With the greatest respect Tarsier, B. said his secret PM Principle was deeply hidden. So I am not surprised you or anybody else is struggling to see how energy could mechanically be taken from the earths rotation and given to an anchored wheel so that it was self-moving and "ever-lasting" rotation.Tarsier79 wrote:
The slingshot maneuver, just like the blackbird and any other engine requires an energy differential to work.
The slingshot uses differential KE, the blackbird uses energy differential of the wind and land.
Besslers wheel was traveling at the same speed as the surface of the earth, so no energy differential exists in rotation or KE between the axle and the earth.
Once it starts spinning, it now spins at a different speed, so I guess there is a differential, but any energy is extracted from the differential, which will slow down the wheel much more than the earth.
I am struggling to see how we would transfer usable power to the wheel from earth rotation.
I offered up the momentum exchange theory explanation as it is currently my simplest and favoured option for how a runner could receive energy to output as external Work, and remain self-moving. That doesn't mean it must be correct. There are one or two other possible mathematical explanations I'm keeping in back-of-mind but at this stage they seem less cogent possibilities.
Anyhoo .. yes, there must be some sort of physical differential or gradient to be exploited it would seem, for any AM exchange or transfer theory to work.
It took me a long time to come up with what i think is a viable mechanical means to reduce back-torque (in my book visibly and for all intents-and-purposes the same as an exchange of momentum from earth to wheel theory).
The "back-box" had to have some mechanics inside it. It could not break Archimedes Law of Levers - yet somehow outwardly the wheel appeared to have asymmetric torque which allowed it to quickly accelerate to operational rpm, and do Work (output mechanical energy).
Needless to say the Toy's Page (TP) was my first port of call - 6 toys and 5 children's games. And we know there is something special behind Stork's-Bills (SB's) BUT .. they are just linear levers (simple machines) that also don't and can't break the Law of Levers. Therefore it must be their in-situ use within the Prime Mover assembly that is special. Perhaps they helped establish that gradient we seek ?!
At this point I acknowledge again that I could be wrong about my device and its capabilities. I haven't built it as yet, and simmed some parts of it. My current optimism may turn out to be entirely misplaced. However I consider myself reasonably balanced, with a reasonable knowledge of B. and his wheels, and some experience in simming and building behind me. I don't get fooled by a device too often but it does happen. Fortunately my mind-sim is still working fine but it doesn't always have to adhere to the rules of physics (mostly it does), as we all know too well ;7)
Soooo .. moving along .. I have what appears to me to be an extraordinary mechanical device that I have never seen before. It is a reworking of something I simmed a few years ago that I thought had potential for further refinement and development, and I finally got back to it. It is made up of parts from the TP. And if it works as I intend it will reduce back-torque manifesting as a forward thrusting-force to the wheel proper. And if eventual real-world experiments confirm this I will be prepared to investigate other sources of input energy to the wheel environment that is ultimately outputted as mechanical energy. Atm it is easier to go with the Ockham's Razor choice in front of me, of momentum transfer / quasi energy transference.
What I categorically know is that gravity force is not an energy source, and is conservative !
