Serendipity

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

Serendipity

Post by Grimer »

I have been going through Docfeelsgood's "new thoughts" thread in order to grasp the background history of this forum's attempts to understand and reproduce Pop Keenie's wheel.

In one of my posts I wrote the following:

My first thought on seeing the weight being transferred from the inner to the outer wheel was - the movement of the lever arm is negligible - indeed in the limit zero - and we know from all the failed attempts at moving weights around that there's no joy there anyway - so the answer must like somewhere else. Static balance ain't the answer.

If one looks at Pop's wheel long enough one eventually sees it as a car wheel with a tyre on it. Now any of us who has ever driven a car knows that it is not enough to balance the wheel statically. This alone will not prevent terrible vibration when the wheel is rotating at speed.
One has to take it to a garage and get them to use one of their magic balancing machines that rotates the wheel and measures the out of balance forces.

The equivalent of altering wheel balance is essentially what Pop's weight shifting must be all about. In other words he is messing with conservation of angular momentum which is only conservation of kinetic energy in the buff, i.e. measured from a objective frame of reference in relation to the fixed stars and not kinetic energy in fancy dress, i.e. measured from whatever subjective frame of reference takes ones fancy. Newton's false first law has a lot to answer for.


An then whilst researching Rowley who had been discussed at length in the thread I came across the following gem of purest ray serene.

Talk about serendipity!

===============================================
http://www.defza.com/notes/life/energy/35/

Bruce Welsh is an electronics engineer with the open spirit which has been devoted to alternative energies for twenty years. It is convinced that one can build machines with on-unit.

He had an uncle who liked to arrange, to invent. One day, old Bruce of seven or eight years, returned visit to the uncle who showed to the grandfather the new play that it had made for his children (it had six of them).

The play made in the sixty centimetres height for a base of thirty centimetres square. It consisted of a slope in spiral of three turns and half. At the bottom of the slope a paddle wheel, connected by some gears to an elevator was placed going up to the top of the play where a hopper furnished with ten balls was. An opening to rocker in the hopper made it possible to let pass, one by one the balls which went down the slope into three to five seconds.

The ball touched the paddle wheel what gave a small upswing which released another ball whereas the first was on the elevator and went towards the hopper. And so on.

There were five balls at the same time on the elevator and the once launched play did not stop any more. To begin, all the balls were to be in the hopper and Bruce remembers to be thundered by the uncle because it had touched the paddle wheel, thus stopping the play started again soon by the uncle. And, several hours after, the play always functioned.

Did the uncle know that it had violated the laws of physics?

Its descendants do not know any more what became this play, it is probable that the uncle in recovered the parts as it was its practice to rebuild another thing, unless it does not sleep yet in an old farm, in dust… They do not remember either to have seen other apparatuses functioning in an autonomous way, nor of engine on the play, but know that the play had stopped afterwards weeks and simply set out again after being cleaned.

Foot-note: the slope in spiral is indeed a vortex and it seems that in a certain way the vortices add energy, one unceasingly finds them in many ideas related to on-unit.


(KeelyNet source of the 14/12/97)
===============================================

I have now connected the understanding of conservation of angular momentum as kinetic energy in the buff, i.e. related to an absolute objective frame of reference rather than a local subjective frame of reference and realise that Bruce Welsh's uncle had indeed built a perpetual motion machine.

He had released the impact component that I've talked about previously.

Look at it this way. There are two potential energies involved in the vortex toy corresponding to the two velocities I mentioned here. The gravitational potential energy and the inertial potential energy. By dropping the balls down a vortex spiral Uncle released them both. So he had lots of energy to play with. Twice as much as he needed which could swamp any minor inefficiencies in the process.

Of course nature shows us this double energy release all the time. Anybody who lives in Kansas should know that. Dorothy certainly experienced it.

Well! Who's going to be the first to emulate Bruce's Uncle and build the second Vortex toy?

I only wish I had the experimental skills to do it myself. Image
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

re: Serendipity

Post by Grimer »

Another way of looking at the doubling of the kinetic energy is that the vortex spiral down which the ball runs contributes an increasing lateral force (ultimately a ground force) as the radius of the spiral decreases. Instead of the impact contribution of a dropped ball being concentrated in the second half of a beam deflection as in the paternoster example, a strain which is complicated to trap and reroute to the lift, the impact contribution is spread out over the whole of the vortex spiral and hands itself over as a most convenient horizontal velocity.

In short the vortex spiral is a very ingenious way of getting the second helping of 1/2.mv^2 which nature discovered years ago in the form of tornadoes.

Image
Attachments
Picture of a tornado.
Picture of a tornado.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

Post by Grimer »

One approach to understanding why Uncle's toy is a perpetual motion machine is to look at it in terms of the conservation of momentum involving the ball rolling down the spiral and the spiral winding up the ball.

