Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?  (Read 13329 times)

Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #15 on: April 12, 2009, 05:59:10 PM »
@ mondrasek

"Also, in the case of the Carnot cycle the energy transfer is dependant on phase change, from liquid to gas and back again. "

Not so. You are getting confused with steam engines.
Logged

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2009, 06:19:10 PM »
Quote from: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 05:59:10 PM
You are getting confused with steam engines.

Hardly!  Now I might be too familiar with the modern AC refrigeration cycle... 

But I agree, the Carnot cycle does not need to include the phase change of the gas.  That is only used in modern AC refrigeration cycle as that unique phenomenon allows for rapid expansion and therefore rapid heat absorption of a greater amount of heat.  We do not need phase change to be part of a successful Carnot cycle.

Thanks,

M.
Logged

Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2009, 09:24:40 PM »
Quote from: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 06:19:10 PM
Hardly!  Now I might be too familiar with the modern AC refrigeration cycle... 

But I agree, the Carnot cycle does not need to include the phase change of the gas.  That is only used in modern AC refrigeration cycle as that unique phenomenon allows for rapid expansion and therefore rapid heat absorption of a greater amount of heat.  We do not need phase change to be part of a successful Carnot cycle.

Thanks,

M.

Sorry. I wasn't trying to be sarcastic.  ;)

Here is my idea of how the iso-gravitic (for want of a better name) and the adiabatic (much better because that is not specific to thermal changes) two legs rotate to give us four. Think a two stroke engine replacing a four stroke engine to give a mental crutch.

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q171/frank260332/rotation.jpg

I've also realised it makes more sense to see the abscissa as the reciprocal of t which is a period. It is easier to see that as a length and thereby a strain. The beauty of log scales is one only has to worry about ratios.

Something else to get the mental juices flowing. Think of gravity as a rather weak and washy thing. After all it only causes an acceleration. It's a physicist type of thing whereas, Jerk, rate of change of acceleration, d2x/dt2 is much tougher, an engineer type of thing, When the massy woman sees Jerk she looses all interest in Fizz and is happy to be dragged by the hair to Jerk's cave.

Now on the other thread they are talking about a final hockey stick section which could well be d4x/dt4and which would enlarge the energy area even more. I seem to remember that Jones C Beene on the Vortex forum christened rate of change of Jerk, Jounce.

You can see I am thinking aloud but this is always the way one gets to formulate new views. Turn a picture upside down and one sees thing one hadn't seen before. Shake concepts around like dice and they will form a new pattern.
Logged

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2009, 10:01:16 PM »
Quote from: Grimer on April 12, 2009, 09:24:40 PM
Sorry. I wasn't trying to be sarcastic.
Well I *was* trying to be facetious!  Humor might draw more minds into the discussion. 

Again, most of what you are discussing is beyond me at this point.  But I will endeavor to remember and learn anew what I must to pursue understanding of your analysis.

Is there anyone who you could invite who would be able to add to this discussion?

M.
Logged

Grimer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
    • Frank Grimer's Website
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2009, 10:58:43 PM »
Quote from: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 10:01:16 PM
Well I *was* trying to be facetious!  Humor might draw more minds into the discussion. 

Again, most of what you are discussing is beyond me at this point.  But I will endeavor to remember and learn anew what I must to pursue understanding of your analysis.

Is there anyone who you could invite who would be able to add to this discussion?

M.

I wish,  ::)
Logged

AquariuZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2009, 03:49:57 PM »
Quote from: mondrasek on April 12, 2009, 10:01:16 PM
Well I *was* trying to be facetious!  Humor might draw more minds into the discussion. 

Obviously humor is not appreciated on this forum. Maybe that is why never anything substantial emerges?

Pity. Especially for the individuals who are really trying (like yourself).

AZ
Logged

Philip Hardcastle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #21 on: April 16, 2009, 04:35:20 PM »
A working wheel is not possible and logic should prove that.

Putting aside the physics and just dealing with reality...

If it were possible it would have been done by now, after all it only involves wheels, weights, arms, pulleys etc.

Human ingenuity would have worked something out by now.

But hey there is a whole bunch of people on the other thread denying reason and working furiously to do what no one has done.

I admire them that they can keep going for weeks on a dead horse idea.

I just feel it is a pity that the debate cannot rise to a more productive level.

Proper theories or postulates being made leading to strong debate and to possible new ideas.

P
Logged

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #22 on: April 16, 2009, 05:01:50 PM »
Quote from: Philip Hardcastle on April 16, 2009, 04:35:20 PM
I just feel it is a pity that the debate cannot rise to a more productive level.

Proper theories or postulates being made leading to strong debate and to possible new ideas.

