este es un gran video y demuestra principios que dado el nivel de corrupción del mundo actual no se desarrollarán.. ( perderían mucho, como otros inventos que ridiculizan y esconden) de tiempo en tiempo lo veo. cada uno a su manera lo debe replicar y aprovechar en silencio .
Ad a small electric motor to your machine and ad a pulley to a generator tie your generator to your motor and any amps left would be free energy close that gap grate idea you have hear needs to be expanded love the consept of your machine
When the action is slowed down in order to better observe the movements of the two suspended weights at the ends of the arm, it will be seen that these weights remain for trhe most part hanging down vertically. Is there an connection between these weights and the arm or are they merely mounted at te ends of the arm free to rotate under power frmo the small motor coupled ot one of the weights as can be seen. How then does the arm rotate with the two weights always handing down vertically? With the two weights hangind down vertically there would seem to be no torque causing rotation of the arm as these weights produce equal and opposite torques. So how does the arm rotate?
Ray I like your idea. Next is to determine how much torque you are getting at the shaft. I'm thinking if you connect a small generator to the shaft, you can check how much wattage you can produce. Nice work on the model.
Very interesting assembly. I've been researching, constructing and analyzing these and other constructions while ago. Now the order has changed and shortened. In the assembly you built all the kinematics ends with fulcrum normalized to cyclic dimension. This is gravity referenced leverage converter. In local motor's frame it still has to produce work by one revolution per main arm revolution. If you let orbital motor spin an 1:1 fixed gear to rotate an arm but motor stator positioned inside bearings itself will be referenced to gravity by extended weight; gravity opposes the load force but doesn't directly produces work. The biggest challenge which makes this contraption practically not applicable that arm's rates have to be reduced to allow to work this assembly on slowest possible rates to minimize inertial interference.
So you're using gravity and Leverage and at certain points and a a certain time in the rotation you're breaking symmetry and to cause constant rotation
This guy is deluding himself. Forget about the motor/chain assembly for a moment. Just letting the load (all those washers) free-fall from the 12 o'clock position will find it reaching the 9-10 o'clock position before gravity reverses it. All the motor is doing is providing the energy needed to complete the little 9 to 12 o'clock arc, then gravity can take over again. Just apply a little reverse-torque to the axle as it spins and you would immediately see how little power this system has through a full 360 degrees - no more than the motor is supplying! No free energy here.
I am convinced the principle is simply having more weight on the short end and compensated leverage on the long end. I don't know how you prefer to use this, it may require a model that runs without a motor, still I think you proved a significant principle. I have listed you in my History of perpetual motion machines on Quora, and your video is now featured as 'the best scientific evidence' on my Perpetual motion links on Quora. At first though I thought it was intentionally trying to take advantage of mass versus leverage which would be more clever. I have a notarized document from 2007--4 years earlier than your experiment, which shows use of the counterweight mass-vs-light-leverage principle. Anyway, I like your experiment perhaps you would like to investigate some things I have been investigating you seem to have better construction skills. For example, you might try duplicating my Swivel Perpetual Motion, searchable on CZcams (I think) under Evidence of Perpetual Motion. It would be nice to have assistance on verifying what I think I have already proved. I hope you try something else like your experiment except using my principles better, or perhaps even something without a motor. You might want to visit my select experiments channel: Select Machines: czcams.com/play/PLcttXCrYoAgP88CiJ3ibPqVl1FjlAAIdi.html And Real Perpetual Motioneer has the very best stuff including two of your videos.
So many of the people commenting here are not intelligent enough to understand what you are demonstrating. Maybe CZcams needs an IQ restriction for videos like this.
I've found that this does not have overunity. The output washer weights tended to balance the output and acted as a flywheel and not a true measurement.
