energy producing experiments
Moderator: scott
re: energy producing experiments
I don't see it.
In that case this is what I wrote:
I found http://filenurse.com/
Maximum filesize: 300 MB
Just drag and drop the file to the [select file]-box, and copy/paste the link it provides (no need to enter emails or click other buttons). It will be there for 7 days.
I found http://filenurse.com/
Maximum filesize: 300 MB
Just drag and drop the file to the [select file]-box, and copy/paste the link it provides (no need to enter emails or click other buttons). It will be there for 7 days.
re: energy producing experiments
www.cabrillo.edu/~cfigueroa/4B/4Blabs/s ... report.pdf
Note that they state that the energy change is equal to the difference in projectile mass and combined mass. The difference in the mass of the spinning satellite and the projectile in the Dawn mission is about 400 to 1.
After the projectile has all the energy it will only give back 1/400 of that energy back to the satellite.
If the projectile has only the original energy, of the spinning satellite, when it has all the motion; then it can only give back 1/400 of the original energy. The satellite's spinning motion would be about 50 mm per second and about 1 rpm.
This does not seem like the quantity of energy that is really there; which strikes fear in the heart of the engineers; to think that a mishap may send the tethered missile back into the satellite.
But the motion can be returned to the satellite as in the cylinder and spheres. And the spinning energy of the satellite is indeed 1/400 that of the missile. One kilogram of tethered mass moving 400 m/sec has 80,000 joules of energy, The spinning satellite has only 200 joules.
Note that they state that the energy change is equal to the difference in projectile mass and combined mass. The difference in the mass of the spinning satellite and the projectile in the Dawn mission is about 400 to 1.
After the projectile has all the energy it will only give back 1/400 of that energy back to the satellite.
If the projectile has only the original energy, of the spinning satellite, when it has all the motion; then it can only give back 1/400 of the original energy. The satellite's spinning motion would be about 50 mm per second and about 1 rpm.
This does not seem like the quantity of energy that is really there; which strikes fear in the heart of the engineers; to think that a mishap may send the tethered missile back into the satellite.
But the motion can be returned to the satellite as in the cylinder and spheres. And the spinning energy of the satellite is indeed 1/400 that of the missile. One kilogram of tethered mass moving 400 m/sec has 80,000 joules of energy, The spinning satellite has only 200 joules.
This line made me smile big... thanks for that !which strikes fear in the heart of the engineers; to think that a mishap may send the tethered missile back into the satellite.
Unfortunately it's wrong.
That sphere on a tether is just a pendulum.
A flat example is like when you let go of a pendulum from the ceiling; it swings down due to gravity and almost hits the ceiling again when it reaches its maximum height again (zero velocity, zero impact). One could say it lands nicely on that ceiling. Note that there is a reaction force on that what pins the pendulum to the ceiling.
For a rotating satellite (or cylinder) in space the pendulum (tethered sphere) swings due to centrifugal effects... it would just land nicely on the satellite again as like that pendulum on the ceiling. As where the ceiling-pin should stay where it is (as it's firmly attached and the ceiling basically grounded by walls), a satellite doesn't have such reference... thus it slows down and later on it speeds up again, due to the reaction force of the swing.
The return of motion is according to your own conclusion, and that's also according to (correct) physics....
So what would that "striking fear" be exactly?
As said before: there is no impact during this process.
It has no relation with some ballistic pendulum where the final momentum of the pendulum includes the mass of the bullet which impacted that pendulum.
Anyway, in what ever way you come to a conclusion where all motion is returned and is comparable to the initial motion (perhaps slightly less due to friction) then there's simply no sign of energy gain... sorry.
You probably won't agree: not agreeing could be good science though, perhaps it leads to something.
How do you measure the energy input to spin-up your system?
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
re: energy producing experiments
'mishap' A 20 to 1 could easily put an eye out; a 400 to 1 could easily disable the space craft. 80,000 joules is a real fear for people that actually do experiments.
re: energy producing experiments
The pendulum part of a ballistic pendulum has nothing to do with the change in motion between the colliding objects. The pendulum is used to determine the velocity after impact. In the past there was no accurate way to determine the velocity of a high speed object except by the calculations done by a ballistic pendulum experiment. Today the pendulum is no longer needed; photo gate timers or photography are used for both the bullet and the block and bullet after impact. Maybe they should be called linear impact experiments.
Gravity has never had anything to do with the impact; it was only used to measure the velocity after impact. In a few cases gravity was used to cause the motion of the bullet; but the impact was at low point of the swing so it had nothing to do with the actual impact. The impact was independent of gravity.
The spheres, as they unwrap from the cylinder (or satellite), are not under the influence of gravity; and they are not pendulum bobs. The impact that the spheres cause is a pull instead of a push; but I don't see a bit of difference between pushing and pulling. The important thing is that the quantity of momentum lost by the spheres is gained by the cylinder; and vice versa. This is exactly the same as a linear impact.
