ABH

Then you will have to say that gravity is an energy. But we are taught that it is a force. Thus I like the term force to energy converter.

Definition (not really negociable):

Work Done (mehanical energy transferred) = Force multiplied by distance moved by the force, in the direction that the force acts

'Gravity' is too loose a term to use meaningfully.

The Force which is

*caused* by gravity (i.e. weight) is a force and is not energy.

The

*Gravitational Potential Energy* of an object is the energy that was put in to getting the object where it is. This Energy (or Work), is given by mgh, where g is the gravitational field, m is the mass and h is the height to which it has been raised.

(You may or may not have been taught that but the above is what you should have been taught.)

You can 'get energy out' of a falling weight (like in an old clock) but, once the weight has fallen to the bottom, you have to wind it up again. Gravity is no more a source of energy than a spring or a rechargeable battery.

If you are 'using gravity' for your machine, then you must have objects falling down in it. If you say the objects move up again, then they will need to be lifted and this will require the same amount of energy as you got our PLUS something to make up for the frictional losses.

If you are using levers, gears, screws or anything else to reduce the force needed to lift them up again then you will have to move this reduced force FURTHER. The total (integral) of force times distance cannot be less.

All the diagrams you can see from past inventions involve 'hopeful' designs with many falling balls on one side and few raised balls on the other (or some such idea). Add up all the Work and you will never get more out than was put in. The friction, consequently, gives you a total loss.

Work it out yourself for a simple lever and the same applies for any other mechanism.

You mentioned your system going very fast. It should be able to work at snail's pace if it were truly Perpetual.