That is very cool Ralph
That pattern seems to hold much of what physics is all about.
Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Moderator: scott
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
JB Wheeler
it exists I think I found it.
it exists I think I found it.
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Yes, I use the golden mean as a discrete-randomizer, for natural-imaging and more stuff.
And if you have a balance of almost 6:4, why not use that number.
But I still can't see CF in that image.
And if you have a balance of almost 6:4, why not use that number.
But I still can't see CF in that image.
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: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Me,
No you will not see CF in that image as the nautilis does not spin. CF is a fictitious force only seen in an accelerating frame of reference.
This quote from MS Encarta explains it better than I can. note the second paragraph, there you see what I mean.
Centripetal Force, a center-seeking force that causes an object to move in a circular path. For example, suppose a ball is tied to a string and swung around in a circle at a constant velocity. The ball moves in a circular path because the string applies a centripetal force to the ball. According to Sir Isaac Newton's first law of motion, a moving object will travel in a straight path unless acted on by a force (see Mechanics). So, if the string were suddenly cut, the ball would no longer be subject to the centripetal force and would travel in a straight line in a direction tangent to the circular path of the ball (if not for the force of gravity). As another example, suppose a person is riding on a merry-go-round. As the merry-go-round rotates, the person must hang onto the ride to keep from falling off. Where the person grasps the ride, a centripetal force is applied to the individual that keeps the person moving in a circular path. If the person were to let go, he or she would travel in a straight line (if gravity were absent). In general, the centripetal force that needs to be applied to an object of mass m that is traveling in a circular path of radius r at a constant velocity v is
.
Often, centripetal force is confused with centrifugal force. While centripetal force is a real force,-that is, the force is due to the influence of some object or field-centrifugal force is a fictitious force. A fictitious force is present only when a system is examined from an accelerating frame of reference. If the same system is examined from a non-accelerating frame of reference, all the fictitious forces disappear. For example, a person on a rotating merry-go-round would experience a centrifugal force that pulls away from the center of the ride. The person experiences this force only because he or she is on the rotating merry-go-round, which is an accelerating frame of reference. If the same system is analyzed from the sidewalk next to the merry-go-round, which is a non-accelerating frame of reference, there is no centrifugal force. The individual on the sidewalk would only note the centripetal force that keeps the individual moving in a circular path. In general, real forces are present regardless of whether the reference frame used is accelerating or not accelerating; fictitious forces are present only in an accelerating frame of reference.
Earlier I used the rotating earth and how gravity is used as a force to keep us from flying off into space. The above example uses the merry-go- round. Here the person is in a horizonal state of acceleration and therefore provide the centripetal force by hanging on.
When I speak of angle of attack, that is referring to a vertical wheel, its velocity plus mass held in place by gravity.
The moon is much smaller than the earth its rotation speed is much slower than that of earth. Due to its smaller mass, if it were to rotate as fast as the earth, there would not be enough gravity to overcome CF.
IMO all planets have a revolving rate based on their mass, exceed this velocity and they would fly apart. with the right mass and angle of attack gravity can be used to negate CF and assist in creating CP.
Cutting to the chase, that force called gravity can perform work by opposing CF. We use the term "work" when a mass is moved, what do we call it when a moving mass is held within a given trajectory against its fictitious forces? Is that not also work!
It is the design properties of the nautilus you need to look at not a source of any force real or fictitious.
Ralph
No you will not see CF in that image as the nautilis does not spin. CF is a fictitious force only seen in an accelerating frame of reference.
This quote from MS Encarta explains it better than I can. note the second paragraph, there you see what I mean.
