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

Author Topic: magnet-gravity wheel  (Read 67830 times)

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #120 on: May 21, 2007, 09:38:24 PM »
i think i have said this before but, the kinetic energy of arm C can be used to block arm A's sticky spot. well not completely block it, but decrease the magnetic field to some degree.

peace
I have then a few questions:
Where do the kinetic energy come from?
How much kinetic energy is present in the time when shielding?
How much will the shielding process brake the rotation?

If the kinetic energy come from the device itself, the kinetic energy is already limited by the forces which made it. In theory, the counter force which occurs when shielding, plus loss, is probably the same or more than the forces which made the kinetic energy available in the first place. So it will stop. I assume you're talking about the arms in the first drawings you made.

Br.

Vidar

i already explained this i think, i'll explain again :)

when arm A is lifted by the smot the whole wheel turns to the right, then arm C slides to the right causing leverage weight. do you see? when arm C slides we can use this kinetic energy to block the sticky spot (arm A).
i don't have the mechanism for this yet but i know it's possible.

peace

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #121 on: May 21, 2007, 10:50:53 PM »
at the sticky point you will have twice (arm C and D) the weight going against the sticky point.

i was wrong about this part. the weight comes from the sliding (kinetic energy) of arm C only. and i think the smot will provide enough momentum for arm C to slide. has to be a one way wheel.

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #122 on: May 25, 2007, 12:19:49 AM »
had another idea.

when arm C slides not only it can block the sticky spot but i think you could also have water pumped insided arm D somehow...and when arm D is at the beginning of the smot the water gets dumped out. make sense? :)


peace

TerryT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network

Low-Q

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #125 on: May 30, 2007, 12:49:15 PM »

kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #126 on: October 29, 2009, 04:18:45 AM »
Horrible.

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #127 on: October 14, 2010, 01:39:16 PM »
i will post this under a new topic tomorrow since i think it deserves one :-)

basically it is the same wheel design but instead of using one wheel we use two wheels. this resembles something like i drew at an earlier post showing the phases of the wheel.
also only the tip of the arms should be attracted to magnet and not the whole arm.

all we need to do is place a magnet(s) at a certain location(s) to cause the arm(s) to slide horizontally making the wheel rotate.
the magnet should only be strong enough to pull the weight of arm horizontally and not vertically.



see what i am saying?


what do you think?

FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
    • The Freedom Cell Network
Re: magnet-gravity wheel
« Reply #128 on: October 15, 2010, 12:37:35 PM »
never mind that.

:-(