I think this will work. I once rod a tivoli machine called "flying teacups" which is a carousel with teacup shaped pods around the edge where the ppl sits. I was astonished by the force generated by the barely turning carousel together with the "cups" when they were swung. The G-force seemed more than doubled. So there is more going on here than weight shifting as it looks like, there will be a tremendous force where the weight is swung out. It would be cool to see this tried in practice.
Good, I like that you share this video An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray. Music by Andy Lee Robinson, I wish success always
I Really Like The Video From Your An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray. Music by Andy Lee Robinson
Just another example of moving weights towards the centre going up, to the outside going down.There are plenty of examples of the same principle.They have one thing in common, they will always come to a stop.Losses due to metal to metal friction (yes lubricated), air friction, heat generation. Maybe I'm just stating the obvious. Beautiful computer graphics though.
As far as relativistic speeds are concerned... mass in converted to energy when you speed it up, and as a result, you don't have ions, and you don't have angular momentum, because you don't have mass - you have energy.
If it weren't bolted down, it might wobble around before it came to a stop. If it were bolted down, it's not much of an antigravity machine. The only way you can get away with calling this an antigravity machine is the fact that you're using a planetary gear setup, which is common in older rotary airplanes for the propellers, as they can handle higher gear turnup ratios while still being balanced. You succeeded in imbalancing the design.
The arms with balls closer to the center are always lighter than the ones that are straight, there fore the heavier ones will keep it going untill you stop it. It is even more effective when you can make it bend 3 or 4 times. And when the resistance is crushed to a minimum - don't even hope for it to stop.
@netsurfer10000 oh i get it, it is using constant force of the small gears and the mini gears attatched to it allowing an infinite number of cycles where as a regular sphere would come to a halt pretty quickly. its anti gravity using force against force, with force. could have at least mentioned that.
I looks possible. I don't know if the theory violates the 3rd law of motion.
It certainly would not be power efficient because of the law of angular momentum. At least 50 % of the power you put into it would be lost due to angular momentum (resisting itself). Since it uses weights to propel itself, it would be like a very heavy engine with out a propeller. It won't be practical as an aircraft engine today.
It's not a perpetual motion machine. what it does is to use centrifugal force to propel itself. the 3 spinning weights rotate so that the farthest point of the weights from the center of the machine is always when each weighted gear is on the up position (12 oclock). when at down postiion (6 oclock), the weight is closer to the center. making an imbalance of centrifugal force. this machine would push upwards when a motor is attached to it.
Looks as though people are confusing this for a perpetual motion/gravity motor. It isn't or, doesn't seem like that was the intent. It's not the generate electricity.
This can work, I've seen boats being propelled on water without a propeller using a similar design placed inside the boat (not touching the water at all). The problem I guess would be getting enough power through 3 or 4 of them to give controlled lift.
Mystery of gravity and therefore Egyptian pyramids, Easter Island stone statues, Stonehenge and other ancient megaliths has been solved two years ago. These time capsules contain super technologies (free energy, anti-gravity, etc) and extraterrestrial knowledge coded in their design which have been left for us by Gods (extremely advanced extraterrestrial civilization). If you want to know the TRUTH, download Evgeny Zhukov's book "The Road to home" from zhukovroad com
OMG, a real angular momentum drive. I always had a vision of something like this (tapping off of centrifugal force in one tangent, up) but never was able to fully express it. You could use several of these for lift on an X axis while using 4 for thrust on a Y axis laterally. The one thing that makes me think this may work is the counter force is detuned and offset, which means the forced moments should be around "10 and 2 oclock"
When the free-swinging weights travel upward, their momentum is maximized by allowing them to travel to the top of the arc, farther away from the hub. At the bottom of the arc, the weights swing inward closer to the hub, robbing them of their momentum on the down-swing so that all of the momentum travels upward, thus making the machine perpetually lighter than it actually is, ergo "antigravity."
this thery wouldnt wrk.i see what ur getting at tho.the magnets are the thrust for the whole thing making it spin until the magnetism fades.however,u havnt considered the actual mgnetic gates.wen the mgnets pass eachother,they would push away,in theory.but,when the mgnets r ariving at ther destination at the end of a cycle and mewt wth anther magnt.the two gates would repel in the same direction they came from,they wuld hve no rson 2 skip the 1st 1/2 of the gate nd nly be afected by the 2nd 1/2
1, i see nothing that has anything to do with "anti gravity",
2, all machines spin continuously (Newtons First Law) ... but they don't spin forever because of friction, so this machine especially with so many moving parts would succumb to friction losses very quickly and stop
Gyro. I heard someone working with self propelled gyro's attached in a way that made them lift off the ground by changing there angle. But that is just rumors.
to mention follow up to my post - (I don't want to read all the post) the Blue part is an electic motor driving the ring that is holding the outer gears.
is everyone done looking at Hutchinson yet? what a joke they give him a electronic device and see if he can make things happen that he has no idea how to produce on a functional basis. don't play john Hutchinson, its like the movie that sucked it stole 2 hours of your life.
402 people dont understand it. (unless i dont get the right idea either then) the golden disks at the bottom will throw you up a little then drop. the same effect works when a plane drops where everything falls at the same speed giving the illusion of antigraviity. if im wrong, then please, ahaveland, explain it to me.
Isn't this just centrifugal force creatively juggled vertically, to create the, yet to be achieved, effect of perpetual motion. Anti has no part in this gravitational display.
Anti gravity would have to actually "turn gravity off". Anything that works against gravity to yield a net force of 0N is just an opposing force. So mechanical movement utilizing centrifugal force to oppose gravity, isn't anti gravity. If it was, then you can anti-grav water simply using a bucket and your arm. Also using magnetism, some form of lift such as an airfoil, some kind of thermal application, etc... does not mean that gravity has been compromised.
@brentthecrass You make a compelling semantic argument but, if such a device were used to oppose gravity, what would you call it? It's not flight, at least not in the aerodynamic sense. Interestingly, the higher such a machine were to "fly," the better it would work, presuming its power source isn't atmosphere-dependent. Test models definitely should be tethered. :-)
What is this someones idea of what might work as a anti gravity machine. I like that people are trying and asking the questions, Because thats the only way we get their is to start somewhere.
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
@TouchableTV Shallow observation. Newtons Laws while solid.. are not uniform.. It is believed that thanks to our advancements in both quantum mechanics and quantum physics, Anti gravity will be possible within our lifetimes. this could easily be the design because at the moment anything might work.. laern to be more analytical... do your research.
