Chas Campbell - Gravity Wheel

[Zealix]

Nice pseudoscience you got going on here.

[MrMalglish]

Mr. Chas, you can visit me at 'plus. Google.com/s/Philip Yong' to view a picture and calculation concerning your design

[MrMalglish]

Many have done it by just tweaking this and that mechanically without fully understanding what forces are at play. Those people out there criticizing the potential of such device work may be too narrow in the think or they are there to ensure nobody gets it right.

You may consider these people part of the so call conspiracy setup by the big energy companies or politician.

I have no idea if such conspiracy exist but it may as well have with all those non contributing critics on the net.

[MrMalglish]

You need to know all the forces in play. You design is very close to being successful compred to many I have seen on YouTube.

[MrMalglish]

Chas, you cannot just draw and expect this to work. You need to have all the forces calculated and measured to get this moving.

[MrMalglish]

If all other resistance forces are ignored, your design will have perpetual motion with barely enough force to do any work. Taking into consideration other resistance forces, your design is a dead duck.

However, this can be easily rectified with some minor design changes that can scale the right outer circle downward force up by more than 70% against the left inner circle downward force.

[MrMalglish]

The right side of the bigger wheel, as you have said, will only have 2 weighted balls at any one time. Whereas, the left side smaller wheel will have at least 8 balls at any one time.

Assuming each ball is 1 Kg, inner circle is 1.5m radius, 4.5m radius outer circle and each arm is 20 degree from each other, you will find that your left inner circle will have approximately 8.5 Kgm downward force and the right outer circle will have approximately 8.86 Kgm downward force.

[MrMalglish]

Chas, you have got it almost right. However, the left side of the smaller wheel with the weighted balls will always have greater force than the right side of the bigger wheel.

The reason why the left side of the smaller inner wheel has greater force is because at any one time the left side of the smaller wheel have more weighted balls than the right side of the bigger wheel.

[Angelsigns2012]

Why not just have the ball bearings unload at 2 o'clock and then load at 6 o'clock? The ball bearings could travel straight up through the center axis of the wheel through a mechanical ratcheting device which is powered by the rotation of the wheel? The weight of the total ball bearings can not exceed the mechanical force necessary to complete one ratcheting movement.

[TenemaesLament]

Gravity is a conservative force. Forget torque: the work done by gravity on the wheel is a function of mgh. It doesn't matter what path the ball takes, the change in energy is ONLY dependent upon the change in height. Gravity is a conservative field. There is no dispute.

[newage4energy]

Ah, British humor. Ive only heard philosophy. Hes not asking anyone for their hard earned money is he? Many organizations pass the plate. Maybe he does this to make friends, hes too shy to ask you to subscribe?

[pcdsgh]

truly one of the saddest videos I've seen. but some people just never listen

[hopdoehop]

god knows

love this guy

but

he is full of beans

[1crazyfocker]

you would think that it would work, after all the wieght is twice as far from the center of the wheel, but count the spokes, there would need to be 4 balls on the 1/2 side and 2 on the full sides with 2 balls on the slopes, he said hims self that they are twice the distance so a 2:1 ration, if each one is 2lbs then the 1/2 side would have 8lbs and the other side would have 4 lbs thus balanced. besides this idea started back with Leonardo, 600 yrs later still dont work. try something new

[sorova]

@1crazyfocker Old as the hills eh! Can't understand why somebody is resurrecting this old one.

[1crazyfocker]

@sorova because not everyone knows the past and they think its new. just like the whole HHO (HH OO is how it should be) thing, they think its this new thing, but we have been doing before AC electricity. we used them in the old stage lights, but ppl thinks its new and fall for it.

[joyful54]

i have looked at this a few times now, and i like it. he has showed the whole thing and you missed it.look at all 3 video s the i qs are going out of there minds. check it one more time.jk2-2011

[ozzirt]

If this works, why isn't he showing us the actual machine?

The man is a raving loony.

[docatomics]

...all you have done is altered the horsepower/tourqe curve by changing the lever length/circumfrence of travel but the same weight to lift the ball the same distance (think g force); this requries addtitional energy input to operate as the friction loss of the weight sphere rolling down the ramps and kentetic energy lost in direction change plus the less degrees of loss in bearing friction &  airodynmaic drag.

