Mr. Bessler's power source

[Gregory]

Winkle,

The imaginary PM wheel would operate differently on Earth and on the Spaceship. It's possible that one type of PM would work at both places, and an other just on Earth for example.

The greatest difference between Earth's gravity & artificial gravity is the fact that on the Earth's surface your wheel's weights at 12 and 6 o'clock pulled down by the same amount of force. So practically it doesn't make any difference where your weights is in the wheel, at what radius, gravity force stays the same. However on the spaceship with CF, it does make a much greater difference. CF is a function of radius, speed, and mass. Jim mich pointed this out in a previous post, and it's important.

This is because the Earth is so big compared to your wheel, there is almost zero difference in gravity force at the floor and at the top of your house. So, to achieve the same thing with CF asks for a very big spaceship and... as Jim said.

[rlortie]

Gregory,

Your above post triggered a pondering question! Always looking at nature for the answer; Note! this is strictly hypothetical and responses should be valued as such!

Gravity on earth is equivalent to centripetal force, it is what keeps Centrifugal force from flinging everything into space as the earth rotates. Centripetal force is a true force so why is gravity conservative? I do not ever recall any one referring to centripetal as "conservative"

The earth is a ball, and as such is half the diameter at the 45 parallel than at the equator. This means that in linear circumference the equator is turning twice faster than that of the quarter. If Centrifugal force is exponential to velocity then why do we not feel any difference from the axis (pole) to the equator?

Remember I am just pondering, but if one were to stand directly at the axis point theoretically there would be no centrifugal force. Yet one would still experience the same centripetal force created by gravity. Why do these values not change? Does an arrow shot into the air from the North pole experience any angular momentum? :-)

Ralph

[Fletcher]

Ralph .. copied from JC's General Discussion Forum .. Topic : "Why Gravity wheels don't violate the laws of Physics"

There is an equal force opposing gravity – it is called weight – it is made up of about ½ percent CF’s at the equator & the rest by muscular, molecular & skeletal resistance [force] to the force of gravity – this is continually renewed by chemical reactions in the body, burning calories i.e. joules & molecular forces.

Any text book will tell you that your weight reduces at the equator due to CF's so you 'weigh' heaviest at the poles.

[jim_mich]

Ralph, when I read this post of yours, it's like chalk or fingernails screeching on a chalkboard. It stands my hair on end. How can you call yourself an engineer?


Ralph's readying list: Look up the value of SIN(45) and COSINE(45). Hint: it is NOT "half". Look up Coriolis force. Look up variations of gravity at different places on the Earth due to variations of Earth density, variations of Earth diameter, and variations of CF at different Earth locations. Look up conservation of forces; for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If centripetal force is a true force then the equal and opposite centrifugal force is also a true force for there is no such thing as a false force. The teaching that one force is real and the other is not real is a product of our dumbed down educational system. One last thing, there are NO vertical centrifugal or centripetal forces when standing at the poles. All CF forces are horizontal and very very weak at the poles. Imagine the CF on an ice skater's arms when spinning at one revolution per day!

The internet is such a fantastic tool where every conceivable piece of information is almost instantly at your fingertips. There is no reason for anyone to not be able to educate themselves. Compare this situation to 50 years ago where it would require a trip to a library and many hours of manual searching to find information. If anyone has the desire to learn there is unlimited knowledge available at your fingertips.

[Gregory]

Remember I am just pondering, but if one were to stand directly at the axis point theoretically there would be no centrifugal force. Yet one would still experience the same centripetal force created by gravity. Why do these values not change? Does an arrow shot into the air from the North pole experience any angular momentum? :-)

Hi Ralph!

I haven't read about this, but as I understand it there MUST be a difference, so your pondering is logical. :)

Like Fletcher said you weight less at the equator than at the poles. However these differences are very small because gravity is much stronger compared to the CF produced by the Earth's rotation, I think.

I heard about more times, that they like to shoot up satellites from the equator, because it's easier from there. But maybe this is not because the CF? I can't remember for sure... but one more interesting thing to ponder.

[rlortie]

Jim_Mich,

Ralph, when I read this post of yours, it's like chalk or fingernails screeching on a chalkboard. It stands my hair on end. How can you call yourself an engineer?

Why should it bother you, did I not write:

Your above post triggered a pondering question! Always looking at nature for the answer; Note! this is strictly hypothetical and responses should be valued as such!

Did you overlook this part? It is hypothetical and meant only to create food for thought, which it appears to have done. And by the way, I very rarely refer to myself an engineer, my training, experience, certifications, and certificates recognize me as one. I prefer being recognized as a blue collar layman of empirical values.

Have a very Merry Christmas!

Ralph

[jim_mich]

Why should it bother me? I'm a stickler for truth. When someone states something that is not true then it just really gets me upset. This is specially true if they are or have been associated with the government in any way.

The earth is a ball, and as such is half the diameter at the 45 parallel than at the equator. This means that in linear circumference the equator is turning twice faster than that of the quarter.

It is hypothetical and meant only to create food for thought, ...