@martinmystery100 My dear martinmystery100 friend. I do relies the possibilities in quantum physics and quantum mechanics development, but this model here is a complex version of a nearly ancient design that has already been produced and tested. This is nothing but an already dead design. Also, i give you credit for playing minecraft (having seen your channel) and im not saying this TYPE of design isn't possible, Its this design itself.
@TouchableTV agreeed.. but to say antigravity is impossible because of simple physics without taking into mind Theoretical physic... That is indeed a rather plain and simple view of it.
this makes me think of when i spin in my office chair and have my legs out and then while i'm spinning pull them in closer to the rotating axis of the chair and it makes me spin a little faster for a second. i guess thats exactly what this does. but i know this just "one stage"-there are three in this design, dont know if it works differently because of that-the energy efficiency gets canceled out.
I also thought of an inertial drive and made some drawing and this was the re-invented called the Thornton Drive (spelling wrong)... no idea if the forces cancel out but I thought a superconducting version using sub atomic particles would be a better way of efficiently showing an effect if it exists.
@spacedecoy Cooling something down so it becomes superconductive requires an enormous amount of energy. Things cooled down this far still obey the laws of gravity. However they can become viscous free which is pretty amazing but completely unrelated.
even with all the spinning weights its just a fly wheel, but !!!!! I'm wondering If you could include a variable offset that activates only when the weight is flung above the device, greater momentum could be achieved by taking advantage of downwards gravity to overcome the centrifugal inertial balance, I'm thinking even a locking clutch mechanism would work to get around the fixed gearing.
There was a man who used this system and made an engine. He demonstrated the function of engine by locating it in a boat and boat moved forward without contacting water or air. I just can't find that video. If any one knows what I'm talking about, please help me find that video and information about that engine. Thanks :)
@BornPatriot (Sigh) Okay, I guess somebody has to say this every once in a while: IT'S NOT A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE. It's a device to generate propulsion using imbalanced centrifugal force. Will it work? No, not as it is, but some very creative people are scratching their heads about it. Imagine sitting in a canoe and swinging a rock on a string in such a way that it propels the canoe forward. That's the concept.
it seems to me the weights would eventually slow down and stop working all together. gravity would eventually want to pull al those weights down thus stopping any progressive movement.
I made something very similar to that in 1989. Mine was constructed with meccano and it had two rotors with fixed rather than swinging bob weights. I experimented with different lengths of weight moment arms. With long ones and slow rotation it realy felt like there was a net impulse. With shorter ones and fast rotation there wasnt. There is also a twin spinning giroscope version. With two spinning giros travelling around a circumference and free to lift in air. The device weighs less in use.
@Adrianlunnon Only impossible in our dimension. However nothing is impossible in another. We don't have to see it or understand it for it to exist. If there's a will, there's a way. If you can think it, it's possible.
@a2zhandi Exactly what do you mean by dimension? and how do you know about other ones? What proof?? You can't prove anything exists by just declaring it does. I can think on many things that are impossible. It doesn't matter how much will you have it's still impossible.
@Adrianlunnon Guess you've never heard of a different dimension being as close to you as millimeters away. Our virtual reality exists in 3 dimension. Where science says there are many others we can't see.
@a2zhandi I have heard of 4 dimensions, 3 in space and 1 in time. Then various string theories have from 4 to 11 dimensions. They are described as being curled up and smaller than atoms. I have also heard another theory called the multi-verse theory where other universes are very close to our universe. It would be nice to know what exists but unfortunately there is no good way to tell yet what is real.
@Adrianlunnon *parallel universes. Have you seen the earths magnetic field images from space? Looks like a bug with the earth as it's brain./head. There's a lot that doesn't meet the eye in our little realm
@a2zhandi Seeing something that may look like something else is called paradolia and it's a well documented problem. Fighting past these things and real gathering evidence is the key!
@Adrianlunnon I think most people who dwell on this know, at least intuitively, about conservation of energy. We don't hope to overturn that law, just find a small loophole. Gyroscopic forces so closely mimic gravity, there's got to be a way to upset the balance just a bit.
@Adrianlunnon You are right in a closed system. Conservation is true. But where do you pass the baton? A gallon of gasoline(petrol) whatever started a million years+ ago.
@Adrianlunnon You are right in a closed system. Conservation is true. But where do you pass the baton? A gallon of gasoline(petrol) whatever started a million years+ ago. Anti- gravity only means it resists. Gravity free would be more apropriate.
@newage4energy What do you mean pass the baton? A litre of petrol has stored energy and I don't know what it has to do with anything?. No! Antigravity means and always has meant it does not suffer from the effects of gravity. Please, do a google search....
@Adrianlunnon Yep, a Piper Cub is a lawn-mower-simple flying machine that, in the minds of most people, defies gravity. Likewise, the device illustrated in the animation is designed to exert force in one direction more than in the opposite direction and, if that imbalance were directed upward, it would appear to defy gravity. Whether or not the device actually works seems irrelevant; the illustration is appropriately named "antigravity."
When you have use idea of a Fermionic negotiation potential to quantify the Bose-Einstein potential with a negative mass you can arrive at the conclusion that no two alpha-beta metastates can occupy the gravitational inertia field. I would focus more on the underlying material physics and quantum gates involved.
@cdoftx Oy! Concepts such as this are best enjoyed at the "gut" level, rather than examined mathematically. Just LOOK at the device! Doesn't it seem as though the masses that are traveling at a higher velocity on a larger radius around the top would exert more centrifugal force on the system than those at the bottom? Yes, the energy needed to slow the masses for their trip around the bottom is what kills the propulsion, but that's much less intuitive for most of us. It's fun to consider.
@clipperflier As a matter of practice, quantum inertial reaction devices such as this suffer from reactive superposition. You can easily model such a device using a rank 8 tensor (one dimension for each Bode dimension, although you could use a rank 16 spinor). Just my "gut" feeling.
@cdoftx Mathematics is a wonderful tool for describing existing phenomena but, for invention and exploration, my money's on some guy in his basement who's whirling liquid mercury at high RPMs in a malleable chamber. Or maybe it'll be techno kids messing with gyroscopic precession. Whoever does it, there'll probably be a mathematician telling her/him "it ain't gonna freakin' work."
@clipperflier We have the engineering grads to ask how it works, we have the maths grads to ask why it works ..... At least there's always be the psychology grads to ask if we want fries with that. :)
the gravitational field is conservative: therefore the potential energy difference between 2 points is only dependant upon the location of the points... therefore going in a cycle results in no extra energy.
the friction in the system however would stop it after a little bit.
U=U(x,y,z).
That is all the math you need.
(i treated this non relativistically though)
i have a physics bachelor's degree, if that counts for something.
This is neither an antigravity machine, nor is it a perpetual motion machine. It is a continuous motion machine. It isn't going faster, so it isn't a perpetuak motion machine, and it's not creating anything but kinetic energy, so it's not an antigravity machine.