Centripetal Force, a center-seeking force that causes an object to move in a circular path. For example, suppose a ball is tied to a string and swung around in a circle at a constant velocity. The ball moves in a circular path because the string applies a centripetal force to the ball. According to Sir Isaac Newton's first law of motion, a moving object will travel in a straight path unless acted on by a force (see Mechanics). So, if the string were suddenly cut, the ball would no longer be subject to the centripetal force and would travel in a straight line in a direction tangent to the circular path of the ball (if not for the force of gravity). As another example, suppose a person is riding on a merry-go-round. As the merry-go-round rotates, the person must hang onto the ride to keep from falling off. Where the person grasps the ride, a centripetal force is applied to the individual that keeps the person moving in a circular path. If the person were to let go, he or she would travel in a straight line (if gravity were absent). In general, the centripetal force that needs to be applied to an object of mass m that is traveling in a circular path of radius r at a constant velocity v is
.
Often, centripetal force is confused with centrifugal force. While centripetal force is a real force,-that is, the force is due to the influence of some object or field-centrifugal force is a fictitious force. A fictitious force is present only when a system is examined from an accelerating frame of reference. If the same system is examined from a non-accelerating frame of reference, all the fictitious forces disappear. For example, a person on a rotating merry-go-round would experience a centrifugal force that pulls away from the center of the ride. The person experiences this force only because he or she is on the rotating merry-go-round, which is an accelerating frame of reference. If the same system is analyzed from the sidewalk next to the merry-go-round, which is a non-accelerating frame of reference, there is no centrifugal force. The individual on the sidewalk would only note the centripetal force that keeps the individual moving in a circular path. In general, real forces are present regardless of whether the reference frame used is accelerating or not accelerating; fictitious forces are present only in an accelerating frame of reference.
Earlier I used the rotating earth and how gravity is used as a force to keep us from flying off into space. The above example uses the merry-go- round. Here the person is in a horizonal state of acceleration and therefore provide the centripetal force by hanging on.
When I speak of angle of attack, that is referring to a vertical wheel, its velocity plus mass held in place by gravity.
The moon is much smaller than the earth its rotation speed is much slower than that of earth. Due to its smaller mass, if it were to rotate as fast as the earth, there would not be enough gravity to overcome CF.
IMO all planets have a revolving rate based on their mass, exceed this velocity and they would fly apart. with the right mass and angle of attack gravity can be used to negate CF and assist in creating CP.
Cutting to the chase, that force called gravity can perform work by opposing CF. We use the term "work" when a mass is moved, what do we call it when a moving mass is held within a given trajectory against its fictitious forces? Is that not also work!
It is the design properties of the nautilus you need to look at not a source of any force real or fictitious.
Ralph
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Yes I know "Centripetal Force", it's Basic Physics, but thanks for the explanaition.
So this is also called CounterForce, or did I mistakenly mixed things up?
..eeeh CP?
So this is also called CounterForce, or did I mistakenly mixed things up?
..eeeh CP?
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: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Me,
Either you or I have things mixed up. I do not recall ever posting anything with the words "Counter force" To my thinking it is a term that I do not care to use. The only way I can relate to it would be to say; The mass is to heavy for me to break its inertial hold and build kinetic energy. If I could get it moving I would hope that inertia will keep it moving via the kinetic build up if I once got it started.
resistance to motion action or change is how I see inertia.
My understanding of kinetic is "of or produced by motion.
MY version of counter force would be a dozen or so burley Irishman sitting at the counter in the local pub, having a pint and looking for a fight.
Ralph
Either you or I have things mixed up. I do not recall ever posting anything with the words "Counter force" To my thinking it is a term that I do not care to use. The only way I can relate to it would be to say; The mass is to heavy for me to break its inertial hold and build kinetic energy. If I could get it moving I would hope that inertia will keep it moving via the kinetic build up if I once got it started.
resistance to motion action or change is how I see inertia.
My understanding of kinetic is "of or produced by motion.
MY version of counter force would be a dozen or so burley Irishman sitting at the counter in the local pub, having a pint and looking for a fight.
Ralph
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
ME .. I saw the term 'counter force' used previously in this thread. I got the distinct impression that you had thought CF stood for 'counter force' ? CF stands for Centrifugal Force in my book. My apologies if it is fact me that is mistaken about the context.
No work is done in the same way that no work is done when you sit in your deck chair reading the sunday paper whilst the earth revolves around its axis carrying you along with it.
