Constant Shifting center of mass motor

[forest]

Why don't you use your knowledge and combine magnetic field with gravity ? The problem with magnetic or gravity motor is two fold :
first it is unpractical, second - everybody seems to know better and try to build his own design instead of looking for proven design in the past (when people were honest and didn't hidden information).
Please read carefully what I stated , such perpetually working device in small scale is needed for people to wake up, but finally it's very impractical. For any serious power it needs a large device , very very costly.

[Allcanadian]

@Forest
Therein lies the problem and if I can build a 1Kw conventional wind turbine for $500 and it runs half the time then it still beats a $5000 gravity device generating 1KW all the time. As it is most of the claimed OU devices can barely compete with solar which is dropping all the time... that is if the OU device works as claimed. So as I said I have little interest in gravity machines other than the enjoyment from considering the problem and even if any person demonstrated a working device right in front of me I would still question it's practicality.
If it ain't practical and competitive then it means nothing in my opinion, so yes let's see a device working with some numbers then we will talk.

AC

[Overboard]

Why don't you use your knowledge and combine magnetic field with gravity ? The problem with magnetic or gravity motor is two fold :
first it is unpractical (no it is not, no free energy is impractical it happens everyday in real physics), second - everybody seems to know better (you think you know better) and try to build his own design instead of looking for (a) proven design in the past (when people were honest and didn't hidden (hide) information, like Bessler did?).
Please read carefully what I stated , such perpetually working device in small scale is needed for people to wake up, but finally it's very impractical (no  it is not).  For any serious power it needs a large device , very very costly (whatever)

It is not impractical, we have been taught to not understand how to make it work, thus believe that it is impractical.

@Forest
Therein lies the problem and if I can build a 1KW conventional wind turbine for $500 and it runs half the time then it still beats a $5000 gravity device generating 1KW all the time. As it is most of the claimed OU devices can barely compete with solar which is dropping all the time... that is if the OU device works as claimed. So as I said I have little interest in gravity machines other than the enjoyment from considering the problem and even if any person demonstrated a working device right in front of me I would still question it's practicality (are you insane? Right in front of you? )
If it ain't practical and competitive then it means nothing in my opinion, so yes let's see a device working with some numbers then we will talk.

Why are they charging $5000.00 for a gravity device then...unless they know it will produce more energy for less, therefore it is worth more than the $500.00 dollar 1 KW solar generator, it is the same "Fallacy" as any needed fuel, oil or even natural gas and nuclear energy, they can hold that utility over your head and charge you for it forever, even if it was free to them except for their initial investment? Shut up and open your eyes. I, yes Overboard have already created a device that combines magnetism and gravity, really? OMG this is so stupid. Right in front of you?  Really?  You are so ignorant.  I would expect that answer from you.

[forest]

Silence! There is no reason to be harsh. 

Both my comments and Allcanadian were resonable. Moreover I posted some time ago working ou device patent from the past combining mechanical force and magnetism but nobody ever declared to build it and show it working. People are more and more interested in money they can get then the truth they can learn 

[forest]

Btw your constant shifting mass center is example of what I posted some time ago and what EXACTLY that patent I posted is showing : the added degree of freedom in movement.
Imho the patent was working this way : the shaft was on bearings but on shaft were mounted a metalic (maybe copper) tube on it's own baearings (or just sliding on resin) . To the tube there was attached mechanical lever with two magnets on opposite sides pushing (or attracting - don't remember) each other. On the shaft was connected ratched device and the mechanical lever with some parts able to change angle acted on ratched wheel due to magnets interaction. It was in cotinous imbalance beacause the shaft where rotating in one direction while the tube with all mechanical parts in opposite direction.
Case closed.

[Overboard]

Whatever, so I have posted your design Forest?  Then why did you give up on it?  No Copper nor magnetic fields needed, it's center of mass is constantly changing and it is always unbalanced.  I do not care if I ever get credit for this design, that is the difference.  I do not CARE!  I cannot wait until the day that we realize that we can make forces our "Bi-otch" with no need for any sort of fuel for energy.  I am so sorry, so sorry, that I hurt your ego.  SILENCE...Whatever...! I never spoke harsh of Allcanadian, just of your unbelievable BS.  The case is so not closed at all! Run Forest run... "People are more and more interested in money they can get then the truth they can learn"... then why oppose my design if it is truly workable, if not, then lets work your designs.  I am no more harsh than the world is to me, but you know this already.

