Nice work !! Maybe you should try putting another elastic band and dc motor on the lower output shaft and use it as a generator.. DC motors work as generators too. Increase the pulley ratio for the generator side.. Then You can compare the input-out to output energy.
Thanks Norm, Sorry for the delay in reply. I had not seen the comments until now. (30/01/15) I found that twin mechanisms 90 deg out of phase, balance out and negate the input lifting forces.
Congratulations friend, has shown many things with this realization: you have a lot of salt in the head and gears are well oiled despite your age, I think like me; your implementation is effective and I also want to try a similar, I love it and I thank you for the suggestion that you gave me.
well done friend, great demonstration, i agree - try throwing a gear train on the out-put or perhaps a planetary gear system to up the RPMs and then to a generator of some sort, would love to see what the C.O.P would be! cheers!
wow explained it better than skinner could himself ...please make a better version and show us it generate a larger dynamo power while drawing less run energy ..thank you
It is clear that if the input pivot arrangement was changed to one that pulsated while the pivot was kept vertically all the time rather than slanting, the top weight would not need to go up and down which is totally unnecessary in this machine and the circulation would have been kept. I am sure that a similar arrangement could be designed such that the lower weight would not change height during its circulation.
if either of the weights are not lifted up against gravity then how can gravity act on them to pull them back down?? this is a gravity harvesting machine, to keep a mass falling as gravity is pulling it down the mass has to come back up in order to fall again.
Hook up the bottom axle to a generator and have that generator run the little motor at the top. If it runs continuously then you have over unity. If you can't run it without a power supply, then the design is only an interesting toy.
Very nice replication ! Most people dont understand well the skinner effect.... i work a lot on some replication of skinner device, and also on other gravity machine, and tell me if i am wrong, the upper weigt have a lot to do in the system, because it act like a counterweight like in a lever system, helping the gravity force to push the lower weight ! the weight of both must match, otherwise you lost lot of gain, if its well balance the input can be multiplied by a factor of x to reach overunity !
the upper weight is the first stage of gravity harvesting. it does the same thing the second stage does, only the first stage provides the power to drive the second stage. I haven't thought about the first weight acting as a counter weight but you may be correct, the weight may counter balance keeping the whole system from destroying it's self. the beginning stage uses input energy to actuate a lever, to use leverage to lift the first weight to a posistion where gravity can act on it, pulling it down in a spiral rotation, it continually does this and the first weight keeps lifting and falling. then the energy of the first stage rotating mass drives the second stage, the second stage being the same as the first only there is more power now to lift a larger mass using the next lever arm with the larger mass on it. you can keep doing this, adding more stages, and keep amplifying till your spinning a army tank, all from only the first stage input power. it amplifies because this method can harvest gravity.
@@rmendes2mendes915 Gravity Harvesting ? A hydropower station certainly harvests gravity but the ultimate energy input comes from the Sun . What is the ultimate energy input of this device , only the tiny motor ? In order to harvest gravity something must fall from a high position to a lower position and in order to reset , energy is required to lift it back up to the higher position .
@@dongraham4760 The ultimate energy input as you put it can be many different forms. this is a gravity harvesting device that uses a form of energy, in this case a motor but you can use anything that has a force really. Then it takes that energy and uses it to actuate a lever, the lever uses leverage to manipulate a mass into a posistion where gravity can act on it, it then falls, when it falls it doesn't just fall straight down it spirals down creating a circular motion, but before it reaches the bottom the lever acts again to lift the mass again back into that position again so that gravity can act on it again. this is a continuous process, you keep lifting a mass using leverage and gravity keeps puling it back down. but there is another effect created, rotational energy, mass spinning. this first stage drives the second stage in the same way only its the rotational energy from the first stage being used to actuate the next lever to do the very same thing the first stage does. and that answers your question, something is falling from a high position to a lower position, the mass you just lifted up. and it resets when it lifts the mass again. energy amplification is created in the oscillation, rotation. you can do this in other ways too, see Milkovic oscillator, another gravity harvesting machine.
