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: 84193
  • *Latest: eirik

  • *Total Posts: 897202
  • *Total Topics: 15809
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant  (Read 662497 times)

Offline i_ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1230 on: May 05, 2009, 12:04:22 AM »
@i_ron,

I strongly disagree. The simulation posts are the most important in this thread.

omni,

Not to me. The simulation posts take up most of this list, yet
the conclusions drawn, that are meaningful, could be summed
up in one short post.

Simulations in the aircraft industry are de rigor, a way of life.
But they have repeatedly flown sensor'ed planes and fine tuned the program to reflect the actual event to the point
that now the program can predict actual behavior (under
most conditions). Where is that here? You are taking an off
the shelve 2D program that has never seen a gravity wheel
before and asking it to preform miracles. You are using the wrong type of program on the wrong type of computer also. An analog computer would render this interaction with the most realism.

The bottom line is... Abeling developed this in a cut and try
approach, we should be able to (with a few more hints) do
the same.

Mind you the sim talk has been enlightening... I feel that I
could almost run the program now myself....lol

Take Care,

Ron



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 825
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1231 on: May 05, 2009, 12:09:24 AM »

Sailing up against gravital wind, using stored graviblablah  :o




Also, to eisenficker2000: WHAT IF THE WEIGHTS ARE CONNECTED VIA A BAR PAIRING THEM IN 2 X 2


Sorry for the rookie speak, I hardly completed highschool despite confirmed 3-digit and then some IQ.
I referred to this earlier today. Didn't read past page 70 or so, and just got home with an idea.
The "outer" weight is connected to the inner weight via the above rod. BUT is it a spring that can lengthen beyond its set optimal minimum. The first part may be without building much tension at all.
The inner weight nicely follows Abeling's patent, 0 to 6 o'clock along inner diameter of the outside of the wheel. The outer weight is slung around.

Sailing against gravity.
At 6 o'clock or slightly after, I suppose the spring rod's length will be maximum, stored energy maximum.
Now, the 2 weights, thanks to the smart ramps, are lined up horizontally, at the bottom of their projected ramps paths which are both "aiming" for 12 o'clock, thus getting closer as they climb up.
Thanks to the shallow angle of the approximating trajectories of the respective weights, make that the kickback from the spring (getting smaller, accelerates both weights up. As the spring hit its "stop", the two "collide" and one is shot-putted out over the 1 o'clock mark, the cycle repeating itself.

See? The two weights are attracting each other with the energy stored in the springs. The angle (like a surfer along the wind)converts this energy in "lift", rather than having it cancel out the two weights "chasing" each other vertically.

I thought in this direction before, "letting the weights be free and restricted when it suits us". Only when I was bugging a friend over this problem, I came up with the part of the two attracting each other upwards. Much like that grease nut shooting from our fingers, but the fingers being the benificiairies of the effect.

Please debunk this before I go to sleep?

Thanks,

J
« Last Edit: May 05, 2009, 12:38:45 AM by Cloxxki »

Offline Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 825
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1232 on: May 05, 2009, 01:37:55 AM »
(Edited, I added some explanations)

OK, I suck at this:

Weights connected by pull-spring. Neutral when weights are at minimal distance. May not even engage until some distance has been established, offering the outer weight a wider trajectory.
Aweful sketch, lacking a scanner to do a horrible one.

Over unity or not, does this use stored centrifugal forced for vertical acceleration?

Obviously, in such a setup, you'll want the weights to roll even so smoothly over the inner and other faces of the wheel, and it's neighbouring ramps. Perhaps the outer weight must engage both the outer wheel and outer ramp with a smooth running bearing rather than rolling right over it, and during its sling it will not gather rotation proportion to its "air speed". Landing on the underside of the wheel without a bearing in between, would cause rotational friction. The inner weight could be a rolling wheel, its outer force should keep it rolling along neatly, if not at varying velocity. I think its diameter as interacting with wheel and ramp should not be too small, for both contant speed friction and preventing slippage during the velocity changes.

In my sketch, without the guiding sleeves in the wheel for the weight, you'll see an abrubt bend onto the ramp for the inner weight.
Restricting its leftward should nett it (in a frictionlessworld) to travel vertically to just as high as it started. In a real world, it would not make it.
BUT, the outer weight swinging a wider trajectoy, from a partially loading spring, will be decellating as well, but not without lengthening (charging) the spring. When the transitions are done right, the outweight will also in the perfect world now have enough to make it back all the way up. But, the spring is not contracting again, causing the two weights to be attracted to each other faster than their restricted sloped collision trajectories, resulting in additional upward energy to become available to both.

