| STATISTICS: Motive Mass VOLITION: 2 (6 active u / 3 dual-axial u) EQUILIBRIUM: 2 (1 u / (1 stem / 2 subcycles)) EFFICIENCY: 1 (equal to dominoes) VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: motive mass is an attempt to translate the domino effect into cyclical theory. Efficiency of 1 seems ambiguous in this regard. |
| MAIN PM Theory CONCEPTS Grav-Buoy2 Fluid Lever Curving Rail MOTIVMASS Process Components Diagrams Experiments Repeat Lever Tilt Motor Coquette Early Failures DISCLAIMER PM Types |
| Questions, comments, or other inquiries may be directed to: contact@nathancoppedge.com |
NATHAN COPPEDGE--Perpetual Motion Concepts
Motive Mass Machine: A Perpetual Motion Machine Concept
Using See-Saws and a “Difference Weight” Applied to Alternating
Sides by Various Methods
PROCESS: How I came across this idea:
1. I was considering a method to return a ball to a starting height by the
use of a spiral ramp blocked by the paddles of rotating wheels. It then occured
to me that an efficient method to catapult the ball back up might be to use a
weighted see-saw. When both sides bear weight, but one side is heavier, the
mass of the heavier side nevetheless contributes to force. Thus it is not
necessary to move either of the weights except by use of counterbalance, and
an alternation of a smaller mass, which I will call the “difference weight”.
2. I attempted futilely to apply the concept to the spiral ramp idea, but
quickly gave up in favor of an application of the rather simpler concept of the
weighted see-saw.
3. I devised some rough sketches similar to Diagram 1, in which it might be
possible for the weighted ends to operate catapults on either end of a tube
arcing over the see-saw. Thus there may be methods for the force of the
falling weight to throw the “difference weight” to the other side, creating a
perpetual cycle.
4. I experimented. I placed a four or five foot board across a simple support
structure, and duct-taped ten pound weights to either end. I found that when
the structure was balanced and I then placed a pound of material on one of the
weighted ends, that the force exerted when it hit the ground was rather over a
pound, in spite of the counter-weight, and the use of a less than 45 degree tilt.
5. I completed some diagrams to explain how:
A. In the case of the catapult method, one outer tube can be used with two see-
saws provided that one outer weight is sufficient.
B. As a perhaps preferable alternative to the catapult method, this device
might be used in series, with more than one see-saw, each activating the next
in a succession, and
C. With an efficient use of pulleys, the devices might be built in modular
looping series which might conceivably be made to reset themselves and
continue moving (see Diagram 6).
D. If it proves impossible to restart the system with the looping pulley process,
a system might be devised whereby the difference weights are repositioned
through a horizontal rotating wheel. Thus the force of the main weights need
only be put towards rotating the wheel, rather than using direct pulleys which
may only have one-time value. This method is not illustrated as it seems like a
method of last resort.
For a criticism of this design, see my Personal Critique.
Motive Mass Machine Components nathancoppedge.com
What are the Prospects of a Motive Mass Machine as a Working Perpetual
Motion Concept?
Using See-Saws and a “Difference Weight” Applied to Alternating
Sides by Various Methods
PROCESS: How I came across this idea:
1. I was considering a method to return a ball to a starting height by the
use of a spiral ramp blocked by the paddles of rotating wheels. It then occured
to me that an efficient method to catapult the ball back up might be to use a
weighted see-saw. When both sides bear weight, but one side is heavier, the
mass of the heavier side nevetheless contributes to force. Thus it is not
necessary to move either of the weights except by use of counterbalance, and
an alternation of a smaller mass, which I will call the “difference weight”.
2. I attempted futilely to apply the concept to the spiral ramp idea, but
quickly gave up in favor of an application of the rather simpler concept of the
weighted see-saw.
3. I devised some rough sketches similar to Diagram 1, in which it might be
possible for the weighted ends to operate catapults on either end of a tube
arcing over the see-saw. Thus there may be methods for the force of the
falling weight to throw the “difference weight” to the other side, creating a
perpetual cycle.
4. I experimented. I placed a four or five foot board across a simple support
structure, and duct-taped ten pound weights to either end. I found that when
the structure was balanced and I then placed a pound of material on one of the
weighted ends, that the force exerted when it hit the ground was rather over a
pound, in spite of the counter-weight, and the use of a less than 45 degree tilt.
5. I completed some diagrams to explain how:
A. In the case of the catapult method, one outer tube can be used with two see-
saws provided that one outer weight is sufficient.
B. As a perhaps preferable alternative to the catapult method, this device
might be used in series, with more than one see-saw, each activating the next
in a succession, and
C. With an efficient use of pulleys, the devices might be built in modular
looping series which might conceivably be made to reset themselves and
continue moving (see Diagram 6).
D. If it proves impossible to restart the system with the looping pulley process,
a system might be devised whereby the difference weights are repositioned
through a horizontal rotating wheel. Thus the force of the main weights need
only be put towards rotating the wheel, rather than using direct pulleys which
may only have one-time value. This method is not illustrated as it seems like a
method of last resort.
For a criticism of this design, see my Personal Critique.
Motive Mass Machine Components nathancoppedge.com
What are the Prospects of a Motive Mass Machine as a Working Perpetual
Motion Concept?
More on my concept of Volitional math at IMPOSSIBLEMACHINE.COM |