@@rmendes2mendes915 I am sorry , you are obviously not an engineer ! You cannot defeat the laws of nature as this device claims to do . You use the word "lift" and in order to use gravity to drive anything the weight or whatever must start from a "high" and fall to a lower position , this results in an energy release of X . Now that weight can travel through a spiral motion as you say on the way down , it makes no difference . But in order for it to release energy again it MUST be lifted back up to the first position which takes an energy input of X + friction compensation the elaborate mechanism creates. I'll say it again , you cannot defeat nature ! There is no device on earth , and never will be that produces more energy than is put into it . In fact there is no device on earth where you can extract the same amount of energy that you put into it . The equation of the Universe : Energy in = Energy out + losses (friction etc) In this equation is the death of perpetual motion devices or over unity devices . And as for the Milkovic oscillator, once again you are not an engineer and I know exactly how this "miracle " device works and it ain't no miracle ! And it is not harvesting gravity ! The swinging pendulum which must be constantly maintained with a push just varies the bias of a cross beam by transfering the pendulum variable load (by swinging) causing the beam to "teeter totter " a small amount . Big deal ! There is NO energy or work magnification involved and all that is happening is that the effort going into maintaining the pendulum swing is transfered into an up and down motion of the beam at it's other end . Exactly the same energy "released" - losses as is put in. And as for Milkovic himself , a bigger self promoter I have never seen . He has even recommended "himself " for the Nobel Prize for his invention , WOW ! www.milkovicpendulum.com/iniciative_for_the_nobel_prize_award_in_physics_nomination_en.html The only thing I have seen where his miracle pendulum is used is in his water pump but in order for it to pump water a large heavy pendulum must be kept oscillating continuously and requires a push on every swing . This is energy input and does have a mechanical advantage ,a lever , but no free energy . He claims 1200 liters per hour on his enormous pump ,big deal , there are hand pumps all round the country that can easily do that and far simpler .
@@dongraham4760 your mind just refuses to understand what I am saying and what is going on with these new energy devices. here I will make the letters larger in case you are having a hard time reading. these are not perpetual motion devices, they do not break the laws of physics. Why? because the energy they produce is simply coming from a different source than mainstream science wants to admit. because if it is true and you can harvest energy from other sources other than what the world has to pay for then you get shut down by the energy cartels and governments. they will not allow any new energy sources to be used unless it is they who do it and sell it to you. it's not magic, the energy you get is just coming from a new source, not breaking any laws of nature. got it?? understand now? or do I have to write it in braile and shove it up your ass. your brain dead statement that there are no devices on earth that can produce more energy out than what is put into it has already been done by many people, lutec, newman, bedini, and lots of others, and all of them are simply extracting energy from other sources with their machines, the machine taps into the new energy source and you get more out than you put in because the new energy source enters the device. no laws being defeated here. and I actually am a engineer, I build electric vehicles of my own design. I together with two friends have build, re produced devices which extract energy out of the charged atmosphere and puts out twice the power than what it takes to run it. all you need to do to discover these new energy sources for yourself Is just pull your head our of your ass, research, and experiment
If it were overunity the output would be more than enough to drive the input, but once again we have all the hard work of building a machine but the easy work of connecting the output to the input mysteriously missing and an external power source driving it instead. I WONDER WHY...
I had no intention of proving overunity l was just explaining how Skinner's drive converted balanced linear motion to gravity assisted rotation. Regarding over unity, the Skinner mechanism was driving heavy workshop machinery with a 1/4hp motor via a cotton thread. It's very easy to be an armchair sceptic.
The torque gain from this small device is too small to overcome the losses incurred in driving a looped generator. But I have no doubt that Skinner's multiple set up produced "over unity" power.
Cool video. I'm curious...you said the power input but have you ever found a way to test the power output of the machine? I'd be very curious to know...thank you.
Jacob Bassett Hi Jacob, I did try comparing input to output by the time talen to lift a weight over a given distance, with the mechanism locked together (like a flywheel) or running with the Skinner principle. I also tried comparing the torque with an alloy disk in the adjustable field proximity of a permanent magnet. On my small device, the mechanical advantage was only apparent during the initial load period. However,the Skinner machine was massive and had four stages balancing out the input load.
you don't have to create any kind of high tech methods to test power in compared to power out. just use your fingers and feel the power coming out of the drive motor and compare it to the power at the output .
the device is replicated wrong. you need to use a spring or differential gears to get it to work right. your tilt only work at one angle, my device works at any angle. i use a spring between the bottom rotor and the angled shaft. a differential gear system would work better. the device is ridiculously simple. skinner had a four in one machine.
perhaps not but with a spring, you can stall the output and the input still turn. your can't do that with yours but my replica can. i have watched the skinner black and white video in detail and found out the device is really simple. my version is far simpler than your and works the way it could work. i tried the crap linkage universal joint at first but realized that it didnt' work well and discarded it in favior of a big powerful spring that support the effect at 360 degree circle at any angle and does not lock up or get stuck like yours.