I do not, however, think this is impossible. The design does look a bit shakey, and something could easily go wrong and screw everything up. But one thing is definite; It is extremely fascinating to watch.
@LeeIongi It may not be possible as we know it, but it could be completely possible. Build that machine to it's exact dimensions and prove me wrong, but for now I believe that this is completely possible.
@fudgyhoops There are some video on youtube do show that similar device work on boat, but the boat move very slow. On air plane is impossible, as no enough friction to support it weight, every time it rise 1cm it fall 1cm, if it far away from gravity (weaker) it may work, but again there are no air there, no fiction to hold it still when before it try to propel upward.
@fudgyhoops Suddenly I think that it is possible to, have you play ballon before? if someone blow it big, it fall to ground very slow, because frictional force is bigger. If someone attach this to a very big balloon, it may actually rise. But that don't sound very practical, people will rather fill it with helium, no energy required to rise it.
@LeeIongi Hmm... that does sound very possible. See what happens when you put your mind outside of the box? Bravo! The only physical problem would be keeping the balloon up there though.
For one, its an exciting and FUN subject mater. Two, WHY is everyone getting so upset over it or what may have seemed to be a misleading title??
Three, perpetual motion seems to mostly be an entertaining riddle. I'm not saying its not possible. I would like to see more people working together. Lets face it. Perpetual motion is overrated AND unnecessary in view of potential alternatives that are more quickly achieved AND less costly. Lets put our brains together instead of headbutting.
Sup, I believe this device to be a propulsion system not anti-gravity. Ever get on a merry-go-round? Real hard to stay on when your positioned near the edge. Not so much closer up to the center. So the weight swinging furthest out pulls with more force than the weights closer to the center. Thus producing thrust. Watch this video and study the track of the weights. Logically this makes sense it would work. 20 years and has anyone tested this form of propulsion?
My father came very close to 'perpetual motion' type of machine. However it relied on free swinging weights. On one occasion he only had to give it a small push in the right direction and it would speed up, then come out of timing. I counted twelve revolutions of acceleration before it flew out of sinc. I have no doubt at all that PM (type) will one day be mastered and deliver a lot of positive power output.
Keep up the thinking, all the good things were impossible once. Cheers
I'm an mechanical engineer and as far as I can tell if you're looking for anti-gravity your up for a huge challenge. I've been trying for awhile now along with the rest of the world for the last 200 years or so.
@depth386 True (of course). I made a similar one in 1994; although the weight seems to create a centrifugal force at the top, it slows down on the way back creating a downwards force.
I hear your frustration, Some folks just post shit on the internet just to be oppositional, weather or not they believe what they write is a mystery. Cool CG modeling! I have been working on a centripetal drive concept for some years now and although your machine here appears to be less efficient, we are seeing things in parallel. Keep the faith,,,, some of us understand and think before we write.
Re your question "However, what would happen with heavy excited ions running at relativistic speeds on one side? Would the resultant angular momentum still be zero?".....
Yes... why not just put one side of the machine under a waterfall to keep it going?
Wow. "Free" energy.
Re "heavy excited ions", how much energy's required to get them going? There's your energy offset back to zero.
And how to keep them excited? Give 'em copies of Playboy?
ahaveland, you have impressive demonstration, I have come out with the almost same idea as inertial proportion as you have here. The primary reason this may be going to work is that we get different angular velocity of weight add at different distance from axis, result in acceleration of mass and produce force, when it spin upward, distance of mass further from the axis, angular velocity increase(provided the flywheel can keep it constant angular velocity). (continue next post)
@LeeIongi The mass accelerate upward and apply a force to the machine at let say 2 o'clock, when it go down, deceleration, result a net force at direction of 10 'clock. These is at least theoretically how it work. But it waste great amount of force x I assume (cancel it other direction out), the result force of Y upward is relatively small. I believe it will work provided if put enough of force into the system, and put the motor into the weight. (continue next post)
@LeeIongi But in real world, I will doubt if someone can get an engine with such a huge torque to overcome the waste in x direction and at the same time the gravity, not to say if any material can withstand very high speed of the system without break apart in order to produce adequate huge lift.
@LeeIongi Inertial Propulsion Device, look at other video, this kind of device actually work, but the force is very tiny under lo speed rotation, sorry misspelling in the first post.
err.... if the earths spin did contribute to any centrifugal force, wouldnt that force be pulling us AWAY from earth??? much like how u spin a ball at the end of a string, the ball will be "pulled" away from your hand which is holding one end of the string.
@danthelongman first of all, most of the people here are just talking bullshit.
to your question: where's a centrifugal force, there has to be a centripetal force (google it!). at the equator, this is about 1/30 times your body mass and at the poles it's nothing! on the other hand, the gravital force is 10 times your body mass (300 times stronger)!
gravity is like the string in your example. if you spin it too fast, the string snaps and the ball flies away.
@Flubbre2100 haha yeah alot of ppl on YT just talk alot of BS..haha.. but still my point was, wouldnt centrifugal force "pull" a person AWAY from the center of the earth where as gravity pulls that person TOWARDS the center of the earth? just like the ball string example i said earlier?
@kbaker02 F=ma... so wouldnt an object under a certain pulling force already implies it undergoes an acceleration... I say pulled to highlight the presence of a centrifugal force acting on it.
@danthelongman Inertial propulsion currently only possible work on car or boat by any mechanical mean. When you spin a ball, you fell it pull you away because you stand on a fixed point which allow exchange of the force with ground, but if you are flying you won't be able to do this. It obey newton third law.
This is so cool, I posted a video response with a video that I made of something similar that I saw in a dream. I think that we're on the right track.
Nice animation. You probably already know, but this was patented as the Thornson device in the eightees. It actually works for horizontal applications, but hasn't been shown to produce vertical lift. you can google Thornson and Canoe for more info.
QUE HARAN AHORA LAS PETROLERAS AMIGOS???? YOUTUBE " 2012 GRANDES ACONTECIMIENTOS " QUE LO PASEIS BIEN. POR SUPUESTO SU FUNCIONAMIENTO HA SIDO COMPROBADO. EN MI CORTIJO NO PAGO LUZ. NI NINGUN VECINO. POTENCIA ILIMITADA. FUERZA DE REACCIÓN NEUTRALIZADA EN EL MOVIL PERPETUO. "sencillo mecanismo dador de energia, capaz de iniciar, mantener, incluso realimentar su propio movimiento mediante la neutralizacion parcial de los efectos que la fuerza de reaccion ejerce sobre un vector original"
I am very happy to see the vidoe after you give this An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray
AntoMelta 18 hours ago
I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge Antigravity
willamricard 19 hours ago
Steady I Really Like This Video An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray. Music by Andy Lee Robinson
imegatrone 21 hours ago
I think this will work. I once rod a tivoli machine called "flying teacups" which is a carousel with teacup shaped pods around the edge where the ppl sits. I was astonished by the force generated by the barely turning carousel together with the "cups" when they were swung. The G-force seemed more than doubled. So there is more going on here than weight shifting as it looks like, there will be a tremendous force where the weight is swung out. It would be cool to see this tried in practice.
