Gravity Engine now in the USA.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
The basis of all these 'gravity' motors, and their persistent failure, is that there's a way to cyclically lift a mass with less energy input than can be recovered when it falls and that's been the fact since the original concepts over 5 centuries ago. Many configurations of this same basic idea have been attempted with great optimism but all have met the same fate - they simply don't work and the reason for that is really basic despite the level of complication in the apparatus. Maybe this one will do something revolutionary (it'll turn at least) but the odds against it producing any energy are huge based on the history of the idea.

It will produce potential energy from momentum. The generator that will have to be attached will generate the electricity, a portion of which will be fed back into the engine to 'reset' the weights for the next 'stroke'.

Think of a pendulum on a grandfather clock...when the pendulum is static, it takes a relatively large amount of energy to make it start to oscillate compared to the much less energy required to keep a pendulum oscillating once it is in motion...another example is duty cycles applied to circuits.

i think the same principle is being applied here on this engine. Energy is fed to the engine, it begins turning (or oscillating), then the energy is only fed to the engine at ideal points to 'nudge' the rotor and arms just enough to reset the downward stroke, cut the feed and allow gravity and mass to complete a swing to the point where another nudge is needed to do the whole rotation once more...depending on how fast the thing turns, this could be happening many times a second.

The shaft would be connected to a conventional generator, a portion of the electricity generated would be used to power the 'nudges', the rest can be chemically stored by way of batteries or Hydrogen production, or directly fed to the grid.

I don't know if it will work or not, but i'm very interested in seeing them try...and if it doesn't work out as planned, then as Edison would say....it's still a positive, as another design has been discovered that doesn't work...which allows moving on to another method that might!

Originally posted by MysterX
I don't know if it will work or not,

It won't work, as the energy required for the "nudges" would be greater than the energy produced - what you suggest is like claiming you can fly by pulling on your shoelaces....

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by MysterX
I don't know if it will work or not,

It won't work, as the energy required for the "nudges" would be greater than the energy produced - what you suggest is like claiming you can fly by pulling on your shoelaces....

It's nothing of the sort.

You read the pendulum example? Is that like flying by pulling on a shoelace too?

The building is progressing, let's see what happens shall we?

Originally posted by MysterX
The building is progressing, let's see what happens shall we?

Is it? There has been no update for over 6 weeks, the design has been changed in the middle of the build....

Originally posted by MysterX
You read the pendulum example? Is that like flying by pulling on a shoelace too?

The building is progressing, let's see what happens shall we?

Yes I read the pendulum example, but there's nothing in the design we see in the pictures that suggests it works the way you suggest. The design has some things in common with the camshaft on an automobile engine where the power cycles are distributed so they are applied at various angles around the camshaft...which is nothing like a pendulum. People who know combustion engines will recognize the similarities in the camshaft.

Back in May they told Sterling Allan it would be completed in 2-3 months. Guess what? That's about how long it's been.

Originally posted by MysterX
It will produce potential energy from momentum. The generator that will have to be attached will generate the electricity, a portion of which will be fed back into the engine to 'reset' the weights for the next 'stroke'.

Momentum or kinetic energy can be defined as (m x v^2)/2 IE a product of mass & velocity

As the mass is constant, what will vary and how when some of that 'momentum' is extracted to spin a generator?

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by MysterX
The building is progressing, let's see what happens shall we?

Is it? There has been no update for over 6 weeks, the design has been changed in the middle of the build....

I found this clarification by Sterling Allan, saying that when they told him it would be another 2-3 months to finish back on May 3, it looked to him like it was already finished in the photos which tells him that it didn't work when they finished it, and the 2-3 months was probably to try to make some tweaks to get it working, so even he is skeptical about the chances for success which is saying something because he promotes lots of non-mainstream ideas which never seem to work, though maybe he's starting to learn to be skeptical as a result, which skepticism leaks out in this video.



To me it looks finished in the photo from June 14, 2013. If it had worked, I think we would have heard about it by now.

reply to post by VoidHawk


Hehe, nice try - the onus is not on us to prove it won't work, but rather on them/you to prove it would.

