Center of gravity used as a motive force?

[Grimer]

Interesting first post.

Anyway, though I make no solid claims, I've personally noticed there are certain aspects of a rotating device on or about the earth's surface that I have yet to see mentioned on this forum; they may apply, they may not.

These "certain aspect" have probably been discussed at some time. For instance, are you aware of the Eotvos effect?

..... and its offspring, the Coriolis effect.

[daxwc]

eccentrically1:

I know the scientific community hasn't always been right about everything. But on this, simple subject, really, it is.

That is the problem, the subject is not so simple. It even has recently been put forward in the scientific community that gravity is a "fictitious" force, doesn’t sound like something physics has a good grasp of.






197sv:

Every so often we all need an overview from a newbie to give us perspective. Remember your first post? This is mine - thanx for having me & I hope I'm not banned immediately because in future posts I'd at least like to try to dispel the, let's say, boderline-cocky ideas of certain members who truly feel they know every nuance regarding gravity.

Not sure why you are worried about getting banned on your first post, nobody has been banned since you joined on July 3, the last was christo4_99 on Jun 26. People get banned not because of the content of their posts, but by their attitude and interaction between members.

So tell me why these borderline-cocky members can’t have their opinion too? Press too hard and guess who becomes the cocky member... just friendly advice from your neighbourhood Spiderman; Opps, I mean pariah rooster, was just trying out your abstract artist neighbour or comic book writer acquaintance suggestion ;)


tks

[eccentrically1]

Actually that's not true, I don't envy you, because I believe with more than faith, that gravity will turn out to be the prime source of energy for Bessler's wheel.

Gravity is not a source of energy, John. That's why it's impossible and none of your wheels have ever rotated. It could be said that gravity is a one-way force that participates in the transformation of energy. But not as a source, an origin, of energy. Nearly all of our energy sources trace their origin back to the sun.

This is not a complex subject, Daxwc. Like 197sv said, you can make it as complex as you want and bring up more contemporary thoughts on gravity; is it just a warp of space-time around a mass; how does it propagate through that space; the difference in the calculation of how much light is deflected between Newton's formula and general relativity formulas, but that doesn't change the very simple, verifiable local effects it has on wheel-and-axles.

The Eotvos effect is toward the center of the earth flying in a westward direction; Grimer's post only shows the eastward.

11Turion: You said on page 2 you already know your build doesn't work, but did the build help you understand why it didn't work? And, if two didn't work, why do you think that adding more of them will make it rotate? If it helps, I can say that adding more will just make it heavier; it won't work for the same reason that two of them didn't work.

I ran across this today; I wonder if you made one so the riders could push their seat with their legs, it would turn the Ferris Wheel from the imbalance; no motor required. But I guess no one would want to pay to ride on it! Well, my daughter maybe!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferris_whe ... ric_wheels

[justsomeone]

Quote from Eccentrically1:

Gravity is not a source of energy, John. That's why it's impossible and none of your wheels have ever rotated.

Thank you thank you!!!! The definition of perpetual motion is " impossible ".
You say a gravity powered wheel is " impossible ".

When my gravity powered wheel starts running, I will have to call it perpetual motion!!!!! ;)

[11Turion]

I learned that a mechanical device mounted on a wheel whose center of gravity changes when it rotates could indeed overbalance a wheel on one side. The device I am playing with would always put the weight closer to the rim when it is on the right side of the wheel as opposed to it's opposite on the left side of the wheel. Whether having weight closer to the rim on one side than the other is enough to get the wheel to rotate remains to be seen. The parts to build this are very simple, and I believe I already have enough parts to put eight or ten of them on my wheel. I need to clean up my shop a bit and then will give it a try. I still have my wheel with all the rolling balls on it to finish up ( http://www.youtube.com/user/11Turion?fe ... rvnu-Vh6Rw ) So need to work on that or get it out of my way. I needed to buy a table saw to finish it up, which would cut the weight in half, actually it would be the same weight of lumber as now, only it would have 28 more steel balls on it.