Thanks for your interest. I dismantled this device and built a second one, before properly testing its output torque. However, a twin mechanism correctly timed needs minimal input power.
Sir, I am older than you are and not necessarily wiser, but when young I learnt that gravitational field is conservative and the vector integral between two points is a constant irrespective of the path taken. If the vector integral is over a closed path then the integral is zero. This means that you cannot get any energy out of gravity when you are moving items around a closed path and that is what you are doing. Keep up your spirit , but have a rest and reconsider this work. I suggest you go and enjoy yourself building some escapements of clocks made by John Harrison and George Daniels, it is very rewarding , storing energy in weight and springs and letting gravity ran a pendulum for a few days.
+Carmel Pule' Incidentally , I wish to congratulate you at the contents of this machine with a pulsating input which shows so clearly that a input Flat reciprocating function as a sine and a cosine is , this machine illustrates the positive and negative going rotations contained in these two very popular mathematical functions. This machine in this video did show that like a single phase induction motor with a flat sinusoidal input will not start, unless it is given a particular push in a desired direction. This demonstration in this video is MUCH more than the explanation of Skinner's machine, but what is contained in the two basic mathematics function as the flat , reciprocating sine and cosine which are made up of two three dimensional rotating functions which this machine eventually followed. Interesting enough it also indicated the delay lag when single phase electric motors ar loaded. Such machine should find its way in the halls of our schools where children would learn about the invisible and silent beauty of our universe. Well done Sir,
Carmel, I have just seen your comment. This model was built to illustrate the principal behind Mr William Skinner's very effective gravity drive. I suggest that you watch my latest and final video on this subject. With four identical two stage systems aligned at 90 degrees to each other, Mr Skinner was able to completely balance out the lifting efforts of the input drive. A local large scale replication of this mechanism produces immense torque from a comparatively tiny power input. A scientific law is only valid until it is disproved. (I've never heard of Harrison or Daniels, but designed and built various clock escapements with Meccano when I was a child)
Hi Michael, There is a slight increase in current with an applied load as kinetic energy is expended. However, as I've shown in another video this small pulsing current can be balanced out. Current drain then remains minimal until the gravitational torque advantage is overloaded. My apologies for the delay.
If it is generating more power than it is consuming as claimed where is the penalty ! ie Where does that extra energy come from . If it comes from gravity then exactly the same amount of energy is require to restore what ever "fell" under gravity back to its original position so it can "fall " again . Energy is not free and it comes with a penalty , you can never harvest 100% of it and it certainly cannot be generated without a consummate input of effort as this device claims .
If it’s generating more useable work than it’s consuming, (and know it’s not), then by definition it would be able to power the upper motor. Or the upper motor becomes redundant. In the 1938 vids Skinner’s demo never powered it from the ‘over unity’ power. Skinner’s description sounded like a mechanical amplifier. His 1/8 HP input returned 12x more HP output. Come on. He could’ve said 1.5x and it’d be just as impressive and impossible.
For this to be any useful, it would have to produce it's own power to operate in isolation otherwise it is just another failed attempt at making an overunity device. Good attempt at the replication however.
you are incorrect, he has demonstrated the skinner device except instead of the top lever arm rotating in a circle he is just using a back and forth motion, which causes the drive motor to have to lift more weight. your statement that it would have to produce it's own power and operate in isolation in incorrect. this is a gravity harvesting device, it has to have a source of power to operate the first stage. to drive a lever arm to off set a weight so gravity can act on it. then it is the second stage that gets driven by the first stage, and because in the first stage gravity entered the system you have gained energy, now you use that energy gain to drive the next stage, which because of the energy gain you can drive even larger weights. and now you have even more energy gain. the device is useful just as it is, it does what it is supposed to do, it harvest gravity as a energy source which you can use to do work. and it does produce it's own power in the form of rotational kenetic energy, why do you think it has to operate in isolation?? it does put out more power than it uses because it is getting power from another source, gravity. it is not a failed attempt, the only failure here is your mind not being able to see and understand what is really happening.