KapteinOpel 22 hours ago
Good, I like that you share this video An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray. Music by Andy Lee Robinson, I wish success always
Melehete 22 hours ago
Nice Video An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You
NganaJHone 1 day ago
I Really Like The Video From Your An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray. Music by Andy Lee Robinson
Ondelendo 1 day ago
Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing An idea for an antigravity machine that I illustrated in 1992 using 3d-studio and povray
bundawartini 1 day ago
wouldve mechanically been dismissed as useless in the 18th century. They started with steam engines then :D
MrTiti 2 weeks ago
ufo Holland, al die oefeningen met een schootel jullie maar denken dat er vliegende schotels bestaan
wimpyentimothy 3 weeks ago
Just another example of moving weights towards the centre going up, to the outside going down.There are plenty of examples of the same principle.They have one thing in common, they will always come to a stop.Losses due to metal to metal friction (yes lubricated), air friction, heat generation. Maybe I'm just stating the obvious. Beautiful computer graphics though.
winterka100 3 weeks ago
@winterka100 its not perpetual motion its mechanical antigrav
MrROTD 3 weeks ago
@MrROTD Sorry, my mistake. I can't see how it demonstrates anti gravity. Maybe "Anti Gravity" is just an artistic name for a cool virtual sculpture.
winterka100 3 weeks ago
gears are by nature inefficient...
trex9966 3 weeks ago
"cough"FRICTION"cough"
blisslen 1 month ago
I wanna see this as a carnival ride. :P
iXaos7 1 month ago 7
@iXaos7 There is one called the zipper that I rode as a kid. It was exactly the same except the outer circle was elongated in an oval shape
7F0X7 2 weeks ago
wheres the BEEF?
1HayesEng 1 month ago
If you put the comment like ''where is antigravity??'' you are an idiot.
D3Nord 1 month ago
Interesting animation. You must have put a lot of time and effort into that.
rigelthe16th 1 month ago
????
DrMachiavelli 1 month ago
As far as relativistic speeds are concerned... mass in converted to energy when you speed it up, and as a result, you don't have ions, and you don't have angular momentum, because you don't have mass - you have energy.
cupidlsu 1 month ago
If it weren't bolted down, it might wobble around before it came to a stop. If it were bolted down, it's not much of an antigravity machine. The only way you can get away with calling this an antigravity machine is the fact that you're using a planetary gear setup, which is common in older rotary airplanes for the propellers, as they can handle higher gear turnup ratios while still being balanced. You succeeded in imbalancing the design.
cupidlsu 1 month ago
@docsharp00
Perpetual motion can be achieved.
vikingWindmill 1 month ago
@vikingWindmill no, cannot ;) you always have lost of energy some where.
docsharp00 1 month ago
@docsharp00
watch?v=Yca2m5PTP7A
The arms with balls closer to the center are always lighter than the ones that are straight, there fore the heavier ones will keep it going untill you stop it. It is even more effective when you can make it bend 3 or 4 times. And when the resistance is crushed to a minimum - don't even hope for it to stop.
vikingWindmill 1 month ago
@netsurfer10000 oh i get it, it is using constant force of the small gears and the mini gears attatched to it allowing an infinite number of cycles where as a regular sphere would come to a halt pretty quickly. its anti gravity using force against force, with force. could have at least mentioned that.
michealharty 2 months ago
looks like stupid ass fucking animation to me
zapster2412111 2 months ago
Let`s get our heads around Perpetual Motion first
AClarke2007 2 months ago
It doesnt work, because it doesn't make any sence! It looks like it does, but it doesn't! Sorry....
TheOriginalEviltech 2 months ago
I looks possible. I don't know if the theory violates the 3rd law of motion.
It certainly would not be power efficient because of the law of angular momentum. At least 50 % of the power you put into it would be lost due to angular momentum (resisting itself). Since it uses weights to propel itself, it would be like a very heavy engine with out a propeller. It won't be practical as an aircraft engine today.
KingLutherQ 2 months ago
It's not a perpetual motion machine. what it does is to use centrifugal force to propel itself. the 3 spinning weights rotate so that the farthest point of the weights from the center of the machine is always when each weighted gear is on the up position (12 oclock). when at down postiion (6 oclock), the weight is closer to the center. making an imbalance of centrifugal force. this machine would push upwards when a motor is attached to it.
KingLutherQ 2 months ago
This made my physics class a waste of 4 years.
Bonnieie1 2 months ago
this is an perpetual motion machine not an antigravity device..
zero00tolerance 2 months ago
I see it spinning and... nothing else. What am I supposed to be seeing here?
KalasenZyphurus 2 months ago
@KalasenZyphurus looks like the weight being flung out at the top should pull it into the air
29379 2 months ago
Looks as though people are confusing this for a perpetual motion/gravity motor. It isn't or, doesn't seem like that was the intent. It's not the generate electricity.
one2toomany 2 months ago
The only thing this device can do is lighten your wallet!
markakroll 2 months ago
This can work, I've seen boats being propelled on water without a propeller using a similar design placed inside the boat (not touching the water at all). The problem I guess would be getting enough power through 3 or 4 of them to give controlled lift.
repawnd 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mystery of gravity and therefore Egyptian pyramids, Easter Island stone statues, Stonehenge and other ancient megaliths has been solved two years ago. These time capsules contain super technologies (free energy, anti-gravity, etc) and extraterrestrial knowledge coded in their design which have been left for us by Gods (extremely advanced extraterrestrial civilization). If you want to know the TRUTH, download Evgeny Zhukov's book "The Road to home" from zhukovroad com
evgenyzhukov 2 months ago
Ouch, my law has been violated.
albdavidt 2 months ago
OMG, a real angular momentum drive. I always had a vision of something like this (tapping off of centrifugal force in one tangent, up) but never was able to fully express it. You could use several of these for lift on an X axis while using 4 for thrust on a Y axis laterally. The one thing that makes me think this may work is the counter force is detuned and offset, which means the forced moments should be around "10 and 2 oclock"
RiaRadioFMHD773 3 months ago
it's anti gravity because gravity is meant to bring it to a stop along with other resistive forces
usuckbad2 3 months ago
If this is an anti gravity machine, why doesn't it float away?
