at a time.  So there is always a small error.  The error is decreased by making the time step of each calculation smaller and smaller, but the error always exists.  So in the case of a spring loaded teetertotter (a la Omni's example.wm2d) the falling weight is calculated to move first.  Then the movement of the teetertotter, then the force of the spring due to the movement of the teetertotter, then the force on the ball on the opposite side of the teetertotter.  But wait!  That other side of the teetertotter has already moved and also now had a spring force, so the resultant force calculated to push up on the second ball is exaggerated.  And so the cycle repeats and everything gets higher.

Springs give very strange results in WM2D unless used with a dampener or with air resistance turned on (per mindsweep).

Thanks,

M.