@@rmendes2mendes915 Nice word salad that demonstrates you do not understand simple Physics...i.e. The Laws of Thermodynamics explain why this device cannot produce unity, nor produce more power out than in... " it is not a failed attempt, the only failure here is your mind not being able to see and understand what is really happening" My mind is just fine! I understand physics and why this is not possible. You never built one and just make comments that are nonsense. Nonsense like these comments you made that clearly show a contradiction in your thinking...: "your statement that it would have to produce it's own power and operate in isolation in incorrect." The Contradiction... " and it does produce it's own power in the form of rotational kenetic energy, why do you think it has to operate in isolation?? it does put out more power than it uses because it is getting power from another source, gravity. " You commented it can't run in on its own "Isolation" and then you commented it produces more power than it takes in, which is bullshit! You can't say in one sentence it can't run in isolation and later comment it produces it's own power! That means it can run in isolation if it actually worked! Get off your ass and build one instead of making comments about things you have no clue about! You should have paid attention in school!
@@valveman12 you understand physics? that just means you believe everything you are told by the physics teacher. and that is where you and others come to the end of the road, the road block for your mind. all new energy devices are labeled the same way, we are told they cannot break the laws of physics ( which are laws made by fallible man) I have not built the skinner device yet but I did build the Milkovic oscillator which does the same thing, it harvest gravity therefor amplifying the force you put in. there are many ways to create power for very cheep and if you don't count having had to build the device to harvest the energy then yes you can say it is free . build the milkovic oscillator, and test it. you will see that it works. leave your physics at the door until you see it working then you will see it doesn't break the laws of physics, the device is simply getting its amplified energy from another source, and that source is gravity.
@@valveman12 The force of a weighted object is greater than the force needed to lift it in these machines as it’s not being lifted from a standstill but a parabolic motion that assists the momentum and aids the lift. Imagine lifting a piano vs pushing a piano on wheels down a street.. Now rethink it with gravitational forces pushing it forward in this thought experiment (instead of downward in reality). Yet these machines also incorporate shaped weights and momentous orbits to add to the effects gravity has on the motion.
@@Null-Red-Blue "The force of a weighted object is greater than the force needed to lift it in these machines as it’s not being lifted from a standstill but a parabolic motion that assists the momentum and aids the lift." *Really?* *let me know when you build your machine and post a video.😂🤣😂*
You tell us how much power was being consumed to get the mechanic working. Why did you not show us the mechanism doing work. What is the point of a demonstration that only shows the device moving. You had the gear to show what was going in but nothing to show us what was coming out . Nar ... don,t believe it. Gravity machine is just another name for perpetual motion machine.
Mr. Quirey, you are a true gem. Thanks a lot Sir
Excellent explanation, research and hardwork. Guys like you can make difficult looking things so simple
Thanks, Anil.
I'm glad the little demo helped.
It's an interesting concept.
Nice work !! Maybe you should try putting another elastic band and dc motor on the lower output shaft and use it as a generator.. DC motors work as generators too. Increase the pulley ratio for the generator side.. Then You can compare the input-out to output energy.
is nice job and explaination ...I see the parabola of... centrifugal force...of the mass..
Oh wow, thanks for the video, this mechanism works great for lifting heavy objects!
Many thanks Dave - a singular and super enlightening demo! Good to see you on the Energetic Forum
Thanks Norm,
Sorry for the delay in reply. I had not seen the comments until now. (30/01/15)
I found that twin mechanisms 90 deg out of phase, balance out and negate the input lifting forces.
Congratulations friend, has shown many things with this realization: you have a lot of salt in the head and gears are well oiled despite your age, I think like me; your implementation is effective and I also want to try a similar, I love it and I thank you for the suggestion that you gave me.
Thanks, Armando.
