A new concept on a Gravity powered Machine(Non-Perpetual)

I usually dwell on the deepest and most impossible problems like the origin and meaning of life... my idea of going towards more practical and immediate matters is to enquire into the end condition of our universe... Starting on Earth I immediately think of expansion of production and living facilities and I reach out into the solar system noticing that the economical and civililized way to the next solar system is harvesting and using solar power in the way Freeman Dyson suggested. Building a sphere around our sun collecting its output in a single ray towards next solar system theres really no need of having anything else in our original system left behind so I suggest we reduce all debrise (yes I include planets) to molecules travelling with us in the ray: At next solar system we repeat the process to produce a stronger ray. Cities in a Dyson Ray can accelerate towards the speed of light since there (probably) will not be much friction in the ray,making intergalactic travel possible: Time passes very slowly for Dyson Cities. Eventually all there is are rays and cities and this will affect the fabric of space in some ways and ...
Eh...Im off topic? Sorry! Ill return to Earth immedeately: BRB!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Even though your comments fly a bit offtopic,your comments have lot of usable Meanings to it.

We need to really develop more efficient cable induction systems even if it's challenging.
I am enforcing my full effort to make my gravity power chargers as compact as possible for future sustainability.
What I have learnt from this forum is try to bring out new innovative ideas and then make extremly heavy effort to remove the difficulties in ideas.

Nothing is achieved without hard work.
The forum due to your contribution has also provided intelligent Forum members ideas for future sustainable Electric transportation.

Thanks!

Page 138 and 139 seems to be one of the best meaningful information content of this thread til now!
Ha Ha Ha!

SigurdV,you didn't replied to my reply on my concept of Gravity power on page 2 of the thread on Artificial photosynthesis!,of coarse through message OR comment on blog on Bessler Wheels Forum website.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What time is it? I look at my watch...Damn its stopped! Time to change battery.
And i must transport myself somewhere in order to do that.
These days there are batteries everywhere and you forget to charge or change them...
Why dont we include ALL batteries in the induction theme?

Where was I when my thinking was interrupted? (Lol!) I was wondering why people travel!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is this what you refere to?If not please repeat the question in here:Travelling should be minimized

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

"To understand better,you may neglect all other comments accept all of my comments in the thread you are referring to.
Other all comments will confuse you.
Also note that I have 2 different ideas of Gravity engine for which I have 2 different threads on two different sections in forum.

Or the best option,
I have mentioned all my research in well explainable manner on my blog:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/weblog.php?w=7"
How far has your work progressed? Is a small prototype to demonstrate the principle far away?

 

Theories has been known to be slightly incorrect before, and I applaud your testing of the theory that the work done by a falling object is equivalent to the work done in moving it back irrespectively of HOW the object travels and WHAT effects it causes on its surroundings while it travels!
((((Perhaps in the fall it might clear the way from obstructions making it easier to put it back))))
Good scientific thinking! Dont accept theory on faith... Test it!

 

SidardV,
One of the concept is proved through experimental setup.
Small Prototype is being made.

Other concept on which you had doubts still needs to be converted into a proper mechanism.

Since the concepts are based on the regular laws of physics or taken from nature,there is 100% gaurantee that the concept will work except for probable possible problematic frictional and entropy losses.
The two concepts do not create any new physics,they only convert Gravitational Energy into Electrical energy and a energy conversion process is not against laws of thermodynamics or laws of energy conservation.
That is why I called them "Non- Perpetual".

As you know Non-Intelluctual people people stupidly relate/consider Gravity engines to PMM.How stupid this assumed relation sounds which do not have any proof or logic.

There are many jokers in society who are trying to make PMM (Perpetual motion machine) and misleading people,which are creating problems to real Scientists.

 

Made by whom?

I would point out that many coils in the hill the ball (magnatized I assume) rolls down costs a lot of money. They only get a tiny fraction of the energy gravity gives the ball - I.e. it will roll down the hill with almost exactly the same acceleration as if the coils were not there. Thus most (99%?) of the energy invested to lifting the ball to the top of the hill will be converted into kinetic energy of the rolling ball, not electric energy in the coils.

The reason ALL electrical generators are circular in form, not linear, is that they can operate continuously, not briefly and then wait for the ball to be taken back to the top of the hill.

Economically both the intermittent use of much larger number of coils linearly deployed down a long hill vs a dozen or so in continuous use in conventional circular generator PLUS the extremely low conversion of the gravitational energy release (probably <1%) as it almost all goes into KE of the rolling ball makes anyone seriously suggesting this "generator" either extremely ignorant OR insane.

Which are you (if not both)?

 

BillyT,my question is not why generators are only rotary?
They are not made for sliding motion, as per my requirnments because no machine or extremly few machines demanded that before.

Secondly,
You might have pointed right,if friction and low genertor efficiency is considered:but that has to be seen though practical testing.This is the concept which isn't mechanismisically tested.Even if most energy might be only used as sliding motion,it would still show that it is possible to extract more gravitational energy and convert to a energy needed for motion.

