Thank you for your continuing efforts and video.
Looks like you have 5 power units around the central support.
Just curious why you choose an odd number.
Skinner's machine has 4 so the off center weights across from each other balance things out. will yours do that?
I agree alignment is important.
I think the input lever rod gimbal must be directly over the bearing under the universal joint at the bottom.
What motion are the tops of the input lever rods making through the air?

Keep up the good work.

Tom

__________________
 

(edit doesn't even work )
Not possible to get kinetic energy from this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U


Circles are least effort (least required applied work)... ellipses will require more work to get out of the corners, because it will raise the mass more quickly in the corners... and a linear is the worst...



At the ends, initially moving toward the center, the most force is used to change the tilt the most rapidly... (Red marks), and then slack off as it gets toward the center, and then on the falling side will accelearte to lead the drive, until it again has to be full force to lift the weight. The ellipse is the same thing, and depending on the eccentricity less and less. Until you get to a circle which (again) should be light blue and light pink dashes all along because it will inevitably accelerate past the drive always.... but the least force to get it to move is in a 1:1 ellipse. (unless starting for the side of an ellipse, then you just delay the issue... the total sum is 0 plus a little because of frictions. (of the drive force, not of the output force)

I don't know why you're so set against the david machine with a single mass (again, you have to stop before adding more weights in balance which will reduce the effective kinetic power, even if gains potential power ... but that potential would be better stored in a flywheel.)

I've tried 4 times to show the specific clip... but then I found that rohndoe has the clip of interest anyway https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3zs8vcBJyE indicating the pivots of the gimbal not set to provide an ellipse. If you're arguing that the deformation of drive rods causes ellipses; maybe... but 1:0.9 ratio is still a circle (10% deformation) and then it will be at arbitrary points with a precession...

I'll be quiet here until I get my implementation more complete... if there truly is a gain, it should be able to accelerate itself. I paid to get an answer to the math, and have gotten nothing back. I saw your clip with graph paper and saying it's an ellipse, but you were driving it with a lever, which has subsequently been disproven (at least to me).

I apologize for challenging your belief system. I have not said you are wrong.

__________________
 

I've tried every variation, circle, ellipse (mild ellipse) and linear. They do not do the same thing even though all three will make the bottom weight spin.

With an ellipse, the "kinetic energy" is the greatest as it gets to the narrow end points and and requires the least amount of input to send it on its way to the other side.

The circular method is like steady DC where you are constantly drawing a load, while the elliptical and linear are like higher efficiency pulsed motors that do not require constant input.

You can say you can pulse the circular method, which is true, but you have absolutely no mechanical advantage at any point during the 360 degree rotation. With elliptical, you do as I mentioned above. You get a power increase, which is an impulse, and you don't get that with circular.

Plus with a circular movement, you are not taking as much of an advantage of the mechanical reaction of the upper weight, which is intended to be "reacted" IN PHASE with the forward movement and with a circle, you deflect too much reaction out at an angle which is way more obtuse than you want. Unless you are considering these facts, you're looking at the machine in a compartmentalized way instead of taking it as a whole and are missing quite a bit of the picture. None of this is speculation.

There is a way to mimic the mechanical advantage of an elliptical orbit using a perfectly circular rotation but I'm not going to go into it because it is related to a machine I developed that was inspired from the Skinner work in an attempt to simplify some of the concepts. It isn't as good as Skinner's but over 1.0 COP is over 1.0 COP.

I'm not "set against" the David machine. It simply has no relation to the Skinner machine and everything from the input to output is in direct proportion to each other and gravity actually cannot contribute to anything the machine since the weights are in lockstep with the input motor. That means the whole point of using gravity as an energy source in that machine is completely defeated. The point of the Skinner machine is that everything is INDIRECTLY related meaning the output is not proportional to the input, but in the David machine it is. The Skinner machine is a non-equilibrium open dissipative system and the David machine is an equilibrium closed system that is shut off to environmental gravitational potential. These are facts.

The gimbals are perfectly capable of allowing an elliptical motion. I don't understand how you can say they are not. Also, they're spring loaded or similar, which nobody seems interested in but it is completely common sense - look at that same video you linked to - the face of the gimbal on the right is not in lockstep with the lever there is an obvious lag at each end point that the lever reaches. This is why I said I have used rubber superballs as my pivot point before because the spring loaded gimbal" is a necessary buffer/dampener to ensure smoother operation of the machine.

I have never argued anything about a deformation of the lever. Mike and myself have posted the mechanism at the top of the lever rod. The rods are rotated in an elliptical path - that is completely indisputable and it is easily observable in the very first part of the film.

Go back and listen to my explanation on paper, I said it is mostly back and forth with some width to it meaning it is a narrow ellipse. That has never been disproved. Again, the mechanism is plain as day in the beginning of the film and Mike showed his interpretation of it and I showed mine - whether it is a little rod, wheel, etc... is irrelevant - the point is that at the end of the oscillating cross bar - the top of the lever goes in a circle while the center of the axis around which it rotates is moved through space meaning it is tracing an ellipse. That is completely indisputable and anyone that claims they have debunked this is completely out of touch with reality.

