|STATISTICS: Curving Rail
(55 active u / 1 dual-axial track
+ 45 dual-axial active u)
(10 u / 1 stem / 1 subcycle for
EFFICIENCY: 0.122 (1.22 / 10)
In spite of a good active-to-
passive unit ratio for a wheel-like
device, subcycles do not account
for the use of such a quantity of
units, amounting to inefficiency.
Perpetual Motion Machine Concept Utilizing Tracked
Weights and Ball Bearings on a Fixed Support Structure
A Chinese patent CN105587479A was granted for this device to
someone else, see image at right.
View at google patents: Chinese rail perpetual motion
I have no legal problems with this.
Wheels or ball-bearings on a gentle slope much reduce the force
necessary to lift.
Thus when a series of weights bound together by cable are each
attached by T-supports to ball bearings running on a serpentine track,
I estimate a 75% overall reduction in rising weight, with only 63%
increase in the number of weights deployed along that length of track.
The result is that when the weights are strung back down to their
starting point via a vertical drop of track, I estimate a 153%
over unity return on resistance, without accounting for friction
(according to my crude equations).
For criticism of this concept, see my Personal Critique.
You may also want to know about my physics background. How
qualified am I to make these statements? I honestly couldn't tell you
except in empirical terms.
Curving Rail Perpetual Motion Components nathancoppedge.com
|Questions, comments, or other
inquiries may be directed to:
More on my concept of
Volitional math at