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.

 

Gravity Engine now in the USA.

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by StopThaZionistWorldOrder
 


A car cannot run on water but it can run on hydrogen.

An ordinary car engine cannot use hydrogen as fuel. Natural gas / petrol gas burning is different from hydrogen burning, as hydrogen burns at higher temperature.

People claim building free energy motors etc. but the principles employed do not seem to yield energy (logically).

We all want to believe in miracles. We all want to live in a world where energy is free or very cheap. However not sure if elite is blocking all science in this area. Elites typically put a "tax" or increase the costs for ordinary people, but not stop a technology from developing.




posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   

whatshannenin
Hi everybody..I made this account a long time ago and really only post on things close to home. I live about 30 miles away from this place. I'll try and get up there this week to ask them some questions and grab some pictures if they/I have some free time. If anybody has a question or two they would like me to ask I would be more than happy to.
Which place? The one in South America, or North America? The latter location all I've seen so far is a building site, but I'd hope if they had any sense they'd wait until the first one was built and verified to work before building a second one.

LamiaLilit
If they are able to generate energy with this and it is even cheaper, then it might be worth it. Also, why are they only building one. Something like this should be built many times over. Why have one when you can have 10 at ten times the price.


hellobruce
They are not able to generate energy with it... why build 10 when 1 does not work.
My thoughts exactly, though they claim the one does work...but I don't believe them. They also haven't shown any progress on the 2nd one they said they were going to build, unless I missed it...but I don't think I did.



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Pilgrum
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


I think you're overlooking a few things in relation to the potential of the water current for generating energy as opposed to the nuclear option, mainly the issues of cost/benefit and economy of scale. A tidal generator there may generate far less than a megawatt which would be hardly worth the expense of construction whereas the nuclear station could easily be in excess of a gigawatt of capability and the nearby ocean current has not been ignored. It's being used as a fairly constant temperature source of cooling water via heat exchangers and the effective cooling allows constant operation at higher loads. If the cooling medium heats up the facility has to be de-rated accordingly.
Actually the tidal current is massive, this was pointed out years ago when the locals were objecting to having a nuke on their door step. To get around the opposition they told the locals that the electricity generated by the station would be "Too cheap to meter". When it was completed the locals discovered it sold most of what it generated too the french!!!
Too cheap to meter!
Now look what they've got.
Too expensive to buy!!


Pilgrum
reply to post by VoidHawk
 

'The predicted output of this device is 30kw. Thats not a lot for a machine thats so big! But its enough for 30 to 50 homes.'
The diversified maximum demand of a typical residence at the peak demand time is more like 4-6 kW so this device could only handle maybe 5 or 6 homes unless the power was actively rationed and just one home if it had luxury inclusions like ducted aircon, spa and heated swimming pool etc.
Wrong!
As you quite rightly point out, the average home needs 4-6kw, but thats during peek times. For the rest of the day/night most homes use very little power. LED light bulbs for instance, they are very economical, flat screen TV's are very economical, in fact most devices these days are very economical. So, the gravity engine would be connected to high efficiency storage devices so that it could store energy for those peek usage times. Remember, its going to output 30kw constantly!
Now consider this device in ten years time when its been redesigned and made even more efficient!

As for the rest of your post concerning the gravity engines ability to be competitive. Many seem to miss the point. Its not supposed to compete! Its supposed to supply free energy! The only costs are the cost of building it. You'll notice how over engineered it is, that means it'll need little more than a squirt of oil occasionally. It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts, it wont need a supply of fuel an it wont need armies of expensive executives etc.



edit on 15-9-2013 by VoidHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   

VoidHawk
Now consider this device in ten years time when its been redesigned and made even more efficient!


In 10 years time it will be running as good as it is today - which is not at all!


It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts,


Well, it will not need replacement parts as it will not work!



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   

hellobruce

VoidHawk
Now consider this device in ten years time when its been redesigned and made even more efficient!


In 10 years time it will be running as good as it is today - which is not at all!


It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts,


Well, it will not need replacement parts as it will not work!


Hi Bruce
Please post your construction diagrams of this device and show us exactly why you think it wont work. If you dont have the diagrams then all your doing is offering your opinion.



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

VoidHawk
If you dont have the diagrams then all your doing is offering your opinion.


The people building it do not have diagrams either - thy have changed the design, and had to redo it several times....



