Is this site the place to show a streaming video of a working wheel?

[WaltzCee]

Inertial drag.

[Dwylbtzle]

preporccupine could be correct
(about earth farking advances in science)
if one somehow were to be able to fashion an infernal device that extracted its energy from (and by resisting) the coriolis effect
one would eventually slow the earth to a dead stop
and all so one could feel like a big man
i hope one is satisfied
grrr

[Furcurequs]

Because of the tidal forces caused by the moon's motion around the earth, the earth's rate of rotation is currently slowing. From information I've found in wikipedia, the earth is supposedly now losing rotational energy at a rate of 3.3 terawatts because of this.

Also from a wikipedia entry, it seems that mankind's current power consumption is around 12.3 terawatts or close to 4 times the above.

The earth's loss of rotational energy should continue until the earth and moon are both tidally locked. When that happens the length of a day and a month on the earth will be the same, with the moon maintaining the same position in the sky, and will be approximately equal to 47 of our current days.

The length of a day is now changing at a rate of about 2 milliseconds every 100 years. It will thus take about 50,000 years for a day to be a second longer.

If there was a way for us to be able to take the equivalent of mankind's current energy needs from the rotation of the earth, the length of a day might then change by about 10 milliseconds every 100 years (again, at the current rate of energy consumption). That would mean that it would only take about 10,000 years for an earth day to become a second longer.

I know such changes could be disturbing, but this at least might buy mankind some time to find a better energy source!

;P

Dwayne

[MrVibrating]

The Earth and Moon are tidally locked, and any rotating system wants to minimise its RKE for its given angular momentum, so gravity and CF are in balance, and any recession of the Moon has the same effect as a radially-sliding mass on a wheel - applying negative torque to the whole Earth-Moon system.

Crucially though, the system's momentum will remain more or less constant, notwithstanding any changes in mass - only the kinetic energy is ebbing away, as angular velocity converts to angular inertia.

I don't know if this would've occurred to Bessler, but in principle, it may be possible to apply his gain mechanism at planetary scales, opening up the possibility of launching planetary or even stellar-scale masses out of a system without adversely accelerating or decelerating the home system...

...this would however boil down to whether or not a Bessler wheel can really create and destroy momentum... which seems highly suspect, just on the face of it..

- if his wheels needed to be vertical in order to apply gravity somehow, then even though we know gravity and mass are constant, therefore a closed-loop path has no energy, the momentum that must continually be replenished has to come from somewhere.

- if the form of 'excess imeptus' (preponderance, a motion-dependent 'heaviness', a stimulus to 'simply rotate' that must come from within.. is, IOW, an inertially-induced torque, then the system energy rises, but not its momentum.

- yet his wheels didn't run out of momentum, so more was being added. So we have a necessity for vertical orientation, and also a necessity for a continual supply of fresh input momentum, to top up that being constantly removed by the applied axle loading.


...and therein's the rub - maybe Bessler wheels are coupled to Earth's momentum, and thus chewing through that momentum's KE.

The acid test i guess would be to replace real gravity with pure inertia, and run a Bessler wheel riding the inside surface of a horizontally-aligned centrifuge - preferably in micro-gravity. Would the centrifuge be decelerated? Or else, consider a Bessler wheel atop an accelerating rocket in deep space, using the forwards thrust as artificial gravity to run the wheel - would the rocket lose velocity relative to an identical ship carrying a static wheel... or even one being powered in reverse?

[preoccupied]

The moon and Earth or any planet and their moons vary in distance from each other based on heat because gravity is heat. It's not momentum. You don't know that it's momentum. It just looks like momentum. You have a small amount of time to make even smaller measurements to base your assumptions on.