At 75 there's still a teenager leaping around inside :-)
Hope you can experiment on a larger scale.
well done friend, great demonstration, i agree - try throwing a gear train on the out-put or perhaps a planetary gear system to up the RPMs and then to a generator of some sort, would love to see what the C.O.P would be! cheers!
whoever you are thank you for this great video!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Very helpful, i plan fabricated. thank you so much, i feel this going to reduce electricity expenses. thank you mister
Awesome! Cheers
wow explained it better than skinner could himself ...please make a better version and show us it generate a larger dynamo power while drawing less run energy ..thank you
It is clear that if the input pivot arrangement was changed to one that pulsated while the pivot was kept vertically all the time rather than slanting, the top weight would not need to go up and down which is totally unnecessary in this machine and the circulation would have been kept. I am sure that a similar arrangement could be designed such that the lower weight would not change height during its circulation.
if either of the weights are not lifted up against gravity then how can gravity act on them to pull them back down?? this is a gravity harvesting machine, to keep a mass falling as gravity is pulling it down the mass has to come back up in order to fall again.
Dave, well done model... Thank you so much.
Thanks for your encouragement :-)
I'd like to see someone build and test a scaled up version.
Hook up the bottom axle to a generator and have that generator run the little motor at the top. If it runs continuously then you have over unity. If you can't run it without a power supply, then the design is only an interesting toy.
Супер! !!!
Obviously the next thing is to arrange an electromagnetic storage system around the revolving mechanism
cool demo...great to see.
Super!
I would not actually call it overunity. If it were 100% balanced and frictionless, it would be a great amplifier.
Is an elliptical orbit necessary for the upper weight only or also for the top lever shaft?
How many times is the lower weight heavier than the upper weight?
Very nice replication ! Most people dont understand well the skinner effect.... i work a lot on some replication of skinner device, and also on other gravity machine, and tell me if i am wrong, the upper weigt have a lot to do in the system, because it act like a counterweight like in a lever system, helping the gravity force to push the lower weight ! the weight of both must match, otherwise you lost lot of gain, if its well balance the input can be multiplied by a factor of x to reach overunity !
the upper weight is the first stage of gravity harvesting. it does the same thing the second stage does, only the first stage provides the power to drive the second stage. I haven't thought about the first weight acting as a counter weight but you may be correct, the weight may counter balance keeping the whole system from destroying it's self. the beginning stage uses input energy to actuate a lever, to use leverage to lift the first weight to a posistion where gravity can act on it, pulling it down in a spiral rotation, it continually does this and the first weight keeps lifting and falling. then the energy of the first stage rotating mass drives the second stage, the second stage being the same as the first only there is more power now to lift a larger mass using the next lever arm with the larger mass on it. you can keep doing this, adding more stages, and keep amplifying till your spinning a army tank, all from only the first stage input power. it amplifies because this method can harvest gravity.
@@rmendes2mendes915 Gravity Harvesting ? A hydropower station certainly harvests gravity but the ultimate energy input comes from the Sun . What is the ultimate energy input of this device , only the tiny motor ? In order to harvest gravity something must fall from a high position to a lower position and in order to reset , energy is required to lift it back up to the higher position .
@@dongraham4760 The ultimate energy input as you put it can be many different forms. this is a gravity harvesting device that uses a form of energy, in this case a motor but you can use anything that has a force really. Then it takes that energy and uses it to actuate a lever, the lever uses leverage to manipulate a mass into a posistion where gravity can act on it, it then falls, when it falls it doesn't just fall straight down it spirals down creating a circular motion, but before it reaches the bottom the lever acts again to lift the mass again back into that position again so that gravity can act on it again. this is a continuous process, you keep lifting a mass using leverage and gravity keeps puling it back down. but there is another effect created, rotational energy, mass spinning. this first stage drives the second stage in the same way only its the rotational energy from the first stage being used to actuate the next lever to do the very same thing the first stage does. and that answers your question, something is falling from a high position to a lower position, the mass you just lifted up. and it resets when it lifts the mass again. energy amplification is created in the oscillation, rotation. you can do this in other ways too, see Milkovic oscillator, another gravity harvesting machine.
@@rmendes2mendes915 I am sorry , you are obviously not an engineer ! You cannot defeat the laws of nature as this device claims to do . You use the word "lift" and in order to use gravity to drive anything the weight or whatever must start from a "high" and fall to a lower position , this results in an energy release of X . Now that weight can travel through a spiral motion as you say on the way down , it makes no difference . But in order for it to release energy again it MUST be lifted back up to the first position which takes an energy input of X + friction compensation the elaborate mechanism creates.