Image

Action equals reaction so any action on the ball is balanced by a counter action on the spiral. If the spiral were free to move then release of the ball would lead to the ball rotating one way and the spiral rotating the other. If the ball and the spiral were appropriately weighted and balanced in rotation then the ball would acquire a KE of 1/2.mv^2 clockwise, say, and the spiral would acquire a KE of 1/2.mv^2 widdershins.

But of course the spiral isn't free to rotate, is it!

And because it isn't free to move the ball acquires all the kinetic energy.

An this is why Uncle's toy works.

The spiral is firmly fixed to the ground. It is mechanically earthed. This means that the angular momentums are very unbalanced. The spiral is rotating the ball and the ball is rotating the spiral-earth combination. If one assumed that the spiral and earth were completely rigid then one could calculate just how instantaneously fast the earth was rotating at any point in the ball's travel from the equation for the conservation of instant momentum,

mV +Mv = 0, where

m is the mass of the ball
V is the velocity of the ball
M is the mass of earth-spiral
v is the velocity of the earth-spiral

It is interesting to contemplate the other boundary case where the weight of the ball is very much greater than the weight of the spiral vortex track and the track is free to move. To keep things simple we will have a mirror track underneath with an earthed column mirroring the ball.

In this case the double track would be squeezed out from the ball falling down to meet the top of the column in the same manner as those slippery prune stones that schoolboys fire across the dinner hall by squeezing them between thumb and finger.

Another interesting feature of the Toy is that the action takes place in three dimensions. I suspect this is an essential requirement for a Bessler wheel and explains why two dimensional pencil and paper are not the best medium for trying to discover his secret.

On second thoughts in the light of the Keenie wheel one could substitute an independent motion such as Pop's "tire" for the third dimension.
Attachments
Bernoulli spiral
Bernoulli spiral
User avatar
path_finder
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
Location: Paris (France)

re: Serendipity

Post by path_finder »

May be, the brachistocrone paradox is used for delaying some balls::
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlSv_IlXmBg
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

Post by Grimer »

Or speeding the ball up. Thanks for that link path_finder.

That's the second good lead I've had from you so I clicked your green button. Image
justsomeone
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2107
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:21 pm

re: Serendipity

Post by justsomeone »

Question. Would the green car have enough speed to make it back to the starting height? I'm sure the answer is no but I thought I would ask.
User avatar
path_finder
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2372
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:32 am
Location: Paris (France)

re: Serendipity

Post by path_finder »

Many thanks for Grimmer.

Dear compatriot (someone),
Obviously NOT.
By definition the path goes from an higher point to another more lower point.
The purpose of the experiment is to show the fastest path between two points at NOT the same altitude. Although the common sense, the fastest path (named 'brachistochrone') is one passing underneath the lowest destination point.
I cannot imagine why nobody though on this before, including myself? It is so simple!...
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

re: Serendipity

Post by Grimer »

The interesting thing about a ball falling down a Bernoulli spiral (vortex) is both gravity is doing work on the ball in driving it towards the ground and the earth reaction is doing work on the ball in driving it towards the centre. It is as though the ball is in equilibrium between two winds, the earth wind acting on area and the gravitational wind acting on volume.

Funnily enough, my Experimental Officer, Nigel Clayton used to say to me that "... it all comes down to the difference between volume and area in the end".

In my terms I think he must have been referring the the different mode of action between the Solid Phase in compression and the Fluid Phase in tension (reduced compression if Beta-atmosphere in taken into account)

Sorry to be so elliptic but someone might just be able to see what I'm getting at. Image
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
User avatar
Fletcher
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8780
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:03 am
Location: NZ

re: Serendipity

Post by Fletcher »

So take a large cone shaped funnel & release a steel ball at any angle [except vertically] - it will spiral downwards & travel towards the center [for the same reasons as the spiral vortex] except that Cf slows the rate of height loss, but this in turn means less Ke at the bottom, IINM.

Whenever there is a ramp path to follow it exerts an upthrust on the ball & this counters or offsets g-force pulling the weight down vertically - the steeper the incline the faster the fall because the incline force [earth pushing upwards] is not directly opposite the g-force & the greater the angle difference i.e. steeper the incline, the less the forces can directly oppose - the ultimate demonstration being a ball on a flat table with no incline, then the forces are directly opposed & in equilibrium & there is no loss of height.