Had they actually discovered some quirk of physics that would allow them to harvest more energy out of the system than it would take to make the system function simply by utilizing gravity, you'd think they would have written a paper on it and won a Nobel prize.

They have not.

Now, I suspect to counter this, you will say something like "Maybe they aren't scientists and don't know how to write a paper", to which I would ask how they could possibly have made the discovery in the first place?

One poster after you describes a process in which they attach the machine to a generator and then use a portion of the energy from that to "nudge" the system so it can "reset" and use gravity.

This simply will not work.

For all the energy you gain out of a falling mass, it will use the same amount of energy to rise - when you factor in you have a generator attached, this would bleed off some of the energy gained from the falling cycle, so there will not be enough energy left in the system to get it all the way up again, much less "nudge" it so it can fall once more.

For example if a falling object produced 10 Watts in half a cycle, it would need 10 Watts to get back up to it's starting position. If a generator is attached, lets just say it produces 5 Watts per cycle, then you have already lost 50% of your energy so cannot possibly "reset" the cycle and start again. If you have to feed the energy from the generator back into the system to "nudge" it, then your net energy result would be 0.

This all ignores the fact that while all this is going on, the system is experiencing friction as well as electrical resistance in the generator, so it will not be close to 100% efficient at capturing said energy in the first place, which would necessitate an external power input just to keep the system ticking over.

You can try an squirm all you like by deflecting onto me the burden of proof, but there are some fundamental physics at work here which you seem to be ignoring.

Originally posted by stumason
but there are some fundamental physics at work here which you seem to be ignoring.

Well, that is how all proponents of "free energy" devices operate, by ignoring the laws of physics....

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by MysterX
I don't know if it will work or not,

It won't work, as the energy required for the "nudges" would be greater than the energy produced - what you suggest is like claiming you can fly by pulling on your shoelaces....

It's nothing of the sort.

You read the pendulum example? Is that like flying by pulling on a shoelace too?

The building is progressing, let's see what happens shall we?

edit on 22-7-2013 by MysterX because: (no reason given)

It's exactly like trying to fly pulling your shoelaces... The pendulum is not trying to power itself, it eventually has to be swung again.

It can't power another clock.

reply to post by MysterX

Think of a pendulum on a grandfather clock...when the pendulum is static, it takes a relatively large amount of energy to make it start to oscillate compared to the much less energy required to keep a pendulum oscillating once it is in motion...another example is duty cycles applied to circuits.

Now think of putting resistance/drag on the pendulum to create power and see how quickly it stops. Fundamentals of physics here... Grade 8 stuff.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

Hehe, nice try - the onus is not on us to prove it won't work, but rather on them/you to prove it would.

Actually that's not true. I am more than happy to say "I don't know if it'll work" because I haven't been shown all the data, but then neither have you! yet even though you cant possibly have all the data you continue to say it cant work!
If you were saying - I don't THINK it will work, I'd have no problem, but your not are you, your insisting it cant work even though you don't know how its supposed to work.

Originally posted by stumason
Had they actually discovered some quirk of physics that would allow them to harvest more energy out of the system than it would take to make the system function simply by utilizing gravity, you'd think they would have written a paper on it and won a Nobel prize.

Again we don't know what they've been up to, you are assuming something without even knowing the facts.

Originally posted by stumason
Now, I suspect to counter this, you will say something like "Maybe they aren't scientists and don't know how to write a paper", to which I would ask how they could possibly have made the discovery in the first place?

Oh please, that is so weak. Are you a scientist? No? then how can you be so knowledgeable? Silly isn't it!

Originally posted by stumason
One poster after you describes a process in which they attach the machine to a generator and then use a portion of the energy from that to "nudge" the system so it can "reset" and use gravity.

This simply will not work.

For all the energy you gain out of a falling mass, it will use the same amount of energy to rise - when you factor in you have a generator attached, this would bleed off some of the energy gained from the falling cycle, so there will not be enough energy left in the system to get it all the way up again, much less "nudge" it so it can fall once more.