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by GargIndia
 


This corvette runs off hydrogen created from putting water in a dry cell and hooking it up to a solar panel. It's not rocket science. There are many cars already invented that can run off a dry cell IN the vehicle. It needs water and some electricity in a battery. Wow what a breakthrough (joking)

If you actually believe we're just one step away from "THE SOLUTION," your sadly mistaken. This has been made ILLEGAL in the name of NATIONAL SECURITY via the DOD. You see, making everyone use dirty fossil fuels is just another layer of taxes for BRITISH PETROLEUM. This also makes us more vulnerable when a power outage takes place because tens of thousands of big rigs won't be able to fuel up leaving the country STARVING...this way FEMA can come in and start their Russian style genocide to what was the best nation on Earth.

This is just one of hundreds of non gas powered vehicles:




edit on 15-9-2013 by StopThaZionistWorldOrder because: I messed up the video link



The energy that already exists in water is MUCH more than the SMALL AMOUNT of energy needed to convert it to usable energy forms. Don't let these ROBOTS scientists quote you the first law of thermodynamics it's buffoon codswallop and they like to mentally castrate themselves in the name of temporary job security bowing to their masters in return for their paper degree. Science has been turned into a snow job dictatorship; just look at the mountain of climate-gate evidence. Who started all the green peace bullsh*t that snuffs our freedoms to wash our car in our own driveway? The queen of england in the 60s. But no we wanna believe some caveman in Afghanistan is our enemy. While their corporations are fracking, creating big oil spills, and nuclear disasters & exempting themselves from their own garbage laws handed down through treasonous politician whores in D.C. Universities teach so called scientists this out of context 1st law of thermodynamics garbage; you'll hear people regurgitating it proudly. This way whenever someone creates a new water or air car they have zero belief.
edit on 15-9-2013 by StopThaZionistWorldOrder because: Expanded idea....



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:19 PM
link   

StopThaZionistWorldOrder
This is just one of hundreds of non gas powered vehicles:


Apparently you are not aware that hydrogen IS a gas! = What do you actually think hydrogen is?



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Yes and it can be made on demand inside the vehicle with some water and a battery! There is no research needed it's already been done over 100 times. Water + Electricity = Hydrogen. If the car has an alternator on it guess what? The battery gets refilled with electricity to run the fuel cell. Hence cars can run off water which is the first thing I stated in my first post.



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:43 PM
link   

StopThaZionistWorldOrder
If the car has an alternator on it guess what? The battery gets refilled with electricity to run the fuel cell. Hence cars can run off water which is the first thing I stated in my first post.


Not for long, the battery would very quickly drain....



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Incorrect. It's called an alternator and a transformer array. As the electrolysis plates get micro sized their efficiency goes through the roof and the cell actually gets to stop producing hydrogen for a while. The cell only runs sometimes.

Praise Jesus.
edit on 15-9-2013 by StopThaZionistWorldOrder because: Expanded idea



posted on Sep, 15 2013 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by GargIndia
 


The pistons get changed, modded to dead over center and the timing is modified faster because it burns quicker. Just like that corvette that runs off hydrogen with a few modifications, any piston engine can be modded to run off hydrogen. I like hydrogen to electric converters because electric engines don't break down as easy, are quieter, and faster.



posted on Sep, 16 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   
The amount of energy required to make that monstrosity could never be recovered, the steel and bearings alone would price most unsuspecting punters from realistically being able to look at it as an option.



posted on Sep, 16 2013 @ 05:49 AM
link   

VoidHawk
As for the rest of your post concerning the gravity engines ability to be competitive. Many seem to miss the point. Its not supposed to compete! Its supposed to supply free energy! The only costs are the cost of building it. You'll notice how over engineered it is, that means it'll need little more than a squirt of oil occasionally. It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts, it wont need a supply of fuel an it wont need armies of expensive executives etc.



So it's free energy at any price?
Am I only one who sees the problem with that?

I can produce my own electricity via a number of means but none can compete with power from the grid for price and convenience. If the 'free' energy costs more than grid energy then it's not going to be used except for a few diehards who'll go broke before they'll admit it isn't 'free' at all.

