Tired of Jim_Mich ??

[Jim Williams]

His ability to sustain a belief for over ten years that a solution is possible in the face of modern physics speaks of something more substantial than a fixed reliance on dogma. If jim_mich were to leave, how many others would suddenly find searching for that solution to be a waste of time.

[Grimer]

The question (which has been discussed before) is whether or not WM2D would show Bessler's wheel as working, assuming we knew Bessler's secret.

In my opinion, the answer is no. The reason is in the method that programs such as WM2D use to solve for motion. There is no way whereby such programs can figure out complex assemblies so as to calculate everything in a conventional manner where they follow force 'A' as it pushes part 'B' which is linked to parts 'C', 'D', and 'D', etc, Then it must take into account all inertia and momentum, and gravity acting on each object, and any springs, etc. It just cannot be done, except someone writes unique computer code for a specific mechanical assembly.

But the program does know the relationships of all objects and all motions and all the kinetic energy within all the objects, and it knows all forces including gravity that enter the system. The program makes a guess as to how far objects have moved from one step to the next based on their previous motions. It then calculates the new KE in everything. If the change of KE is not zero, then the program assumes it moved things too fast or too slow. So it makes another guess. If that guess does not equal out to zero change of KE, then it calculates its next guess based on the last two guesses. This third guess it usually very close. The forth guess usually hits zero change of KE.

Even if Bessler's wheel were modeled in WM2D, the program would assume conservation of energy, and force the model to not gain any energy. This is the nature of computer modeling.

WM2D is great for figuring out how things might act. But it will never show over-unity. If you discover a real working wheel, WM2D will never show it as working, because that would go against how WM2D is programed.

This is just my opinion.
I've had this same opinion of WM2D for many years.

PS.
My old HP48sx programmable calculator from 1989 has a 'solver' program. Give it a formula to solve, and it will solve most any formula. A long time ago, I extracted the 'solver' program from that calculator and analyzed how it solved formulas. And it was as I described above.

Spot on Jim. Excellent advice.

I recently has a bad experience with the WM2D program at the hands of Tarsier79. You can read all about it in Furcurequs's "Another claim to a working device..." thread.

The relevant posts start here.

As you will see, Tarsier carried out 2 WM2D analyses. I took them at their face value and thought initially that they provided a positive contribution. One point I couldn't understand was why the simple pendulum wouldn't return to its starting point relative to the compound pendulum and lock on. At first I thought is was a incorrect assumption on Tarsier's part but when I realised the the program had made a gross error in failing to combine the two pendulums to form a balanced beam, I realised it was probably the program at fault.

I have always been rather suspicious of sims. This experience has confirmed those suspicions in spades.

[cloud camper]

Even if Bessler's wheel were modeled in WM2D, the program would assume conservation of energy, and force the model to not gain any energy. This is the nature of computer modeling.

WM2D is great for figuring out how things might act. But it will never show over-unity. If you discover a real working wheel, WM2D will never show it as working, because that would go against how WM2D is programed.

False. WM2D contains no "history" of total energy. It uses Finite Element Analysis using each elements' current mass, velocity and position and predicts in each unit of time where the next velocity and position will be of every element.

Every increment of time in a simulated process is then a "new" starting position, with no retained memory of past levels. Nothing in the simulator "cares" whether you have violated symmetry.

This is just like nature. Nature does not know or care whether you violate symmetry. It's just that each micro level energy conversion process (GPE to RKE and the reverse) adds up to a conservation of total energy.

There is no one keeping tabs on the total. Each moment is it's own. There is no past, there is no future. Only now.

This is why WM2D is so good as a simulator. If there was any OU occurring with a mechanical process, it would show it.

In my Milkovic Rotary Secondary Oscillator proposal, I believe the sim IS showing it, although I haven't built the PoP that would prove it.

http://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic ... oscillator

[Grimer]

Not my experience as you can see from the edited post above yours.

[jim_mich]

Even if Bessler's wheel were modeled in WM2D, the program would assume conservation of energy, and force the model to not gain any energy. This is the nature of computer modeling.

WM2D is great for figuring out how things might act. But it will never show over-unity. If you discover a real working wheel, WM2D will never show it as working, because that would go against how WM2D is programed.

False. WM2D contains no "history" of total energy. It uses Finite Element Analysis using each elements' current mass, velocity and position and predicts in each unit of time where the next velocity and position will be of every element.

Every increment of time in a simulated process is then a "new" starting position, with no retained memory of past levels. Nothing in the simulator "cares" whether you have violated symmetry.

This is just like nature. Nature does not know or care whether you violate symmetry. It's just that each micro level energy conversion process (GPE to RKE and the reverse) adds up to a conservation of total energy.

There is no one keeping tabs on the total. Each moment is it's own.

This is why WM2D is so good as a simulator. If there was any OU occurring with a mechanical process, it would show it.

In my Milkovic Rotary Secondary Oscillator proposal, I believe the sim IS showing it, although I haven't built the PoP that would prove it.

http://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic ... oscillator

Cloud camper, you are the one calling it a 'history'. I never used that word. But WM2D does save the results of each step into computer memory. This is why a WM2D file that is saved after running will be much bigger than one save after clearing memory by making any tiny change to the assembly.