I have not yet figured out whether, if this at would work, we'd want the weights to swap places now. This would not only make the guidance more complicated, but also might created some counter effective vectors.
If I'm not mistaken, the outer weight is as I sketched now always travelling faster than the inner weight.

Now I didn't read the patent too thoroughly, and as said before I have seen zero youtube vids or simulation, but I think that although Abeling did not specify the relationship between the weights, my sketch seems to be in line with his statements.

Please debunk me now, it's 1:57AM.

Thanks,
« Last Edit: May 05, 2009, 01:58:34 AM by Cloxxki »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1232 on: May 05, 2009, 01:37:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 825
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1233 on: May 05, 2009, 08:47:55 AM »
124 pages in 4 weeks, but not one post overnight from the newer side of the Atlantic? Must be a really reply-unworthy idea then... Anyone in Europe, please?
I'll have to fill this space with something more useful later, sorry for the bump.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1234 on: May 05, 2009, 02:23:18 PM »
@i_ron,

Quote
Simulations in the aircraft industry are de rigor, a way of life.
But they have repeatedly flown sensor'ed planes and fine tuned the program to reflect the actual event to the point
that now the program can predict actual behavior (under
most conditions). Where is that here?

This is a very limited understanding of what simulations are. Simulations we’re talking about are based on classical mechanics and it isn’t true that classical mechanics only predicts the behavior of bodies first flown with sensors on.  Classical mechanics can predict the trajectory of a stone thrown at given initial conditions before having been thrown repeatedly with sensors attached to it to fine tune the equations to reflect the actual event. Similarly, classical mechanics can predict the behavior of more complex systems such as a gravity wheel before experimenting with an actual wheel. Therefore, the question

Quote
Where is that here?

is irrelevant, as long as the classical mechanics equations are applied correctly. In other words you may question the model, the way the equations of classical mechanics are applied to make the predictions but not question the fact that classical mechanics, correctly applied, can predict the behavior of mechanical systems before an actual laboratory experiment. The latter is a pessimistic view about the predictive strength of classical mechanics which can be demonstrated to be incorrect at once (recall the example with the trajectory of the stone) using the discrete mathematics of the available computers, at that. This will also save us from the wrong impression that realism can only be brought about by analog computers.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1234 on: May 05, 2009, 02:23:18 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline i_ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1235 on: May 05, 2009, 05:15:46 PM »
@i_ron,

 Therefore, the question is irrelevant, as long as the classical mechanics equations are applied correctly. In other words you may question the model, the way the equations of classical mechanics are applied to make the predictions but not question the fact that classical mechanics, correctly applied, can predict the behavior of mechanical systems before an actual laboratory experiment.

Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

Kind regards,

Ron

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1236 on: May 05, 2009, 06:10:36 PM »
Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

Kind regards,

Ron

Unfortunately, no answer yet. On my part one of the reasons is that I'm new to these simulations and have no experience with them whatsoever. I learned about wm2d just about a month ago and even sooner the revelation from @Jubjub came about that 3ds max reactor can do a 3D simulations. Unfortunately, this important research is left in the hands of inexperienced people like myself and the infrastructures whose job is to do them won't touch such simulations with a ten foot pole. Why? We all know why. A positive outcome from this will destroy them to the core. What we're doing is as much anti-business as it can get.

On a side note, wonder if you've heard about the Swedish pirate party which is gaining more and more political ground there. It's support has grown in the last months from close to zero to about 4% mainly among the young voters. One of the things they ask for is to have the patents on certain creations abolished. The area we're doing research in should be one of those where there should be no patents and expectations to get rich through exploiting society. Those who think that the outcome of this research can be turned into a profitable business are badly mistaken. These fellows, such as Sterling, may finagle to earn some crumbs now but in the long run, should this be proven to be real, it will revamp society in a way we can't even imagine now, leaving no grounds to continue to have some enrich themselves at the expense of others mainly through lies and manipulations. No wonder why this had been suppressed for so many centuries.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1236 on: May 05, 2009, 06:10:36 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1237 on: May 05, 2009, 06:50:13 PM »
Excellent rebuttal, points well taken.  Perhaps the bottom line
here then is... in the one month and two days that this list has been operational, and simulations have been stressed...
where is the answer as to whether the wheel works or not?

