kinetic energy hypothesis

[preoccupied]

Jim_Mich has left Bessler Wheel forum. On his final thread I believe that I posted what Johann Bessler made in which you all are searching for on this forum.

My three MS painting illustration are showing my kinetic energy hypothesis at work in respect to my dumb bell experiment. It is also the real reason that the chain fountain flies into the air #ICallBSonCambridgeUniversity. It is the reason that my #flyingcar idea would work. And IMO, it is the real Bessler Wheel.

In "wheelz.gif" it shows how two weights shift each other's positions. On the top right weight falls under the force of gravity. On the left the weight shifts from right to left while the wheel is turning clockwise. That changes the direction the weight is going which according to my hypothesis for my dumbbell experiment would produce EXTRA lift towards the direction it was going before changing direction. This motion without external force would drive this wheel and cause it to turn perpetually. Also the same things happen on the bottom right when the weight on the bottom right shifts from left to right when the weight on the top right falls. The weights work together in this way. Mechanically the weights shift by being pushed by a rod that is attached to their lever and the rod is pushed by a conveyor belt between the two effected positions.

Jim_mich had a water motion wheel. I do not know what Jim_Mich wheel was. I know I speculated about it before but I decided that I will not now. I accidentally drew it incorrectly anyways. My water version would work by filling and draining pouches of water that would move the levers in the same way as the mechanically weighted wheel would.

My #flyingcar would work by shifting weights to right angles and changing their direction with more force than they were going. What will happen when the weights changes direction with this extra force is that some of that extra force is pushed towards where it was going in "space". It's a special shift. It can be done in outer space where there is no gravity and no rocket propulsion. It's ideal for space ships, #flyingcar, and for astronauts to get around if they are stuck in the middle of a space ship. The astronaut would just swing his arms to right angles and fly backwards. It would work especially well for the astronaut if he held some heavy weights in his hands. The Professors at Cambridge University did not see this idea or even try to. They were wrong and I am right.

I think that Jim_mich had a similar idea as mine is. Somehow though, he believed he knew that it would work because of extra centrifugal force. I fundamentally disagree with this. I think that motion without external force is created by the shifting of weights but specifically when weights shift with more force than they can shift with right away. Well someone is at the door I better get it.

[preoccupied]

I wanted to store an article on lesswrong forum but I could not for the life of me figure out how to imbed an imagine in the article text!!

I have not advanced academically much since I lost some because of concussions. So I am not describing specific mechanical drawings or formulas that I think might exist for this topic. I promise you that I am genuinely interested in the topic.

I want to bring to your attention a youtube video:

"Understanding the chain fountain"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eEi7fO0_O0

"Published on Jan 15, 2014


Over 2.5 million viewers, including many physicists, have been astonished by Steve Mould's videos of a chain flowing along its own length from a pot to the floor below. Apparently defying gravity, the chain rises above the pot as a fountain before falling down. Proceedings A has published a paper which explains why this fountain occurs by considering the forces bringing successive links into motion. In this podcast, authors Mark Warner and John Biggins explain what is going on.

For more information see: http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.or...

For a collection of related problems to work through go to http://www.rutherford-physics.org.uk/"

I disagree with Professor Mark Wamer and Dr John S. Biggins. At 4:44 Dr John S. Biggins begins his explanation about a new force, which is the pot pushing the chain as the chain is pulled upwards. What do I think? I think that the pot does not push on the chain. I hypothesize that the beads at the top of the fountain move higher as they are being pulled down.

Section A: I want to test it. If an object is moving and a force pulls it in the opposite direction, will its "position in space" shift towards the original direction? If the force pulling in the opposite direction is greater than the force of the original direction, is the force coming in the opposite direction added towards the "shift in space" towards the original direction? In the vacuum of space can pistons shift weights to produce propulsion? Can weights produce propulsion without an external force?

Section B: This is what I think pistons that shift weights to produce propulsion might look like: (HOW DO I IMBED IMAGE?)
"pistons pumping chain fountain.gif"

The lever is shifted by pistons in the MS painting. Hypothetically if my idea is correct, if the pistons on the left are pushing with more thrust and the change in direction uses greater force then the weights will shift the axle (in yellow) towards the left "in space". I think shifting these weights will change the direction of the crafts "position in space".

Section C: How can I test my hypothesis? If my hypothesis is correct then gravity can be stolen to make a "perpetual motion machine" by using a swastika. I think it would look something like this:

"wheelz.gif" and "motion wheel.gif"



Obviously I chose the swastika because it's physically necessary. This is not propaganda in support of the NSDAP. Along the x and y axis I need a lever in which to apply the "shift in space to". Illustrated in the MS paintings is the direction the weights went (in red) and the "shift in space" the swastika is pulled towards (in orange). There are two levers on the end of the swastikas in which one shifts towards only the outside and the other shifts only towards the inside. In the first quadrant the weights fall under the force of gravity and shift the weights on the second and fourth quadrant. If the weights can fall under the force of gravity in the first quadrant, i.e. the wheel is spinning with less force than gravity, then they will shift the weights with extra force in its opposite direction. This perpetual motion machine can therefore be the experiment to test my original questions about this topic in section A.