So, even it is all even, the weight balance out the output, means the output as weight get less from the center to equal higher weight of an object. Can explain in layperson term that why it doesn't has OU? You mention unbalance which means two weight that is opposite and the mobile weight when what go up to go down, it converts into motion energy, the more motion energy that is balance to more motion energy. Well, it is about weight and motion energy that is in balance. If two side that is weight is exactly the same and motion energy which the gap diameter is exactly the same of two side. Same weight and different weight of two side don't create OU because of resistance which create friction to slow it down. So, it is because of resistance or lower than resist energy, if the mech. energy is lower than kinetic energy which the motion energy loops over as it gains by going down which lower input by going down and higher input by going up, so it is unbalance of down and up, so the lower unbalance, the OU can happen? So, unbalance produces resist and friction so it cancels out. So, OU needs negative resistance or zero resistance, not positive resist, no matter how small because that small will show how long before it stops, right. Ya can measure using rotate meter and to measure one half to another half, since the light senses the motion of rotate at different side, so it will recognize different number of two side. The down side and the up side, so both rotate number is different? So, the higher mass above higher mass, the gap different, the more the higher mass will fall faster to higher mass that is the ground so it is zero resist as work is already done by gap as it falls down, in compare to smaller gap that is higher mass to go farther from higher mass that is ground so the resist increase as work is being done by mech. energy. So, it is not even mech. energy on two side, but one side so mech. energy is resist energy in motion, it is still same resist.
Абромовичу, никогда не надоест - на "ЗАРЯДЕ" - такими роликами - серьёзные моменты, в технологиях пассивного преобразования СЕ - в эффективность - разбавлять. Вот и разбавляет.
mmh no gain - i believe that the whole system constitutes a flywheel and any heavy flywheel can be driven with a small motor. The final answer will be given by a generator driven from the output and the measurement of the corresponding output/input wattage.
Ray, are you still with us? I like your idea. Maybe add a pulley to the shaft and see if you can turn a small generator? - If so you might be able to close the loop on this thing.
Thanj you for your explanation. However i cannot agree with you that the arim rotates because of any imbalance on either side of the arm. The arim rotates due to the reaction of the small arms supporting the weights at the ends of main arm. This can be established by preventing one or the other of the small weights. As these are couple by a chain it makes no diference which weight is held.If any one of the weights is held, then the reaction on its pivot caused the main arm to move. Either thiat of if the small motor is of too low a power to cause the main arm to move up or down and the weight is still held locked, then the small motor will be forced to stall and stop.There is no overunity effect in this machine and from a study of all other machines for which over unity action has been claimed, there is also no over unity effect in any machine invented up to the present time and indeed there can be no such machine if it forms part of a closed system.
How can you say you have overunity when you didn't measure the input power, the motor, and compare that to the output power? You have not demonstrated overunity...
We don't believe in nothing. that not were accordig with 1irst and second law of Thermodinamics, perhaps one day we'll see msgnetics generators that works! I'm sure of this. I made a energy catcher but I myself don't know how this machine works! Is a wonderful and crazy generator!
Unfortunately it doesn't show overunity. It would show overunity if it could start on its own. But you have started it by hand push. Once in full rotation it only needs to cover the friction losses to keep running. And they negligible.
some very late info. since this video was just re-posted, i thought i would stop by, again. the operation of this apparatus was not very informative. in particular, the discontinuous, Determined-by gravity loading was a Joke. googletranslate
That's great, balanced working with gravity, definitely will give good results.
este es un gran video y demuestra principios que dado el nivel de corrupción del mundo actual no se desarrollarán.. ( perderían mucho, como otros inventos que ridiculizan y esconden) de tiempo en tiempo lo veo. cada uno a su manera lo debe replicar y aprovechar en silencio .
great demonstration of OU!!!
Ad a small electric motor to your machine and ad a pulley to a generator tie your generator to your motor and any amps left would be free energy close that gap grate idea you have hear needs to be expanded love the consept of your machine
This would be a GREAT "Torque Device" to run a generators .... with a few mods it would work great
When the action is slowed down in order to better observe the movements of the two suspended weights at the ends of the arm, it will be seen that these weights remain for trhe most part hanging down vertically. Is there an connection between these weights and the arm or are they merely mounted at te ends of the arm free to rotate under power frmo the small motor coupled ot one of the weights as can be seen. How then does the arm rotate with the two weights always handing down vertically? With the two weights hangind down vertically there would seem to be no torque causing rotation of the arm as these weights produce equal and opposite torques. So how does the arm rotate?
