William F. Skinner - 1939 Gravity Power

[norman6538]

Thanks Mike, I understand the moving of the goal posts but which weight
is the ball and which is the goal post?
top? bottom?

Back to Patrick Kelley's chair. I when the chair falls to one side it
has to be lifted back up so it can fall again. Where does the work
come from to lift it back up? My thinking was centrifical/centrifugal
force around the end of the oval...

Norman

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Hi Norman

I did a lot of theoretical work on this after taking apart the video.

The drive motor is totally dislocated from the levers which when pushed (by hand to start it all) start to semi engage (sling shot) at certain points in the lever parabolic/ovallated movement.

The effect is like the small push of a child on a swing to keep it going. The energy created (loose word there) comes from the effect of the weights falling with reference to the MOVING reference point. (shoot a ball to the left of the goal post, but move the post so you make a goal ). One set of weights is the ball and the other the posts, the motor is the person who kicked the ball at the right time, and so this is repeated over and over again at the speed the machine is set to.

The top connection of the lever is just a free turning, both ends, bent piece of metal.

Hope that explains it a bit.

Regards

Mike

[norman6538]

struggling with correct geometry

I'm still struggling with the correct geometry of the device.
in msg # 205 p. 7 Michael Nunnerly has a hand drawing
named skinner.drawing.jpg and I can't quite read all the
comments. It appears that the top weight is free to move and
as the top lever is moved back and forth the translation plate
will have to swing around and thus the comment is written that
it works like a slingshot which I envision as the amusement park
ride we called the whip because at the end of the oval you are swung
around the outer part of the "racetrack" real fast - thus slingshot.

And there is a gimbal at the top whereas other folks say there is a gimbal
at the bottom..

Any help with the correct geometry would be appreciated.

Another point is the small weight on a string swing around your head
will lift a much larger weight when swung fast enough... Surely that
is part of Skinner but my simple question is how do we capture
that force and use it. I did that in my balanced bicycle crank enhancement
of the test above by capturing the twisting back and forth of the bicycle crank.
But I did not get it properly measured yet.

Norman

[norman6538]

Sorry Les.

Norman,

You have already admitted (in a private email) that you are NOT ready to make a full size gravity machine which can fully supply a home.
You just keep "theorizing".

Further, you seem to have ignored my single page document I sent you:
"Gravity powered free energy device"
Well, IF you want better technical explanations for EVERYTHING involved in a gravity powered project, you better check out Kevin Hay's Facebook page!
No ifs, no buts!

You are right. I was reviewing old posts and replied to things that I had
learned and did not go to the last page till this morning. I was also tied
up on a computer scam yesterday and I have no dial tone on the ph.

Thanks to all who are diligently working and sharing you ideas.

I'll use my wife's facebook to check on Kevin Hay's Facebook page!
I'm processing you info next.

Norman

[Les Banki]

Along with this then is Patrick Kelly's point about a chair on one
leg is easy to tilt and get it to turn with very little effort...

Any help or thoughts guys?

Norman

Norman,

You have already admitted (in a private email) that you are NOT ready to make a full size gravity machine which can fully supply a home.
You just keep "theorizing".

Further, you seem to have ignored my single page document I sent you:
"Gravity powered free energy device"
Well, IF you want better technical explanations for EVERYTHING involved in a gravity powered project, you better check out Kevin Hay's Facebook page!
No ifs, no buts!

Perhaps other readers may be interested to read that short document, I paste it here:

Gravity powered free energy device

ELEGANT simplicity

ALL 'mass' has a certain 'weight', due to the effect of GRAVITY.
When a weight (or weights) are rotated around an axis (shaft) on a circular path and a given radius, centrifugal force is created.
The formula for calculating uniform circular motion centrifugal force is:
F=m*r*ω2

where:
F : is in Nm, m: is 'mass' (weight) in kg, r: is radius in meters, ω: angular velocity in rad/sec
How it works:

Unbeknown to most people, ALL planets have their 'N-S' axis tilted and so have all AtomsWe find that when we rotate a LARGE mass (weight) on a tilted axis, the power required is just a fraction of the resultant centrifugal force!

No, I am NOT.
Period.

ALL energy is FREE and LIMITLESS.
Always has been.
However, most people cannot understand WHY and HOW they have been forced to pay for energy.

