William F. Skinner - 1939 Gravity Power

[Aaron]

momentum vs inertia

watching this thread with much interest... nice work you guys.. one thing regarding terminology.. the word inertia is use in this thread to express what I would term momentum. the root of inertia being inert that of momentum/moment... I' m just sayin... best to all Ja

Hi Jabrinka,

Momentum is there whether a mass is accelerating or not. Inertia is just there during a rate of change in the speed and is the resistance to acceleration or deceleration. If an object is moving at a steady speed, there is no inertial resistance to its movement, but there is still momentum.

[Danny B]

20 times

"That 'something' has an effective mass density 20 times that of the rotor,"
LECTURE NO. 30
BTW, Edward Leedskalnin said that the electron does not exist.
"Really it is not one current they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and the other is composed of South Pole magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screw like fashion, and with high speed. One current alone if it be North Pole magnet current or South Pole magnet current it cannot run alone."

I did an experiment a while ago that I found interesting. I built the Tesla hairpin with solid copper round bars. Mass is important. It had a good neon sign transformer, doorknobs and spark gap. I had an aluminum bar that I used at times as a bridge across the tops of the 2 rods. The arc was stronger with the top gap bridged rather than open. I put a 1x1x2 NEO magnet in the gap. The arc got MUCH stronger. If I bridged with a piece of plain metal, it made no difference.
Leedskalnin produced a LOT of good experiments. LEEDSKALNIN.COM: MAGNETIC CURRENT RESEARCH
One of which can not be explained away is the magnet holder. If you energize just ONE coil with DC, the other coil produces AC.
Speaking hypothetically; if electricity is actually a helical flow of magnet "moments"? , how can the Faraday generator work?
"Now about the generator, in the first place all currents are alternating. To get direct currents we have to use a commutator. " Leedskalnin

"He also gives us common sense reasons why the electron is not feasible. He goes even further by demonstrating the flaws in the JJ Thomson experiment that led to the invention of the electron: "
If the electron is in doubt, electron movement is questionable. ??????????

BTW, the best success with these shaker machines will be found if you run the belts slack to allow oscillation.

[shylo]

the slack

Yes there is a point of rotation , where if the input needs the most input you remove it, the momentum of the weights' carries you beyond this point.
The time of this required input is spread over the 4 units , all at different times.
One unit alone won't work ,but with the four , the needed input is over exceeded by the force of the other three.
When one is being fed ,the other three are feeding more out than the one is taking.
The mass of the weights will determine the time it takes to exceed the input...
Thats going to take some time to figure out.
artv

[Aaron]

reference

"That 'something' has an effective mass density 20 times that of the rotor,"
LECTURE NO. 30

Thank you for that reference. I thought you were talking about a DePalma reference.

In any case, I think there is that something else spinning - the Aether deflected by the rotating mass, but not sure about measuring the density of it at any level to determine that it is 20 times that of the rotor. Possible I suppose, but I haven't looked into that.

The first time I started to think about memory effects of the Aether was when I was charging batts from a trifilar SG with large capacitive discharges, I could completely turn it off and the battery would continue to charge for up to an hour above the previous resting state and it would power a load, not just a fluffy voltage charge.

[Danny B]

spinning,, not spinning

Aaron, I vote for conditioning rather than spinning. You get the same effect no matter the direction of rotation on restart. Milkovic said that reciprocating motion dies out much slower that rotating motion.

Shylo, take a VERY careful look at the Terawatt device. Also, V-belts are not all that great for power transmission. Cog belts work a lot better. They can be run slack. Once the device starts a shaft oscillation, the mass is precessing / recessing. I suspect that the aether tries to confer inertia when it is diminishing.

[velacreations]

Way back on page 3, velacreations asked Aaron for help in building his replication.

Rather than helping, Aaron answered that he didn't want to make any claims regarding his results.