However my another concept described on "Alternative Theories" is been verified as correct because it's noticeable in daily nature activities,as well as verified through very simple experimental setup.Actually it was not needed to check it experimentally because of its obviousness,however I need to reduce back EMF and frictional losses.For any machine the most problematic thing is entropy frictional losses and Back EMF losses which needs to be reduced.

 

First:Its not impossible to generate power from gravity! There is power generated from tidal waves...
this power originates from the gravity of the Moon rotating around the earth.

Second: Its the principle Im interested in, the prize of the apparatus involved is irrelevant .

Third: Is the work done to lift the ball EXACTLY equivalent to the work done by the ball on the way down
IRRESPECTIVELY of how long the way down is and what happens on the way?

I have seen no answer to this question. Suppose the ball travels around the earth a couple of times before its back down on the ground?
Doesnt it produce work by moving molecules out of the way,and how much electricity is generated in a very thick coil?
The ball might also produce power by pressing and releasing buttons along the way...

 

I think,I had discussed this clearly in both my threads on both of my concepts on this forum.You may not have seen or understood it properly.
However,you may see my blog articles:
1)http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/weblog_entry.php?e=153

And

2)http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/weblog_entry.php?e=151

which summarises all points properly.

"There are 95 percent chances that working Gravity engines should work on the principle that the Gravity engine/Gravity wheel systems are innovatively designed to take in (consume) much more Gravitational energy than what energy needed to lift heavy ball upward."

 

Then the person proposing such a scheme does not understand the "regular laws of physics."

If it perpetually creates energy from a static gravitational (or magnetic, or electrical) field then it is a perpetual motion machine.

 

Yours this comment shows the Typical thinking of a Persion whose concept of physics is really bad and cannot think out of box and who want to close jobs of scientists.Sorry I did not wanted to hurt anyone but this is what I feel.

I mentioned many times everywhere that real Gravity engines are not Perpetual Motion Machines.
But what to do?
This virus called "Perpetual" has killed people's ability to think properly.
Real Gravity engines should convert Gravitational energy into electrical energy.
They do not generate any new energy.

They should work on basic rule that

"There are 95 percent chances that working Gravity engines should work on the principle that the Gravity engine/Gravity wheel systems are innovatively designed to take in (consume) much more Gravitational energy than what energy needed to lift heavy ball upward."

Offcoarse this needs Innovative and detailing thinking power to design such a engine.

If you substract total Gravitational energy input from the energy needed to lift heavy balls up in a gravity wheel,you get some net gravitational energy which is the net energy input to the system(input after subtraction) which can be converted to electrical energy.This is the scientific basis for any real Gravity engine.And hence real Gravity engines are not perpetual and do not violate Laws of energy conservation,simply because these gravity engines will use gravitational energy as net input, for a balanced Energy equation.

I started working on Gravity engines 5 years back when I was not aware of this word called "Perpetual",but I was not foolish enough to not know the Law of conservation of energy,and was well aware of the challenge of converting this static energy into electricity.

No textbook says that Gravity engines are Perpetual.It is your's and people's own new law which is not realistic.

In gravity engines,gravitational energy should converts to electrical energy just like tidal wave energy due to moon's gravity is converted to electrical energy.Thats it.

A perpetual motion machine either makes new energy OR gives more output than input,which is impossible to achieve.
If a engine converts Gravitational energy into electrical energy or any other form of energy,can it be called Perpetual Motion Machine?
First read the Defination of Perpetual Motion Machines on wikipedia's website and then make such comments.

When you make such NONSENSICAL claims of Gravity engines as Perpetual Motion Machine,are you telling gravitational energy to keep quiet and to not to be converted into electrical energy or any other form of energy?

If this is the case then tidal energy caused due to gravitaional energy conversion into tidal motion should only be science fiction.

Tidal power is extracted from the Earth's oceanic tides; tidal forces are periodic variations in gravitational attraction exerted by celestial bodies.Would you then call a Tidal gravitational energy conversion machine as Perpetual Motion Machine?

That is why I say that world is becoming more mad mad mad,suppresing real inventions by creating their own rules that violate laws of physics.

 

The theory behind Gravity engines is interesting and maybe it should be continued in:http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=113803
Where Amans concept is presented. Or perhaps: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=113547&page=6 A thread I just noticed.

Tidal power depends on gravity, yes , but also on movement. If moon and earth stopped moving around the sun I think generating tidal power could go on...And the gravitational fields should be static. But if earth stopped rotating then tidal waves stop moving. But not because earths gravity field stopped rotating, if it ever did, but because the water moon attracts no longer is transported anywhere by rotation.

Movement,then, is necessary for gravity engines, is the movement of the ball sufficient?

 

"Want to close jobs of scientists?" What does that even mean?

Like I said before, if gravity engines convert STATIC gravitational fields to electrical (or any other form of ) ENERGY then they are perpetual motion machines (or over-unity machines if you prefer.)

That's fine. If you are converting DYNAMIC changes in gravity fields to energy then you are changing one form of energy into another. Work is being done on a system, and some of that work is extracted and turned into another form of work. In the tidal power example, the moon lifts and drops the oceans, and power can be extracted from that motion. Energy is removed from the moon, and its kinetic energy is converted to a different form of energy; hence it slows down.