Centripetal Force (CP) is a real & tangible force that holds you in an orbit whether it be around a planet or holding onto the fair ground ride so that you don't fly off.
CF is our perception of that force i.e. inertia wants you to carry on in a straight line (tangent to the orbit path). We experience that as a pull on our bodies which we perceive as CF. CP is actually what keeps us in orbit & is the real force in action. We do however experience an acceleration because we are traveling in a curve.
Gravity _is_ the CentriPetal Force in this instance.Ralph wrote:Cutting to the chase, that force called gravity can perform work by opposing CF. We use the term "work" when a mass is moved, what do we call it when a moving mass is held within a given trajectory against its fictitious forces? Is that not also work!
No work is done in the same way that no work is done when you sit in your deck chair reading the sunday paper whilst the earth revolves around its axis carrying you along with it.
Centripetal Force (CP) is a real & tangible force that holds you in an orbit whether it be around a planet or holding onto the fair ground ride so that you don't fly off.
CF is our perception of that force i.e. inertia wants you to carry on in a straight line (tangent to the orbit path). We experience that as a pull on our bodies which we perceive as CF. CP is actually what keeps us in orbit & is the real force in action. We do however experience an acceleration because we are traveling in a curve.
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Fletcher,
I thank you for bringing the confusion about "counter force" to light.
I could not find where "Me" was coming from with the statement. I guess it is time to start a thread, to explain all the acronyms used on this board.
There are some that I do not know what they stand for either.
Some I can relate to are CF, CP, COG and G. after that my mind goes blank.
Where as these are used so fluently it sure would be nice if spell check did not spit them back at you every new post. hitting the learn button will get you through until the next letter and then it the same routine.
Ralph
I thank you for bringing the confusion about "counter force" to light.
I could not find where "Me" was coming from with the statement. I guess it is time to start a thread, to explain all the acronyms used on this board.
There are some that I do not know what they stand for either.
Some I can relate to are CF, CP, COG and G. after that my mind goes blank.
Where as these are used so fluently it sure would be nice if spell check did not spit them back at you every new post. hitting the learn button will get you through until the next letter and then it the same routine.
Ralph
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Thanks.. this clears the whole thing up.
For some reason I never understood otherwise. Now I have to read all is written about it all over again.
me neither.. Mixed things up in the mind... 1 possibility is the term "Counter Torque" from other threads.. maybe (or for sure) I'm getting old and senile...damn.I could not find where "Me" was coming from with the statement
For some reason I never understood otherwise. Now I have to read all is written about it all over again.
It should be a sticky-thread, or else one can start again in a few months.I guess it is time to start a thread, to explain all the acronyms used on this board.
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.---
-
ken_behrendt
- Addict
- Posts: 3487
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:45 am
- Location: new jersey, usa
- Contact:
re: Oxygons Inertial Engine...
Ralph...
I have only found it necessary, so far, to use four acronyms. By CG I mean "center of gravity" and by CF I mean "centrifugal force". With regard to direction of rotation, I use CW to mean "clockwise" and CCW to mean "counter clockwise".
To me a "counter torque" is one that operates in the opposite direction to the direction that one expects one's wheel to turn in due to its "driving" torque. Thus, if a wheel is expected to turn CW, then a counter torque would be in the CCW direction.
ken
I have only found it necessary, so far, to use four acronyms. By CG I mean "center of gravity" and by CF I mean "centrifugal force". With regard to direction of rotation, I use CW to mean "clockwise" and CCW to mean "counter clockwise".
To me a "counter torque" is one that operates in the opposite direction to the direction that one expects one's wheel to turn in due to its "driving" torque. Thus, if a wheel is expected to turn CW, then a counter torque would be in the CCW direction.
ken
On 7/6/06, I found, in any overbalanced gravity wheel with rotation rate, ω, axle to CG distance d, and CG dip angle φ, the average vertical velocity of its drive weights is downward and given by:
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ
Vaver = -2(√2)πdωcosφ