Geneva inventions show gives bronze award to 'Free Energy' device?
Geneva inventions show gives bronze award to 'Free Energy' device?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-WEC...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVMOq...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUkh7...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=pJfiDmWaXuA
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo..._System#Videos
The given show:
http://www.inventions-geneva.ch/cgi-...-exposants.php
It appears to be related to the basics behind Veljko Milković's two stage mechanical pump:
You see, gravity and inertia interact differently depending on the 3d vector, within the earth's fields/interactions.
I've built a model of this two stage design (in the animated gif), in order to test the basics. What it comes down to, is that you can grab that hammer at the anvil end, which is of very high mass, and a person can be on the other end..and very gently ..just touch.. that swinging weighted pendulum..and keep it oscillating/swinging.
The force required to stop that heavy anvil from moving is simply not there. Not by anyone who has ever tried to stop it. The amount of force or energy dumped into the hands and arms is beyond the muscular and bodily mass limits. This can be looked at as a simple force multiplier in the one single motion, but the point that repeated oscillations and thus force delivered can be continued with nearly no input, just the light brushing of the pendulum...is the key point. That gravity and inertia are not tied in the vertical vs the horizontal plane...in the same way.
As well, this basic aspect: Inertia increases as a squared function of the rotation speed.
Look carefully at the animated gif and note the direction, overall motion and distance covered by the pendulum in the two stage oscillator, in each given directional swing. When these devices are built, they have the anvil end being very massive and slightly heavier than the pendulum end, IIRC. due to the way that the device works, regarding peak energy levels spiking, the inventor has shown it being used to pump water, for example. the fluid draw issue helps the device overcome some of the issues involved in dealing with the peak energy spikes, with respect to efficient use, or load coupling.
Here is the Peswiki page on this device:http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directo...cal_Oscillator
i was told, at one time, that gasoline motors that were designed to be as perfect as possible in the vertical and the horizontal plane..that such designs would show 10% more power generation when oriented in horizontal domain. (think spinning like a record as the horizontal)
We don't use horizontal motors in vehicles, overall, due to inertial, ie, in this case, gyroscopic conditions surrounding such orientation, with regard to desired vehicle motion. We have to mount the drive systems in a specific orientation. Vertical orientation, the given center shaft along the vehicle axis, is the way to minimize the forces that would impede desired vehicle motion.
We DO have traverse mounted engines in many cars. My mistake.
But lest just say you'll probably never see them in aircraft, or Formula 1 cars. The gyroscopic effect at the high RPMs would take the car off the road or have it showing very unequal force loading depending on the direction of turn and speed of turn. same for aircraft.
On the two stage pump:
"This does not appear to be a primary energy source, such as solar, but serves as a lever to amplify an existing energy source many times. The act of keeping the primary pendulum swinging through minimal energy input computes to a leveraged energy output via the resulting secondary oscillations. Anyone involved in mechanical energy, whether in the generation or in the application thereof, ought to consider using this lever mechanism to amplify / economize the system."
The trick is that horizontal inertial conversion. In gearing, the energies can be more 'fluid'.
Specifically with respect to the point that, for example, tests have been done with motors, where one that is stopped and started immediately, it takes 10% less energy to get back to original speed than it would if the motor was stopped for a much longer time. That there appears to be an initial frame dragging component, across time and/or dark matter aspects. The least that can be said, is that the relationship that is hiding in the answer to that quandary, involves time.
I got this from an old prof in electronics, who was originally involved in a multi-nation defense project and installation, as a development and installation engineer:
"In the old days, there was a thing called "dynamo pits" for testing dynamo designs. These pits were used due to the fact that some dynamo designs tested, that were designed to be as efficient as possible, would levitate at extreme rpms. Most importantly, they would go into 'runaway' at these extreme rpm tests. with no more input, their speed would go incredibly high, levitation would occur, and they'd fly apart from those extreme rpms. The dynamo pits where lined with steel, you see..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo
Reply With Quote
We don't use horizontal motors in vehicles, overall, due to inertial, ie, in this case, gyroscopic conditions surrounding such orientation, with regard to desired vehicle motion. We have to mount the drive systems in a specific orientation. Vertical orientation, the given center shaft along the vehicle axis, is the way to minimize the forces that would impede desired vehicle motion.
Bookmarks