I don't really have a "belief system". Some insincere people would have you belief I don't want to be challenged because they can't answer simple questions but if you pay attention to how it unfolded - it was he who started to challenge what I said about ellipses - but as soon as I challenge him to answer a simple question - look out!!! But what I am saying is not my speculation - it is all completely visible in the original video backed by experiments that I have done. Even without my own experiments, it isn't debatable what is in plain view right there in the original video.

__________________

@aaron
Can you sketch on this picture where the moving part is that causes an ellipse?
did a google image search for 'skinner 1939 miami' and found this for sale on Ebay...

$_57.JPG

__________________
 

Here are the images of the Skinner device from the ebay picture auction I enlarged and posted at the OU topic.

Now, the question is, who here bought this picture? it was sold for $10. minutes before it was first mentioned at this topic.

Also, look at the top mechanism, each side seems to have about 4 shafts to hold many gears in series to reach the final lever. So why would Mr. Skinner make it so complicated?

__________________
 

Good grief man.....let it go! We just disagree. Why do you keep bringing it up? I don't understand your creepy obsession with my comment.

__________________
 

Thanks for posting those Luc.
A couple days after the auction ended I emailed the seller to
see if he could send me an electronic copy of the pic without the words "Historic Images" across it but I never heard back from him.

Does anyone know how to contact the buyer?
If so, maybe we could ask them for clear copy of it.

Based on the picture, I drew out what I thought was a realistic representation of the drive gear/pulley train and counted 5 speed reductions from the electric motor to the input lever. I think that means the torque would be multiplied 5 times as well.

The cotton thread must have been under fairly good tension and I think skinner must have had the motor on a quick release swivel plate so he could get the thread off/on without stretching/breaking it.

What does using a cotton thread signify?
Is it just proof that the whole drive train is very easy to turn or is it there to protect the motor similar to a fuse? or both?
Anyone have any ideas about that?

Tom

__________________
 

Everyone seems to be missing a very important point. The top input shaft in the picture on the right side of the machine is clearly leaning out from the machine this shows that the top input shaft does rotate in a circle.

__________________
William Reed

Hi Tom,

I would tend to believe that it's someone from this forum who has bought the picture. Look at the date and time the information was first posted and by the way, the link was for an auction that had expired (no bids) but it was re-listed as a buy it now (not an auction) and if you look at the date and time you'll be surprised.

I think the cotton tread demonstrates that mostly the rotation movement of the motor is used and not torque.

One thing I have mention and has been ignored is, why would Mr. Skinner go through the trouble of having the upper lever shafts turning when he could of just had a bearing in the mid (translation) plate? which would be quite similar to what Dave Q did, which he has demonstrated it can work.
What if Mr. Skinner was actually using the rotation force of the upper lever to assist (feedback) in the upper mechanism? As you can see there's a lot of pulleys up top

No one knows for sure how it works until you see them demonstrate a full working device (P in - P out) so anyone's guess is as good as the other.

Luc

__________________
 

Hi William,

I know it makes sense to think the levers are going in a circular motion when you consider the right and left levers are out. That's what I was thinking weeks back. But what if the right and left levers are going in and out and the front and back are going side to side?

Luc

__________________
 

gotoluc,

I have been building machines for over fifty years. Many times I use parts already in my shop or parts off of the last prototype. This requires more thinking and more labor, but less money. I am building a full size replica of this machine. It will function as Skinner's does, but not have exactly the same parts. The gears on top may have been old threading gears off of lathes.
Garry

__________________
 

X marks the spot. Top of lever on a little wheel at the end of the oscillator bar - its plain as day in the original film right in the beginning. You can see it rotating around as the oscillator bar goes back and forth. The water mark on that postcard is blocking it - it is easier to see in the original film - it is not hidden there.

__________________

I'm tired of your mouth - your church comment was it. You're a complete hypocrite. You challenge my claims about the symmetry vs asymmetry but the moment I challenge you with a simple question that you don't have the guts to answer and then you attack me as someone who will only tolerate one viewpoint. Hypocrite.

__________________

The levers are going in a circle on the end of the oscillator bar while the oscillator bar goes back and forth - what does that tell you? It is tracing an elliptical path. It is not a guess that is as good as anyone's, it is a fact that is right there in front of everyone's face in the beginning of the video.

__________________

When looking at the video it is clear that all the top bars move the same in and out, and back and forth.

I am NOT here to stir up any conflict so I will stop talking about it now. Thanks for your reply.

__________________
William Reed

I hope you realize you're proving the point that Mike and I showed in diagrams.

If the top crossbar is only oscillating back and forth, how does the top of the rod exit the perimeter of the frame? If it wasn't for the little wheels/arms rotating on the end of the oscillating bar, the top of the rod would be fixed to a simple back and forth oscillation and would remain inside the perimeter of the frame.