[Dwylbtzle]

gravity ( a time/space warp phenom, which is not actually a "force") is that direction in which more of your future lies
so if time is moving slower in the north
you will drift north
(but usually it's not north--it's down) -lol
in fact--anywhere where time is running even the TEEEENsiest bit slower
you will call that "down"
because there is no force acting against you moving that direction
so you WILL "fall" that way
and falling - you feel no force acting upon you
if you rolled off a cliff in yer sleep and woke up as you fell
the only reason you know yer falling is the wind going "up" for some weird reason
you don't feel any 'tractor-beam'-like suck force pulling down from beneath you
nor any push-down force pressing on top of you
in a vacuum you might not even wake up because you wouldn't even be feeling that cold upwind up yer arse

the more gravity the slower time runs
google it
(well, actually, you should use duckduckgo not google - they don't track you)
finally--if you were approaching the event horizon of a black hole
time stops completely

and it's probably a good thing!

then--add to all that: the fact that space is also being bent--(not the things you see in space but space itself)
and you have gravity
so you see now that time only goes one way because gravity only "pulls" one way
and vice versa

[preoccupied]

I'm not convinced Einsteins relativity is accurate. There is so much math that it could be fitting data for something other than what he thinks that it is. The Mould Effect math calculations are fitting data to an event, and I think the actual event is behaving different than the idea for the calculations so then the math calculations are estimating to a different similar event. The actual results are a big assumption. The calculations end up so small for relativity that I think something similar could be happening with that as well. So I firmly believe my hypothesis could be correct and that heat is the reason gravity exists.

[Dwylbtzle]

well, einstein never did find the unified comprehensive immigration theory did he? -lol

that's why true anti-gravity is so tough (for ME anyway)
because maybe you could do anti-gravity if you could reverse time
but to reverse time you have to reverse gravity
and i'm chewing gum right now
so i can only do one other thing at the same space-time

same trouble with time travel:
i can't even watch a movie, any more, if it has a time conundrum in it
-lol
i start screaming at the writer: "oh kiss my ass you lazy cheap hack!"

oh sure--he looks real clever as the movie starts
but SOMEwhere in this frikkin movie we're (as the audience), gonna be left with some unexplainable conundrum and asked to just suspend our disbelief and eat it
just ignore it and enjoy the movie - we got our money already

[WaltzCee]

I'd ask for my money back if I were you.

[WaltzCee]

...and therein's the rub - maybe Bessler wheels are coupled to Earth's momentum, and thus chewing through that momentum's KE.

This is an ancient idea. I think the first instance was from one of my client's mouth pieces, some 750b.c.

The acid test i guess would be to replace real gravity with pure inertia, and run a Bessler wheel riding the inside surface of a horizontally-aligned centrifuge - preferably in micro-gravity.

You will go blind!!

[MrVibrating]

Obviously, i've dealt with the matter extensively in the past but the context here is the realisation that while you can get free energy from a CoM violation, no amount of energy, free or otherwise, can buy a CoM violation.

So, if Bessler was applying an energy asymmetry, he'd also have needed a second layer of mechanism for converting that energy gain into an asymmetric distribution of momentum.

So Occam's razor would suggest his symmetry break was actually a CoM violation in the first place, and the energy asymmetry just a consequence of the asymmetric distribution of momentum.

So if the system's thermodynamically open to momentum, it is by definition an environmental source, and either quantum or classical. In either case, but especially the latter, the most obvious source is the one under our feet.

This is quite different to a consideration of the effects of trying to apply the coriolis force, or simply wondering aloud 'if PM wheels might slow the earth' as some kind of vapid open question..

To put it in familiar terms, even if i were wrong about the impossibility of a GPE asymmetry, harvesting the gain directly from the wheel's RKE also necessitates removing momentum from the wheel, because simply adding energy doesn't necessarily also add momentum, the conservation of which is perhaps more fundamental than that of energy.

I doubt i'm elucidating much for anyone else here, but for myself, i now have a clearer and more definite description of the type of asymmetry Bessler must've found. I know better where to look, and what to look for...

[MrVibrating]

@Dwylbtzle


Great stuff, thanks for sharing!


Ever since realising the centrality of time-invariance WRT conservation, in the back of my mind has been the possibility of some kind of reciprocal interaction here... ie. that any system manifesting a classical symmetry break might in some sense be temporally accelerating..

The force mediators are ambient virtual particles - classical, symmetrical force interactions are, at root, vacuum interactions - whatever the force involved, we perform some work against it, then it performs equal opposite work back. Or vice versa. A classical asymmetry however, would see these vacuum-generated force mediators performing more work than was performed back upon them.

