Gravity Assist

[Grimer]

The phenomenon of gravity assist draws attention to the subjective nature of Kinetic Energy; more specifically to the subjective nature of the velocity variable in KE and its dependence on the frame of reference for velocity.

If I roll a bowl down a bowling alley, what is its velocity? Relative to the alley it is only a few feet per second and its KE correspondingly small. Relative to the earth's local space however I have to vector in the rotational velocity of the earth at the latitude of the alley and the KE of the bowl is enormous. We can keep vectoring in higher and higher velocities as we move out through the solar system, the galactic system, etc.

We have no accepted absolute frame of reference for velocity and so KE is frame dependent.

In the case of angular velocity there is of course an absolute frame of reference and any rotation with respect to this absolute frame can be easily measured.

Now when a body descends under the earth's Newtonian Gravity field and enters a Ersatz gravity field its subsequent path is the vector combination of the NG + EG acceleration fields "acting simultaneously and continuously". But the EG field is a rotating field, a frame accelerating field and the composite acceleration vector of the body changes within that field. On leaving the composite field the body has gained KE relative to the earth frame and the system has lost angular momentum. The earth, etc., has lost angular momentum in other words. This loss is so tiny it can easily be overlooked.

I have crudely illustrated this process in the following diagram.





In the upper sector with lighter shading the body's EG "weight" is reduced to a negative value by the opposition of the NG vector and so the body moves in towards the centre of the wheel. In the lower section it is increased and so the body moves out with the combined weights of EG and NG.

[Grimer]

In other words the movements and corresponding gross KE that the bodies would display if they were unconstrained by the frame of the wheel are suppressed and only show up as tiny strains in the wheel.

Superficially there is no difference in the appearance of constrained bodies on a stationary horizontal wheel and constrained bodies on a wheel rotating in a vertical plane.

However, if one makes strain gauge measurement one sees that the constrained bodies on the rotating wheel are moving under the action of NG and EG, albeit only very slightly, whereas the constrained bodies on the stationary wheel are not .

[Grimer]

Re-reading the previous post I see that I should have made something clearer.

The red bodies are fully constrained by the frame. The blue bodies are partially constrained by the frame. An example of such a partial constraint would be freedom to slide along radial spokes for example. This allows both the NG and EG vectors to act on a body simultaneously. It allows macro manifestation of KE as opposed to the micro manifestation (strains) of the fully constrained red bodies.

There are obviously many alternatives for this pattern of partial constraint which may involve some full constraint over part of the path.

Obviously, complete freedom from any constraint at all would simply allow the bodies to fall vertically under the NG vector since unlike the EG vector the NG vector can no be switched off for rotations in the vertical plane.

[greendoor]

Interesting thoughts Frank. Reminds me of Bessler's line in Apologia: "The rain flows. Snow falls." I speculate that he was wanting us to think about the differences between a falling rain drop, which falls straight down, and a falling slow flake, which falls slowly with a spin. Same mass of water falling, but one takes longer and acquires spin. I assume that something about the crystal structure of the snowflake is involved, and that it probably does not assume the crystal structure all at the same time. So maybe there is a period of time where the snowflake has partially restrained mass.

Or maybe not. Water is strange, and there are too many other energies involved, such as heat and electro-chemical bonds.

I agree that Velocity is relative, and have often wondered if we can somehow tap differences between inertia frames. Tapping Earth's rotation appears feasible to me.

Foucaults pendulum suggests to me that we could get 360 degrees of rotation from a heavy swinging pendulum that could be maintained in oscillation for practically zero energy input (magnetic bearings, vacuum chamber). The Earth rotates underneath the swinging pendulum, but from our inertial reference frame it appears that the pendulum is rotating. Could this deliver useful torque that could be geared up?

[Grimer]

One would need an enormous pendulum bob - ideal situated at one of the poles - so the answer is, no, it couldn't deliver useful torque.

But the value of the gravity assist example is it gets one thinking about movement from one field to another and the effect it has on KE.

[Grimer]

...
I agree that Velocity is relative, and have often wondered if we can somehow tap differences between inertia frames. Tapping Earth's rotation appears feasible to me.

Indeed - and I now realise that even the humble swing is a "flyby" situlation.

Code: Select all

Rider       - CW
Short chain - CCW
Long chain  - CW
Earth       - CCW

The Kiiking rider puts a series of pulses into the earth. It rather seems that Collins was quite right in suspecting understanding the Kiiking swing is the solution.