With all due respect to Omnibus, I would say that the simulations show the Abeling wheel to be a non-runner.  The simulation of the designs as discovered from the video and later from the patent have failed to show a wheel that operates as described that produces useful torque.  In fact, most well constructed simulations behaved exactly like a balanced wheel, as can be predicted by both physics and the sims.  Several sims have shown unusual behavior, most having been shown due to improper modeling techniques, but none yet have shown anything close to a power generating ability.

Now there is still the possibility that something has been missed or purposefully withheld from the patent.  If so, I am confident that when those other elements are properly added to the sims they will again show a respectable representation of a real life device, either working or not.

One point with regards to the comments about simulations used in air/spacecraft design:  The equations that govern fluid dynamics (particle interactions) are much more complex than those of basic mechanics.  Many are unsolvable except by iteration, and as such, approximations must be used.  The actual wind tunnel and flight testing is used to verify real world operation as well as improve those necessary approximations.  That is not the case with basic mechanics where equations like F=ma and T=md are absolute.  Solving them gives exact and true results that do not then need to be verified by real world testing.  But even those equations do not take into account the minor real world effects of friction and air resistance encountered by a working mechanism than again are governed by much more complex equations.  So the real world build will be necessary to exactly understand those effects.  But the major interactions and performance can be correctly predicted by (good) simulations.


Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1238 on: May 05, 2009, 07:56:06 PM »
@mondrasek,

We really have to sort this out. I said it already but I'll repeat it here -- are we trying to determine whether or not such device is real in principle or we're doing these simulations just to satisfy the critics and prove through simulations that such devices are inherently non-working. If the latter is our goal and we're set to impose any conditions to achieve that, we can easily prove also that no machine whatsoever is working. I think, however, that our goal is the former and regarding the answer to that the jury is still out. Firstly, if we're talking about ideal devices whereby the friction is zero and only the construction and gravity are at play, I think we have definitively proven such devices are working. That you can't deny. Where's the limit to imposing friction on such devices so that they can be realistic is still to be determined. Like I said, our goal isn't to make them non-working at any rate (which we can do for any machine) but to find out the boundaries whereby a working ideal device becomes a real-life working device. There's more work to be done to reach the answer to that. Recall, I was suggesting that the best way to do that is to find out whether or not there can be analytical solutions at all. Simulations are second best choice for that purpose.

As for fluid dynamics, while it's true that it's more complex to model such systems there are certain firmly established laws and approaches which make the outcome physically predictable even prior to actual lab experiments in fluid dynamics too. Engineers use every day Stokes' law or Nusselt and Reynolds numbers, let alone the empirical formulae, to name a few in constructing their reactors on paper, the way civil engineers apply their set in stone mechanical formulae. Indeed, approximations are made but they are all within the framework of known, predictive physical laws. The approximations are to find out what, say, the coefficients in a formula describing a concrete physical situation are but are hardly yielding anything new in terms of new mechanical or physical laws. If something is found out in this way that contradicts the established laws of physics then it is counted as a discovery and not as just an engineering solution of a problem. This happens very rarely and is a noticeable event, not just a routine everyday engineering work.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1238 on: May 05, 2009, 07:56:06 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1239 on: May 05, 2009, 08:04:31 PM »
@mondrasek,

Speaking of simulations, were you able to take a look at @Jubjub's 3D simulation using 3ds Max reactor? Your input would be very valuable.

Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1240 on: May 05, 2009, 08:31:26 PM »
Firstly, if we're talking about ideal devices whereby the friction is zero and only the construction and gravity are at play, I think we have definitively proven such devices are working. That you can't deny.

I most certainly do deny that!  Not one of the devices that you say are "working" is not something that I can understand as an aberration due to the iterative nature of the software and "not best method" modeling.  Having a model wiggle around in a virtual environment with large interferences and time steps being allowed does not prove the device works.  It proves an ignorant approach to the use of the simulation tool.  Dismissing and failing to follow the proper methodology as I have described repeatedly does not mean there is any hope left for simulated designs that show absolutely no forceful tendency to accelerate or produce usable torque.  My interpretation of such evidence is that the design does not work, not that we need to play around with the software further.

As for fluid dynamics, while it's true that it's more complex to model such systems there are certain firmly established laws and approaches which make the outcome physically predictable even prior to actual lab experiments in fluid dynamics too. Engineers use every day Stokes' law or Nusselt and Reynolds numbers, let alone the empirical formulae, to name a few in constructing their reactors on paper, the way civil engineers apply their set in stone mechanical formulae. Indeed, approximations are made but they are all within the framework of known, predictive physical laws. The approximations are to find out what, say, the coefficients in a formula describing a concrete physical situation are but are hardly yielding anything new in terms of new mechanical or physical laws. If something is found out in this way that contradicts the established laws of physics then it is counted as a discovery and not as just an engineering solution of a problem. This happens very rarely and is a noticeable event, not just a routine everyday engineering work.