UpcomingJedi 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you want to get the Magnetic-Generator plans
Just search Google for "Best Magnetic Generator"
Click the First result (Skip the Advertisements)
I found it to be a great resource
eithanyakobi 3 months ago
@eithanyakobi ★★★★★
If you want to get the Magnetic-Generator plans
Just search Google for "Best Magnetic Generator"
Click the First result (Skip the Advertisements)
I found it to be a great resource
SurvivalGuide2012 3 months ago
When the free-swinging weights travel upward, their momentum is maximized by allowing them to travel to the top of the arc, farther away from the hub. At the bottom of the arc, the weights swing inward closer to the hub, robbing them of their momentum on the down-swing so that all of the momentum travels upward, thus making the machine perpetually lighter than it actually is, ergo "antigravity."
KratosBlades1 3 months ago
What's anti gravitational about it? It just looks like a needlessly complex circular motion pendulum.
bladerunner12 3 months ago
Windmills do not work that way! GOOD NIGHT!
Typho0n86 3 months ago
Cute cartoon.
antilibercrat 3 months ago
i could make this out of lego
cistang1000 3 months ago
this thery wouldnt wrk.i see what ur getting at tho.the magnets are the thrust for the whole thing making it spin until the magnetism fades.however,u havnt considered the actual mgnetic gates.wen the mgnets pass eachother,they would push away,in theory.but,when the mgnets r ariving at ther destination at the end of a cycle and mewt wth anther magnt.the two gates would repel in the same direction they came from,they wuld hve no rson 2 skip the 1st 1/2 of the gate nd nly be afected by the 2nd 1/2
209hii 3 months ago
1, i see nothing that has anything to do with "anti gravity",
2, all machines spin continuously (Newtons First Law) ... but they don't spin forever because of friction, so this machine especially with so many moving parts would succumb to friction losses very quickly and stop
Ash243x 3 months ago
video should be named 'Perpetuum Mobile'. Would have saved a few hundred comments.
Holammer 3 months ago
and where's the antigravity?
netsurfer10000 3 months ago 42
I had the same idea, but I want to make it electrónically.
disaluan 3 months ago
Gyro. I heard someone working with self propelled gyro's attached in a way that made them lift off the ground by changing there angle. But that is just rumors.
tock101 4 months ago
Fing awesome man! I made the same (motion and equal gear system) 20 years ago. Only issue is it take a "lot" of energy and rips itself apart.
The answer to why it works is false neutral center. It's a momentium/impules engine.
Mahhn 4 months ago
to mention follow up to my post - (I don't want to read all the post) the Blue part is an electic motor driving the ring that is holding the outer gears.
Mahhn 4 months ago
So, How does this relate to anti gravity?
usernamen0tfound 4 months ago
such media is used by insolent swindlers to merchandise their cheep perpetuum mobile!
Mixam89 4 months ago
it will not turn by itself even one 360' cycle..no fucken way !
logika1972 4 months ago
is everyone done looking at Hutchinson yet? what a joke they give him a electronic device and see if he can make things happen that he has no idea how to produce on a functional basis. don't play john Hutchinson, its like the movie that sucked it stole 2 hours of your life.
Canada's Einstein.
groovygoolie 4 months ago
402 people dont understand it. (unless i dont get the right idea either then) the golden disks at the bottom will throw you up a little then drop. the same effect works when a plane drops where everything falls at the same speed giving the illusion of antigraviity. if im wrong, then please, ahaveland, explain it to me.
xxXpitboyXxx 4 months ago
That is cool !!!
spacemouse1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If You want to get Free Energy System to power your Home:
- Here is my advice for you:
-- There is a website that review the current Magnetic Generators in the market
--- Go To Google and search for --> Top Magnet Generator
---- Click the first results and... Wa-la!
TopMagneticGenerator(dot)Com
gmesthermax 4 months ago
it must be a hot day, why did they turn that fan on?
glinka57 4 months ago
HEY SHAVELAND (huh huh heh huh , SHAVEland...) don't get yer Pubic Hairs caught in that thing! I speak from Experience.
DancingSpiderman 4 months ago
Isn't this just centrifugal force creatively juggled vertically, to create the, yet to be achieved, effect of perpetual motion. Anti has no part in this gravitational display.
QuasiBonafide 4 months ago
Anti gravity would have to actually "turn gravity off". Anything that works against gravity to yield a net force of 0N is just an opposing force. So mechanical movement utilizing centrifugal force to oppose gravity, isn't anti gravity. If it was, then you can anti-grav water simply using a bucket and your arm. Also using magnetism, some form of lift such as an airfoil, some kind of thermal application, etc... does not mean that gravity has been compromised.
brentthecrass 4 months ago
@brentthecrass You make a compelling semantic argument but, if such a device were used to oppose gravity, what would you call it? It's not flight, at least not in the aerodynamic sense. Interestingly, the higher such a machine were to "fly," the better it would work, presuming its power source isn't atmosphere-dependent. Test models definitely should be tethered. :-)
clipperflier 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please watch You Tube"New Amazing Invention for EV-4".
dftdmt 5 months ago
What is this someones idea of what might work as a anti gravity machine. I like that people are trying and asking the questions, Because thats the only way we get their is to start somewhere.
kennyd722 5 months ago
@kennyd722 there*
MrEuler0 5 months ago
I only see a computer animation, not antigravity...
theR34p3R 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are a truth seeker, search "Truth Contest" in Google and click on the 1st result, then open The Present and read what it says. Everyone needs to see this. The Present will turn this world right-side up if it reaches enough people. You will see what I mean when you read the first page.
SeekTruthN0w 5 months ago
Nice thought but the thing is... it wouldn't work. basic physics.
TouchableTV 5 months ago
@TouchableTV Shallow observation. Newtons Laws while solid.. are not uniform.. It is believed that thanks to our advancements in both quantum mechanics and quantum physics, Anti gravity will be possible within our lifetimes. this could easily be the design because at the moment anything might work.. laern to be more analytical... do your research.
martinmystery100 5 months ago
@martinmystery100 My dear martinmystery100 friend. I do relies the possibilities in quantum physics and quantum mechanics development, but this model here is a complex version of a nearly ancient design that has already been produced and tested. This is nothing but an already dead design. Also, i give you credit for playing minecraft (having seen your channel) and im not saying this TYPE of design isn't possible, Its this design itself.
TouchableTV 5 months ago
@TouchableTV agreeed.. but to say antigravity is impossible because of simple physics without taking into mind Theoretical physic... That is indeed a rather plain and simple view of it.
martinmystery100 5 months ago
@martinmystery100 I have to agree. Im not saying its impossible all together, but rather unlikely with this particular design.