I'll give him the benefit of doubt and say its possible he just meant 'publicly' and contacted velacreations offline.

no one has contacted me offline or publicly. I haven't seen any results from any tests that showed a COP >1

I have requested those many times in this thread, and can only conclude no one has seen results of COP > 1

[shylo]

tests

I did 3 tests, 1-just ran for 5mins. nothing hooked to the output, 2-ran with a gen connected to the output same 5mins. the gen out unloaded was 6 volts dc, 3- ran the gen loaded with a tail-light as a load the volts dropped to 3 and the amp draw of the bulb was 2amps ran for the same 5mins.
The interesting thing was all 3 runs used the same amount of voltage as input.
I was using an 18 volt cordless drill as input , I started each test with a full battery , the resting voltage after each run were identical.
So to me that means there is something here. Not sure if those are fair tests?
artv

[Danny B]

Dean Drive and inertia

Found a good quote;
It is widely accepted that the inertia of a non-rotating body is proportional to its mass and is an instantaneous function of all the rest of the mass in the whole universe8,9 via the medium of the aether (also called the universal lattice or universal reference frame). It follows directly that an accelerating mass has an interaction with all of the rest of the mass in the aether10. Rotation of a body involves centripetal acceleration, which is a subset of more generalized acceleration. In the specific instances of the devices disclosed in this invention, the accelerating mass is a spinning precessing mass having a reduced level of inertia in the direction of precession, depending on its construction. Since the inertia of a body is a function of its interaction with the aether, the reduction of the inertia of a spinning precessing mass in the direction of precession is also a function of its interaction with the aether. The exact reason for the reduced magnitude of inertia and angular momentum during precession and a calculation of the magnitude of its reduction is not well understood or agreed upon by many present day physicists. The inventor has derived his own formula for the reduced inertia and angular momentum as shown in later paragraphs.
DeanSpaceDrive.Org « The Dean System Drive is a self-contained propulsion system not requiring the loss of mass. DeanSpaceDrive.Org

[Simetra]

Pleasant greetings Energetic forum. My purpose is practicality.

Hello Energetic forum members,

Thank you for your continued efforts on the Skinner replication as well as your devotion to assisting people who desire your help. After studying closely the information I can find on the functionality of the rotor, I am attempting to design a replication of the Skinner device. So far I have built the rotor assembly as well as to acquire and construct the driving motor circuitry with which I have included a passive ammeter wired with a PWM for speed control of a 12V DC motor.

My current thought process is to drive the machine with the DC motor, driven by a battery, while the increase in torque via gravity's influence on the weight drives the output shaft at a level of power compatible with a gearing system capable of spinning a DC generator (Alternator) which in turn charges the battery bank. In this way, the increased torque is put to use in a quantifiable and practical manner. Providing any of you take interest, you I would enjoy it if you would share your thoughts on few simple questions I have regarding the device and its construction.

1) Has anyone, including Aaron, ever achieved a coefficient of performance greater than 1 with this machine? All pathos aside, is this a successfully replicated "free energy" device? (Proportional of course to the torque increase on the rotor via gravity's influence) Or, is this machine at the current point in time still unsuccessfully replicated. (I have seen spinning shafts attached to weights in videos claiming to be "Skinner gravity machines" all over the web. When I say "replicated", I mean a clear concise display of a self-running version of a Skinner device which clearly demonstrates that it is producing enough output power to not only drive the input mechanism but possibly other loads as well.)

2) Providing anyone has achieved a COP of greater than 1, the crucial point in the design of this machine in order to achieve said performance of an output power greater than the input power is the disconnect of the rotating lower weight from the shaft, correct?

3) Are there any other crucial design points to achieve this COP of > 1? I note in Aaron's videos that he specifies the"key" to this machine as the shaft/weight disconnect. However, (and forgive my linguistic crudity) are there any other "keys"?

4) (An elaboration of question #4) Is the top-mounted smaller weight necessary to the COP>1 functionality of the device?
Is the elliptical driving motion necessary to the COP>1 functionality of the device, or would the sliding driving motion also result in the correct functionality as displayed in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWFeMTgx58E

Note: Although I truly recognize the importance of emotional conjecture, opinion, and ext essential thoughts on spirituality and what-if scenarios when discussing "free energy" in general, I would respectfully request that those who have no genuine experience and purely factual information on the practicality of the Skinner gravity machine relevant to my situation, not contribute to my questions.

Thank you again very much for your consideration.

[shylo]

The plate

Hi Sim, From what I've seen the upper shaft can spin freely in the plate where the upper weight is solidly attached. The lower shaft can spin freely in the plate, but I think the lower weight is attached solidly , I disagree that the lower weight spins on the shaft. I have tried both cases and when you add a load to the output of the unattached weight you kill it just as etimple showed.
You can stop the lower shaft and weight and the upper and plate will still rotate.
The plate is always changing the center of gravity of both weights.
The rotation of the input shaft is orbital ,but when you make it go back and forth you create an eliptical path.
The upper weight is being forced out and up from the input but always trying to fall and this action is pulling the lower weight always to its' highest point so it is always trying to fall.The momentum of the falling weights is I think where the extra comes from.
Just what I've seen so far .
artv

[gotoluc]

Hello Energetic forum members,
All pathos aside, is this a successfully replicated "free energy" device?