Big whorls have little whorls,
Which feed on their velocity,
And little whorls have lesser whorls,
And so on down to gravity.


I'll post a diagram of the hierarchy of four rotations later.

[greendoor]

It seems to me that putting pulses or force into the earth is a waste of energy we can never get back. I'm more interested in systems that avoid putting force into the earth. I have a theory that a functioning gravity wheel will weigh less than it's static weight - due to the force of gravity acting on the weights being diverted into Acceleration and external energy output, rather than being used to stress the earth.

For example - a falling brick. G-force accelerates the brick, until it reaches the ground. Then all the momentum of the brick is dissipated into the ground and lost. There can be a small amount of rebound, but that is a very small percentage of energy retained.

Imagine instead two falling bricks, on pendula, counter-rotating, being allowed to smash into each other at 6:00. I figure all the energy will be available for smashing the bricks, and effectively the velocities of the two bricks have been summed together - resulting in a squaring of their combined velocities as far as energy is calculated.

Compared to dropping two bricks from the same height - I predict that the carnage to the colliding bricks will be far greater than the damage to the bricks that merely fall the same distance. Even if we engineer the contacting surfaces to be identical - i'm fairly sure that more energy will be liberated by the colliding bricks. And if that could be proved to be true - would that not expose a flaw in current energy thinking?

The difference that I see (apart from the summing of velocities causing a squaring of energy which I find rather interesting) is that force is not being squandered by compressing the earth.

While the bricks are falling, they are weightless and the earth is not compressed. Force is being used for Acceleration, rather than causing Strain/Stress. I figure that during impact, the two weights are traveling horizontal to the earth, and at the time they collide, I can't see that they would put any force into the earth.

Destruction of bricks isn't a great use of energy, but this thought experiment is about whether we can get more energy out of mass falling X height. I think we can. So what if there was a device that could extract useful mechanical motion energy?

[Grimer]

Forget about kinetic energy. Think in terms of the conservation of angular velocity. If Bessler's wheel is to have angular velocity it has to get rid of the counter angular velocity somewhere. It has to off-load that angular velocity. It off-loads it to the earth.

How does it do this?

I'm coming to that.

[Grimer]

The above diagram updates the hierarchical swing angular velocity conservation diagram. I use the term angular velocity rather than angular momentum to avoid the use of the word mass since mass is an accidental property of matter and not matter itself. Perhaps Specific Angular Velocity might be clearer as then it refers to a standard body without specifying any properties other than existence.

[Grimer]

The above diagram illustrates the rider/earth conservation of specific angular velocity.

[Grimer]

The order in which specific angular velocity is transferred up and down the four order Swing Cycle can be understood by using the Carnot Cycle as a template.



Interestingly enough the very large jump between the rotation of the long chain and the rotation of the earth is reflected in the Carnot by the very large jump between the closed path rotation equivalent of the atoms (pressure) and the rotation of the piston driven flywheel.

[Grimer]

[greendoor]

I'm a bit lost, being more of an engineer than a hard core academic. But in a nutshell, it seems to me that you are looking at tapping the rotation of the earth for free energy gain. That I could understand ...

We know that as jet plane flys straight through the air, the earth rotates underneath it. So the energy requirement of flying around the world is far cheaper going against the earths rotation than it is going with it. From our earth-based reference frame, the displacement is identical in both cases, but the the energy cost is very different.

When missiles are fired, the earth rotates underneath them. I believe the first use of computers was to calculate rocket trajectories for this reason.

The Coriolus Effect. Foucalts pendulum. All indications that a mass in free flight can be in a different inertial reference frame relative to the earth, and therefore there can be relative displacement obtained for free due to the rotation of the earth.

The idea that Bessler's wheel was a way of tapping earths rotational energy really should be investigated in depth. Most people dismiss that possibility too lightly, imo.

So if the intention is to make use of this effect - how would we go about maximising it ... ?

[jim_mich]

The Eötvös effect was first brought to our attention by Debbie, one of the few gals to visit the forum.

Roland Eötvös (1848-1919) noticed that gravity readings were lower when on a boat sailing eastwards and higher when sailing westward.

From Wikpedia: "any object co-rotating with the Earth at the Equator has its weight reduced by 0.34 percent, thanks to the Earth's rotation."

The Eötvös effect is simply the change of gravity between an object moving East and one moving West. The Earth is moving at about 1040 MPH at the equator. Thus to take full advantage a weight must move backward (westward) at the same speed as the Earth thus eliminating all centrifugal force. Then the weight must do a U-turn and move forward (eastward) at the same speed on the Earth thus moving forward twice as fast as the Earth.