TouchableTV 5 months ago
@TouchableTV With that I can agree.. It has been very nice debating with you.. goodbye
martinmystery100 5 months ago
@martinmystery100 Ha yes you are quite an agreeable opponent. Have fun with minecraft :D
TouchableTV 5 months ago
@TouchableTV As well with you maybe some day you cane look me up: Bazinga7425. Farewell
martinmystery100 5 months ago
Nice CG project, Wheres the anti gravity?
winghoof69 5 months ago
not anti gravity boys and girls... nice graphics though.
scirustech 5 months ago
could that work? cause I think something is not right, just couldn't put my finger on it.
AhmadAboulFarag 5 months ago
this makes me think of when i spin in my office chair and have my legs out and then while i'm spinning pull them in closer to the rotating axis of the chair and it makes me spin a little faster for a second. i guess thats exactly what this does. but i know this just "one stage"-there are three in this design, dont know if it works differently because of that-the energy efficiency gets canceled out.
benjorgensen1 5 months ago
so the weights pushes the wheel so it would go on forever
theyoyoclawman 5 months ago
This isn't anti-gravity, it USES gravity. Looks like a nice way to make free energy, though.
legacysage 5 months ago
I also thought of an inertial drive and made some drawing and this was the re-invented called the Thornton Drive (spelling wrong)... no idea if the forces cancel out but I thought a superconducting version using sub atomic particles would be a better way of efficiently showing an effect if it exists.
Respect Guy
spacedecoy 5 months ago
@spacedecoy Cooling something down so it becomes superconductive requires an enormous amount of energy. Things cooled down this far still obey the laws of gravity. However they can become viscous free which is pretty amazing but completely unrelated.
Adrianlunnon 5 months ago
@Adrianlunnon There are copper oxide superconductors that superconduct at temperatures above 90K. Some even as high as 133K now!
vanderholt2 5 months ago
@vanderholt2 This is true, However it still doesn't change my point. It requires a lot of power to cool anything down to those temperatures
.
Adrianlunnon 5 months ago
EXCUSE ME , BUT IF YOU TITLE A VIDEO , " ANTIGRAVITY " . DON'T SHOW US A SIMPLIFIED AUTOMOBILE DIFFERENTIAL . GIANFRANCO FRONZI . AUGUST / 5 / 2011
9493760 5 months ago
@9493760 XD
Your explanation=Awesome
TouchableTV 5 months ago
even with all the spinning weights its just a fly wheel, but !!!!! I'm wondering If you could include a variable offset that activates only when the weight is flung above the device, greater momentum could be achieved by taking advantage of downwards gravity to overcome the centrifugal inertial balance, I'm thinking even a locking clutch mechanism would work to get around the fixed gearing.
Php48 6 months ago
i only saw one weight doing the heart shape on the vimana video
DarkStatic69 6 months ago
There was a man who used this system and made an engine. He demonstrated the function of engine by locating it in a boat and boat moved forward without contacting water or air. I just can't find that video. If any one knows what I'm talking about, please help me find that video and information about that engine. Thanks :)
125varma 6 months ago
@125varma if you find that video can you send it to me?
GoBIGclan 6 months ago
Ok, nice graphic of a prepetual motion machine - udder failure -
computer simulations dont always work in the real world this is one of them
BornPatriot 6 months ago
@BornPatriot (Sigh) Okay, I guess somebody has to say this every once in a while: IT'S NOT A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE. It's a device to generate propulsion using imbalanced centrifugal force. Will it work? No, not as it is, but some very creative people are scratching their heads about it. Imagine sitting in a canoe and swinging a rock on a string in such a way that it propels the canoe forward. That's the concept.
clipperflier 6 months ago
yeah this idea haunted me for years of my life. Intuition can be a bitch
Sq7Arno 6 months ago
you're a f00kin idiot!
CrustyCrabs 6 months ago
Why wouldn't a device like this increase the torque in windmill turbines?
Mrcrazysnowmonkey 6 months ago
it seems to me the weights would eventually slow down and stop working all together. gravity would eventually want to pull al those weights down thus stopping any progressive movement.
f8talh8red 6 months ago
I made something very similar to that in 1989. Mine was constructed with meccano and it had two rotors with fixed rather than swinging bob weights. I experimented with different lengths of weight moment arms. With long ones and slow rotation it realy felt like there was a net impulse. With shorter ones and fast rotation there wasnt. There is also a twin spinning giroscope version. With two spinning giros travelling around a circumference and free to lift in air. The device weighs less in use.
railroader100 6 months ago
Dare you to stick your finger in that...
darkarm3rocks 6 months ago
You would think so but the fact is there is no way and no loophole.
Adrianlunnon 6 months ago
@Adrianlunnon Only impossible in our dimension. However nothing is impossible in another. We don't have to see it or understand it for it to exist. If there's a will, there's a way. If you can think it, it's possible.
a2zhandi 6 months ago
@a2zhandi Exactly what do you mean by dimension? and how do you know about other ones? What proof?? You can't prove anything exists by just declaring it does. I can think on many things that are impossible. It doesn't matter how much will you have it's still impossible.
Adrianlunnon 6 months ago
@Adrianlunnon Guess you've never heard of a different dimension being as close to you as millimeters away. Our virtual reality exists in 3 dimension. Where science says there are many others we can't see.
Thanks
a2zhandi 6 months ago
@a2zhandi I have heard of 4 dimensions, 3 in space and 1 in time. Then various string theories have from 4 to 11 dimensions. They are described as being curled up and smaller than atoms. I have also heard another theory called the multi-verse theory where other universes are very close to our universe. It would be nice to know what exists but unfortunately there is no good way to tell yet what is real.
Adrianlunnon 6 months ago
@Adrianlunnon *parallel universes. Have you seen the earths magnetic field images from space? Looks like a bug with the earth as it's brain./head. There's a lot that doesn't meet the eye in our little realm
a2zhandi 6 months ago
@a2zhandi Seeing something that may look like something else is called paradolia and it's a well documented problem. Fighting past these things and real gathering evidence is the key!
Adrianlunnon 6 months ago
Yes it would still be zero due to the laws of conservation of energy.