So I guess I'm asking Grimer is a Bernoulli vortex spiral any different from an ordinary straight incline ?
User avatar
jim_mich
Addict
Addict
Posts: 7467
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2003 12:02 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by jim_mich »

Fletcher wrote: it will spiral downwards & travel towards the center [for the same reasons as the spiral vortex] except that Cf slows the rate of height loss, but this in turn means less Ke at the bottom, IINM.
Is the reverse true? Of course a ball will not ride an up-side-down funnel cone. But if there were a cone shaped path that spiraled outward as the ball rolled lower then would the ball have more KE at the bottom? Logic says that if what Fletcher says is true then the reverse would also be true.

Image
User avatar
Fletcher
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8780
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:03 am
Location: NZ

re: Serendipity

Post by Fletcher »

Good question - wish I knew he answer ;)
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

re: Serendipity

Post by Grimer »

Fletcher wrote: ... So I guess I'm asking Grimer is a Bernoulli vortex spiral any different from an ordinary straight incline ?
I feel sure it must be.

It has to be some kind of optimum in three dimensions in the same way the the brachistocrone curve is an optimum in two. That is why tornadoes and water going down plugholes take that form. Also, it is a logarithmic spiral and logarithms in the form of power curves are constantly cropping up in my research.

I was completely unaware of the existence of the brachistocrone curve until path_finder pointed it out. It is a fascinating subject, counter-intuitive and a humiliating reminder of one's ignorance on the behaviour of pendulums for example.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
User avatar
Fletcher
Addict
Addict
Posts: 8780
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 9:03 am
Location: NZ

re: Serendipity

Post by Fletcher »

IIRC re: the brachistochrone curve, the velocity of the balls are the same but one arrives earlier i.e. no extra velocity gained but a timing difference.

I can see how the vortex spiral might well be a 3-D analogue of the brachistochrone.
User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

re: Serendipity

Post by Grimer »

Interestingly enough, vortices have been associated with "free" energy through the researches of Viktor Schauberger

Schauberger and his works have become part of an Internet-based conspiracy theory claiming that Schuaberger invented free energy/perpetual motion devices and that this was "covered up" by the US government. However, perpetual motion devices are impossible under basic laws of physics as they violate the fundamental concept of conservation of energy. Schauberger never claimed to have invented perpetual motion machines, but instead stated that he used the Earth's natural power.

Schauberger's "implosion" technology sounds suspiciously like the Fluid Phase (in tension) of our Di-Phase theory (see attached .pdf). It sounds as though Schauberger has found out how to use the other half of the mv^2 which is normally not available because the tensile strain and compressive strain energies are not in equilibrium. The forces are (absolute strain entropy = absolute strain ectropy) but the energies aren't.
Attachments
SST paper.pdf
A General Approach to Strength of Materials
(1.33 MiB) Downloaded 247 times
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
greendoor
Devotee
Devotee
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 6:18 am
Location: New Zealand

re: Serendipity

Post by greendoor »

I'm a little uncomfortable comparing fluid flow dynamics to solid mass kinetics. Tornados & vortexes & Schauberger etc have fascinated me for years, and I don't know if anyone really knows exactly what is going on. (The more certain somebody thinks they know everything, the more likely they are missing everything).

In a fluid vortex, I don't think we should overlook multiple effects: gravity, kinetic, chemical, thermal, electric, earth rotation, etc, etc. Moving particles do what moving particles want to do - and each one is subject to multiple forces, and in turn affect each other. Too hard for my brain.

In particular, I think the following effects are worth noting:

Coriolus Effect (99% of Tornados rotate Cyclonically - and we still say that they are too small to be affected by the Coriolus Effect?)

Ranque Effect - rotating particles are subject to centrifugal force and this tends to create higher density/higher pressure at the periphery, and lower density/lower pressure at the core. This means the periphery is hotter, and the core is cooler. Almost a Maxwell demon effect ... the creation of a cold zone means that ambiant heat energy can enter the core of the vortex and feed it with surplus energy ... I think this is a very significant factor in explaining energy gain ... how different is this from a Heat Pump?

People who have survived being sucked into a tornado vortex have commented on the intense electrical phenomena. Our earth is surrounded by an electric field (as well as magnetic) and there are millions of volts available as we ascend vertically. It seems to me that when we have a conductor (water) to 'short out' this field, we get lightening, which is plasma. Tornado spouts are no doubt tapping into this available energy too - I believe Faraday did some amazing experiments with generating high voltages by dripping water ... can't be ignored in a Vortex situation ...

Vortexes are very cool, but I think rolling balls in a Vortex won't have as much fun as fluid particles. I think the strains involved in directing the vertical force of gravity into horizontal force will basically divert the force and waste it. I don't see any special 'shapes' or 'paths' as contributing to free energy.

I could be wrong, but my prefered theory does not depend on anything other than the relentless vertical pull of gravity. The trick is not to waste that force on anything other than Accerlerating a Mass.
Anything not related to elephants is irrelephant.
Post Reply