[forest]

Ok,Overboard do whatever you like...I advise only to watch what was already done and build on it.

[Overboard]

Whatever you'all are liars, YOU HAVE NOT POSTED WHAT YOU HAVE BUILT, and you have no intent of furthering anything of what has already been built...because you refuse to show your designs.  You are liars, there is nothing to build on lies!  Whatever, wash up and blow away, you are not helping the free energy movement at all, whatsoever.

[Overboard]

Ok,Overboard do whatever you like...I advise only to watch what was already done and build on it.

Show it then...What have you already done?  Nothing at all.  It is obvious to me forest, you are only here to propagate propaganda, because you have not posted any thoughts of your own.  Really, leave this up to me to prove?  Fine!

[Overboard]

  But, I am a newbie...you have no idea how long I have been here.  I'm a newbie...not.

[forest]

But, I am a newbie...you have no idea how long I have been here.

Of course, you have been "how long" nobody knows and still you haven't show us your working ou device ? What a joke!

[Overboard]

The joke is that you claim to be qualified to critique my design through experience, when you will not share your own design that you say is somehow just like this design?  What a joke!  Constructive criticism does not qualify you alone.  Have you built this?  What a joke, no you have not.   You just immediately said that it will not work when, it is nothing like anything that has ever been built or you have ever built.  What a joke! As far as I am concerned, you are not here to help us, but only to confuse and confound because you have not provided a working OU device as well! But, you already know that.   Mine is waiting to show the money, What a joke! Show it then, otherwise you really are just a liar.

"Btw your constant shifting mass center is example of what I posted some time ago and what EXACTLY that patent I posted is showing : the added degree of freedom in movement.
Imho the patent was working this way : the shaft was on bearings but on shaft were mounted a metalic (maybe copper) tube on it's own baearings (or just sliding on resin) . To the tube there was attached mechanical lever with two magnets on opposite sides pushing (or attracting - don't remember) each other. On the shaft was connected ratched device and the mechanical lever with some parts able to change angle acted on ratched wheel due to magnets interaction. It was in cotinous imbalance beacause the shaft where rotating in one direction while the tube with all mechanical parts in opposite direction."
Case closed. Huh?

Have you built this? What a joke! The ranks have been infiltrated by the enemy. They have no vested interest in the revelation of free energy. Case closed. Unless you - don't remember)?

Gravity is a force...just like the blowing wind...Yes it is, the wind blows in one direction, gravity flows in one direction...to the source of gravity, it will only take time to determine how to make a fan blade that is sensitive to it. Did I say enemy?  I meant traitor.  We do not need fuel anymore.  Where is your OU device BTW?

[Overboard]

O.K. Any more BS for anyone else to post here?  No, O.K. good.  now please show what you have already built before you speak, otherwise you have no forest to stand on.   Sorry forest. I disagree, the normal force, gravity, and torque is enough, or could you please explain to me how you came to that conclusion? Using the scientific method... only... Once again, I ask you in a civilized manner. Isn't it funny?  No matter how many posts that I post the counter is now stuck at 24 posts (25, 26 27 now).  Gravity is a force...like the blowing wind... wind blowing in one direction turns a rotor, gravity flows in one direction...to its source, it will only be a matter of time when we fashion a rotor or "fan blade" that is sensitive to it.

[Overboard]

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/user.html?id=1303903412291566695804698
Watch what happens when you increase the length of the rotor arms...nothing...its center of mass or center of gravity is constantly to the bottom left right, it is constantly unbalanced.  The weight of seven (7) arms is more than enough, to lift five (5) arms.

[Overboard]

Just ask Cassini if it is burning fuel or if it is using the slingshot effect of gravity of the moon, of Venus, of Jupiter? It actually increased velocity, sounds like moving a mass a distance to me, with gravity? Isn't the Cassini spacecraft getting more out, than what was put in? Ask Bill Nye the science guy, even the Juno spacecraft is gleaning energy from the Earth's gravity to sling-shot out to Jupiter. Gravity, being used to accomplish work.  Doesn't that usually require burning a fuel?  So just admit it, we can obtain energy from the force of gravity already.  It meas that yes, we can produce energy from forces.

[Overboard]

Please let me know when you figure it out...New world order my ass.

Whatever...

[TinselKoala]

I can tell by the tone of the comments that this isn't going to do any good... but here goes anyway.