Whatever the mediator in question, the substance of the force is ambient quantum momemtum - 'spin' - exchanged between charges / masses or whatever via the intermediary of the vacuum in quantised, signed units of h-bar.

So if we've had an asymmetric classical result, then we're prompted to wonder where these signed units came from, and what the consequences of a sign asymmetry may mean..

If the excess force is attractive, we've left the vacuum with a surfeit of negative momentum, and vice versa for a repulsive excess output / positive environmental momentum deficit.

If, as has been suggested in interpretations of QED (by Feynman himself IIRC) virtual particle pair production 'borrows energy from time', and this energy symmetry is only enforced by mutual self-annihilation or classical CoE / CoM, then some kind of temporal manipulation seems implicit..

The same point i guess might be applied to Hawkings radiation - any resulting temporal disunity would remain until the thing evaporated..

Obviously, Heisenberg would seem to render much of these thoughts moot if it's simply uncertainty that's ultimately responsible for spontaneous pair / virtual particle production, and no doubt classical asymmetries won't even be able to speak to the issues you're considering..

The more fundamental issue, it seems to me, is that any vacuum manipulation is global - the global value of 'spin', every cogwheel in the whole mechanism, its net momentum, changing in unison - so if any such changes are radiating outwards at C in all directions, how do we localise it in a box or whatever? If a Bessler wheel really was having an effect on the rate of time, it seems unlikely we'd be able to devise an experiment able to sense it.

Unless of course we can develop the principal to weaponised levels - unleashing very high energies very quickly. Then we could start playing with clocks and interferometry..

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Because of the tidal forces caused by the moon's motion around the earth, the earth's rate of rotation is currently slowing. From information I've found in wikipedia, the earth is supposedly now losing rotational energy at a rate of 3.3 terawatts because of this.

Also from a wikipedia entry, it seems that mankind's current power consumption is around 12.3 terawatts or close to 4 times the above.

The earth's loss of rotational energy should continue until the earth and moon are both tidally locked. When that happens the length of a day and a month on the earth will be the same, with the moon maintaining the same position in the sky, and will be approximately equal to 47 of our current days.

The length of a day is now changing at a rate of about 2 milliseconds every
100 years. It will thus take about 50,000 years for a day to be a second longer.

If there was a way for us to be able to take the equivalent of mankind's current energy needs from the rotation of the earth, the length of a day might then change by about 10 milliseconds every 100 years (again, at the current rate of energy consumption). That would mean that it would only take about 10,000 years for an earth day to become a second longer.

I know such changes could be disturbing, but this at least might buy mankind some time to find a better energy source!

;P

Dwayne

Hi Dwayne,

How much of that 12.3 terawatts is use at a cost of mass density, by burning Mass and changing it to pollution gasses? So which would be eating the most gravity, gravity wheels, or making energy how we are doing it now.

For those people who are worried about gravity slowing down the earths rotation, I will make sure that all my gravity wheels are facing in the same direction so the backing force actively pushes in the direction of the earths rotation, there I can't say fairer than that.

Hi preoccupied,

you have a interesting theory about Gravity, but within your theory of heat generating gravity, why do Ice comets still have gravity and cold planets still have the same pull as hot planets and Stars (per mass quantity's & density's). Gravity being a element of mass works for me, But theories are just that, so we all find one that suits our way of thinking as we all try to make our own sense of this wonderful Universe.

PS. Sorry axel for being off topic!
Edit, spelling.

[preoccupied]

I don't think ice comets have gravity. I think if it's a cold comet that it will fly right into the sun, unless it's going too fast which it would be pulled by the gravity of a warm planet or star. I think all of the planets are warm because I think that if a planet were cold that it would slowly or quickly descend into warm bodies and I don't trust reports about astrophysics that say there are cold bodies of gravity. I think that heat rises inside of a warm planet and that against a vacuum gravity pulls in cold bodies towards a warm planet. It's all buoyant. So buoyancy exists beyond the vacuum that heat is trapped in and also heat gets trapped in vacuums and doesn't travel out into space at a loss.