So Ralph, do you stand by your statement that the Earth is half the diameter at the 45th parallel and spins twice as fast at the equator? Or is this supposed to be some hypothetical world where physics is all screwed up? Maybe you need to go back and get re-certified? Or maybe you don't understand why your statement is false?

The Earth is not "half" the diameter at the 45th parallel. At the 45th parallel the Earth is 0.7071 times the diameter of the equator. Maybe you failed the math portion of those government sponsored certificate exams? Go get an orange and draw a line around the equator. Then draw another line at the 45th parallel. Now get a kitchen knife and cut a very thin slice from the equator and another at the 45th parallel. Note that the 45th parallel will NOT cut the orange in half. Eat the inside then cut the orange peel ring and lay them out straight one next to the other. The shorter one will be a little less than 3/4 the length of the longer. To be exact it will be the COSINE(45º), which equals 0.7071, which is also half of the square root of 2.

[evgwheel]

Riorty

Fletcher (Edit: Sorry Fletch this should have said Jim_Mitch) is right... In very ROUGH terms, one degree is 110km at 0 degrees and 80 km at 45 degrees and different south or north. At 90 degrees it is 0 km.
But I thought you also meant it as a guide and I took it as that. You are wrong, but who cares, the idea was right. (except if you are givin navigational lessons) EVG

[rmd3]

Jim_Mich,

We enjoy your posts, but please don't detract from the quality of your posts with insults to others. I think engineers can make mistakes - if I'm not mistaken (I am an engineer afterall).

Thanks,
-Randall

[rlortie]

Jim_Mich,

Or is this supposed to be some hypothetical world where physics is all screwed up?

Why do you make an issue and answer the facts at the same time?

I said it was hypothetical from the start but you seemed to have ignored that part not once but now twice.

This is specially true if they are or have been associated with the government in any way.

As a civilian gainfully employed by the U.S Army, which by constitution is not political did not make make me any more associated than any tax payer with the right to vote. Its government by the people for the people. Do you not associate?

The basic root of my career was to participate in making sure that when you you flipped a light switch the light came on. Followed by mitigation of the decimation of wild salmon runs caused by construction of dams and overfishing,

Randall, Fletcher, Evgwheel: Thank you for your valued input and having the discerning values to understand that it was hypothetical. Not that far from the subject matter of a gravity wheel in a space station.

I wonder if Jim_Mich is simply taking out his frustrations because of stagnation on his concept of CF as a prime mover. Kind of reminds me of Robert who was banned for such behavior.

Ralph

[rmd3]

Ralph,

Your last paragraph was uncalled for as well. So the same advice for Jim_Mich applies for you as well.

Come on, guys. Stop personal jabs.

Thanks,
Randall

[jim_mich]

Ralph fails to see that his statement, "The earth is a ball, and as such is half the diameter at the 45 parallel than at the equator. This means that in linear circumference the equator is turning twice faster than that of the quarter" is a false and untrue statement.

When people see a false statement, why should they be expected to remain silent? If a government politician tells people something that's not true, why should people be expected to remain silent? This is part of what is behind the Ron Paul Revolution. People must learn to be truthful. Anything less is no longer acceptable.

I'm not against Ralph. I'm against untrue statements.



Edit: Maybe I should make this crystal clear for those that have trouble understanding things. The Earth's diameter around the 45th parallel is NOT "half" of the diameter of the equator as Ralph states. It is slightly under 3/4 diameter.

[rmd3]

Jim_Mich,

You have every right and responsibility to speak up if someone states something false. It isn't any politcal candidate's "revolution" that proves that point - it's just the right thing to do.

But correcting mistakes was never my objection. I hope my point isn't being missed. My point is this: personal attacks are not exceptable for mistaken posts. I would think as a moderator this would be part of your responsibility to ensure (though I don't know if the policy of the forum allows for personal attacks - certainly good manners doesn't).

And although both you and Ralph have responses with personal attacks against each other, I don't have to have either one of you admit they've personally attacked the other for my point to be correct.

Just trying to raise the level of conversation,
-Randall

[rlortie]

45th parallel is NOT "half" of the diameter of the equator as Ralph states. It is slightly under 3/4 diameter.

And once again "Ralph states" that the whole issue was emphasized and or made clear to be hypothetical. It is easier to imagine half of something rather than go into mathematical issues of exactness.

When people see a false statement, why should they be expected to remain silent?

I don't, and as you will not remain silent! That is the issue, we both are not afraid to say what we think! I also expect them to read that it is "hypothetical" and not overlook that fact. To make a personal slam with the pretense that it is a statement of fact tells me you are biased, you did not bother to read the full text Which I emphasized with you in mind. But that did not stop you did it!

This post is not intended as a personal slam, I am only attempting to defend my literacy. I am not as dumb as some attempt to portray me on a personal level.

"If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging" (Will Rogers)

Back to gravity and space wheels; IMO if a design can be found that works in gravity then replacing that constant force with springs would work in a non-gravity environment as well. It would work without CF being present, and in any position as it need not have reference to anything. It need not be within a space station. It would in fact react similar to a gyroscope in space and utilized accordingly.