~add magnetic push & a timed shield to disrupt the magetic field at pull mode !

[monkeys1954]

wtf

[mrrts312]

why does this video have so many likes?! Do people really not realize that this is bullshit and has been attempted many time before? In fact, this particular idea is exactly the same thing as Simon Stevin's ball-ramp experiment, and he lived in the 1500s! For this to be even remotely plausible, the hypothetical temperatures below absolute zero would have to be reached!!!! AND ITS NOT EVEN POSSIBLE TO REACH ABSOLUTE ZERO!!!!!!!

[zaq4267]

Ok. let us look at what we have here. I don't know about free energy, but we surely have evidence that men love to play with their balls,

[UnderManiac]

@zaq4267 Too funny.

[FarceTheory]

I think grampa flunked math.

[hardhatg69]

im not really sure that would work...the turn ratios are off....the out side ball only goes 1/5 a turn and has to move the inside ball 1/2... so you would need 2.5 balls to go from top to bottom to move one ball to the top....in turn you would quickly run out of balls to go to the outside wheel

[ShadyMan01]

He is talking about perpetual motion, then he mentions something about "centrifugally thrown out". Oh dear, someone needs to take a semester or two in physics.

[maluket]

@ShadyMan01 Oh, Really?

Do better and post it...

Have many to put the poor old man down. but no one to help him...

[ShadyMan01]

@maluket There is no doing it better, it can't be done to begin with, I'm not having a go at anyone, but  a few hundred years of people trying and failing is evidence in itself that it can't be done. Try looking up conservation of energy and discover for yourself why these things cannot work!

[UnderManiac]

The unbalanced gravity wheel concept has been around since Leonardo Da Vinci's time. This will NOT work because the balls never change weight. Thus, the weight on one side of the wheel will be the same on the other side. In this case, the weight on the inside wheel is greater than the one on the outside wheel. At best you can only achieve a balance of forces (if you forget the frictional forces), otherswise you have a negative proportion.

[claudia009]

@UnderManiac you are right, the weigt of those balls will not change, but have you ever heard of the lever principle? "force" x "force-arm" = "lever" x "lever-arm"

[FarceTheory]

@claudia009 And the Ratio = Equilibrium.

[UnderManiac]

@claudia009 Of course I have. I have a clear understanding of how levers work and the formulas explaining them. It's simple physics. However, the unbalanced wheel idea will always prove to be impossible. It has everything to do with weight, since it relies on gravity to work. On paper, anything is possible. However, practically, these things will never work. Make a few calculations yourself, if you're savvy. Gravity will pull on every part at all times. Then, there's friction.....

[amaddog6]

simple leverage how much power can it make

[amaddog6]

this will work it is simple math one ball on the outside is more than two balls on the inside

[K0W0O0N0]

Looks like an Bessler Wheel....

So this has been invented a hundret years ago....

[ToemanX]

This device would never work. Campbell's explanation and drawing are both wrong.

When the long arm drops, with a ball, from top line to bottom line it can only lift

another ball, on short arm, from bottom line to center line. It requires the dropping of

two balls on the long arms to raise one ball, on short arm, from bottom line to top line.

Having to drop two balls to raise one ball is not a sustainable system.

[Libertasfalsus]

The thing that sets this man apart from all the other "free energy" inventors I've come across as of yet, is that he says he doesn't want money, fame, he just wants to try and help mankind by giving freely to the world this device that he obviously very passionately believes in. As long as they all keep hoarding their ideas and discoveries to try and make a buck, there will never be any progress in the free energy field whether or not it is possible. Kudos And much respect to you Mr. Campbell.

[skyfligther]

Don't work, because the external angle is 3 times lower than the internal

[vatrenikrug]

made it,but ... i also forgothen that iner wheel have greater road (degre) to pass :(

[PatriotSonx]

is not the frequency of the inside in excess to the inside and is that important or not?

[retsnom92]

I retract my statements. This machine fools all of us by hiding one simple fact.

The small wheel has to travel 180 degrease to bring 1 ball up. While the big wheel spins Mush less of that. If the wheels are locked together then one degrease of rotation on the big wheel will be one degrease of rotation for the smaller wheel.

