Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxi!trough
From: trough@ihuxi.UUCP (Chris Scussel)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Gravity-based drive mechanism
Message-ID: <1182@ihuxi.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 25-Mar-85 09:19:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxi.1182
Posted: Mon Mar 25 09:19:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 26-Mar-85 05:37:18 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 35

The "Tomorrow" section of the Chicago Tribune for Sunday, March 24 had
an article about a vehicular "drive" that "uses" gravity. A diagram
of the mechanism was included, as well as an explanation of "how it
works." It appears to be based on a pair of counter-rotating weights.
The inventor is preparing to scale up his current models in order
to build an automobile-sized version. He claims that it would also
be good for "powering" boats. (The article concedes that it will
probably never replace the gas engine for either cars or boats.)

	To me this just seemed to be a vibrating weight that shook
whatever it was attached to, and in the presence of friction would
cause said body to skitter in a particular direction. I don't see
how it could work in a wheeled (low friction) vehicle, much less
a boat. Also, the article was worded (for the most part) as if this
thing was just a way of "making things move" (instead of using, say,
a transmission geared to the wheels or propeller). However, it also
says the device won't "replace the gas engine", implying that it
isn't powerful enough. So, is it supposed to be like a transmission
or like an engine?

	The article was careful to claim that this "uses gravity" and
is not a something-for-nothing proposition. It then goes on to suggest
that the device would be useful for levitating hovercraft! Shades
of the Dean Device!

	I'd like to consider myself open-minded, but this seems much
too bogus to be believed, as if a typical perpetual-motion crackpot
had learned what to say and what not to say in order not to have his
(old, tired) ideas immediately dismissed. Did anyone else see this
or similar articles? I believe it was "credited"(!) to the New York
Times News Service.

				Chris Scussel
				AT&T Bell Labs
				ihnp4!ihuxi!trough