Private mail regarding this subject was discussed approximately 1-1/2 months ago with a prominent member of this forum, the basic concept of a design is currently being tested.

The fact remains that such a device may function better in space than here on Terra firma.

I post the following boring text in hopes of pleasing those who wish to be impressed with explicit educated dazzling input.

1 Newton = 1kilogram 1 meter sec.2

F=ma

d=1/2 X (a X t2 )

1 Newton acting on 1kg will accelerate the mass at a rate of 1 meter sec^2

the time that ½ the mass of the rim is exposed to the tilting force at 5 revolutions a second is 10 times a second or 1/10; .1 sec

The distance, d, the mass will go in .1 sec
d = ½ X 1m / sec2 X (.1sec)2 ; = ½ X 1m/sec2 X .01 sec2 = .005 meter

The axis is twice as long as the distance from the average distance that the rim mass is calculated from .005 X 2 = .01 meters

Now consider the other side of the gyro as acted on by the same 1 Newton force.
.01m / 2 = .005

The force will have ten times a second to accelerate the rim mass from a relative velocity of 0m /sec.
10 X .005m = .05m; or 5 centimeters

Years ago there was a news story about a man that used a gyro to produce more energy than was needed to keep the gyro spinning. He used a surplus ship's directional gyro. I think what he did was use the property of precession to run a generator.

If left undisturbed, a gyro on the surface of the Earth would turn 360 degrees once every 24 hours. The top of the gyro would normally go westward. But if the top axis were held so that it could not rotate from east to west, due to precession, the gyro will rotate in the north and south direction depending on the direction the rim is rotating. The gyro would turn due to precession until it reaches 90 degrees with it's axis pointing north and south. Then it would be in the same plane as the rotation of the Earth and gyroscopic precession would stop. To get the gyro out of the Earth's rotational plain a small force could be applied to the gyro axis and precession would put the axis back in the original position. The 90 degree precession rotation would be much faster than the once per 24 hours opposing forces rotation, but some gearing would probably still be needed to run a generator. The generator would be mechanically linked to the precession back and forth motion in one direction only so it will turn the same direction all the time. The amount of energy needed to keep the gyro's rim spinning and the energy needed to turn the gimbals back 90 degrees would determine the overall efficiency.

This is NOT a free energy thing. The energy comes from the rotation of the Earth and therefore the Earth rotational speed is slowed as energy is tapped from a gyro-generator type machine. If this method of generating energy is used to a great extent, days and nights would become longer. If this should happen. let me be the first credited to use the term "rotation pollution" or "motion pollution".

Other experiments with a gyro
There might be a way to accelerate the rotational speed of the rim of a gyro by using a short duration tilting force on the axis. The force's duration would be for much less then the length of time that is required for the rim to rotate 90 degrees. When the rim has rotated 90 degrees from the time the tilting force was first applied, The tilting force would be purposely reversed. The direction that the rim is rotating and the direction the rim would have moved due to precession are now close to the same. The two motions might combine and result in an increase in the rotational speed of the rim.

Ralph

[rlortie]

Ralph,

Your last paragraph was uncalled for as well. So the same advice for Jim_Mich applies for you as well.

Come on, guys. Stop personal jabs.

Thanks,
Randall

Randall, You are correct and I apologize, I should not have added the last paragraph. My preceding post is also somewhat tainted, but I have to defend that which I consider a misrepresented personal slam on my mentality.

I do believe I have made my point and you will hear no more of it. Not until the next attack at least.

I wish whenever Jim_Mich finds my posts to his distaste, he would bring it to my attention by PM. I would then make public retractions when and were required. Or at least use the thread he started for that purpose.

If a spring powered wheel driving a gyroscope was placed in a low orbit would it still be effected by the planet and be revolving many times a day rather than once every 24 hours?

Gyroscopes in space;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Space_Telescope

Hubble Telescope uses gyroscopes to stabilize itself in orbit and point accurately and steadily at astronomical targets. Normally, three gyroscopes are required for operation; observations are still possible with two gyros, but the area of sky that can be viewed would be somewhat restricted, and observations requiring very accurate pointing would be more difficult. In 2005, it was decided to switch to two-gyroscope mode for regular telescope operations as a means of extending the lifetime of the mission. The switch to this mode was made on August 31, 2005, leaving Hubble with two gyroscopes in use and two on backup. Estimates of the failure rate of the gyros indicate that Hubble may be down to one gyro by 2008, after which the telescope would be rendered unusable.[27]

In addition to predicted gyroscope failure, Hubble will eventually require a change of batteries. A robotic servicing mission including this would be tricky, as it requires many operations, and a failure in any might result in irreparable damage to Hubble. However, the observatory was designed so that during Shuttle servicing missions it would receive power from a connection to the Space Shuttle, and this fact may be utilized by adding an external power source (an additional battery) rather than changing the internal ones

Ralph