hmmm...d...d...d... Hey what do you know you aren't on my idiots list, congratulation you just became a fully qualified idiot, rejoice about the special treatment from now on.
I get special treatment. WOW!!!!
I wonder what it is?
Hmmm... probably the same inutility as your facilitation.
Why is it most of the young people today, all demand other people help with humanitarian or environmental causes, while they themselves wish to avoid any of the hard work. If they played around on a computer for awhile they think they have done the world a huge favour.
Maybe I am wrong about you Broli, it is hard to tell from my perspective, but I do know it would not take much money to build and validate the experiments yourself. Being handicapped is an excuse, if you have one, but being young sure the hell isn’t.
Broli, a suggestion - take the WM2D sim you showed an ani of & take it a step further - uses the impetus of the extended spinning smaller grey/blue weights to start the stopped large weights spinning again i.e. momentum transfer back again - try it without any air drag of other pivot frictional losses then add some & compare the velocities of the components to original torque/energy input to start it rotating in the first place.
If it can go one way [usable energy creation] it should be able to go the other & make energy disappear & not net out ?
A big portion of my work happens on the computer, my income is so low it would be equivalent to a student doing part time work but I'm not complaining and don't want more. If anyone can exploit my skills to better the world they are free to use as much of it as they like. Clinging to rusty believes will do you no good.
Fletcher wrote:Broli, a suggestion - take the WM2D sim you showed an ani of & take it a step further - uses the impetus of the extended spinning smaller grey/blue weights to start the stopped large weights spinning again i.e. momentum transfer back again - try it without any air drag of other pivot frictional losses then add some & compare the velocities of the components to original torque/energy input to start it rotating in the first place.
If it can go one way [usable energy creation] it should be able to go the other & make energy disappear & not net out ?
Wm2d loves to destroy energy like the ballistic pendulum, but energy gain in favor of momentum conservation is taboo for wm2d.
I think it was DrWhat that asked me why I had not made a wheel.
Well what exactly do you want the wheel to look like?
On page 29 are nine consecutive frames of the cylinder and spheres working. I have done masses of ten to one (cylinder to spheres). Why isn’t this a wheel? It lacks a center bearing and has no rubber tire, but it is a wheel. It just happens to be floating.
On pages 3, 4, and 9 are pictures of a vertical wheel with a center bearing. They also show an attached horizontal wheel. The horizontal wheel is also attached to linear motion, for which I got the same results.
By attaching two wheels together the small wheel could have an effectively mass of a ton. There is no need for a two meter wheel, but it would be fun.
You “close the loop� by catching the sphere. I can close the loop.
I guess some people may not be building a machine based on this concept because it appears radically different from Bessler's wheel. I suspect also because few people have really understood why we should be very excited about these principles. Then there is the general disbelief that violating the holy COE may be this easy. As far as I can see, this probably has the potential to be far more 'efficient' (if that's even the appropriate word) than Bessler's wheel. Remember Bessler's wheel didn't have a huge power output for it's size.
I'm guessing when the actual Bessler wheel design is re-discovered, we will find the similarities in principle to Pequaide's principles here. For me, it makes perfect sense that Gravity is the source of practically unlimited available Force that Bessler used. (CF or CP are forces to be reckoned with - but they seem to be the product of energy input into spinning a mass, so why should we expected to find unlimited energy from a finite store of energy that we have to input in the first place, and restore once consumed ...?)
For those who still don't get it - the Cylinder & Spheres experiments are all about converting ALL the available slow/heavy momentum into fast/light momentum. If you followed the simple Bolas experiment, you can see that at best we have to halve or share the momentum between the heavy & light mass. That's still impressive, considering we can always accumulate more momentum than we need.
But there is another level of 'efficiency' to be able to use ALL the available momentum. If you understand the NASA de-spin yo-yo effect (an old rocket science trick) then you can see that this is indeed possible.
