New Scrap Pad

[Senax]

DRAFT

Terragravitic Induction - Part 2

[Senax]

[Senax]

All we need is - see 2.20.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbiDrzTd8fE
Potentially, I have 3.

[Senax]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjSFjfWy1h4

[Senax]

DRAFT

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectio ... 20series).

If you hold the axle of a long pendulum flat against horizontal rails and move it back and forward by hand then on finds it is easy to instinctively synchronise movement with the pendulum to increase its amplitude even to the point of getting it "over the top and into a state of continuous circular motion.

(to be continued)

[Senax]

https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 741#p58741

[Senax]

[Senax]

The existence of Terra reaction energy can be demonstrated with a half swing of
a cycloid pendulum from start point to 6 o'clock continuing on as a conventional
pendulum's circular swing.

For equal start and finish heights the integrate pull to right for the cycloid section of
swing will be greater than the integrated pull to the left for the conventional section.

This difference in energy will lead to the pendulum rising above the starting point on
the left hand side. In other words there will be a gain in gravitational potential energy.

Experimentally it is probably easier to perform the inverse experiment using
push instead of pull.

A toy "Hot Car" starting at the beginning of the cycloid slope is allowed to progress onto the conventional slope where it will finish higher than its start point.

Th beauty of Hot Cars is that their wheels are so small that the the complicating factor of rotational energy is virtually eliminated.

[Senax]

The existence of Terra reaction energy can be demonstrated with a half swing of
a cycloid pendulum from start point to 6 o'clock continuing on as a conventional
pendulum's circular swing.

For equal start and finish heights the integrate pull to right for the cycloid section of
swing will be greater than the integrated pull to the left for the conventional section.

This difference in energy will lead to the pendulum rising above the starting point on
the left hand side. In other words there will be a gain in gravitational potential energy.

Experimentally it is probably easier to perform the inverse experiment using
push instead of pull.

A toy "Hot Car" starting at the beginning of the cycloid slope is allowed to progress onto the conventional slope where it will finish higher than its start point.

Th beauty of Hot Cars is that their wheels are so small that the the complicating factor of rotational energy is virtually eliminated.

Experiment cannot disprove the above since it is based on the logic of action = reaction and Bernoulli. Experiment can only support it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CG8KR9edp9Q

[Senax]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xK6aQ6h1g8

[Senax]

[Senax]

[Senax]

I've now realized that the action of the Ventomobile is the key to the Bessler and Laithwaite puzzles.
and that the "law" that gravity is conservative has to be made more specific.


First, a recap on the Ventomobile.

Rotor-powered examples have demonstrated ground speeds that exceed that of the wind, both directly into the wind and directly downwind by transferring power through a drive train between the rotor and the wheels

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/windene ... 5-2048.jpg

Now if there is a one in twenty slope, say, and the wind is blowing down along that slope it's pretty clear that the Ventomobile will be able to drive up that slope.

This insight can be extended to greater slopes and even to a vertical slope given suitable cogged wheels and track.

This takes us to the concept of gravity seen as a vertical wind which I share with at least one other member, namely, John Collins, a founding member of this forum.

It is clear that there is an implicit assumption in the idea that gravity is conservative, namely that mass is dead and motionless in its interior, the same false assumption that was made about pond water and water molecules.

This is the implicit assumption that Professor Laithwaites critics were making and they were
dead WRONG.

Mass is not dead,
It is very much alive.

All we need now is a Rocket Scientist to join all the bits together and make the case watertight.

********************************************
When the vampire squid gets wind of this he will doubtless start bundling
energy shares into complicated derivatives and selling them to unsuspecting customers.

[Fletcher]

... It is clear that there is an implicit assumption in the idea that gravity is conservative, namely that mass is dead and motionless in its interior, the same false assumption that was made about pond water and water molecules.

This is the implicit assumption that Professor Laithwaites critics were making and they were dead WRONG.

Mass is not dead, It is very much alive. ...

What is meant when we say gravitational force is conservative ( conserved ) ? ..

ChatGPT says ..

* When we say gravitational force is conservative, we mean that the work done by the gravitational force on an object moving between two points depends only on the starting and ending positions of the object, not on the path taken. It means the force has specific properties that allow the energy in a system to be conserved under its influence.

This property has several important implications:

1. Path Independence: The work done by gravity is the same whether an object moves along a straight path, a curved path, or any other trajectory between two points. The work done by the gravitational force on an object moving between two points depends only on the initial and final positions of the object, not on the path taken. For example, if an object moves from height h1​ to h2​, the work done by gravity will be the same, regardless of whether the object takes a straight path, a curved path, or any other trajectory.

2. Potential Energy Exists And Can Be Defined: Since gravitational force is conservative, we can define a gravitational potential energy (U) associated with the position of an object in a gravitational field. Near the Earth's surface: U=mgh . Here, U depends only on the height (h) above a reference point and not on how the object reached that height.

3a. Energy Conservation: In a system influenced only by conservative forces like gravity, the total mechanical energy ( E = KE + PE ) is conserved. This means any loss in potential energy is exactly converted into kinetic energy, or vice versa. In the absence of non-conservative forces (like friction), the total mechanical energy in a system influenced by gravity is conserved:

3b. Zero Work in Closed Loops: The work done by a conservative force over a closed path (starting and ending at the same point) is zero.

Etotal = Kinetic Energy (KE) + Potential Energy (PE) . This means any decrease in potential energy results in an equivalent increase in kinetic energy, and vice versa.

4. No Energy Loss / Dissipation: A conservative force does not dissipate energy as heat or other forms of non-recoverable energy. This is unlike non-conservative forces like friction, which cause energy dissipation. Gravitational force does not dissipate energy as heat or any other form. This is unlike non-conservative forces such as friction, which convert mechanical energy into other forms like heat.

Key Implication:

Gravitational force being conservative allows us to analyze systems using principles like potential energy and conservation of mechanical energy, simplifying calculations and understanding of motion under gravity.

..................

** My Summary of the current definition of Conserved ( maintained ) .. Conserved Gravity Force simply means Work Done ( WD ) by gravity force x vertical displacement = KE + PE , and is independent of path taken, and has no energy losses to non-conserved forces ..

[johannesbender]

You can also add to that , that non conservative forces are path depended although not thought of very often and quite obscure to demonstrate i think .

*dependent