Adrianlunnon 7 months ago 2
@Adrianlunnon I think most people who dwell on this know, at least intuitively, about conservation of energy. We don't hope to overturn that law, just find a small loophole. Gyroscopic forces so closely mimic gravity, there's got to be a way to upset the balance just a bit.
clipperflier 6 months ago
@Adrianlunnon You are right in a closed system. Conservation is true. But where do you pass the baton? A gallon of gasoline(petrol) whatever started a million years+ ago.
newage4energy 5 months ago
@Adrianlunnon You are right in a closed system. Conservation is true. But where do you pass the baton? A gallon of gasoline(petrol) whatever started a million years+ ago. Anti- gravity only means it resists. Gravity free would be more apropriate.
newage4energy 5 months ago
@newage4energy What do you mean pass the baton? A litre of petrol has stored energy and I don't know what it has to do with anything?. No! Antigravity means and always has meant it does not suffer from the effects of gravity. Please, do a google search....
Adrianlunnon 5 months ago
A Piper Cub is an anti-gravity device.
clipperflier 5 months ago
@clipperflier Care to explain a little more? I googled it and it seems you are recurring to a PLANE!
Adrianlunnon 5 months ago
@Adrianlunnon Yep, a Piper Cub is a lawn-mower-simple flying machine that, in the minds of most people, defies gravity. Likewise, the device illustrated in the animation is designed to exert force in one direction more than in the opposite direction and, if that imbalance were directed upward, it would appear to defy gravity. Whether or not the device actually works seems irrelevant; the illustration is appropriately named "antigravity."
clipperflier 5 months ago
antigravity? yes, and i´m mickey mouse.
jezuceto 7 months ago
@jezuceto imposter!
MadOldPete 6 months ago
When you have use idea of a Fermionic negotiation potential to quantify the Bose-Einstein potential with a negative mass you can arrive at the conclusion that no two alpha-beta metastates can occupy the gravitational inertia field. I would focus more on the underlying material physics and quantum gates involved.
cdoftx 7 months ago
@cdoftx Oy! Concepts such as this are best enjoyed at the "gut" level, rather than examined mathematically. Just LOOK at the device! Doesn't it seem as though the masses that are traveling at a higher velocity on a larger radius around the top would exert more centrifugal force on the system than those at the bottom? Yes, the energy needed to slow the masses for their trip around the bottom is what kills the propulsion, but that's much less intuitive for most of us. It's fun to consider.
clipperflier 7 months ago
@clipperflier As a matter of practice, quantum inertial reaction devices such as this suffer from reactive superposition. You can easily model such a device using a rank 8 tensor (one dimension for each Bode dimension, although you could use a rank 16 spinor). Just my "gut" feeling.
cdoftx 7 months ago
@cdoftx Mathematics is a wonderful tool for describing existing phenomena but, for invention and exploration, my money's on some guy in his basement who's whirling liquid mercury at high RPMs in a malleable chamber. Or maybe it'll be techno kids messing with gyroscopic precession. Whoever does it, there'll probably be a mathematician telling her/him "it ain't gonna freakin' work."
clipperflier 7 months ago
@clipperflier We have the engineering grads to ask how it works, we have the maths grads to ask why it works ..... At least there's always be the psychology grads to ask if we want fries with that. :)
Freeflyer91 6 months ago
lemme prove it doesn't work:
the gravitational field is conservative: therefore the potential energy difference between 2 points is only dependant upon the location of the points... therefore going in a cycle results in no extra energy.
the friction in the system however would stop it after a little bit.
U=U(x,y,z).
That is all the math you need.
(i treated this non relativistically though)
i have a physics bachelor's degree, if that counts for something.
De4sher 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I would like some opinions on the device I have designed. Check out my page!!
Innateengineer 7 months ago
what are you trying to make exactly? it looks very nice. but I didn't understood your idea (after reading the desc.).
P.S: I'm a MS in mechanical engineering.
gomunkul 7 months ago
This is neither an antigravity machine, nor is it a perpetual motion machine. It is a continuous motion machine. It isn't going faster, so it isn't a perpetuak motion machine, and it's not creating anything but kinetic energy, so it's not an antigravity machine.
I do not, however, think this is impossible. The design does look a bit shakey, and something could easily go wrong and screw everything up. But one thing is definite; It is extremely fascinating to watch.
fudgyhoops 7 months ago
Comment removed
LeeIongi 7 months ago
@LeeIongi It may not be possible as we know it, but it could be completely possible. Build that machine to it's exact dimensions and prove me wrong, but for now I believe that this is completely possible.
fudgyhoops 7 months ago
@fudgyhoops There are some video on youtube do show that similar device work on boat, but the boat move very slow. On air plane is impossible, as no enough friction to support it weight, every time it rise 1cm it fall 1cm, if it far away from gravity (weaker) it may work, but again there are no air there, no fiction to hold it still when before it try to propel upward.
LeeIongi 7 months ago
@LeeIongi That may be so, but still I am persistent that unless you prove to me that it's fake, I will believe.
fudgyhoops 7 months ago
@fudgyhoops Suddenly I think that it is possible to, have you play ballon before? if someone blow it big, it fall to ground very slow, because frictional force is bigger. If someone attach this to a very big balloon, it may actually rise. But that don't sound very practical, people will rather fill it with helium, no energy required to rise it.
LeeIongi 7 months ago
@LeeIongi Hmm... that does sound very possible. See what happens when you put your mind outside of the box? Bravo! The only physical problem would be keeping the balloon up there though.
fudgyhoops 7 months ago
For one, its an exciting and FUN subject mater. Two, WHY is everyone getting so upset over it or what may have seemed to be a misleading title??
Three, perpetual motion seems to mostly be an entertaining riddle. I'm not saying its not possible. I would like to see more people working together. Lets face it. Perpetual motion is overrated AND unnecessary in view of potential alternatives that are more quickly achieved AND less costly. Lets put our brains together instead of headbutting.
KDUBINYA 7 months ago
I hate misleading titles! This is decent CG, but it has nothing at all to do with antigravity.
aerhearts 7 months ago
it's shiny. what is it suppose to do
pokemonkiller20 7 months ago
Sup, I believe this device to be a propulsion system not anti-gravity. Ever get on a merry-go-round? Real hard to stay on when your positioned near the edge. Not so much closer up to the center. So the weight swinging furthest out pulls with more force than the weights closer to the center. Thus producing thrust. Watch this video and study the track of the weights. Logically this makes sense it would work. 20 years and has anyone tested this form of propulsion?
Ninjabones 8 months ago
all you guys are nerds
TheCrazyKid1381 8 months ago
it works! thank you!
schpeidermann 8 months ago
My father came very close to 'perpetual motion' type of machine. However it relied on free swinging weights. On one occasion he only had to give it a small push in the right direction and it would speed up, then come out of timing. I counted twelve revolutions of acceleration before it flew out of sinc. I have no doubt at all that PM (type) will one day be mastered and deliver a lot of positive power output.