Rockets are given axial spin (like a rifle gives a bullet axial spin) to make them fly straight. Then you have the problem of de-spinning the heavy mass. If you had a stationary cylinder of equal mass as the rocket, you could use a coiled up rope to transfer all the spin to this other cylinder (in the same way that rotary lawnmowers are started). That obviously isn't practical - so what you could do is transfer all the spin to a much smaller mass, also by means of a coiled up rope. You end up with a small mass rotating EXTREMELY fast (which you throw away as space junk), and the rocket ends up stationary. All momentum transfered! AND - if you do the energy maths - because energy is a CALCULATION based on Velocity Squared - Energy has gone up (which is embarassing for a conservative scientist to attempt to explain - so they don't).
NASA used this principle to de-spin rockets before they came up with modern gyroscope methods.
I may have gone some details wrong here - but the basic principles are very exciting and deserve much better attention.
One year old, congrats. This thread has continued to inspire. Greendoor, people are building wheels based up these ideas and have been since before the thread started.
Congrats on closing the loop.
Dave
A great discovery solves a great problem, but there is a grain of discovery in the solution of any problem.
daxwc wrote:Do the forum a favor then and rewrite wm2d
I'm not going to reinvent the wheel, but your wish will be partially granted as I will code my own simulator that will simulate the old swinging sphere experiment.
When I was coding the simulation I realized what I was trying to do could be done with wm2d.
I believe wm2d can be forcefully made to only use linear concepts to a non linear problem. To be more exact instead of using constraints you split up the setup and apply custom forces that represent mostly the centripetal/centrifugal forces.
The two separate setups are:
1) one heavy linear moving mass that gets decelerated by centrifugal force of 2)
2) a small mass with two custom variable forces. One force is dependent on its imaginary distance from the center of the wheel, the other force is dependent on its speed component that is perpendicular to the imaginary rod it's attached to.
By splitting the problem up like this you handle circular motion using linear motion. And can thus bypass the possible limitation of wm2d which is CoE.
The youtube video may be confusing as the big red masses are actually 1kg while the small colored masses are 50kg. This experiment is similar the original laithwaite cart experiment. As the heavy masses move north and south they accelerate the lighter masses, these in turn decelerate the heavy masses causing momentum transfer. At the top the heavy masses would have no velocity and the lighter ones will have maximum velocity.
I highly encourage others to take part in this project.
Broli, could you post the wm2d file for this design? I believe we can start the initial spinning motion from a free standing flywheel elsewhere in the sim and then transfer the resultant increase in momentum back to that same flywheel. If so, it should show an increase in the speed of the flywheel and further confirm this concept.
I'd much rather build on your sim (or help you to do so) than mimic it with a new one and give any appearance of having "stolen" anything.
mondrasek, I'm concentrating on building a real experiment rather than hack my way on the computer. It's much easier to just let reality handle physics. Currently I'm making a 3d design of the built, when done I will post it for feedback.
Hello all,
I haven't posted in along time,
but try and picture this.
A gear/flywheel(say, a 100 lb.)with a one pound weight to start it turning.
The one pound weight is released at 6:00, picture a rod falling which stops the gear/flywheel.
At the exact time the weight falls off, a (previously released) yo-yo de-spin device has almost reached the height it needed to stop the combined weight of the gear/flywheel/weight assembly.
Question: How high is that?
Question: If higher than the start point, will it have enough uumph to lift the one pound weight .100 of an inch?
Question: If it has the uumph, will it still stop higher than the starting point? If so, it would fall down on the gear/flywheel and start the process over.
Oke here is the 3d model in all its glory. The video and images should make everything clear. I tried to use highly customizable materials so that many parameters can be tried out.
When building this, one single experiment can be performed to confirm momentum transfer which doesn't require speed measurements. It's a very ingenious one which is mentioned by Pequaide at the beginning of this thread.
You first start finding the exact radius at which all the momentum gets transfered for a certain setup. Once this is found you change the mass/radius of the heavy rotor in such a way that linear momentum remains the same.
If the heavy setup still gets stopped then either Co. angular momentum holds and the smaller masses will swing out at lighting speed, or angular momentum doesn't hold but the masses still swing out ignoring Co. energy. Pequaide confirmed the latter with his cylinder and spheres experiment. Either way we win.
Pequaide, can you confirm the following since I always just assumed for apparently no valid reason. Once you have found that you can transfer all the momentum with a certain radius, am I right to assume that this then holds to any initial rotational speed. Whether it was 1 rad/s or 1000 rad/s?