By the way, the claimed "linear" motion is actually a slight arc and not linear because the oscillating bar is on a piviot in the middle meaning the end of the oscillating bar is tracing an arc.

At the end of the oscillating bar are little wheels or arm that rotates around and causes the top of the lever to exit the permieter of the frame as the full path that is traced is elliptical.

__________________

http://feelthevibe.com/free_energy/s...ticallever.zip 52.4mb - that is a video clip from the beginning of the original video showing the top mechanism.

I have it zoomed in quite a bit, little blurry but the mechanism is very clear - you can see the oscillating cross bar going back and forth while the top of the lever rotates around a wheel/cam as shown below tracing an elliptical path as a matter of indisputable fact.

Had this not been visible in the video, sure, debate it all you want, but since it is there plain as day, sorry to burst anyone's bubble that wants to keep perpetrating the misinformation about it going in only a linear or circular motion are completely wrong.

The top of the input lever is doing 100% exactly as I have described from the beginning and diagrammed here:



If nobody likes my aggressive attitude on this subject, too bad. Too much time and effort has been invested to show the truth and I will take a stand against blatantly false information being perpetrated about this machine. Like I said, it is not disputable because the evidence is right there in front of everyone's eyes who are intellectual honest enough to admit it.

__________________

Well Garry, I wish you luck since that's what it's going to take to get this device to work without one real working replication.
I've been around these public research forums for over 8 years and built all kinds of things. This looked simple enough so I built an 8 foot single version (see my videos) but no free lunch from gravity yet.
I know of others who built but don't share on the forums and it's the same for them.
The bottom line is, if Mr. Skinner's device really worked then we don't have all the information. That's what I'm trying to let people know, real facts
If anyone here knows it works then prove me wrong and show us your working device with P in - P out.

Hopefully through replication attempts and tests someone may find something but this is starting to look like 99% of all the other topics that have gone by over the years. No real gain or information

Luc

__________________
 

One interesting thing I just now noticed in the photograph. It 'appears' that all 4 arms are pointing out.

I realize that the machine is at rest here but I thought the 4 arms were tied together mechanically at the top and adjacent arms were always 90 degrees out of phase so that when one opposite set is furthest apart (pointing outward), the other set are closest together (pointing inward). But in the photograph, they are all pointing out??

Can anyone reconcile this?

__________________
 

Good observation on your part there purelyprimitives
As far as I know the top mechanism is all tied together! how else could it stay in timming
Also notice the bottom weights. They are not all the same, the side ones are in and front and back are out.

Luc

__________________
 

OK, scratch that.....

Its most likely an optical illusion and the arms are actually pointing inward at the top. Just looks weird....

__________________
 

No, I think you had it right!

Luc

__________________
 

That's the way that I think we have all assumed it was. I just can't really tell from the photograph if the arms in the foreground and background are tilted in or out.

It would make sense that the weights would cause the tilt of the upper arm in the opposite direction. Based on the weights in the foreground, the attached upper arm should tilt in.

But like I said...just looks weird

__________________
 

I agree, something looks weird.

Look at the lower left and right weights, they are in and their upper weight which is 90* forward has just pasted the frame... so why is their upper lever leaning out so much

Maybe something important here?

Luc

__________________
 

Maybe the upper levers are mostly offset to the outside of the frame with a movement that's a straight line across (side to side) then half circle (outwards), so basically a half circle?

That would be an interesting twist!

Luc

__________________
 

Have a look at this looped video I made back in May and posted at the OU forum topic.

Look only at the left side upper lever. You'll see the lever travels away from the side steel frame but when it comes back in it doesn't travel inwards as much as it travels outwards. You can't even see the very top of the lever pass the other side of the steel frame.

Link to video: http://www.overunity.com/14655/1939-...attach/138942/

I think this would support the half circle motion, would it not? ... or at least an elliptical that is offset to the outside of the frame.

Luc

__________________
 

Hi Luc,

I think I downloaded that one when you first posted it and have referred to it often. Its a great clip.

Definitely something different about it. I wish we had a clearer and closer clip of its actual movement which would end the controversy

__________________
 

Hi Luc, does it not look like that just due to the angle it was filmed at?
I am still trying different things, I think that the inputs, because there are 3, are all offset. Thats' 12 in total for a complete machine.
Top input, mid , bottom weight.
The centre of gravity from the top input is offset from the mid plate , which is offset from the output.
artv

__________________
 

Looking at the looped video (front lever) frame by frame and I counted about 12 to 13 frames each half cycle (side to side). So I don't think it can be equal if it was a half circle since the straight movement would be a shorter distance then the half circle. So looks more like an elliptical movement with an offset to the outside of the frame.

Luc

__________________
 

I can't tell for sure but something looks strange

Your experiments sound interesting,

All the best

Luc

__________________