There will always be a timing issue, so it will take two or more balls falling to lift one ball up. This thing will never ever work.

[dreamtheatre2112]

complete foolishness. has anyone realized the simple fact that the wheel has to rotate a full 180 degrees to move the ball back into position just so that it can produce a few degrees of fall? people are mental and uneducated even for considering this dribble!

[RCbeastly]

The fact is, the energy expended through gravity on the downward part of the cycle, is just the same as the energy used to raise the ball in the upward part of the cycle.

[SCRTpilot]

@RCbeastly

Correct, the work done in an closed loop in a homogenus gravity field is ZERO. So Chas Campell, stop making a fool of yourself and remove your vids from YT.

(horizontal movement takes no effort exept due to friction)

[joecam905]

thanks chas for all.excellent project.i totally understand your design..

thank you toolow101

joecam905

[spychopath]

I see that this was posted in 2008. Assuming that it was posted soon after making, I wonder how long it took him to realise that his obvious source of free energy didn't work?

;o)

[toolow101]

@arthus1971  who are you !!!!!!!

[arthus1971]

@toolow101 Someone interested in this system

[toolow101]

@arthus1971 then copy and make your self

[arthus1971]

See this 3w . panacea - bocaf . org / files / Campbell 1 - 2 . pdf

[toolow101]

@arthus1971 i dont undrestand please say again

[glmel]

balls.....i see this a lot here. what on earth is anyone going to POWER with a ball. perhaps the balls are 20 ton in the big mega model later?

good idea, good luck

[shinkengatsxa]

i can only wonder how many of the naysayers here are employed by oil companies...o_O

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa - all the naysayers have studied physics and therefore know there is no such thing as free energy, and thus all such inventions will never work.

So put your tin foil hat back on and go and hide in your basement before the oil companies find out where you live.

LOL

[shinkengatsxa]

@LiamXaoh yeah what ever all the students

mock stuff until someone comes along and

"redefines" something in science. not challenging the

status quo never got us anywhere. you accuse his device of not working but provide no real evidence while he does. ad mit it

you are just a physics fangirl.

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa - in the real world of physics it is up to the person making the claims to provide evidence for those claims. The device being described in this video has been made by many people before and none have worked, so on the basis of evidence to date this device won't work.

Additional evidence is that for this device to work it would have to work on the principle of perpetual motion. Where is the energy coming from to do that? Please explain.

I'll bet you this device never works.

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa - anyone who has invented something that works has never broken the laws of physics. All they have done is shatter people's opinions of what is or isn't possible.

Name one invention that broke any law of physics ever. You're such a smart person so that shouldn't be too hard.

Waiting

waiting

waiting...

[shinkengatsxa]

@LiamXaoh when ever someone did, they

"redefined" what the laws were. Tesla did

a lot of stuff people thought was impossible

also it is ignorant to assume we have discovered

ALL the forces in the universe. it is possible to

build a machine that works off of unknown forces

also apparently this guy did the news investigated it

and the shit ran. sooo you're dumb.

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa

1. Name one law that has been redefined due to an invention.

2. Anything Tesla built that worked broke no laws of physics

3. Provide evidence that this wheel works without any external assistance. You won't be able to because you're talking out of your ass.

4. Who said all the forces in the universe have been discovered - not me - change the subject why don't you?

5. It is not possible to build a machine that doesn't have an energy input.

Waiting

waiting

waiting

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa - google "Chas Cambell gravity wheel" and you'll find out the truth.

But hey, keep on posting, it's good to hear an expert on the field of bullshit.

[shinkengatsxa]

@LiamXaoh @LiamXaoh hey dumbass i did and i found an excelent

theory at to how it works but it isnt "gravity"

per-say it's an inertia motor to be more precise

and physics only says you cant get more energy than

you put in, it DOESNT it's powered by gravity

just because the energy doesnt come from fuel

doesnt mean it's magic god you're dumb

wireless power units can obtain energy from

radio frequency ps i sent you the link to shut u up.

[LiamXaoh]

@shinkengatsxa - so how come when I google for info on this I find test results which say it failed and this is quoted: "It was also admitted that the big gravity wheel "shutters to a stop" and does not self run at this point."

