It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Gravity Powered Machine

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Bob Kostoff got a patent for his free energy machine.

Source: www.thepost.ca...






The machine – which only requires a little bit of start-up juice before it creates enough power to sustain itself - works much like a teeter-totter, using a series of sliding weights that, with the help of the earths gravitational pull, force the unit to continue spinning around in a circle.

Install a series of magnets in the unit and tens of thousands of watts of electricity can be produced, an amount that depends on the size of the actual machine.




posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Awesome!


I see no reason why something like this can't work. After all, it's not "free energy", it's simply using gravity as the energy.

I hope the energy companies don't buy him out and shelve the thing.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by KruelI see no reason why something like this can't work. After all, it's not "free energy", it's simply using gravity as the energy.
Here's why: If you let something drop, yes, you can get energy from that. So if you have a weight and let it fall, you could generate a small amount of electricity from that. But to generate some more, you'd have to let it fall again, which requires lifting it back up. And that lifting takes exactly the same amount of energy as you get from letting it fall. So with friction and heat and other losses, you could certainly never get more energy out of it than you put in. You couldn't even get the SAME amount of energy out of it that you put in.

That's why stuff like hydroelectric plants work. They rely on falling water, but they mother nature (the sun and water cycle) do the work of lifting the water back up again and letting it fall. A mechanism that relies on gravity as it's sole energy input will never work.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 

I agree, its not possible using conventional physics. Unfortunately there is no information available on how he is doing it. (or I did not really searched hard enough). Like we need to know exactly how much watts went in and how much came out, i.e the efficiency of this machine.

Secondly, it needs to be verified by independent experiments. Thirdly, if it comes out in market and when you can buy one, there will remain no doubt about it.

Until that happens, we just wait and pray



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Good find!
However, I'm betting the machine won't keep going indefinitely.... unless he knows something we don't about the earth's gravity increasing as we approach the galactic plane. Even then, it would end eventually after a decade.

We saw this hype and fiasco with Steorn. Let's not get our hopes up again this time.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Perhaps the device simply works by the force of the spinning earth to lift its self over? There must be plenty of energy forced on the separate objects on the earths surface, maybe the device just takes that pull and rotates its self? Who knows... maybe his readings are just off and it looks like he is getting a bit more energy then he put in...



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by halfmask
maybe his readings are just off and it looks like he is getting a bit more energy then he put in...


That's usually the case.


But in Sean's (Steorn) case, his readings aren't the only thing that's off.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Unless our knowledge of some extremely basic physics is dead wrong, this device cannot work. Nataylor explained it quite well. Even if you could somehow build a machine that had zero friction, the best you could do would be to break even on energy input.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 05:46 AM
link   
This sounds fantastic.

Unfortunately I like many others got caught up in the excitement leading up to Steorn's ill fated public demonstration. So of course I will view this news with caution and lukewarm expectations.

I'd love to get involved in the physics debate but I not nearly as technically minded as I would need to be.

I shall just resign myself to pointing out the disturbing fact that this plucky inventor is from a place called Little Britain.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 07:13 AM
link   
The video:



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Ah, this is like a "Free Energy" machine that needs an external initial input to work.

Well it would be nice if its effect is permanent.

Though I highly doubt it's permanent.

[edit on 8/9/07 by -0mega-]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocksolidbrain
The video:


Oh, yes. That's real convincing evidence right there.
Not your fault though, you're just showing us what a clown this guy is.

[edit on 9/8/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by pjslug
 


I'm not claiming that this works as shown.

I've no proof at all.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by pjslug
 


I don't understand the reason for your remark.

I think the goals behind what the inventor is trying to achieve is worthy of admiration, not mockery.



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by not_fazed
I don't understand the reason for your remark.

I think the goals behind what the inventor is trying to achieve is worthy of admiration, not mockery.


What don't you understand, sir? It's really quite simple. I said the guy is a clown. I believe it, too. Did you not follow the Steorn fiasco? I did, and it was sure disappointing.

If someone has an invention that really works for any length of time, do you really believe (and I'm serious here, do you realllllllllyyyyy believe) that it would be sitting in his basement? And if it did work and he was looking for funding or a buyer to sell it to, he wouldn't be posting a video on youTube as it would be kept confidential until the contract was signed.

But let's say I'm wrong about the whole contract thing. This guy isn't showing us anything. He's cranking the machine for 3/4 of the video. He lets it run for 1/8 of the video, and then spends the last 1/8 of the video stopping it. Oh yes, a real perpetual motion machine folks.


Apparently I'm not alone in my opinion. This thread hasn't even made it page 2 yet.

[edit on 9/9/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by pjslug
 

when i went to missouri in 1991 with my family to attend the feast of tabernacles we took a side trip and visited some caves that were said to have been used as a hideout at one time by jessie james and his gang.in one large high section they had a cable bolted to the roof top that was 100ft ? long and a huge steel ball weighing a couple hundred? pounds attached.on the floor was a circle painted 10ft? across.this ball was following the path of that circle at the same speed as the earth takes to rotate in 24 hours.as long as the earth rotates here you have a real perpetual motion object.the spin of the earth makes that ball deviate from the perpendicular out 5 feet?-------?the question marks are because i dont remember the exact specifictions but these must be close



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by yahn goodey
 


Just like I said above on how the device could work. I watched a documentary years back, the guy made some sorta ferris wheel type thing that he claimed to keep spinning. It was dismissed because, he couldn't explain why and it would start spinning again after he stopped it. I think the lacking explanation was the earths rotation but, by the looks of it the guy and the investigators for the documentary where not very open minded... It was dismissed unjustly I think, they should have put more research into it first before giving up on it.



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Ive always thought to myself for a VERY long time, why hasn't anyone figured out how to get free energy using Magnets or Gravity? But wow maybe we are getting closer to something like that!

[edit on 9-9-2007 by _Phoenix_]



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by _Phoenix_
 


The reason is because if you look at mainstream science, it is mathematically impossible to do this for either magnetism or gravitation. That means that either the mainstream is right and it is impossible, or that they are wrong, and would actually have to admit it, and then figure out how they were wrong, and use the principle to develop perpetual motion.

The giant pendulum that Yahn Goodey describes sounds very interesting. From a mathematical point of view, that would not be perpetual motion. I don't know if you could actually use it to generate power, but at least there is a chance. You couldn't get very much out of it, though, even if it works.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
Ive always thought to myself for a VERY long time, why hasn't anyone figured out how to get free energy using Magnets or Gravity? But wow maybe we are getting closer to something like that!

[edit on 9-9-2007 by _Phoenix_]


Magnets and Gravity are not Energy. They are forces.

A rock at the top of a hill represents potential energy in the energetic state of the environment because of the force of gravity that can pull it downhill.

The same for two magnets that are apart and could pull towards eachother. It is not magentic energy that they hold it is potential kinetic energy in the energetic state of the environment.

You are surrounded with all kinds of potential energy in your environment that add up to the energetic state.

But none of the forces add any energy to the environemnt. It was always there. You just changed the state of the energy by rolling the rock down the hill. None was added to the environment and none was taken away.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join