For example if a falling object produced 10 Watts in half a cycle, it would need 10 Watts to get back up to it's starting position. If a generator is attached, lets just say it produces 5 Watts per cycle, then you have already lost 50% of your energy so cannot possibly "reset" the cycle and start again. If you have to feed the energy from the generator back into the system to "nudge" it, then your net energy result would be 0.

This all ignores the fact that while all this is going on, the system is experiencing friction as well as electrical resistance in the generator, so it will not be close to 100% efficient at capturing said energy in the first place, which would necessitate an external power input just to keep the system ticking over.

Again none of us have been told how it's supposed to work, but some of us have been trying to work it out using the little data that we have. You however, have a magical ability to know it wont work, even though you haven't been shown the the completed project.

Originally posted by stumason
You can try an squirm all you like by deflecting onto me the burden of proof, but there are some fundamental physics at work here which you seem to be ignoring.

I'm not ignoring anything. You however are ignoring the FACT that you don't have all the data.

I understand the physics just as well as you do. We've all been educated since birth that free energy is not possible. I've studied many perpetual motion engines and its obvious why they don't work. However, just look back on human history, it's full of inventions that people thought were impossible. As I said earlier in this thread, maybe, just MAYBE, someone will find a way! Could this be it?

When this engine fails, and I do suspect it will, you and your ilk can crow from the rooftops "WE TOLD YOU SO" and you can feel all good and smug about it, but until it fails, all you can honestly say is - we dont THINK it'll work.

Please show me the plans that enable you to be 100% certain that it cant work. The onus is on you because it's you making that claim.

This video is completely irrelevant as the guy has no connections with the project and has no more information than those of us in this thread!

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by MysterX

Think of a pendulum on a grandfather clock...when the pendulum is static, it takes a relatively large amount of energy to make it start to oscillate compared to the much less energy required to keep a pendulum oscillating once it is in motion...another example is duty cycles applied to circuits.

 

Now think of putting resistance/drag on the pendulum to create power and see how quickly it stops. Fundamentals of physics here... Grade 8 stuff.

Yep! Its such a shame that NOBODY in this thread knows what they are talking about, and that includes you.
None of us have the blueprints for this project, all we have are a few photo's of an incomplete project.
Some of us have been having a guess at what MIGHT be going on with this device, and all we receive is what amounts to ridicule.

Well done.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
Yep! Its such a shame that NOBODY in this thread knows what they are talking about, and that includes you.

Wrong again, some people here know about physics, and thus why this device will not work. Those who have no understanding of physics think that somehow devices like this one will automagically start working.

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by VoidHawk
Yep! Its such a shame that NOBODY in this thread knows what they are talking about, and that includes you.

Wrong again, some people here know about physics, and thus why this device will not work. Those who have no understanding of physics think that somehow devices like this one will automagically start working.

So tell me. Why are you and those with opinions like yours spending so much time in this thread? Why do you spend so much time talking to us silly people?

automagically

I like that
It kinda describes how you and your buddies know stuff, without having all the info.

Originally posted by VoidHawk
So tell me. Why are you and those with opinions like yours spending so much time in this thread?

Trying to educate people

Why do you spend so much time talking to us silly people?

Trying to get you to stop and think for yourself, instead of you believing every snake oil salesman that comes along.

It kinda describes how you and your buddies know stuff, without having all the info.

What info do you think we do not have?

Originally posted by VoidHawk
This video is completely irrelevant as the guy has no connections with the project and has no more information than those of us in this thread!

So, you called them up and spoke to them on the phone to get additional information from them like he did?

I didn't call them, so he got more information than I have with his phone call.

Originally posted by hellobruce
What info do you think we do not have?

edit on 23-7-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)

The blueprints, or a picture of the completed device. Can you supply them?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by VoidHawk
This video is completely irrelevant as the guy has no connections with the project and has no more information than those of us in this thread!

So, you called them up and spoke to them on the phone to get additional information from them like he did?

I didn't call them, so he got more information than I have with his phone call.

The point is, he got nothing.