Keep up the thinking, all the good things were impossible once. Cheers
Loader2k 8 months ago
I see how it could work.. its throwing the weights upwards creating negative G's. it would make it lighter but not have any "antigravity."
BeauKnight96 8 months ago
I'm an mechanical engineer and as far as I can tell if you're looking for anti-gravity your up for a huge challenge. I've been trying for awhile now along with the rest of the world for the last 200 years or so.
awabast 8 months ago
This is not antigravity. It's a bunch of gears and linkages that do nothing.
depth386 8 months ago
@depth386 True (of course). I made a similar one in 1994; although the weight seems to create a centrifugal force at the top, it slows down on the way back creating a downwards force.
It's a nice animation though.
Nomasain 8 months ago
I hear your frustration, Some folks just post shit on the internet just to be oppositional, weather or not they believe what they write is a mystery. Cool CG modeling! I have been working on a centripetal drive concept for some years now and although your machine here appears to be less efficient, we are seeing things in parallel. Keep the faith,,,, some of us understand and think before we write.
kevinmoore001 8 months ago
Re your question "However, what would happen with heavy excited ions running at relativistic speeds on one side? Would the resultant angular momentum still be zero?".....
Yes... why not just put one side of the machine under a waterfall to keep it going?
Wow. "Free" energy.
Re "heavy excited ions", how much energy's required to get them going? There's your energy offset back to zero.
And how to keep them excited? Give 'em copies of Playboy?
YorkLumsey 8 months ago
ahaveland, you have impressive demonstration, I have come out with the almost same idea as inertial proportion as you have here. The primary reason this may be going to work is that we get different angular velocity of weight add at different distance from axis, result in acceleration of mass and produce force, when it spin upward, distance of mass further from the axis, angular velocity increase(provided the flywheel can keep it constant angular velocity). (continue next post)
LeeIongi 8 months ago
@LeeIongi The mass accelerate upward and apply a force to the machine at let say 2 o'clock, when it go down, deceleration, result a net force at direction of 10 'clock. These is at least theoretically how it work. But it waste great amount of force x I assume (cancel it other direction out), the result force of Y upward is relatively small. I believe it will work provided if put enough of force into the system, and put the motor into the weight. (continue next post)
LeeIongi 8 months ago
@LeeIongi But in real world, I will doubt if someone can get an engine with such a huge torque to overcome the waste in x direction and at the same time the gravity, not to say if any material can withstand very high speed of the system without break apart in order to produce adequate huge lift.
LeeIongi 8 months ago
@LeeIongi Inertial Propulsion Device, look at other video, this kind of device actually work, but the force is very tiny under lo speed rotation, sorry misspelling in the first post.
LeeIongi 8 months ago
I know it wouldn't work but if someone built it. It would be a work of art. It looks great.
52memor 8 months ago
Your all virgins
doggydog941 9 months ago
kool
xXxFallenGreedxXx 9 months ago
err.... if the earths spin did contribute to any centrifugal force, wouldnt that force be pulling us AWAY from earth??? much like how u spin a ball at the end of a string, the ball will be "pulled" away from your hand which is holding one end of the string.
danthelongman 9 months ago
@danthelongman first of all, most of the people here are just talking bullshit.
to your question: where's a centrifugal force, there has to be a centripetal force (google it!). at the equator, this is about 1/30 times your body mass and at the poles it's nothing! on the other hand, the gravital force is 10 times your body mass (300 times stronger)!
gravity is like the string in your example. if you spin it too fast, the string snaps and the ball flies away.
Flubbre2100 9 months ago
@Flubbre2100 haha yeah alot of ppl on YT just talk alot of BS..haha.. but still my point was, wouldnt centrifugal force "pull" a person AWAY from the center of the earth where as gravity pulls that person TOWARDS the center of the earth? just like the ball string example i said earlier?
danthelongman 9 months ago
@danthelongman with "talking BS" i actually meant the guy saying something about the spinning of the earth creating gravity.
what you were saying was right.
every mass induces gravity, whether it's spinning or not. F = (G * m * M) / r²
gravity depends only on the masses of two bodies [m & M] and the distance between their centers [r].
Flubbre2100 9 months ago
@danthelongman It wouldn't be "pulled" away from your hand; it would accelerate away from your hand.
kbaker02 9 months ago
@kbaker02 F=ma... so wouldnt an object under a certain pulling force already implies it undergoes an acceleration... I say pulled to highlight the presence of a centrifugal force acting on it.
danthelongman 9 months ago
@danthelongman Inertial propulsion currently only possible work on car or boat by any mechanical mean. When you spin a ball, you fell it pull you away because you stand on a fixed point which allow exchange of the force with ground, but if you are flying you won't be able to do this. It obey newton third law.
LeeIongi 7 months ago
keep it up fella hope it goes well
smelldis1luv 9 months ago
Build it, then you'll see if it works :-)
sphinxart 9 months ago
i would think that friction would cause a problem here but im not entirely sure
germanmcccxxxvii 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hello! I am a student of engineering in Spain, I am completely amazed to see this!,
I recently had the same idea with a different design!
It also makes me sad that something that I thought it was not discovered is already patented...
anyway I'd like to continue studying this machine, it would be great to improve it someway.
uo208561 10 months ago
Hello! I am a student of engineering in Spain, I am completely amazed to see this!,
I recently had the same idea with a different design!
It also makes me sad that something that I thought it was not discovered is already patented...
anyway I'd like to continue studying this machine, it would be great to improve it someway.
uo208561 10 months ago 10
@uo208561 Wanna tell u a "secret"? The thing is that ordinary turbojet engine is far more efficient "antigravity machine" than this piece of shit.
sonic7235919 5 months ago
This is so cool, I posted a video response with a video that I made of something similar that I saw in a dream. I think that we're on the right track.
Naddycat 10 months ago
Nice animation. You probably already know, but this was patented as the Thornson device in the eightees. It actually works for horizontal applications, but hasn't been shown to produce vertical lift. you can google Thornson and Canoe for more info.
Cheers!
strongmindII 10 months ago
QUE HARAN AHORA LAS PETROLERAS AMIGOS???? YOUTUBE " 2012 GRANDES ACONTECIMIENTOS " QUE LO PASEIS BIEN. POR SUPUESTO SU FUNCIONAMIENTO HA SIDO COMPROBADO. EN MI CORTIJO NO PAGO LUZ. NI NINGUN VECINO. POTENCIA ILIMITADA. FUERZA DE REACCIÓN NEUTRALIZADA EN EL MOVIL PERPETUO. "sencillo mecanismo dador de energia, capaz de iniciar, mantener, incluso realimentar su propio movimiento mediante la neutralizacion parcial de los efectos que la fuerza de reaccion ejerce sobre un vector original"