Ray I like your idea. Next is to determine how much torque you are getting at the shaft. I'm thinking if you connect a small generator to the shaft, you can check how much wattage you can produce. Nice work on the model.
Very interesting assembly.
I've been researching, constructing and analyzing these and other constructions while ago. Now the order has changed and shortened.
In the assembly you built all the kinematics ends with fulcrum normalized to cyclic dimension. This is gravity referenced leverage converter. In local motor's frame it still has to produce work by one revolution per main arm revolution.
If you let orbital motor spin an 1:1 fixed gear to rotate an arm but motor stator positioned inside bearings itself will be referenced to gravity by extended weight; gravity opposes the load force but doesn't directly produces work.
The biggest challenge which makes this contraption practically not applicable that arm's rates have to be reduced to allow to work this assembly on slowest possible rates to minimize inertial interference.
hello
@@avantevou1586 H311o!
esto me dejo fascinado
Fantastic very nice.
So you're using gravity and Leverage and at certain points and a a certain time in the rotation you're breaking symmetry and to cause constant rotation
How much time working withou stop?
This guy is deluding himself. Forget about the motor/chain assembly for a moment. Just letting the load (all those washers) free-fall from the 12 o'clock position will find it reaching the 9-10 o'clock position before gravity reverses it. All the motor is doing is providing the energy needed to complete the little 9 to 12 o'clock arc, then gravity can take over again. Just apply a little reverse-torque to the axle as it spins and you would immediately see how little power this system has through a full 360 degrees - no more than the motor is supplying! No free energy here.
I am convinced the principle is simply having more weight on the short end and compensated leverage on the long end. I don't know how you prefer to use this, it may require a model that runs without a motor, still I think you proved a significant principle. I have listed you in my History of perpetual motion machines on Quora, and your video is now featured as 'the best scientific evidence' on my Perpetual motion links on Quora. At first though I thought it was intentionally trying to take advantage of mass versus leverage which would be more clever. I have a notarized document from 2007--4 years earlier than your experiment, which shows use of the counterweight mass-vs-light-leverage principle. Anyway, I like your experiment perhaps you would like to investigate some things I have been investigating you seem to have better construction skills. For example, you might try duplicating my Swivel Perpetual Motion, searchable on CZcams (I think) under Evidence of Perpetual Motion. It would be nice to have assistance on verifying what I think I have already proved. I hope you try something else like your experiment except using my principles better, or perhaps even something without a motor.
You might want to visit my select experiments channel: Select Machines: czcams.com/play/PLcttXCrYoAgP88CiJ3ibPqVl1FjlAAIdi.html
And Real Perpetual Motioneer has the very best stuff including two of your videos.
www.google.com/search?q=MAGIC,+kevin+hay%27s+mechanical+alternating+gyroscopic+inertial+compression+system&sxsrf=ACYBGNQTz-SkKie1fv3DUqGb4iRK_3abow:1579316236395&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjNl4i6k4znAhXHqp4KHV0jAr0Q_AUoAXoECAsQAw&biw=1366&bih=608
So many of the people commenting here are not intelligent enough to understand what you are demonstrating. Maybe CZcams needs an IQ restriction for videos like this.
if your driving the motor witrh 7.5 volts then where is the over unity, The washers could be placed on there own shaft and rotated with 7.5 volts
Correct raymond. You need to create a torque to approximate the systems capability. Nice work though. Very interesting concept.
But the output weight is just more like a flywheel....so no real output...
I've found that this does not have overunity. The output washer weights tended to balance the output and acted as a flywheel and not a true measurement.