Section D: What other tests can be used on my hypothesis? I own two ten pound dumbbells. When I push them away and pull them back towards me, my shoulders move towards the original direction. This is an observation of the position in space of the dumbbells moving towards the original direction despite me pulling them towards me. This is convincing to me but not convincing enough. To truly convince myself that my hypothesis is correct, I think somebody will have to make this "perpetual motion machine" described in section C.

[preoccupied]

If a gear for a mechanical bicycle pushes on two rows, in the same way that the pistons would to fly a car, then the rods connecting to those rows could have ratchets on them, allowing two sides of the gear to alternate and oscillate the weights. How can the change in direction have more force (not drawn)? One direction could have half the distance to travel before the weight reaches it's designation at the right angle and travel the remaining distance as the other weight waits to reach its chance to move the weights again. So basically to make this work for a bicycle that someone could pedal with their legs and fly into the air with the gears would have to be set up so that it immediately and forcefully with greater force changes the direction of the weights when they are at their sides and then the rider would patiently wait until the gear they are pedaling can put force on a weight again as it will take some time before the next shift in weights when the weights are next to each other. I couldn't have worded it with less eloquence.

shown in MS painting is red rods that push on the weights and orange rods that push on the track that has ratchets in it. The circle is just a gear (however not drawn is the two gear system that would make the weight shift with greater force when they are separated that is required to create flight).

I don't have this drawn in any of my ms paintings because I think it would be confusing but I automatically assume that the rod would push on a gear that spins the axle rather than the rod pushing on the lever. I think this is necessary too because the motion without external force has to push on the shoulder of the lever.

[Furcurequs]

preoccupied,

You are your own pop-up toy!!

I remembered these from years ago. You compress the spring which is then held down temporarily by the suction cup clinging to the base. You then place the toy on the ground or table or whatever and wait for the suction cup to give way. The spring then flings the top into the air, but it doesn't detach from the base. So, it carries the base up into the air with it.



http://www.childofthe1980s.com/wordpres ... up-toy.jpg

http://www.childofthe1980s.com/category ... sandjokes/

Dwayne

[preoccupied]

Thank you Furcurequs. I like you too. How is the wife and kids? You're an old man right? Your life must be full of fulfilling experiences. I love older people.

I've had this idea since conception. I swear, the only reason it looks similar to Jim_Mich suggestions is because we have shared similar viewpoint somehow. I want to be fair though, if Jim_mich has the same design he certainly did well because I'm 80% that this would be a good perpetual motion machine.

If you could, any help telling me how to imbed an image into the forum text? How would I do it for lesswrong blog forum?

[Furcurequs]

You're welcome, and thanks!

I don't have a wife or kids, but I am getting on up there, I guess. I've had a lot of experience with chronic pain in the past 18 years, so unfortunately I, for the most part, kind of have to go back to before that to find the more fulfilling experiences.

Anyway, maybe I should have made sure to point out that I was comparing this toy to your dumbbell experiment. The spring basically does what your arms do and so the "dumbbells and you" system behaves like the "top smiley face and its base" system (in the picture).

To display an image in the text section, you just need to place the "img" tags before and after the link to the image, like this:



http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/files/help2.png

You can do that without actually having to type the tags by highlighting the link and hitting the "Img" button in the reply window, like this:



http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/files/help.png

Dwayne

[preoccupied]

How can I keep an imagine online on a website in order for me to Img it? I can't use Bessler wheel album. Can I?

In my hypothesis I think that the greater force changing a direction of moving object shifts the weights position in space. How much force does it shift with? This will determine how much distance it travels in the "shift in space" when pushing against gravity and the remaining accelerated mass that is not shifting. This force amount is what is necessary to teach school children how to calculate this, just kidding... It is needed to write a paper that counters the one written by the Cambridge University people. Jim_Mich seemed to think that there was extra Centrifugal force energy. I think that would mean that the force created that shifts the shift in space would be equal to the original directions energy. I think the shift in space is created by the energy from the new direction. Therefore I support the idea that it's x-y=y, if that is at all accurate where the y line goes negative and does so with the force of the y line before going down at the force of the y line, know what I mean?

[preoccupied]

Imagine that it's impossible to travel infinite speed by building up momentum. What if you stood still and the rest of the universe moves? How can you move the entire universe and you stand still? When you shift in space by changing direction using greater force in the new direction, "maybe" you move the entire universe and then you stand still for a moment in space. You "might be able to" travel at a speed that build up momentum repeatedly with my #flyingcar method, which could reach infinite speeds based on our speed limits for the universe.