A 100 lb weight at the equator moving west at 1040 MPH will actually be moving at zero MPH and will weigh 0.34 lbs more than its 100 lbs. Conversely a 100 lb weight at the equator moving east at 1040 MPH will actually be moving at 2080 MPH. Because of the squaring effect of CF the weight will weigh 1.36 lbs less than 100 lbs. A 100 lb weight making a round trip down a ramp in a east direction and then back up a similar ramp in a west direction will have a 1.70 lb weight difference. The weight need not be solid. It can be water flowing in a pipe. The problem as I see it is that the 1.70% weight difference (at the equator) is not enough to overcome friction caused by movement at 1040 MPH.

Such a mechanism at a more northern location such as Michigan or New York City (about 45º north) will have about 70% as much power.

If friction could be kept to a bare minimum it might be possible to build a machine that gains enough energy from the Eötvös effect to run perpetually. It could be as simple as a tilted wheel spinning at a very high speed on magnetic bearings in a vacuum.

Or one might attempt to pump water back and forth along long sloped pipes, though again, I feel that friction would kill any potential gains.

[Grimer]

The Eötvös effect was first brought to our attention by Debbie, one of the few gals to visit the forum.

Roland Eötvös (1848-1919) noticed that gravity readings were lower when on a boat sailing eastwards and higher when sailing westward.

From Wikpedia: "any object co-rotating with the Earth at the Equator has its weight reduced by 0.34 percent, thanks to the Earth's rotation."

The Eötvös effect is simply the change of gravity between an object moving East and one moving West. The Earth is moving at about 1040 MPH at the equator. Thus to take full advantage a weight must move backward (westward) at the same speed as the Earth thus eliminating all centrifugal force. Then the weight must do a U-turn and move forward (eastward) at the same speed on the Earth thus moving forward twice as fast as the Earth.

A 100 lb weight at the equator moving west at 1040 MPH will actually be moving at zero MPH and will weigh 0.34 lbs more than its 100 lbs. Conversely a 100 lb weight at the equator moving east at 1040 MPH will actually be moving at 2080 MPH. Because of the squaring effect of CF the weight will weigh 1.36 lbs less than 100 lbs. A 100 lb weight making a round trip down a ramp in a east direction and then back up a similar ramp in a west direction will have a 1.70 lb weight difference. The weight need not be solid. It can be water flowing in a pipe. The problem as I see it is that the 1.70% weight difference (at the equator) is not enough to overcome friction caused by movement at 1040 MPH.

Such a mechanism at a more northern location such as Michigan or New York City (about 45º north) will have about 70% as much power.

If friction could be kept to a bare minimum it might be possible to build a machine that gains enough energy from the Eötvös effect to run perpetually. It could be as simple as a tilted wheel spinning at a very high speed on magnetic bearings in a vacuum.

Or one might attempt to pump water back and forth along long sloped pipes, though again, I feel that friction would kill any potential gains.

Thanks for that contribution, Jim. It was so informative I have quoted it in full. It's invaluable having an addict with as good a memory as yours so that stuff can be dug up from the archives.

That bit about measurement on ships was certainly new to me - I don't think I was that clear of the difference between the Eötvös effect and the Coriolis effect before I had read the relevant link. It is fascinating to think that the difference can be measured at the relatively low speed of ships sailing east and west.

As far as "gravity assist" the original subject of this thread is concerned, I can now see that it was more of a lesson in how interactions between independent fields are discovered than a template for a gravity engine.
After all, even if the earth were not rotating or orbiting at all relative to the fixed stars it would still act as a sink for angular velocity wouldn't it.

Just as that sink extends indefinitely outwards beyond the earth (as was recognised by alexjrgreen earlier in this thread) so it must also extend indefinitely inwards to gravity itself. I am saying that the source of all angular velocity must ultimately reside in the gravitational field. That was the import of my little piece of doggerel which I repeat below.

Big whorls have little whorls,
Which feed on their velocity,
And little whorls have lesser whorls,
And so on down to gravity.

The human rider is just one possible location on the multiple paths of ascent between the angular rotations of the gravitational field and the angular rotation of the earth and beyond. The Bessler Wheel is another.

Needless to say I don't expect anyone to take this idea seriously until a gravity engine is built and Bessler is vindicated.

One can see the importance of Ersatz Gravity (CF/CP) in all this. It defines a universal wide spatial frame of reference. One might say that NG and EG are the alpha and omega of motion.