The relationship of the difference in mass and the change in energy would not be challenged by those that do experiments. A bullet of one ninth the mass gives the combined mass one ninth the energy.
The experiments (4.5 to 1; 9:1) prove that the final spin rate is equal to the initial spin rate; midway between the two initial and final shared motions is a pair of spheres that have all the motion. The spheres have 1/4,5 and 1/9 the mass of the combination. It is just simple: the combined masses have one ninth the energy of the 1/9 mass spheres. But the experiment begins with combined motion; and at the half way point the spheres have 900% the initial energy.
One ninth the mass is nine times the energy. It is just experimental fact.
Gravity has never had anything to do with the impact; it was only used to measure the velocity after impact. In a few cases gravity was used to cause the motion of the bullet; but the impact was at low point of the swing so it had nothing to do with the actual impact. The impact was independent of gravity.
The spheres, as they unwrap from the cylinder (or satellite), are not under the influence of gravity; and they are not pendulum bobs. The impact that the spheres cause is a pull instead of a push; but I don't see a bit of difference between pushing and pulling. The important thing is that the quantity of momentum lost by the spheres is gained by the cylinder; and vice versa. This is exactly the same as a linear impact.
The relationship of the difference in mass and the change in energy would not be challenged by those that do experiments. A bullet of one ninth the mass gives the combined mass one ninth the energy.
The experiments (4.5 to 1; 9:1) prove that the final spin rate is equal to the initial spin rate; midway between the two initial and final shared motions is a pair of spheres that have all the motion. The spheres have 1/4,5 and 1/9 the mass of the combination. It is just simple: the combined masses have one ninth the energy of the 1/9 mass spheres. But the experiment begins with combined motion; and at the half way point the spheres have 900% the initial energy.
One ninth the mass is nine times the energy. It is just experimental fact.
re: energy producing experiments
This is at 1:07:197 seconds.
The spheres are fully extended and the cylinder is stopped:
The spheres are fully extended and the cylinder is stopped:
- Attachments
-
re: energy producing experiments
Well I should say the rotation is stopped.
At 1:07:167 I took 5 frames (5/240th sec) to cross the distance of the black square (20 mm).
At 1:07:227 I took 5 frames to cross the distance of the black square.
The energy at 167 and 227 is the same.
The spheres have a mass of 304 grams. The cylinder has a mass of 2432 grams.
The spheres have 1/9th the total mass.
We know that when a small mass gives all of it energy to a larger mass there is an energy reduction that is in the proportion of the small mass to the combined mass.
When a mass of 304 grams gives its energy to a 2736 gram mass; the energy reduces to one ninth.
So we know that the energy at 197 is nine times that of the energy at 167 and 227.
The rotational energy at 167 and 227 is ½ * 2.736 kg * .96m/sec * .96m /sec (4 mm/frame * 240 frames/sec) = 1.26 joules.
That means that the energy at 197 is 9 * 1.26 joules or 11.346 joules.
So at 197: 1/2 * .304 kg * v * v = 11.346 joules therefore v at 197 equals 8.64 meters per second.
There is an increase in energy to 900% between 167 and 197.
At 1:07:167 I took 5 frames (5/240th sec) to cross the distance of the black square (20 mm).
At 1:07:227 I took 5 frames to cross the distance of the black square.
The energy at 167 and 227 is the same.
The spheres have a mass of 304 grams. The cylinder has a mass of 2432 grams.
The spheres have 1/9th the total mass.
We know that when a small mass gives all of it energy to a larger mass there is an energy reduction that is in the proportion of the small mass to the combined mass.
When a mass of 304 grams gives its energy to a 2736 gram mass; the energy reduces to one ninth.
So we know that the energy at 197 is nine times that of the energy at 167 and 227.
The rotational energy at 167 and 227 is ½ * 2.736 kg * .96m/sec * .96m /sec (4 mm/frame * 240 frames/sec) = 1.26 joules.
That means that the energy at 197 is 9 * 1.26 joules or 11.346 joules.
So at 197: 1/2 * .304 kg * v * v = 11.346 joules therefore v at 197 equals 8.64 meters per second.
There is an increase in energy to 900% between 167 and 197.
re: energy producing experiments
The gray rectangle is paper taped onto the monitor.
re: energy producing experiments
I'm toe-curling speechless... going to cry just a bit in some corner now.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-
justsomeone
- Addict
- Posts: 2089
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:21 pm
re: energy producing experiments
ME , before heading to the corner, I Would love to hear your response. :)
. I can assure the reader that there is something special behind the stork's bills.
re: energy producing experiments
Too late, perhaps others can help in regaining my senses again?ME , before heading to the corner, I Would love to hear your response. :)
And a response to what exactly?
There's nothing. Which is actually amazing on itself, on the assumption P tried his best here.
Despite the 'original' imagery from an arbitrary point of view I liked the cylinder and spheres.
That's the most positive response I could manage.
What's your view?
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---