[preoccupied]

Scratch that last post. I mean, it's not very likely. What is more likely is somehow gripping onto space and moving by some connection to space itself. Space would therefore be a tangible object like matter is, if that's true. If my hypothesis is correct, I mean.

[preoccupied]

"gravity doesn't exist"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hByJBdQXjXU

I think that gravity is my motion without external force hypothesis. The scratched post should be unscratched as I think there is a fair compromise in it that I want to call gravity. When motion without external force happens, I believe that it moves space (and not something position in space). This is something that I think happens all of the time and I think it is called gravity. So essentially we are living in a world full of gravity and anti gravity and motion without external force is literally anti gravity and what follows anti gravity is gravity, according to this developing idea here that I'm inventing for hypothetical purposes.

[preoccupied]

Isaac Newton asked if an apple falls does the moon also fall?

I ask, if weights changes direction and shift in space creating anti gravity and gravity, do electrons and the rest of standard model also? I think if I'm right about everything, and I'm like 65% sure that I am, then all mass has gravity and has more gravity when in motion and this is because of motion without external force being created by anti gravity and gravity. Nobel prize and all the ladies I could ever dream to ever have lined up for miles forcing me to do stuff for them one by one, yeah.... I will like tell them about my perpetual motion machines and how great it functions and then they will want to see it for themselves. Chicks dig Nobel prizes!!

[Furcurequs]

How can I keep an imagine online on a website in order for me to Img it? I can't use Bessler wheel album. Can I?

You can either link to a picture hosted elsewhere or, yes, you can just link directly to images in the besslerwheel.com album.

After you've added an image attachment to your post, you can then just right click on its filename, copy the direct link and then paste it into the text window. ...then highlight the url in the text window and hit the "Img" button. Here is where the link is shown after adding the attachment:



http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/files/img.png

Dwayne

[Furcurequs]

Take for example the chain fountain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eEi7fO0_O0

#2 Do you agree with John S. Biggins?

I don't. #ICallBSonCambridgeUniversity

For the record, I think you should ask John S. Biggins how his lunch is, for I believe he is out to lunch.

He's talking as if the chain is somehow being launched up into the air by the glass or beaker or whatever. Seriously, all the interesting stuff is really happening in the air. The amount of descending mass is constantly increasing as the amount of ascending mass remains fairly constant. That's significant as too the accelerations and the conservation of both angular and linear momentums.

Yes, it's important that the weight of the non-moving part of the chain is being supported, but the chain is then just yanked up and out of the beaker a link at a time. The energy to accelerate the non-moving links and to "fling" them upward obviously comes from the descending part of the chain.

His idea about having a more rigid connection between links is probably somewhat valid, though, but for the behavior in the arc of the chain - not the behavior in the beaker.

I have a demonstration that I can do in Physion that might shed a little light on some of what's going on. I'll try to make a video sometime later.

Dwayne

Okay, I finally made my Physion demonstration. First take a look at this gif animation depicting a couple of collisions showing the conservation of linear momentum.

The first collision shows a large mass colliding with a smaller mass which is at rest in our reference frame, and then the second shows a small mass colliding with a large mass which is at rest.



Now, take a look when I offset the two masses and throw another element into the mix. I've also rotated the gif so that things are oriented more like in the chain fountain videos. This is with gravity turned off in the simulation, btw.



Obviously, the chain fountain is a much more complex dynamics problem that also includes the "flow" of mass along the path of the chain and increasing amounts of mass on the descending side, but I would still humbly suggest that this is a part of the correct solution when modeling what's going on.

The large circle represents the larger amount of chain mass that is already descending. The small circle represents bits of chain that start out from rest in the beaker and have to be accelerated upward into the air. And the beam would represent the part of the chain in the arc which due to its stiffness can transmit a torque.

Dynamically, bits of chain that are initially accelerated upward soon become part of the arc and then part of the descending mass.

Dwayne

[preoccupied]

torque expressed from center of mass pushing on a class two lever is based on observation (chain fountain) only. It is actually negligible. The observation is wrong. What they are actually seeing with the chain fountain is motion without external force. The beads at the top are shifting with more force downwards than the original direction upward which shifts space (not positions in space but space itself).

[preoccupied]

rlortie, this is a component that I think would test my hypothesis on a swastika. I drew it and in the middle of the drawing I thought to myself, it would probably be best if it were all completely symmetrical meaning that the conveyor belt would be in the center and the swastika would be even on all sides for its right angles. I don't know the best way to test my hypothesis, just that the swastika is the only shape that would use the motion without external force to produce perpetual motion using gravity because according to my dumbbell experiment because a lever is needed along an x, y axis in order to produce leverage for the motion without external force to use. It just so happens to be the swastika shape that is a right angle in which to ride the force on. The weights apply force to this right angle using motion without external force from shifting weights.