The machine interests me too so let's see the numbers (if it works) and see if it can be competitive. One important requirement I can't see in the pics is any form of mechanical governor which is essential to maintain a constant speed (therefore constant frequency) when supplying a variable isolated load. Synchronous connection to the grid which is a virtual 'infinite busbar' would stabilize it effectively. Also we need to consider loads with electric motors when working out how many houses it could supply - best look into how much current is drawn momentarily when something as simple as a washing machine, aircon, pump or dishwasher starts DOL (direct on line).



posted on Sep, 16 2013 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Was anyone else surprised that it looks like a cotton gin?



posted on Sep, 16 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Pilgrum

VoidHawk
As for the rest of your post concerning the gravity engines ability to be competitive. Many seem to miss the point. Its not supposed to compete! Its supposed to supply free energy! The only costs are the cost of building it. You'll notice how over engineered it is, that means it'll need little more than a squirt of oil occasionally. It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts, it wont need a supply of fuel an it wont need armies of expensive executives etc.



So it's free energy at any price?
Am I only one who sees the problem with that?

I can produce my own electricity via a number of means but none can compete with power from the grid for price and convenience. If the 'free' energy costs more than grid energy then it's not going to be used except for a few diehards who'll go broke before they'll admit it isn't 'free' at all.

The machine interests me too so let's see the numbers (if it works) and see if it can be competitive. One important requirement I can't see in the pics is any form of mechanical governor which is essential to maintain a constant speed (therefore constant frequency) when supplying a variable isolated load. Synchronous connection to the grid which is a virtual 'infinite busbar' would stabilize it effectively. Also we need to consider loads with electric motors when working out how many houses it could supply - best look into how much current is drawn momentarily when something as simple as a washing machine, aircon, pump or dishwasher starts DOL (direct on line).


Are you deliberately avoiding the fact that NO FUEL is required? That means only the build cost has to be recovered! Forget about the grid, forget about competition, and think about a small version buried in your garden!

Just for arguments sake, lets assume that it will work.
Once this device is built it will continue to turn on its own, no fuel is needed, thats why they call it a gravity engine.
The only expense is the cost of the build, and considering the very expensive price of electricity these days that would be quickly recovered.

You mention it needs a governor to maintain a constant frequency.
No it doesnt! The 50/60 hertz (depending where you live) would be controlled via the voltage controller circuit, thats how its done with solar cells where the inverter controls both frequency and voltage regulation.

You talk about "Isolated load" and then talk about "connection to the grid", two completely different things and of no relevance to this discussion.

Also you again refer to peek loading - "best look into how much current is drawn momentarily when something as simple as a washing machine, aircon, pump or dishwasher start".
I explained that above, and its so simple to deal with. All thats needed is a reservoir, this could be batteries but there are more efficient devices these days. Like I said above, the engine is left running permanently, when loads are small it charges the reservoir, when loads are high power is drawn from the reservoir.

If it works its a perfectly viable generator.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   

VoidHawk

hellobruce

VoidHawk
Now consider this device in ten years time when its been redesigned and made even more efficient!


In 10 years time it will be running as good as it is today - which is not at all!


It'll run for many many decades without need of replacement parts,


Well, it will not need replacement parts as it will not work!


Hi Bruce
Please post your construction diagrams of this device and show us exactly why you think it wont work. If you dont have the diagrams then all your doing is offering your opinion.


Please take and pass some physics and engineering courses and then you will understand why an engine without an energy source cannot produce energy.



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
The last picture I saw of it showed gawd awful parasitic friction...
They're connecting the driveshaft at the 1/3rd moment....huge torque required for that.....
edit on 17-9-2013 by GBP/JPY because: Yahuweh...the coolest of names, I swear



posted on Sep, 17 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   

VoidHawk
Once this device is built it will continue to turn on its own, no fuel is needed,


Why will it turn on its own? what will power it?


You mention it needs a governor to maintain a constant frequency.
No it doesnt! The 50/60 hertz (depending where you live) would be controlled via the voltage controller


Voltage has nothing at all to do with frequency - why do you think it does?

You really do not understand much about electricity or physics....



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


I was working my way up to variable exciters, AVRs etc but a modern grid-connect style electronic inverter would be a practical solution to that problem of stabilising the output voltage & frequency at the cost of overall efficiency. That's not the largest problem needing a solution though.

Let's say we have a rotating/reciprocating mechanical machine that produces a set amount of mechanical energy on the shaft. It needs some form of governor even if only for safety to cope with a sudden loss of load (eg a blown fuse) which could cause it to accelerate to destruction, or a sudden increase in load which could stall it. Normally we simply regulate the fuel supply but how do we regulate the gravity that supposedly 'fuels' this gravity powered machine?.

A governor is what's notably absent in all 'overunity' devices and my thought is it's because they don't need governing to control the speed simply because they don't actually work except for extracting cash from non-technical investors.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join