Frictionless OU?

[Matos de Matos]

Zoom

Seems like we will have to spend some energy to attach the mover to the swing arm

But, the vertical drop does add more energy to the mover than the curved drop.

Hi Harvey:

You do not need the magnet on the top. The ball will reach the top with a considerable velocity.
With the cylindrical smiley, with multiple times reducing the radius (sorry my English) and changing the center too, you have an addition of velocity gains having a high velocity on the top, enough for a load before dropped down.
You see, this is different from changing the radius with a force, in which we reduce the radius but keep the same fulcrum.
Your idea is more efficient than mine; I only break the radius once.
I hope you understand what I am saying.

Regarding the math, I think that if you use radians and do the analysis with same principle that I had, you will find different values, but proportional to my results.

Thank you
David

[Harvey]

Velocities, Newtons and Vectors

Hi David,

Your Linear velocity is accurate at 14 m/s for both frames 1 and 2 and since frame 2 is a negative velocity we can expect those two velocities to cancel at the top leaving us with zero at the end of the swing.

The Newtons are off by a factor of 100:

Linear Velocity V = Angular Velocity ω times radius r or V=ωr. Or transposed, ω = V/r.

So for Frame 1:
V = 14, ω = 14/10 = 1.4
F = mrω² OR F = 10 * 10 * 1.4² = 100*1.96 = 196

For Frame 2:
F = 10 * 5 * 1.4² = 50 * 1.96 = 98

Centripetal Force has a vector that runs from the weight to the Center of Rotation. Conversely, Reactive Centrifugal Force has a vector in opposition to the Centripetal Force from the weight outward, so all it does is add tension to the string.

The path distance for Frame 1 is (2*Pi*10) / 4 = 15.70m. If the velocity were constant, we could expect it to take 1.22 seconds, but the velocity is not constant - it is zero at the beginning and accelerates to 14 m/s at the end. By using this calculator we find that our time (1/4 of the period T) = ~1.87 seconds - longer because of starting off at zero.

The path distance for Frame 2 is (2*pi*5) / 2 = 15.70m and again if the velocity were constant we would expect it to complete in the same amount of time, 1.22 seconds and again, the velocity is not constant but is decelerating. So going back to the same calculator and using 500cm for the length and 180° for the angle we now get 2.21 seconds instead of 1.87 seconds. A bit counter intuitive, since we know the angular velocity has increased - ω = V/r and r is now 1/2 of what it was, so now ω = 14/5 = 2.8 radians / s when before it was 1.4 radians / s. But we doubled our radians! We are going 180° on Frame 2 and that is Pi (3.14159) radians.

So the angular velocity is doubled and the angles traveled is doubled and the overall real circumferential distance is the same. So how is it that the time takes longer? It is a factor of traversing a full vertical sweep and thus changing the angle at which gravity applies it's force to the vector. Since the overall pendulum period is now a circle times 2, even with a smaller radius the time is extended and this means that gravity can act on the weight for more time thus negating the energy.

===========================

Another approach to this problem would be determine the momentum of the weight at the various stages of travel to determine if any energy is left in it at the end of the swing.

As far as Frame 3 goes, I think there is a compound error in there from the angular velocity conversion issue and factor of 100 error from before.

==========================

As regards add the big magnet, I think it is necessary for two reasons:

1. The magnet on the end of the string has mass and must be lifted
2. The system nets to zero at the very top of the travel and some force is required to get it over the gap.

[Matos de Matos]

==========================

As regards add the big magnet, I think it is necessary for two reasons:

1. The magnet on the end of the string has mass and must be lifted
2. The system nets to zero at the very top of the travel and some force is required to get it over the gap.