I'll say it again , you cannot defeat nature ! There is no device on earth , and never will be that produces more energy than is put into it . In fact there is no device on earth where you can extract the same amount of energy that you put into it .
The equation of the Universe : Energy in = Energy out + losses (friction etc) In this equation is the death of perpetual motion devices or over unity devices .
And as for the Milkovic oscillator, once again you are not an engineer and I know exactly how this "miracle " device works and it ain't no miracle ! And it is not harvesting gravity ! The swinging pendulum which must be constantly maintained with a push just varies the bias of a cross beam by transfering the pendulum variable load (by swinging) causing the beam to "teeter totter " a small amount . Big deal ! There is NO energy or work magnification involved and all that is happening is that the effort going into maintaining the pendulum swing is transfered into an up and down motion of the beam at it's other end . Exactly the same energy "released" - losses as is put in. And as for Milkovic himself , a bigger self promoter I have never seen . He has even recommended "himself " for the Nobel Prize for his invention , WOW !
www.milkovicpendulum.com/iniciative_for_the_nobel_prize_award_in_physics_nomination_en.html
The only thing I have seen where his miracle pendulum is used is in his water pump but in order for it to pump water a large heavy pendulum must be kept oscillating continuously and requires a push on every swing . This is energy input and does have a mechanical advantage ,a lever , but no free energy . He claims 1200 liters per hour on his enormous pump ,big deal , there are hand pumps all round the country that can easily do that and far simpler .
@@dongraham4760 your mind just refuses to understand what I am saying and what is going on with these new energy devices. here I will make the letters larger in case you are having a hard time reading. these are not perpetual motion devices, they do not break the laws of physics. Why? because the energy they produce is simply coming from a different source than mainstream science wants to admit. because if it is true and you can harvest energy from other sources other than what the world has to pay for then you get shut down by the energy cartels and governments. they will not allow any new energy sources to be used unless it is they who do it and sell it to you. it's not magic, the energy you get is just coming from a new source, not breaking any laws of nature. got it?? understand now? or do I have to write it in braile and shove it up your ass. your brain dead statement that there are no devices on earth that can produce more energy out than what is put into it has already been done by many people, lutec, newman, bedini, and lots of others, and all of them are simply extracting energy from other sources with their machines, the machine taps into the new energy source and you get more out than you put in because the new energy source enters the device. no laws being defeated here. and I actually am a engineer, I build electric vehicles of my own design. I together with two friends have build, re produced devices which extract energy out of the charged atmosphere and puts out twice the power than what it takes to run it. all you need to do to discover these new energy sources for yourself Is just pull your head our of your ass, research, and experiment
If it were overunity the output would be more than enough to drive the input, but once again we have all the hard work of building a machine but the easy work of connecting the output to the input mysteriously missing and an external power source driving it instead. I WONDER WHY...
I had no intention of proving overunity l was just explaining how Skinner's drive converted balanced linear motion to gravity assisted rotation.
Regarding over unity, the Skinner mechanism was driving heavy workshop machinery with a 1/4hp motor via a cotton thread. It's very easy to be an armchair sceptic.
so would it be able to power itself after startup with a dynamo?
that is the interesting experiment to do:) nice build
The torque gain from this small device is too small to overcome the losses incurred in driving a looped generator. But I have no doubt that Skinner's multiple set up produced "over unity" power.
@@davidquirey6917 why has nobody replicated Skinners machine and improved upon it to make it run on itself and power a home ?
@@janadhikaar3057 Corporate greed
mechanical advantage != overunity .........cool though
Cool video. I'm curious...you said the power input but have you ever found a way to test the power output of the machine? I'd be very curious to know...thank you.
Jacob Bassett Hi Jacob, I did try comparing input to output by the time talen to lift a weight over a given distance, with the mechanism locked together (like a flywheel) or running with the Skinner principle. I also tried comparing the torque with an alloy disk in the adjustable field proximity of a permanent magnet. On my small device, the mechanical advantage was only apparent during the initial load period. However,the Skinner machine was massive and had four stages balancing out the input load.
you don't have to create any kind of high tech methods to test power in compared to power out. just use your fingers and feel the power coming out of the drive motor and compare it to the power at the output .
Hey, mate" did you get this as a little kit to put together, or just did it yourself"
One piece at a TIME.??