Anyway, by analysing my simple design, you will see five (5) main sections:

1. The GRAVITY section: 2 weight arms, 2 weight holders and the lead weights (4 or 5).
2. The CONTROL section, consisting of the tilted drive shaft, the upper arm to the motor and the motor itself.
3. The ELECTRONIC power supply, power analyser, speed controller and battery charger.
4. The GEARING123RPM to 1500RPM required by the generator.
It consists of 2 x 40 teeth pulleys, 2 x 140 teeth pulleys, and 2 x 1600-8M-30 belts.
5. The GENERATOR (10kW for this design)

If mains power is no longer connected, the system is started by a start-up battery (takes about 30-60 seconds, depending on the set-up) which is then automatically recharged by the built-in charger.
A digital RPM meter (using a Hall effect device and a magnet to sense rotation) is also built-in.
After start-up, the required RPM is set manually. (for now)
Should the speed vary too much with applied load variations, automatic speed controller will be fitted.

Les Banki

[norman6538]

wondering about the current status of the Skinner work

I did some work on the centrifical force here

Skinner 1939 gravity machine centrifugal force tests and hope

And I've been thinking that the oval rotation is much like
the amusement ride called the "whip" which was an oval
that had a car you sit in that got whipped around the corner/end
of the oval real fast because it had to keep up with the outer
longer circumference. And with the point on a paper and the
eraser head up top rotating in an oval makes the pencil
drop toward the paper and then rise back up when it gets
to the center/narrow part of the oval...
My question then becomes how does it go back up that slope
toward the middle of the oval?
Michael Nunnerly talked about the sling shot concept that was used
when a space craft was shot around the moon's gravity/hold so that
it could be accelerated back to earth...

Along with this then is Patrick Kelly's point about a chair on one
leg is easy to tilt and get it to turn with very little effort...

Any help or thoughts guys?

Norman

[Les Banki]

As I have stated in my reply to Carroll, you better do your own research on ORMUS, instead of taking my words on the subject.
However, let me just say that I have known about ORME (or ORMUS as it is known now) since 1995 and I also have 7 audio tapes (lecture) by Don (David Hudson's chemist).
The only reason I was not taking it (before now) is because there was NO supply that I know of at that time and even if there was, it would probably be prohibitively expensive.
Now, there are several suppliers and their prices are affordable.

As for the Joe cell, note this:
I have known Joe personally since 1995 when he stayed at my place for 4 days (and nights).
My best friend for 46 years, Paul C., had the opportunity to drive Joe's car with his "cell" fitted.
So, all those who have argued for years about the "Joe cell" are MORONS!!
Period.

Cheers,
Les Banki

[Sputins]

Hi Carroll,

Well, I don't "do" Facebook either but I use my wife's Facebook account just to check out Kevin Hay!!
By the way, Kevin is having a break from Facebook (which pisses him off!) and has now joined "minds.com" to try it out.

Be aware that he has published a hell of a lot of info of various kinds over the years but you should keep in mind that he has been on ORMUS for almost 5 years now so his brain/mind is UNIQUE.
No kidding.

IF you don't know what ORMUS is, you better do some studies!!!
His reference to the PJK ebook is general, meaning all other inventors and their inventions but NO, you will not find him in that book!!

Personally, I have saved most of his important posts, notes, comments, pictures, drawings and videos.
Thus, I have no less than 30 files in my 'Kevin Hay Folder'!

Cheers,
Les Banki

[Les Banki]

Hi Les,

I don't do Facebook, but I have spent over an hour on the PJK website looking for anything from Kevin Hay. I have not been able to find any information on that site about his devices. Is there somewhere else to look at them or do you know where on the PJK site his information might be?

Thanks,
Carroll

Hi Carroll,

Well, I don't "do" Facebook either but I use my wife's Facebook account just to check out Kevin Hay!!
By the way, Kevin is having a break from Facebook (which pisses him off!) and has now joined "minds.com" to try it out.

Be aware that he has published a hell of a lot of info of various kinds over the years but you should keep in mind that he has been on ORMUS for almost 5 years now so his brain/mind is UNIQUE.
No kidding.

IF you don't know what ORMUS is, you better do some studies!!!
His reference to the PJK ebook is general, meaning all other inventors and their inventions but NO, you will not find him in that book!!

Personally, I have saved most of his important posts, notes, comments, pictures, drawings and videos.
Thus, I have no less than 30 files in my 'Kevin Hay Folder'!

Cheers,
Les Banki

[citfta]

Hi Les,

I don't do Facebook, but I have spent over an hour on the PJK website looking for anything from Kevin Hay. I have not been able to find any information on that site about his devices. Is there somewhere else to look at them or do you know where on the PJK site his information might be?

Thanks,
Carroll

[Les Banki]

ALL!

Perhaps its about time to look at other options, a hell of a lot simpler than the quad Skinner device!

May I suggest that you check out Kevin Hay (Canada) on Facebook.
(Make sure you get the right guy - he owns 'Vancouver Island Ormus'.)
Kevin has got it all worked out!

To illustrate this point, I paste his first email to me about two weeks ago.

Cheers,
Les Banki

Hello Les,

Yes, our first model was sustained at over 400 COP.
It took less than 0.1 amp at 12 volt to sustain 1.9636 HP.

I am currently working in medical agricultural production areas however I am also engineering some of my more modern methods with a Japanese company that I am partnering with.
My engineering partner works in large scale rice agriculture and drone technology so this will allow me to incorporate my work into several areas, and allow me to provide these dynamos for people working in agriculture before any other field becomes involved.

All electricity is gravitational inertia based torsion induced compression.
All of it.
This is braking planetary inertia and this is not complicated.

I have over 170 designs of workable systems just in the mechanical area alone. My basic show and share designs are based on children's ability to understand this, apply this and use it effectively.
My work is in plasma initiation.
I have several dozen easier methods to generate high voltage current Les.
If you want electricity, do what Tesla did. Tap the planet.

My systems are being applied to electro-gravitational propulsion dynamics, as some of the complex algorithms for attaining inductive inversion of gravitation are not so complicated.

If you can understand that it is gravity that moves water, then you can understand that it is also gravity that is being compressed allowing for this reaction, called phase conjugation, to induce an electrostatic inversion of gravitation.
Restricting this induces electricity.
Not restricting this allows for inductive electro-gravitational potential.

I have simple leveraged systems that can make whatever electricity you want....just put the dynamo under it and line up the crank, and place whatever mass inversion is necessary onto the oscillator.
Any size dynamo, mega watt and larger can be run...so please understand that this is what Tesla did...in reverse.

I am showing how to build an electromotive generator.
Tesla showed how to tap the planets movement and electrify it.
I am showing how to tap the planets movement, by not electrifying it and using the inertia as a torsion based electromotive reaction.
It is easier making the river any size that you need, than tailoring a new system.
All that is really required is that you correct the inversions in the schematic and allow the existing model not to fight itself.

My first electromagnetic transformer induced 100V AC on 0.000 volt.
My second one went 23 feet into the air with a 9 volt battery.
My third one induced 268V with an induction sealer and self resonated a secondary circuit with 9.6amp at 120volt AC.

By the way, I have shared all of this on Facebook and you can resource this information in the PJK Free Energy Book.
Everything that Tesla did can be accomplished much much easier by understanding torsion tensors and inertia. We can create our own electromagnetic self induced oscillator, we do not even need to tap the planet any longer.

Cheers,
Kevin

[Danny B]

Skinner geometry

I'm going to try to describe the various actions that are going on in the Skinner device. It is difficult on paper. First, a list of terms / parts.
1. lower shaft
2. output shaft at the bottom of the lower shaft.
3. lower weight
4. lower arm(s) aluminum
5. square plate that connects the bottom of the upper shaft to the top of the lower shaft
6. upper weight
7. upper shaft

Part 7 transmits a circular movement to part 5. This path of motion is fixed by the top motorized arm and the gimbal. Part 6 is locked in to part 5.
The arm of part 6 always trying to fall to the lowest point possible. This constant falling is what holds part 1 in a circular orbit. Part 7 is locked into a circular orbit. Part 1 is limited in it's orbit but, NOT locked in. Part 1 revolves in a near perfect circle.
As part 2 receives drag, it slows down part 1.
Part 1 is directed in a circular orbit by part 5 and the force of gravity against part 3. If part 2 were to come to a stop, part 5 would continue to rotate but it would be forced to rise up. It isn't locked into part 5 but, it is directed by it.
Any drag on part 2 causes part 4 to try to rise. It must lift the full weight of part 3. In addition to the weight of part 3, there is added downforce created by the centrifugal force against the top of part 3. There is centrifugal force against the entirety of part 3 but the upper part describes the largest diameter circle.
This centrifugal force is working with the leverage of the very tall weight. The included angle where part 3 attaches to part 4 is under considerable strain.
The longer that part 4 is,, the greater the strain,,, given a constant rpm. A longer arm produces more downforce. A greater angle on part 1 produces more downforce. The drag on part 2 is trying to create an upforce.
It is an ingenious device.

[Danny B]

Centrifugal force acting on the top of the lower weight

Centrifugal force is absolutely critical. The John Device uses a flat weight so, it has little down-force. The Skinner device uses a tall weight. The centrifugal force translates to downforce against the bottom arm. It isn't just gravity that is pulling / pushing the end of the arm down. The load (resistance to rotation) is effectively trying to make the weight climb up. The taller the weight, the more leverage against the lower arm. The higher the rpm, the more centrifugal force is being converted to downforce. As the lower weight spins up to speed, it exerts ever-more downforce against the end of the lowest arm.
The top of the lower rod is pushing up against a ramp. The lower weight is pushing down to stay at the bottom of the ramp.
The upper part is pretty much a compounding device.

[norman6538]

Centrifugal force tests I made

I am very intreagued by Skinner's machine and have read all the fine work you all have done. I was very curious about centrifugal force and did the following tests that gave me hope.
Skinner 1939 gravity machine centrifugal force tests and hope

In this case I used a seesaw movement and not an oval.

And now I'd like to make a similar setup to test the input and output
of the Skinner principles.

More than anything right now the world needs a better energy source
along with some serious peace....

Norman

[d3x0r]

last night it struck me that my math was a little wrong... and came back to check some progress....

rohndoe had a pretty good demo...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTWwp5qUY3U

the longer the vertical shaft, the less work is used (L2a/L1*Mg) to raise the weights so they can fall, but the real work is resulting as torque on the shaft, (L2*Mg). removing Mg as a common factor from both leaves L2 (length of the arm), L2a (length of the arm + a little for the offset of the horizontal from the bottom), L1 (Length of the arm from the horizontal to the top).

L2 is constant so whatever length arm you have determines the base multiplier of torque.
L1 increasing decreases the work to raise the weight.

Oh, but it's the sin of the angle only that gets applied to the torque so a longer arm has a lesser angle (unless the top rotation is increased in diamter, which is doable I suppose; limited by the angle of ... well no, I guess a gear system on two hemispheres could be made such that even 90 degrees can result in good torque transfer. (100% gravity to torque translation) (or really just 2 45 degree gears since it doesn't have to pivot)

I guess 1.0 translation of mass to torque would be having the drive bar horizontal (attached image)



you don't gain RPM directly - the red (output generator/transmission) could be a gearbox to leverage it. The lower the output load, the lower the weight will be up to a maximum.... would need to be some sort of limit.

The outside ring would have to be fixed to the center part and rotate together... (lazy suzan plate in the center? )

That design is of course less horizontal space efficient but gains vertical stacking efficiency (somewhat).

(classic john device model, with a mostly vertical shaft, but then output torque only gains the sin(theta) torque, where theta is < 5 degrees, whereas the above is 90 degrees which sin(90) = 1.0 )


Some possible builds of a flat device....
The top is like a peice of plywood or something with a hole cut in it in the center for the gear drive, and a hole for the arm to go through, can then mount the drive arm down to that....
the second is the same sort of idea but maybe a bicycle wheel with a few spokes removed so the drive gear can get through...would have to keep the bar from moving in and out and keep it meshed against the center gear...



But this sort of arrangement simplifies the math some; should be easier to prove that the linear force required on the outside of the drive is less than the torque force you can get out for basically any mass > 1 on the mass-arm. and based on how much greater you can then consider moving it back to a more vertical drive

But then also the load needs to be a greater force than the input in order to require any gain from the pivoting mass. The mass would hang vertically and basically be a 1:1 transfer from the input drive to the output drive, then as the output requires more load, the weight would raise and compensate, and the input would gain at a rate of L2/L1 ( if L2(the mass arm) is shorter than L1 (the drive arm) the required force will then be that fraction of force required, and you'll start to note a greater output.

The skinner device would mostly be leveraging its inertial to drive a lathe, and probably only a very very tiny shift in the weights would be required. Full load would be the drive shaft ahead of the mass by 90 degrees. (even in Rohnjoe's video because there's no real load, the mass is only slightly lagged from the drive, only the slight force required to overcome the friction on the bottom would lag the weight).