Whats wrong with this free energy experiment

In summary, the conversation revolves around the speaker's experiment with a balance that has the center of mass in the axe, which they believe will cause movement in the object without lowering the center of mass. They have noticed a period in the movement, and are seeking suggestions on how to improve their experiment. The conversation also touches on the speaker's belief in blindly accepting physics and their obsession with free energy. There is also a suggestion to clearly explain the experiment and not make judgement calls without proper understanding.
  • #1
eosphorus
78
0
my objective was that gravity caused movement in an object without lowering the center of mass

i built a balance that has the center of gravity in the axe:

i used a 60 cm long 1 cm thick wood beam, i put a nail in the middle as an axe,

i put 100 grams of plastiline in each end of the beam

first try the CoM was lower than the axe what would be noticed because turning upside down the beam it wouldn level

the way to make sure the CoM is in the axe is by trying the balance normal and upside down

ive noticed it even has a period which by the way i was given here and deppends on the mass and length of the beam not how low the CoM is from the axe as is the case of a pendulum

my next step is freezing the plastiline to make sure the CoM is not lowered by the weight

anny suggestion of what I am doing wrong or how this is posible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
What's the obsession with "free energy"? Every single one of your examples so far--the yo-yo, the lop-sided balance, the tetherball--has been shown to have been based on a misunderstanding of the physics involved. What makes you think that your balance is any different?

As usual, it's unclear what you are trying to accomplish. Note: If a rigid body has its center of mass exactly at the axis of rotation that supports it, then it will be stable in any position.
 
  • #3
physics has always been far to describe how nature works there are always corrections, if it wasnt this way the Earth would still be said to be flat

im not claiming on ideas I am claiming on facts, i built a balance that levels with the center of mass in the axe, anybody can reproduce this

you say it won't level because physics say so, i disagree because I've experimented it

now if physics say one thing and experimental data say the opposite what's the conclusion

my conclusion is that as long as people believes blindly what they are taught mothers will see their kids starve to death(from here comes my obsesion with free energy) because things are too complex to be changed then

you say an object with the center of mass in the axe won't move, I've experimented a balance with the center of mass in the axe will move and i welcome anybody to reproduce the experiment

just my two cents
 
  • #4
What is your native language? some of what you say does not make sense - when you say axe, do you mean axes? (x.y,z axes?).

I agree with you that it is not good to blindly accept all of physics, but you need to explain yourself more clearly. Do not forget that it is *possible* that you overlooked something in your experiment. Try and explain the experiment fully and see what people say about the physics...
 
  • #5
eosphorus said:
physics has always been far to describe how nature works there are always corrections,

You have no ability to say that when you are ignorant of physics. You should follow your own advice and stop making judgement calls on things you haven't not understood in the first place.

And please don't ask us to EXPLAIN what you did when you cannot even state what you are doing in a clear and coherent manner. This has been an ongoing pattern of your post and I have seen zero improvement at all. This has the earmark of going down the path of all your other posts, i.e. nowhere.

Please refrain from starting one of these types of threads again.

Zz.
 

What is a free energy experiment?

A free energy experiment is a scientific investigation that aims to find a way to generate energy without using any external inputs. This type of experiment often involves trying to harness energy from sources such as the sun, wind, or water.

Why do people question the validity of free energy experiments?

Many people question the validity of free energy experiments because they seem to defy the laws of thermodynamics, which state that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed. Some also believe that if free energy was possible, it would have already been discovered and implemented.

What are some common flaws in free energy experiments?

Some common flaws in free energy experiments include insufficient data, lack of reproducibility, and errors in measurement and calculation. Additionally, some experiments may not take into account all the factors involved in energy production, leading to false results.

Are there any successful free energy experiments?

There have been claims of successful free energy experiments, but none have been proven and widely accepted by the scientific community. Many of these claims have been debunked and shown to be either hoaxes or based on flawed experiments.

What is the current scientific consensus on free energy experiments?

The current scientific consensus is that free energy experiments are not scientifically valid and are unlikely to produce usable energy. The laws of thermodynamics and the lack of reproducibility and evidence make it highly unlikely that free energy can be harnessed in a practical and sustainable way.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
122
  • Classical Physics
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
130
Views
7K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top