I stand behind my earlier statements.  Many of the equations that govern fluid dynamics are not solveable to an exact value.  This is due to the fact that fluids are made of many tiny particles and we cannot calculate the exact reactions to known forces of each particle simultaneously.  Several methods are commonly used to approximate the solutions with varying degrees of accuracy.  Real world testing is sometimes used to update the best approximations to use under specific conditions.  So a comparison between the simulations used to model fluid dynamics and the simulations used to model basic mechanics differ in this respect.  The proper methodology for achieving coorelations between those sims and the real world therefore also differ.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1240 on: May 05, 2009, 08:31:26 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1241 on: May 05, 2009, 08:35:15 PM »
@mondrasek,

Speaking of simulations, were you able to take a look at @Jubjub's 3D simulation using 3ds Max reactor? Your input would be very valuable.

No.  I have not used 3ds Max reactor.  And so far I am not interested in exploring further anything that has been presented where that tool would be necessary.  I am learning the answers to any questions that I have about those sims through the posts of others including yourself.

Offline rlortie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
    • 'Arrache'
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1242 on: May 05, 2009, 09:03:10 PM »
I will not debate with omni on this simulation issue.

I will say that it is my opinion; accidental discoveries through hands on research is more likely than any conclusion using simulations which still can not be deemed 'objective' until utilized...They are limited  on programs running mechanics and physics  as accepted fact and leave little chance of an accident recognized by the empirical builder.

For an example; I and a working partner were working on a ramp design when a temporary wire strap holding the ramp broke. The end result was discovery of a leverage system capable of producing over 260 degrees of + torque out of one levered weight. A simulation to my knowledge could never achieve this.

I too am beginning to have stronger  doubts about Sjack's claims. We have heard nothing from him or anyone he is allegedly associated with. Even Dusty seems to have gone quiet.

In the meantime as time permits I will continue with my design that achieves the same performance without the use of stationary ramps and slotted disks.

@Dusty

I am very impressed with your hands on trials and tribulation. You are a very empirical builder (my type of guy) showing the  aptitude that it will take to vindicate Bessler. If you ever wish to have private communication with some one to bounce ideas off of I offer my services, I am not a believer in 'free sourcing' until after a certified patent pending is issued.

Ralph Lortie
   

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1243 on: May 05, 2009, 09:09:41 PM »
@mondrasek,

Quote
Dismissing and failing to follow the proper methodology as I have described repeatedly does not mean there is any hope left for simulated designs that show absolutely no forceful tendency to accelerate or produce usable torque.

This is what I’m questioning. I would in no way dismiss a proper methodology. However, I need more to be convinced that decreasing the time step, let alone setting up air resistance to non-zero is indeed the proper methodology and not just seeking ways to prove the device is non-working. What if setting up lower thresholds for the iterations leads to desynchronizing the calculations that are supposed to be simultaneous and worsens the outcome? I don’t know. There may be reason, as I said before, for these threshold to be set up at what their defaults values are, and not lower. This I don’t know either. Further, why would one device work and another, similar device with slightly changed track won’t work, despite the same small threshold set up for both? So far these questions have not been addressed and all that has been given as a counter argument are devices containing known flaws (such as, for instance, rigid joints set on Optimized). No, the answer to whether or not ideal devices are non-working still isn’t clear cut, to say the least, let alone that an ideal device with an initially imparted energy should go on indefinitely which doesn’t seem to be the case with the correctly constructed (without rigid joints on Optimized, for instance) non-working devices set at low thresholds.  More is needed.

One sure way would be to prove analytically that equations describing such devices cannot have solutions leading to their indefinite functioning. This is a very involved, non-trivial task, however, up to only highly trained mathematicians and/or theoretical physicists versed in solving such problems. With these simulations we're trying to find a shortcut but, as I said, I'm still not sure we've found it.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant
« Reply #1244 on: May 05, 2009, 09:12:04 PM »
@rlortie,

What we're doing here has nothing to do with a discovery but with finding a proper engineering solution of something proved to be possible in a discontinuous way. Engineering solutions are not scientific discoveries.

 

OneLink