I hope it's better than your last one.."when it's running "
"The Skeptic. The skeptic is someone who has no faith in their own work." JB.
the device is replicated wrong. you need to use a spring or differential gears to get it to work right. your tilt only work at one angle, my device works at any angle. i use a spring between the bottom rotor and the angled shaft. a differential gear system would work better. the device is ridiculously simple. skinner had a four in one machine.
No springs or differential gears are required. Look at my last video for a more detailed explanation of the Skinner principle.
perhaps not but with a spring, you can stall the output and the input still turn. your can't do that with yours but my replica can. i have watched the skinner black and white video in detail and found out the device is really simple. my version is far simpler than your and works the way it could work. i tried the crap linkage universal joint at first but realized that it didnt' work well and discarded it in favior of a big powerful spring that support the effect at 360 degree circle at any angle and does not lock up or get stuck like yours.
Thank you very much for your video. Have you connected a little generator to the output shaft at the bottom?
Thanks for your interest.
I dismantled this device and built a second one, before properly testing its output torque. However, a twin mechanism correctly timed needs minimal input power.
Sir, I am older than you are and not necessarily wiser, but when young I learnt that gravitational field is conservative and the vector integral between two points is a constant irrespective of the path taken. If the vector integral is over a closed path then the integral is zero. This means that you cannot get any energy out of gravity when you are moving items around a closed path and that is what you are doing. Keep up your spirit , but have a rest and reconsider this work. I suggest you go and enjoy yourself building some escapements of clocks made by John Harrison and George Daniels, it is very rewarding , storing energy in weight and springs and letting gravity ran a pendulum for a few days.
+Carmel Pule' Incidentally , I wish to congratulate you at the contents of this machine with a pulsating input which shows so clearly that a input Flat reciprocating function as a sine and a cosine is , this machine illustrates the positive and negative going rotations contained in these two very popular mathematical functions.
This machine in this video did show that like a single phase induction motor with a flat sinusoidal input will not start, unless it is given a particular push in a desired direction. This demonstration in this video is MUCH more than the explanation of Skinner's machine, but what is contained in the two basic mathematics function as the flat , reciprocating sine and cosine which are made up of two three dimensional rotating functions which this machine eventually followed. Interesting enough it also indicated the delay lag when single phase electric motors ar loaded.
Such machine should find its way in the halls of our schools where children would learn about the invisible and silent beauty of our universe. Well done Sir,
Carmel, I have just seen your comment. This model was built to illustrate the principal behind Mr William Skinner's very effective gravity drive. I suggest that you watch my latest and final video on this subject. With four identical two stage systems aligned at 90 degrees to each other, Mr Skinner was able to completely balance out the lifting efforts of the input drive. A local large scale replication of this mechanism produces immense torque from a comparatively tiny power input.
A scientific law is only valid until it is disproved.
(I've never heard of Harrison or Daniels, but designed and built various clock escapements with Meccano when I was a child)
don't know what you are talking about, gravitational field? what field? if you want to call gravity a field well call it what you like. closed path?
Hi Dave, have you checked if the current draw goes up when you apply pressure to the output?
Hi Michael,
There is a slight increase in current with an applied load as kinetic energy is expended. However, as I've shown in another video this small pulsing current can be balanced out. Current drain then remains minimal until the gravitational torque advantage is overloaded. My apologies for the delay.
How do I contact you, I would like to build a Skinner device in 2023
How is it coming along? Me too,
@@reeferbeleafer9912 building my area.....machine next👍
If it is generating more power than it is consuming as claimed where is the penalty ! ie Where does that extra energy come from . If it comes from gravity then exactly the same amount of energy is require to restore what ever "fell" under gravity back to its original position so it can "fall " again . Energy is not free and it comes with a penalty , you can never harvest 100% of it and it certainly cannot be generated without a consummate input of effort as this device claims .
If it’s generating more useable work than it’s consuming, (and know it’s not), then by definition it would be able to power the upper motor. Or the upper motor becomes redundant.
In the 1938 vids Skinner’s demo never powered it from the ‘over unity’ power. Skinner’s description sounded like a mechanical amplifier. His 1/8 HP input returned 12x more HP output.
Come on. He could’ve said 1.5x and it’d be just as impressive and impossible.