However, any system that uses complex collections of wheels spinning/balls dropping without the influence of a measurable external change in gravitational potentials is a perpetual motion machine. There are a great many examples. None have worked.

 

Thanks sigurdV for the appreciation.The thread you just saw is my another concept of gravity engine.

I didn't understood what you want to ask?The movement of the balls is offcoarse guided by earth's gravity in the analogous example of principle of working of my engine.

 

Not always!!!
It depends on the approach you are using.

I will proove you wrong.

Let us discuss my that another idea on gravity engine.

For example,If there is a 1 kg of solid powder to be lifted upwards,I need X amount of work done upwards.If I have to push 2 Kg of solid powder downwards,I need to consume X plus X (2X)amount of Gravitational energy.

Net energy consumed = 2 X -X =X
Which is then converted to Net electrical energy Output.This is what one of the way of satisfacting the Principle,

Mostly real Gravity engines should work on the principle that the Gravity engine/Gravity wheel systems are innovatively designed to take in (consume) much more Gravitational energy than what energy needed to lift heavy ball upward.

Now notice that this cannot be achieved when such a overcommable resistance gradient occurs only with respect to time vertically.In other words,you need your system to be in a cyclic circular path OR in other words the gradient should occur in a continuous circular cyclic path.

I have developed a mechanism to achieve this cyclic process but it's a secret until It is published in official gazette.Actual engine will not use powder ok:::this is just an analogy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's talk of Principle of minimum Potential energy and Creep.

Again I will proove you wrong!

I guess you know what is meant by creep and Body force(self weight).

I guess you know what is stress(resistance to deformation),atomic dislocation and strain.

Note that creep,self weight,stress are not new things which I am proposing,and are foundations of structural engineering.

Refer rough analogous sketch on

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59145126@N07/6927929850/

The splashing of water resistance (overcomming of water resistance)is quiet similar to the Overcomming of cantilever beam resistance by the central weight loading.The machenism of failure of two column supported beam(Simply supported beam) works similarly.Let weight W be loaded at centre.The overcomeability of a good beam should be less at initial stage.Initially there will be allmost an equal and opposite reaction from the beam for the weight loading,with little energy spent for deformation.Slowly ATOMIC Dislocation takes place(slippage of atomic planes/slippage of grain boundaries)and a point reaches where stress become unbearable(stress is resistance to deformation).As the stress become unbearable,there will be minimum equal and opposite reaction for the weight loading and then the most amount of continuous gravitational energy will be used to overcome this beam resistance/stress and finally the beam breaks.This is analogous to what happens in my engine with the exception of the speed at which all this happens.This is what I learnt in Material Science subject.No good material science Professor in machenical engineering would deny this.
The speed of this similar process is actually relatively fast,occurs in extended nanoseconds time in my engine whereas in beams it is very low speed [It occurs in beams due to mainly Creep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creep_(deformation) ]

So my engine does not go against laws of physics.In fact what I have told here about mechanism of Creep due to stress becoming unbearable is the backbone of structural engineering and the first question for an interview could be "how beams fail under self weight load and external weight load."My technology does not bend physics but uses it in a altogether different way.

Defination of analogy:The word analogy can also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves.

Actual engine details will be out once it is published in official Gazzete on International patent office website.it is really a simple concept.

The idea behind the overcommable resistance is to extend time spent by gravity to act on a heavy object/ball by a few nanoseconds due to the slowing down of the heavy ball speed due to resistance offered.The more the time gravity acts at a particular height(H=H1),the more the gravity energy gained to overcome resistance (splashing the water resistance in analogous example given) as well to rotate the half cycle generator rotor.

Note that in the sketch example,water resistance only acts in downward direction and do not act in uoward direction.
--------------------------------
The mechanism of creep depends on temperature and stress created due to weight loading on a structural member(many times,the weight loading is only self weight). The various methods are:

Bulk diffusion (Nabarro-Herring creep)

Climb — here the strain is actually accomplished by climb(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dislocation#Dislocation_climb)

Climb-assisted glide — here the climb is an enabling mechanism, allowing dislocations to get around obstacles

Grain boundary diffusion (Coble creep)(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coble_creep)

Thermally activated glide — e.g., via cross-slip

Just a note so that you do not confuse: Phenomeneon similar to Creep and "not creep" occurs in the actual engine.

 

Never heard that before ...lifting yes, but dropping?

If we could tap the gravity field itself through some contraption... not some large scale movement...then earth should loose mass. So the contraption wouldnt be a perpetum mobile.

 

Absolutely Wrong Trippy,
god will read this:

Now notice that this cannot be achieved when such a overcommable resistance gradient occurs only with respect to time vertically.In other words,you need your system to be in a cyclic circular path OR in other words the gradient should occur in a continous circular cyclic path.

I have developed a mechanism to achieve this cyclic process but it's a secret until It is published in official gazette.Actual engine will not use powder ok:::this is just an analogy.