And just what do you think *this* thread is about?  We have an analysis of the gravity wheel power cycle that appears to show it is possible.  That is what this thread is about.  Can you argue this mathematical analysis?
Logged

AquariuZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #23 on: April 16, 2009, 09:48:47 PM »
Quote from: Philip Hardcastle on April 16, 2009, 04:35:20 PM
I just feel it is a pity that the debate cannot rise to a more productive level.

Proper theories or postulates being made leading to strong debate and to possible new ideas.

P

Then start by re-examining all you were taught and assuming Newton et al were wrong.

Take it from there and bring something completely new for a change..

Please.
Logged

Philip Hardcastle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #24 on: April 16, 2009, 11:29:02 PM »
I thought this thread was an open minded question. It seems that Mondrasek is a believer that wants an argument. Everyone here takes an attitude that everything is possible and that physics is so wrong. Why not take a view that physics is probably right and that we search for ideas that go with the flow rather than against.

There is no analysis that gravity wheels will work that even looks like a scientific or logical argument.

Aquariuz suggests I am the problem for believing in Newton et al, well it seems that agreeing with established science is a better starting point than trowing it all out and believing in rumours such as some here seem to follow.

We all see that there are thousands of claims for overunity but none pan out, then we get conspiracy theories about MIB etc. All I can say is that on the site I have put forward 2 technologies (curled ballistic and rotating thermionic generator) that have no found flaw but I have never received a threat.

I am offering a cash prize on curled ballistic thermionics for someone to find a flaw (no takers). I have debated with a dozen professors. Now you guys that believe in magic ignore my ideas but then say I should come here with new ideas! I think I have proved my preparedness to challenge conventional thinking but do not ask me to believe in superstition, conspiracy or rumour.

Phil


Logged

Philip Hardcastle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #25 on: April 16, 2009, 11:30:51 PM »
Follow on from last post,

If someone saying gravity wheels make sense let them post some proper calculations of forces etc, not their intuitive feel about the forces.

Put forward a theory then it can be debated.

P
Logged

AquariuZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2009, 02:12:59 PM »
Quote from: Philip Hardcastle on April 16, 2009, 11:29:02 PM
I thought this thread was an open minded question. It seems that Mondrasek is a believer that wants an argument. Everyone here takes an attitude that everything is possible and that physics is so wrong. Why not take a view that physics is probably right and that we search for ideas that go with the flow rather than against.

There is no analysis that gravity wheels will work that even looks like a scientific or logical argument.

Aquariuz suggests I am the problem for believing in Newton et al, well it seems that agreeing with established science is a better starting point than trowing it all out and believing in rumours such as some here seem to follow.

We all see that there are thousands of claims for overunity but none pan out, then we get conspiracy theories about MIB etc. All I can say is that on the site I have put forward 2 technologies (curled ballistic and rotating thermionic generator) that have no found flaw but I have never received a threat.

I am offering a cash prize on curled ballistic thermionics for someone to find a flaw (no takers). I have debated with a dozen professors. Now you guys that believe in magic ignore my ideas but then say I should come here with new ideas! I think I have proved my preparedness to challenge conventional thinking but do not ask me to believe in superstition, conspiracy or rumour.

Phil

I was not aware of your curved ballistic thermionics theory and will look for it because given the reactions it sounds interesting.

Not being hampered by formal technical schooling I find myself at disadvantage to theorize in a scientific way and understanding theories which are formulated in a mathematical or scientific way.

This disadvantage does not outweigh the advantage of my layman´s look at things, however childish or even insulting (unintentional) that may be to the educated ones in here. You are right, there should be sound debate, hopefully without too much hurt ego (not specifically talking about you here) and preferably with a tone of lightness.
Logged

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Gravity Wheel Power Cycle - A working Wheel Is Possible?
« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2009, 09:07:49 PM »
Quote from: Philip Hardcastle on April 16, 2009, 11:29:02 PM
I thought this thread was an open minded question. It seems that Mondrasek is a believer that wants an argument. Everyone here takes an attitude that everything is possible and that physics is so wrong. Why not take a view that physics is probably right and that we search for ideas that go with the flow rather than against.
Phil,

I started this thread because Grimer gave a Power Cycle analysis that he claimed showed that a working gravity wheel was possible.  I do not fully understand his higher derivative analysis and comparison to the Carnot cycle.  So I invited anyone who did understand and could argue for or against this analysis to please do so in this thread.  I was hoping to learn from that exchange.

If you can argue the analysis, please do.  If not, please move on.

I was not trying to pick a fight with you.  Just was only attempting to show that you were asking for the exact thing that was the reason for starting this thread:

You wrote:  I just feel it is a pity that the debate cannot rise to a more productive level.
Proper theories or postulates being made leading to strong debate and to possible new ideas.

Grimer has a new theory (to me anyway).  That is what this thread is about.  Please discuss it here if you can.  But if you want to discuss other analyses, please start a different thread.

M.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »