I know this may not make sense to some, and most will jump up and down shouting at me saying that “this is not what we were taught in physics class”. I only ask for an open mind, but for you to remain critical for the sake of science, to understand exactly what is already happening in our everyday lives.
Toss a ball into the air; like I once mentioned before, doesn’t it come back to your hand automatically? Did you have to expend any energy or extra effort to make that ball fall back into your hand? No, it is the downward force of gravity we experience here on planet Earth. With this, we know that what goes up, must come down.
Now take a simple pendulum or weight mounted on a solid arm with a central pivot or fulcrum. If you release that pendulum from its top most position, it will always fall down until it rests motionless at its lowest position. Now take a “teeter-totter” or a “see saw” at a park. If a person weighing more than you, sits down on the opposite side of you on that see saw, won’t you be lifted up by their weight? Yes, I am only suggesting to combine the leverage or mechanical advantage of using excess weight to turn a rotational load of a lesser rotational weight. I understand this is certainly not a new idea, but I believe it has never been applied in this manner.
For example, take a 10 pound pendulum and affix it to a motor(1) shaft capable of lifting a total 11 pound rotational load weight. Now direct couple or connect that motor(1) rotor shaft to a rotor shaft motor(2) / load(2) of a 1 pound rotational load. If you turn off motor(1) when the pendulum reaches the top most position of clockwise rotation with a limit switch, won’t the weight of the pendulum (weighing more in excess than the direct coupled or connected rotor shaft motor(2) / load(2) with the 1 pound rotational load) drive the rotational rotor down by the effects of the downward force of gravity, until that pendulum reaches the lowest position of rotation?
Then, turn the motor(1) back on again at the lowest position of rotation to drive the pendulum back up in the same rotational direction, completing one full rotation. In this design you will expend the energy required to lift 11 pounds one time with a slow RPM rotation, and receive the mechanical advantage of nine excess pounds over the driven load of 1 pound. I understand that it is excessive but, I only used this example to explain this concept.
You really only need to determine the amount of excess weight required to fully pull your driven load “down” to the lowest position of rotation on the downward portion of rotation utilizing the downward force of gravity. If it only requires a 1 and ½ pound attached pendulum to drive that 1 pound driven load “down” on the downward portion of rotation utilizing the downward force of gravity, then you honestly are harvesting from the downward gravitational force provided by our very own planet Earth, and will only be consuming the electricity required to raise a 1 and ½ pound pendulum (plus the attached load) upward on only one half of a full rotation. Just like tossing a ball into the air.
This is not explaining a “perpetual motion device”, it is a description of how to harvest 50% of a rotational cycle from gravity on a low RPM rotational device, as centrifugal force would have a tendency to override this effect if allowed to rotate at a high RPM. If low RPM ever causes an issue, simply gear it up or utilize a belt system of a large wheel rotating a small wheel to increase RPM.
No matter how you do the math, when you receive energy INPUT from a force that is freely available from OUTSIDE of the system (gravity) you are saving energy and coming out ahead in the end. So let’s do the simple math that all of us can understand:
Both examples, driving a 1lb. constant rotational load
1½ upward motor/electricity ON + 1½ downward motor/electricity ON + the 1 pound rotational load = pay for total 4 one full rotation
1½ upward motor/electricity ON + free downward motor/electricity OFF + the 1 pound rotational load = pay for total 2½ one full rotation
Consider the impact this design could have on any Electrical production system in use today. If the pendulum is designed and incorporated into the turbine/generator of any electrical producing power plant, -hydro, -coal or even nuclear, it would enable 50% more output for the same amount of expended natural resources. In other words, it would buy us time, it could increase and prolong the now diminishing usage of consumable materials. An example would be, used at a coal burning electrical production plant; say for instance, the steam is used to rotate a 1 ton balanced rotor to produce “X” amount of electricity for one full turbine/generator rotation. When designed with a 1 ton pendulum affixed to the rotor, the power of the steam would be used to lift that 1 ton pendulum for only ½ of the turbine/generator rotation cycle and then harvest from the gravity free-fall on the second ½ of rotation. It could then produce 50% more energy with the same amount of spent coal. That is an awesome idea.
*Note: You cannot compare apples to oranges, so a pendulum and a balanced rotor are in the same manner, not equal mechanical loads and values of results cannot be compared. In order to compare you must use the pendulum affixed running on upward and downward as well as the on and off method. Otherwise, you could just use a magnetic propelling field instead of electricity to drive the rotor attached pendulum back up to the top most position of rotation to allow gravity to disconnect it from the propelling field and dropping back down into the starting position of the propelling magnetic field at the lowest position of rotation again for one complete rotation. -Michael Q. Shaw