Overboard, you are wrong about the way that gravitational slingshot navigation works. There is an exchange of momentum between the tiny tiny spacecraft and the huge planet: The spacecraft accelerates substantially and the planet slows infinitesimally. Momentum is conserved, as always.

Gravity is most certainly NOT a "flow" in the way that wind is a flow of air. There is nothing "flowing" in any gravitational interaction, except the particles that are under the influence of gravitational acceleration. Gravity is a conservative field of force. You can use it to store energy and you can recover that stored energy from it, minus losses. Neither is magnetism a "flow", in spite of the unfortunate use of the term "Flux" to describe certain aspects of magnetism. Again, magnetic fields are conservative fields and you can store energy in them, and recover this stored energy, minus losses. That's all. Combining magnetism and gravity gains nothing, except compounding losses.

A proper analysis of overbalanced wheels, taking into account _moment arms_ and torques, shows that they aren't really overbalanced after all and so cannot work as the designer believed or intended that they work. And proper comparison testing of "inert" mechanisms (containing no magnets, but inert weights instead; or weight levers blocked so they cannot move) always shows that the "inert" mechanism has fewer losses and so will continue to turn longer with a given starting impulse than the fully "operational" mechanism will. But you can count the number of gravity/magnet wheel builders who perform proper analysis and comparison testing on the fingers of one hand.

If you feel otherwise, Overboard, you should get to building. Build and test your idea properly and report your results here. Insulting others will get you nothing--- it's conservative, you will only reap what you sow, and if it's disrespect... that's what you'll get back.

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/centgrav.htm
https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/overbal.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIsABzDkw0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcPuKv9Z-XE

[Smudge]

While I admire your work TK I feel I have to reply to your latest post concerning gravity and magnetism.  You say nothing is flowing and that is certainly one viewpoint.  But there is another possibility that does involve something flowing.  Taking EM fields for example, if there is a sudden change in a static field, that change propagates outward from the source at light velocity.  In your view the only thing moving is that change, like a surface wave on water the water does not move along the surface.  But equally it could be a change in an otherwise uniform stream of particles, like puffs of smoke.  And we do know that if you get down to very small time increments then magnetic or electric effects are particulate, they come in chunks.  So an equally valid viewpoint is that in static electric or magnetic fields there is a constant flow of particles flowing outward from the source charges responsible for the field, and that these particles carry "information" in say their spin vector, like the spin vector angle wrt the velocity direction.  A spin vector pointing parallel or anti-parallel to the velocity can represent a positive or negative longitudinal wave, and such particles arriving at a constant density could be what we know as a static field.  Spin vectors that are not parallel or anti-parallel will have some degree of "transversivity" and these could be responsible for transverse waves.

Of course if charges such as electrons constantly emit a stream of particles, then to remain stable they must constantly absorb particles, so "empty" space must contain an enormous density of such particles.  Then it is possible to give space properties based upon that continuum, properties such as light velocity (the particle velocity), permeability, permittivity and impedance.  It is unfortunate that the name "virtual particle" has been given when in reality these can be real particles having zero rest mass but carrying spin, like neutrinos.

And gravity is just another outcome of that space continuum, warped space (or warped space-time) can be envisioned as something physical and not abstract.  If we could produce a colored image of the space particle density (or other characteristic) around a massive body and realize that mass moving through that cloud receives forces from those particles then some of the mysticism of Einstein's GR is removed.

Smudge

[Overboard]

Who did I insult?  Or, are you talking about all of the the people insulting me now?  What do you call a physicist (Donald E. Simanek) that will not adapt to new knowledge? You call them wrong.  And it's time for him to retire.  Prove my current magnetic theories wrong then TK.  Prove then that what does work somehow does not TK.

[Overboard]

While I admire your work TK I feel I have to reply to your latest post concerning gravity and magnetism.  You say nothing is flowing and that is certainly one viewpoint.  But there is another possibility that does involve something flowing.  Taking EM fields for example, if there is a sudden change in a static field, that change propagates outward from the source at light velocity.  In your view the only thing moving is that change, like a surface wave on water the water does not move along the surface.  But equally it could be a change in an otherwise uniform stream of particles, like puffs of smoke.  And we do know that if you get down to very small time increments then magnetic or electric effects are particulate, they come in chunks.  So an equally valid viewpoint is that in static electric or magnetic fields there is a constant flow of particles flowing outward from the source charges responsible for the field, and that these particles carry "information" in say their spin vector, like the spin vector angle wrt the velocity direction.  A spin vector pointing parallel or anti-parallel to the velocity can represent a positive or negative longitudinal wave, and such particles arriving at a constant density could be what we know as a static field.  Spin vectors that are not parallel or anti-parallel will have some degree of "transversivity" and these could be responsible for transverse waves.