@@larryscott3982 Exactly ! If he said it gained 1.00000001 x it would be spectacularly impressive and impossible .
OMG I THINK THAT'S IT
For this to be any useful, it would have to produce it's own power to operate in isolation otherwise it is just another failed attempt at making an overunity device. Good attempt at the replication however.
you are incorrect, he has demonstrated the skinner device except instead of the top lever arm rotating in a circle he is just using a back and forth motion, which causes the drive motor to have to lift more weight. your statement that it would have to produce it's own power and operate in isolation in incorrect. this is a gravity harvesting device, it has to have a source of power to operate the first stage. to drive a lever arm to off set a weight so gravity can act on it. then it is the second stage that gets driven by the first stage, and because in the first stage gravity entered the system you have gained energy, now you use that energy gain to drive the next stage, which because of the energy gain you can drive even larger weights. and now you have even more energy gain. the device is useful just as it is, it does what it is supposed to do, it harvest gravity as a energy source which you can use to do work. and it does produce it's own power in the form of rotational kenetic energy, why do you think it has to operate in isolation?? it does put out more power than it uses because it is getting power from another source, gravity. it is not a failed attempt, the only failure here is your mind not being able to see and understand what is really happening.
@@rmendes2mendes915
Nice word salad that demonstrates you do not understand simple Physics...i.e. The Laws of Thermodynamics explain why this device cannot produce unity, nor produce more power out than in...
" it is not a failed attempt, the only failure here is your mind not being able to see and understand what is really happening"
My mind is just fine! I understand physics and why this is not possible. You never built one and just make comments that are nonsense.
Nonsense like these comments you made that clearly show a contradiction in your thinking...:
"your statement that it would have to produce it's own power and operate in isolation in incorrect."
The Contradiction...
" and it does produce it's own power in the form of rotational kenetic energy, why do you think it has to operate in isolation?? it does put out more power than it uses because it is getting power from another source, gravity. "
You commented it can't run in on its own "Isolation" and then you commented it produces more power than it takes in, which is bullshit! You can't say in one sentence it can't run in isolation and later comment it produces it's own power! That means it can run in isolation if it actually worked!
Get off your ass and build one instead of making comments about things you have no clue about! You should have paid attention in school!
@@valveman12 you understand physics? that just means you believe everything you are told by the physics teacher. and that is where you and others come to the end of the road, the road block for your mind. all new energy devices are labeled the same way, we are told they cannot break the laws of physics ( which are laws made by fallible man) I have not built the skinner device yet but I did build the Milkovic oscillator which does the same thing, it harvest gravity therefor amplifying the force you put in. there are many ways to create power for very cheep and if you don't count having had to build the device to harvest the energy then yes you can say it is free . build the milkovic oscillator, and test it. you will see that it works. leave your physics at the door until you see it working then you will see it doesn't break the laws of physics, the device is simply getting its amplified energy from another source, and that source is gravity.
@@valveman12 The force of a weighted object is greater than the force needed to lift it in these machines as it’s not being lifted from a standstill but a parabolic motion that assists the momentum and aids the lift.
Imagine lifting a piano vs pushing a piano on wheels down a street..
Now rethink it with gravitational forces pushing it forward in this thought experiment (instead of downward in reality).
Yet these machines also incorporate shaped weights and momentous orbits to add to the effects gravity has on the motion.
@@Null-Red-Blue
"The force of a weighted object is greater than the force needed to lift it in these machines as it’s not being lifted from a standstill but a parabolic motion that assists the momentum and aids the lift."
*Really?* *let me know when you build your machine and post a video.😂🤣😂*
Приветствую.Кто понимает што говорит автор ролика,подскажите?
Титры с переводом включить
You tell us how much power was being consumed to get the mechanic working. Why did you not show us the mechanism doing work. What is the point of a demonstration that only shows the device moving. You had the gear to show what was going in but nothing to show us what was coming out . Nar ... don,t believe it. Gravity machine is just another name for perpetual motion machine.
he was showing us how the skinner gravity machine works he was not trying prove to us that it can harvest gravity. although it can.
Its no work..
Super es geht auch anders mit gleichem Ergebnis czcams.com/video/PND-GEPl84c/video.html
It's just a geared motor 😂😂 with low rotation and high torque at the output 😂😂 . Over unity O really Papa ??
😂😂😂