Tests show 1.4kw in and 1kw out. Not free energy. As expected it obeys those silly old laws of physics.

Score one more for the rational people.

[4256573]

Johnthetreeplanter:

Please let me know what engineering school you are attending so that I can be sure to N E V E R hire any of its graduates.

Chas is a world class kook, plain and simple.

[1a2bcea]

Its a pity all these people who dont have a

clue about work done and friction never

mention friction.

I wonder why they never get basic physics.

Perhaps they never had an education.

[1a2bcea]

Right

[1a2bcea]

Sound like alot of balls to me.

[arburo1]

Here we go again! Whatever you do with the old favourite of the unbalanced balls or levers it will always balance. Just check the moments of all weights about the axis, moment being mass times distance. Don't talk about force. Talk about moments. Gravity is not a source of energy, it is simply a force, like an extended spring. When will people learn?

[toolow101]

Dear Its work nicely

regard

shah

[arburo1]

Please read the book Perpetual Motion by Arthur Ord-Hume. This shows all your designs and more.  Perpetual motion is impossible. This was first postulated by Leonardo daVinci, who compared it with the Alchemists, again a fruitless endeavour. Unfortunately, people still strive for the impossible, much of it on Utube. If your design does work, why don't you prove it with a real machine?

[jonthetreeplanter]

genius!!! I'm an engineering student in canada, and my sir name is campbell, keep on inventing bro!!! Harvesting gravity!!!! the only free energy on earth is gravity, I'll keep this concept in mind!!!

[toolow101]

thanks

regard

shah

[GayBoyRunning]

I belive in this Guy as im not to ignored like most of the people of this planet also im very open mined and also i understand what he is saying as its true in wat he's saying. and im also a inventer and made my own engine that runs on air and self feeds and runs by its self with out extra input of power. so my airo motor runs by a serect way as im not risking the desgin on a world wild Blog...

[xadam2dudex]

seems the Aussies have been doing a lot of this kinda thing.. hope they develop something of use and not a waste of time

[876marko]

but not like his 2:1 if I put video a am in trable sory for bed inglish

[876marko]

posible

[lmusho]

Why cant people just show the thing working, I only care about the explination if it works.

[njimbus]

i agreed with rotitomato

although its obviously 2:1 ratio in leverage, but the small ratio travels 3 times more distance in the matter of circle radius. 180 degree vs only 30 degree

no new energy generated here

its always be equal

anyway, great video

[supertecrt]

Thank you for sharing this information. I would like to learn more and buy or build what you have here. How do i contact you? Please send me a message here. Thank you and God Bless you.

[thishasgottobecrazy]

soooooo stupid!!!!

[dominikdul]

Ha ha ha !!! Stupid men!

[Rotitomato]

This is totally full of crap! The outside circle has to move all the way to 6 o'clock in order to lift the inner circle to the same height

[xXxlllManHacklllxXx]

you are right! If we could see one full spin we would see that for 2 balls down he has to lift 6 in the inner circle...

[4take4give]

I hate the fact that you call this a gravity wheel.(I don't believe in gravity. I feel you are using the power of levers. By utilizing the strenght of the 60 degrees. Great idea. I did a video on levers that you might find interesting. Also you might want to look at windmills to see how to gear rpm up. I am pretty sure they gear up from about 15 rpm to 1800 rpm to run a generator.

[furzeham]

How can you not believe in gravity ?, what stops us shooting up into space ?

[4take4give]

not gravity

the force they define as gravity is impossible.

mind you most of their definitions are just plain stupid. then again I might be the idiot, who knows. lol

I think I'll do a quick video right now on physics, check it out tell me what you think . I'll call it E doesn't equal mc^2

[4take4give]

not gravity

the force they define as gravity is impossible.

mind you most of their definitions are just plain stupid. then again I might be the idiot, who knows. lol

I think I'll do a quick video right now on physics, check it out tell me what you think . I'll call it E doesn't equal mc^2

[4take4give]

I guess I should of mentioned that this idea won't work before people assumed that I thought it would. I did a video called why gravity wheels work won't explaining some of the common mistakes why people feel they will.