Of course if charges such as electrons constantly emit a stream of particles, then to remain stable they must constantly absorb particles, so "empty" space must contain an enormous density of such particles.  Then it is possible to give space properties based upon that continuum, properties such as light velocity (the particle velocity), permeability, permittivity and impedance.  It is unfortunate that the name "virtual particle" has been given when in reality these can be real particles having zero rest mass but carrying spin, like neutrinos.

And gravity is just another outcome of that space continuum, warped space (or warped space-time) can be envisioned as something physical and not abstract.  If we could produce a colored image of the space particle density (or other characteristic) around a massive body and realize that mass moving through that cloud receives forces from those particles then some of the mysticism of Einstein's GR is removed.

Smudge

TK, prove it otherwise, the burden of proof is on me and it is on you to prove otherwise.

[Overboard]

You go smudge, let em have it, the alternative opinion. "I can tell by the tone of the comments that this isn't going to do any good... but here goes anyway."  Like you know better somehow than the rest of us.  Oh, you are so much better then anyone else here on OU.  TK you are so enlightned that...you have all of the answers, wow, I wish we were all as smart as you, you propagandist.

[Overboard]

Donald E. Simanek, Then look at my design...Oh is it too much to comprehend?  Three dimensions?  Oh that is soo difficult. 3 dimensions, Donald E. Simanek can only handle 2 dimensions? retire.

[Overboard]

WHATEVER....

[TinselKoala]

Who did I insult?  Or, are you talking about all of the the people insulting me now?  What do you call a physicist (Donald E. Simanek) that will not adapt to new knowledge? You call them wrong.  And it's time for him to retire.  Prove my current magnetic theories wrong then TK.  Prove then that what does work somehow does not TK.

Who did you insult?  On this page alone:

I do not CARE!  I cannot wait until the day that we realize that we can make forces our "Bi-otch" with no need for any sort of fuel for energy.  I am so sorry, so sorry, that I hurt your ego. Cheesy  SILENCE...Whatever...! I never spoke harsh of Allcanadian, just of your unbelievable BS.  The case is so not closed at all! Run Forest run...

Whatever you'all are liars, YOU HAVE NOT POSTED WHAT YOU HAVE BUILT, and you have no intent of furthering anything of what has already been built...because you refuse to show your designs.  You are liars, there is nothing to build on lies!  Whatever, wash up and blow away, you are not helping the free energy movement at all, whatsoever.

It is obvious to me forest, you are only here to propagate propaganda, because you have not posted any thoughts of your own.

Show it then, otherwise you really are just a liar.... Have you built this? What a joke! The ranks have been infiltrated by the enemy.

O.K. Any more BS for anyone else to post here?

TK you are so enlightned that...you have all of the answers, wow, I wish we were all as smart as you, you propagandist.

TK you do not know SH*T

Donald E. Simanek, Then look at my design...Oh is it too much to comprehend?  Three dimensions?  Oh that is soo difficult. 3 dimensions, Donald E. Simanek can only handle 2 dimensions? retire.

I suggest that you take a look at the pdf document referenced in this post:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=8.0

You are making claims, without support. The burden of proof is ON YOU. I have given you references with rigorous analyses of why your _proposed_ design cannot work...you have not refuted any of those analyses. I have shown you my own work showing how to test such claims... you have provided nothing in return EXCEPT MORE INSULTS.

The proper way for you to proceed is to REFUTE ME with demonstrations of your own, showing that your claims are true. But of course you cannot... because they aren't. Therefore you follow the Usual Script to the letter: you rant and moan and proceed with your pottymouth insults that would be silly coming from an eighth-grader, but are just pathetic coming from someone who is supposed to be all grown up:

TK you do not know SH*T

Go ahead, PROVE ME WRONG. Prove that I don't know SH*T. You cannot.  I've already demonstrated that I know more than you do about: gravitational slingshots, gravity wheel analysis, experimental methodology, and the Creed of this Forum. Now let's see you demonstrate something other than your ability to insult everybody in sight.

[poynt99]

@ overboard,

Please tone it down. Disrespectful, childish behavior won't be tolerated on this forum.