Comments on Idea - Harvesting gravity #2

The GOCE gravity-tracking satellite now has an even better use for life as we know it.

Toss a ball into the air and catch it back in your hand and then tell me that this is not possible. You exert energy only one time to cause the ball to raise up into the air, the fall happens like clockwork with no additional input from you, and we all take this fact for granted every day in our daily lives. So, if you have a rotary machine that takes 5 pounds of rotational force to drive a load and rotate, then all that must be done is to affix a 6, 7 or a 10 pound pendulum to the rotor. Turn the electrical power on at the bottom of rotation and then turn it off at the top of rotation, You honestly would be utilizing gravity to do useable work. The weight of the pendulum will be driving the load on the down portion of rotation, and the electricity to the motor on only the upward portion. Connect this system to a pump that operates 24 hours a day, ta-da!

Place 10 pound weights on each pedal of your bike, even 20 pound weights, I just used duct tape to prove the point, now, isn't it easier to pedal around town? Similar to a pumpjack, similar to a dual connected elevator, less exertion is required. The bicycle is 20 pounds heavier, true, but the pedals still feel the same as before the extra weight was added because the system is still balanced and the extra weight is now available for your use to assist you to pedal the bike on straightaways, uphill or down a hill, counter-balanced to the load. If I could make each pedal weigh as much as do, yes the bike would weigh more than 300 pounds, but you would not ever notice it except when picking it up, peddling it would take minimal effort and all I would have to do is shift my weight on each pedal.

My example of the bicycle is incorrect, you certainly would "feel" as if there were more weight and downward thrust available each time you pedal, you would only be peddling a 20 pound heavier "you". But, if it is in fact true that energy is not gained nor lost, that it only changes form, if you put more energy into a system, shouldn't you should get more out? A single pendulum swing will put out what was put in. Now, how much energy does it take to keep that process going in one direction? How much energy is required to continue in the same direction and to "bump" that pendulum, over the apex of the rotational plane to start again? A lot less than rotating an entire weight and mass +plus the amount that was truly consumed or used in the transaction by loss or friction or driving an affixed load.

http://www.youtube.com/user/michaelqshaw?feature=mhum#p/u/0/1l2wWl2DRfw

What would happen if you built a motor that on the shaft we had rotors that rotated clockwise and then the next one rotated counter clockwise ... What would be the forces that could create anti-gravity or a force field to mimic gravity? The smaller the rotor plates the more effects could be produced.

Already been done, but without the gravity mimicking garbage.
http://www.youtube.com/user/PESNetwork#p/a/u/0/tgTcHAZaIyE
All that they are doing is harvesting the downward force of gravity on the downward portion of a low RPM rotation. As you can already see in the video provided by the PESwiki website, the AOGFG Gravity Motor Prototypes 9 and 10 are visibly driven by a motor with an external power source. Any supposed over-unity is only possible gains from the designs shifting center of gravity, otherwise, from the downward fall of gravity portion of rotation.

The entire purpose for posting these ideas was only to hopefully explain and describe the operation of how an upward curved magnetic propulsion field can in fact be designed and built to actually drive a worthwhile and useable load.
I was told by a very important and helpful attorney, to whom I owe much gratitude, that I have designed and built a “cool toy “. After humiliating myself with a inadequate and faulty comparison to a conventional motor design, I only hope that one person that read this may understand what it was I was actually trying to describe. As I have described with the pendulum, it is a rotatable mass, while with the magnetic propulsion field, motion is not constrained solely to the rolling of a chrome steel ball, motion can be transferred to a central fulcrum, pivot or otherwise a bearing mounted rotor.
I used the example of a ten pound pendulum, you can use a one ounce pendulum, it does not matter, a magnetic propulsion field can be constructed to provide the upward driving force to propel and gravity will always provide the downward force which places the driven element back into the starting position of the curved propelling magnetic propulsion field. If the rotating element weighs ten pounds, or one ounce, it will have the capability to drive any lesser driven load than its own weight utilizing a driving magnetic field with a gravity re-set making it so much more than just a cool toy.
Good luck Andrea Rossi, I hope your Energy catalyzer can transform our world!
http://www.youtube.com/user/michaelqshaw?feature=mhum#p/u/0/1l2wWl2DRfw

“Lift” an object 12 inches, stop, and then open your hand on the ISS, otherwise in space.
Q. How far did the object travel? A. Twelve inches.

“Lift” an object 12 inches, stop, and then open your hand on Earth.
Q. How far did the object travel? A. Twenty-four inches.

You did dot “give” the object that energy. You did not “provide” that downward force, you simply exerted a force against a force. The force exerted by your arm against the downward force of gravity. As that object is lifted upward, yes it gained potential energy. You did not provide it that energy, it gained it by virtue of its elevation.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-tech/sustainable/gravity-powered-lamp1.htm

Here’s an epiphany... according to astronomers isn't our cosmos constantly expanding? Isn't it also expanding at increasing speeds? Doesn't that mean that everything is “perpetually moving” further and further away from everything else even while I lie motionless asleep in bed? Perpetual motion in reality, in existence right here, right now. The devil is in the details.

Doesn't it require energy to move an object with mass any distance? But, if a force moves an object with mass any distance, how is that not the same?

Gravity is in fact, a conservative force, but because it is a constant, consistent force, applied whenever it's source is present, just like a magnetic field...it CAN be used to convert the provided force into energy.

Of course you can use a mass to generate electricity. You simply lifted the mass, you exerted a "FORCE" against a "FORCE" that was present. You did not "GIVE it that energy like we are taught in schools today, because you do not provide that downward "FORCE" you did not make it fall. Awesome video. Keep up the good work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DzEUxmiPMA&feature=share