So, even it is all even, the weight balance out the output, means the output as weight get less from the center to equal higher weight of an object. Can explain in layperson term that why it doesn't has OU? You mention unbalance which means two weight that is opposite and the mobile weight when what go up to go down, it converts into motion energy, the more motion energy that is balance to more motion energy. Well, it is about weight and motion energy that is in balance. If two side that is weight is exactly the same and motion energy which the gap diameter is exactly the same of two side. Same weight and different weight of two side don't create OU because of resistance which create friction to slow it down. So, it is because of resistance or lower than resist energy, if the mech. energy is lower than kinetic energy which the motion energy loops over as it gains by going down which lower input by going down and higher input by going up, so it is unbalance of down and up, so the lower unbalance, the OU can happen? So, unbalance produces resist and friction so it cancels out. So, OU needs negative resistance or zero resistance, not positive resist, no matter how small because that small will show how long before it stops, right.
Ya can measure using rotate meter and to measure one half to another half, since the light senses the motion of rotate at different side, so it will recognize different number of two side. The down side and the up side, so both rotate number is different? So, the higher mass above higher mass, the gap different, the more the higher mass will fall faster to higher mass that is the ground so it is zero resist as work is already done by gap as it falls down, in compare to smaller gap that is higher mass to go farther from higher mass that is ground so the resist increase as work is being done by mech. energy. So, it is not even mech. energy on two side, but one side so mech. energy is resist energy in motion, it is still same resist.
nice
Абромовичу, никогда не надоест - на "ЗАРЯДЕ" - такими роликами - серьёзные моменты, в технологиях пассивного преобразования СЕ - в эффективность - разбавлять. Вот и разбавляет.
mmh no gain - i believe that the whole system constitutes a flywheel and any heavy flywheel can be driven with a small motor. The final answer will be given by a generator driven from the output and the measurement of the corresponding output/input wattage.
Muy bueno 😃
Ray, are you still with us? I like your idea. Maybe add a pulley to the shaft and see if you can turn a small generator? - If so you might be able to close the loop on this thing.
que prooo!!
almost...........
Thanj you for your explanation. However i cannot agree with you that the arim rotates because of any imbalance on either side of the arm. The arim rotates due to the reaction of the small arms supporting the weights at the ends of main arm. This can be established by preventing one or the other of the small weights. As these are couple by a chain it makes no diference which weight is held.If any one of the weights is held, then the reaction on its pivot caused the main arm to move. Either thiat of if the small motor is of too low a power to cause the main arm to move up or down and the weight is still held locked, then the small motor will be forced to stall and stop.There is no overunity effect in this machine and from a study of all other machines for which over unity action has been claimed, there is also no over unity effect in any machine invented up to the present time and indeed there can be no such machine if it forms part of a closed system.
warshers... lol... I'm guessing you're from WA?
Fun Toy ...But just a fancy Flywheel driven by a motor in the end ...
Its very simple it doesnt start on its own therefore does not work
Very Nice Concept , but you have made the output very far from the Center !!! ; put a normal generator on the axe directly without any distance, 💐
now make a kit system and start to sell. There are many people who want to try it
How can you say you have overunity when you didn't measure the input power, the motor, and compare that to the output power? You have not demonstrated overunity...
in this device what is the function of spring?
Wondelfull
We don't believe in nothing. that not were accordig with 1irst and second law of Thermodinamics, perhaps one day we'll see msgnetics generators that works! I'm sure of this. I made a energy catcher but I myself don't know how this machine works! Is a wonderful and crazy generator!
Unfortunately it doesn't show overunity. It would show overunity if it could start on its own. But you have started it by hand push. Once in full rotation it only needs to cover the friction losses to keep running. And they negligible.
If it's overcoming friction losses, it is over unity
Hello may I have your email
Worshers
some very late info. since this video was just re-posted, i thought i would stop by, again. the operation of this apparatus was not very informative. in particular, the discontinuous, Determined-by gravity loading was a Joke. googletranslate
Downvote for the mention of overunity
doesn't work! trust me!