No one has been able to build and demonstrate a working device.

Luc

[Simetra]

Thank you.

Thank you for the reply,

You can stop the lower shaft and weight and the upper and plate will still rotate.

The momentum of the falling weights is I think where the extra comes from.
Just what I've seen so far .
artv

Agreed. Apparently, from what I understand, gravity is allowed to add to the system in the form of an increase in rotational torque when the lower weight is connected to the output shaft, but disconnected from the drive/input shaft and therefore not directly proportional to the driving force.

"I have tried both cases and when you add a load to the output of the unattached weight you kill it just as etimple showed."

Can you possibly post the URL to his video that demonstrates this stall effect? At the current time I have been unable to find the specific upload.
Thank you again.

A few thoughts,

Eltimple shows that it is indeed possible to utilize a side-to-side driving motion in order to create the circular path of gravitational imbalance that the lower weight follows, despite the perhaps more desirable elliptical motion adhered to by Aaron among others.

I suspect that the upper weight is not a necessity for the correct functionality of this device, because (in my understanding) it serves purely to facilitate the lever back and fourth input mechanism and is therefore not vital to energy increasing functionality of the device.

If anyone can shed some light on these theories, I would greatly appreciate it. At this point they may be incorrect and I would not mind it if they were explained/disected in a simplified manner. (Referring to the purposes of the upper weight, and the side to side driving motion. Since I am attempting a practical replication, I don't want to have the wrong ideas about the basic design principals.)

To anyone who desires action taken and not just conjecture on these types of devices, I am currently about 60% finished building a full replication. I plan to compare input energy with output energy in the form of a 12V system, where as actual units of energy produced/consumed will be measured in the form of amperage and displayed by digital meters which I have already acquired. This will eliminate all so-called "guess work" in regards to the success or failure of the device.

Many sincere thanks again to Aaron, Eltimple, and all others anywhere that have spent time working on the Skinner device.

[ybaggi]

Isolate the work and effects

I did 3 tests, 1-just ran for 5mins. nothing hooked to the output, 2-ran with a gen connected to the output same 5mins. the gen out unloaded was 6 volts dc, 3- ran the gen loaded with a tail-light as a load the volts dropped to 3 and the amp draw of the bulb was 2amps ran for the same 5mins.
The interesting thing was all 3 runs used the same amount of voltage as input.
I was using an 18 volt cordless drill as input , I started each test with a full battery , the resting voltage after each run were identical.
So to me that means there is something here. Not sure if those are fair tests?
artv

I believe resting voltages are a poor indicator of electrical energy spent (or gained).

On any machine that I test (mainly bedinis right now) I use a power meter like this. They're cheap and eat up just a bit of power.

Now additionally I use a volt meter and amp meter separately to check. But this allows me to not have to monitor the voltage, record it and estimate the power, it kinda logs it for me over time which comes in very handy.

I'm an ok builder with electronics but mechanical stuff? I suck bad.

so here's a suggestion: how about you run your machine at a nominal input rpm or power that you can measure. Then load the output with your hand or a break or a generator or something. while doing that see if the input needs more power.

I think that's a great first test.

Afterwards here's how i would proceed:

Input motor: chart RPM, Torque vs electrical watts produced.
This way when the motor is hooked up you'll be able to read the
electrical wattage and lookup the torque.

For the output generator: do the same. Figure the rpm vs wattage it puts out (for af few given loads in order to possibly match impedances).

this way you can look at the input wattage vs output wattage
Lookup the mechanical power that's input into the device
Lookup the mechanical power that comes out
and compare to see if the machine gives you any gain.
You could have 98% electrical out/electrical in. but the motors beion 85 or 90% efficient the mechanical advantage would be over unity.

with an alleged 12 fold mechanical power gain this should be completely irrelevant but at least once could figure out the mechanical gain or losss of the machine fairly easily. IMO.

Now if I could just finish my darn device quickly.

cheers

[3758]

Uploaded INVESTIGATION QUALITY edit of the original Pathe "Skinner Gravity Power" video - for replication efforts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObdM7VzE18A

[Burnit0017]

Greetings, I have some enough spare parts from other projects to start a build. I look forward to your results. Cheers