And at any given point of WM2D's 'history', the component's location is known along with its velocity. Thus the KE is known at each step. And if you include a graph of KE, then WM2D does indeed save the KE at each incremental step.

Maybe I didn't explain such a program in clear enough language for you to understand. So I'll try again...

Based upon the existing conditions of motion and mass, the program calculates current KE. Then based upon the existing conditions of motion and mass, the program makes an estimate of where each component will be at the next increment of time. It applies all forces and calculates how fast it expects each component to be moving. Also in what direction its motion.

Up to this point, you and I agree. But since the components interact with each other, the program has no way of knowing how component 'C' is going to affect component 'A' until component 'C' has been calculated. And the motions of component 'C' may affect component 'A'. So it then calculates the new KE, and compares it with the current KE. The program has made assumptions as to how far all components have moved. It then tries to verify if the assumptions were correct. If the calculations of current KE do not match the new KE calculations, then the program adjusts the motions accordingly, and makes a 2nd try. If the 2nd try fails to give a balanced KE result, then the program makes more adjustments as to how far the components moved. When the motions of the component produce a situation where the new KE equals current KE, then the program assumes the new positions of the components to be the current position. The program then steps into the next increment of time.

My HP48sx calculator had a limit of 11 tries when solving equations. This is about right for most solver programs. They either hit equality, or they hit sign reversal where the last two answers are either side of zero, at which point the program chooses the answer closest to zero. My HP48sx calculator always noted zero or sign reversal.

Sign reversal is where slight errors come into play with such programs.

Making 3 to 11 full calculations each step takes a LOT of computer power. Which is why WM2D used to run very slow on older slower computer.

[preoccupied]

I think we should all put this ugly mess behind us. The poll has spoken. Jim_Mich should stay by a strong majority. Lets focus on Bessler's Wheel discussion now... Jim_Mich other thread Mechanical configurations is interesting. I want everybody to go there and talk about it because I added a lot of info to it recently. I appreciate you all.

[nicbordeaux]

preoccupied, you appreciate us all ? Hmmm.... Are you a hippie by any chance ?

[preoccupied]

nicbordeaux,

hippie? Maybe. I am wanting to build a 12,000 ft house in a poor black neighborhood (see my off topic thread). No wait that's hipster. I'm not rich if that's what you're asking. I appreciate you all because there is so much love to go around. And who doesn't like love from old people who like pseudoscience. Who here is under 30? I raised my hand. Besides life is so busy, you can just post something here and have a good conversation regardless of when you have time to look at it. Some people are difficult to understand but at least they are trying to speak English. =-D Yeah you're all so great.

[primemignonite]

For what it is worth I am with Preoccupied and any others that might be thinking like him to wit: ". . .The poll has spoken. . . ."

During their heyday - even though very square myself - I always liked the ethical Hippies (chicks and dudes) and thought that era of freedom really neat, with some of the music produced being outstanding. (For instance The Mommas and the Poppas, Donovan, The Fifth Dimension, etc.)

I know, this does not very well square with my 19th Century Style expressional predilections but, most all must endure at least a few seeming contradictions in order to remain real. (Admittedly, there are a few on this site that are perfectly uniform and predictable; they know which they are. Such heights of perfection-of-being are almost impossible of attainment.)

James

[daanopperman]

Hi jim_mich ,

Glad ur back

[johannesbender]

well if you think about it , if the laws weren't
hard coded into the software , the common mechanical designs of normal non OU designers
would be useless .

so it does what it needs to do within the
confines of what it was designed for .

the question I have , falls on this assumption.

why would certain laws need to be invalid
for energy gain ?

or rather ,why would OU need laws to be invalid?

it is from confusion between two different lines
of thought that i have ,that I ask the question.

does it really need to gain energy , I mean does
weight not remain the same , as in , weight cannot be drained ?

[triplock]

you are correct JB.

Imbalance can only come from Balance. With balance, nothing is lost or gained. No laws are broken.

Chris

[murilo]

well if you think about it , if the laws weren't
hard coded into the software , the common mechanical designs of normal non OU designers
would be useless .

so it does what it needs to do within the
confines of what it was designed for .

the question I have , falls on this assumption.

why would certain laws need to be invalid
for energy gain ?

or rather ,why would OU need laws to be invalid?

it is from confusion between two different lines
of thought that i have ,that I ask the question.

does it really need to gain energy , I mean does
weight not remain the same , as in , weight cannot be drained ?

Once, I designed a good/nice/huge unbalanced wheel 'operated' or 'commanded' by one, or two, water jet! B)))

Almost as good as avalanchedrive...

[LustInBlack]

That must be the most idiotic Thread ever created on any forum on the internet, who the hell are you!? .. You are not special in any way, you are not better than anyone. Suck it up, be a man, and stop acting like a child.

[preoccupied]

LustInBlack,
You make a funny point LustInBlack.

If Jim_Mich had said this it would be funnier:

"Cloud camper keeps saying the forum is tired of Jim_Mich. Who is tired of cloud camper? I am tired of cloud camper, Yes. Or. I am not tired of cloud camper, No."

I'm sure the point of this thread is about cloud campers insulting comments and not Jim_Mich wanting affection.