Hi Harvey:
I did carried on and mix centripetal force with force due to real velocity.
I can’t understand the increase of a force without an increase in velocity.
I thought that a change in centripetal force would change the opposing centrifugal force and that would change the speed of the mass.
With an action, not an external force, we double the centripetal force, and exchange for an inner position on the advantage of the wheel (lever). No gains on action.
Good lesson,
Thank you
David

Sketch 5.JPG

27smiley.JPG

21.JPG

22.JPG

23.JPG

25.JPG

[Matos de Matos]

Two more

26.JPG

28.JPG

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Harvey:

Can you give your opinion on my new thread
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post106333
Thank you
David

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Harvey
Once again thank you for sharing your knowledge.
The magnet experience made me think of setups to make it work.
Did you try the use of a spring to turn the round magnet?
It may give a push, or it may increase the holding (attraction) between the two magnets. I am not sure if will help, but here it is the idea.
Thank you
David

[Matos de Matos]

Hi Harvey

Finally, (internet is back ) I could see your experiment with time, and it is totally counter intuitive.
It is unbelievable.
This is how I think, and my apologies for the simple words, I am not an academic and refuse (handicap ) to see the world by numbers.

Please correct me, but I feel that the attraction field is a union and union is easy to do, so the field interact and rotate easily. It is like marriage, easy to get hooked but difficult to separate.
With repulsion the fields react slow, and bend, and contract, when struck to each other.

I see magnetism as a path for the Aether, that changes direction under the influence of the field. The repulsion is Aether colliding, and in the attraction the Aether flows in the same direction. It is the dynamic Aether that provokes gravity pressuring from all directions.
Magnetism is like a tube in a turbulent pressured vessel. Despite of having random directions of the air, inside the tube the air will flow in one direction. If the entrances are oriented, the direction of flow inside the tube can be controlled.
Between the two magnets the pressure is less than around them, so they short the path of the Aether, joining. Well, this is another subject, going back to your experiment.

It seems that the compression of the descending field does influence the center of mass, and if so, the center of mass will raise, and parametric pump it. I think that the slow down just after bottom, is due, not much by the attraction, but by the shift of the center of mass.
Did you see my proposal http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...scillator.html where I used halfback array cylinders, and combine them in a parametric pumping with the repulsion of magnetic fields?

Did anybody try your MAP with rotating cylinder, as a rotor, with the outside surface with same polarization, and another rotating cylinder with same polarization (repulsion) as a stator?
I think that may work.

Thank you
David

[Matos de Matos]

Jpeg

[ATTACH]6233[/ATTACH]

[Harvey]

Imagine if we put the MAP rotor as a gyroscope wheel so we have a dual gimbal supporting it.

Now, when it gets to the end of its travel, with the small gain, we rotate pivot the outer axis so the wheel swaps faces, but we do not have to put much energy in to do that because it is already top heavy and will carry itself over. And now, both of the the magnets can remain fixed in their positions.

The path of the magnet will be down like a pendulum, then at half way where it stops swinging, it will roll over to the back side and then down again and then roll over to the front side and then down again. Like following the outer edge of an inverted taco shell.

Because the magnet always exceeds the horizontal position there will always be enough energy to roll the rotor over the axis.

Therefore, the system will continue to operate until it wears out.

A small magnet can be placed in an upward attraction to a fixed frame to encourage the roll over and gravity can do the rest for pulling the moving magnet down into the lower field. As long as the momentum is sufficient to push through the magnetic field compression the system will have repeated gains on each half cycle.

[Matos de Matos]

Imagine if we put the MAP rotor as a gyroscope wheel so we have a dual gimbal supporting it.

Now, when it gets to the end of its travel, with the small gain, we rotate pivot the outer axis so the wheel swaps faces, but we do not have to put much energy in to do that because it is already top heavy and will carry itself over. And now, both of the the magnets can remain fixed in their positions.

The path of the magnet will be down like a pendulum, then at half way where it stops swinging, it will roll over to the back side and then down again and then roll over to the front side and then down again. Like following the outer edge of an inverted taco shell.

Because the magnet always exceeds the horizontal position there will always be enough energy to roll the rotor over the axis.

Therefore, the system will continue to operate until it wears out.

A small magnet can be placed in an upward attraction to a fixed frame to encourage the roll over and gravity can do the rest for pulling the moving magnet down into the lower field. As long as the momentum is sufficient to push through the magnetic field compression the system will have repeated gains on each half cycle.

Hi Harvey:

I understand it and will come up with a drawing in the next days.
Why you don’t flip the stator magnet? Any particular reason, because would be easier and if in good bearings not much work will be needed.

Can you help my math on the questions that I posted?

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post106823

Thank you
David