[Grimer]

...
Gravity is not a source of energy, John. ...

Yes it is.

John Collins is absolutely right - and will be shown to be right.

... is it just a warp of space-time around a mass;

No.

The Eotvos effect is toward the center of the earth flying in a westward direction; Grimer's post only shows the eastward.

My diagram was copied from the Wiki on the subject. Look it up.

In point of fact that diagram gives two enormous clues on why the RBM works. I shall be explaining what those clues are in the RBM thread.

[Grimer]

I learned that a mechanical device mounted on a wheel whose center of gravity changes when it rotates could indeed overbalance a wheel on one side. The device I am playing with would always put the weight closer to the rim when it is on the right side of the wheel as opposed to it's opposite on the left side of the wheel. Whether having weight closer to the rim on one side than the other is enough to get the wheel to rotate remains to be seen. The parts to build this are very simple, and I believe I already have enough parts to put eight or ten of them on my wheel. I need to clean up my shop a bit and then will give it a try. I still have my wheel with all the rolling balls on it to finish up ( http://www.youtube.com/user/11Turion?fe ... rvnu-Vh6Rw ) So need to work on that or get it out of my way. I needed to buy a table saw to finish it up, which would cut the weight in half, actually it would be the same weight of lumber as now, only it would have 28 more steel balls on it.

Good for you Turion. Keep at it.

[eccentrically1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Corio ... stward.png

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rocNtnD-yI

This is a clip from the Elegant Universe explaining the warp of space-time by gravity. The whole show is here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

And here is the wiki entry on gravitational lensing:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens



Gravity only represents potential energy in other objects with mass.

[Grimer]

I, and I presume most others here, are quite well aware of the orthodox view on gravity so there's no need to try teaching your grandmother to suck eggs.

I don't believe it. I would even go further. I think its unmitigated bollocks.

[eccentrically1]

Nonsense? It isn't nonsense; it's a refinement on the original views of gravity. Newton's formula works for most applications such as our solar system. When the distances and masses reach large enough proportions, Einstein's equations are more accurate for modelling interstellar behavior.

Ad hominems are normally used in moral arguments. Can you try a different tack?

[daxwc]

http://knol.google.com/k/einstein-was-w ... -presented#

http://www.plasmaphysics.org.uk/research/lensing.htm

http://www.physorg.com/news190027752.html

http://www.calphysics.org/articles/wesson.pdf


There are lots of naysayers in the scientific world and continued work; suddenly a simple topic is complicated and always will be if they can’t fit gravity with the other forces and its origins. Of course we could just keep making things up like dark energy. This discussion needs to be brought back a little closer to home. The end effect might not be energy from gravity but say from the rotation of the earth. Probably 2000 years ago scientists said boats could never sail faster than the wind.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailing_fa ... n_the_wind

[11Turion]

Deleted.

I started to jump into the middle of this debate, and realized I have better things to spend my time on.

[jim_mich]

this is the first time I have been on this page long enough to notice the figure of Bessler in the upper left---that his eyes shift and his tongue sticks out.

Scott has a sense of humor.

I'm of the very strong belief that Bessler's wheel was a real PM wheel. I believe very strongly that gravity is conservative and cannot be the prime mover source of energy for any PM wheel. So when other people post ideas based on using gravity I take a real quick look and move on the the next post. No need for me to spout off about my beliefs or to point out the obvious errors in thinking of other members. Unless of course they start spouting off saying their idea actually work, when in fact they have not even built it yet.




Edit: That is just down right rude, to post something then erase it. Think before you first hit the submit button. Do you want to post or not?

[Grimer]

Nonsense? It isn't nonsense; ...

Yes it is.

[Grimer]

...
I believe very strongly that gravity is conservative and cannot be the prime mover source of energy for any PM wheel. ...

Even though I obviously don't share your belief, Jim, I admire the way you stick to your guns on what must be the opinion of a small minority on this forum.

As a matter of interest are you aware of any other members who also take the view that gravity "cannot be the prime mover source of energy for any PM wheel".