Jon , IMMO what is happening with the elastic band stuff is that as action engders reaction and that sequence is producing energy in excess to what small amount is needed, you are 1) limiting the amount of detrimental reaction by limiting travel; 2) you are storing the excess energy; 3) you are getting your timing right.
Elastic bands are simple and relatively predictable, I've also tried with some measure of success a restraining mech made from a length of alarm clock spring ben into a "L" shape. The lever type weight forces it's way under the spring (just moderate pressure required), and under the effect of gravity or CF, it releases itself at the appropriate moment. Doesn't change the fact that there are energy losses in my experiments, but it might be worth a try.
Ealadha : I don't give up, just see what is happening, try all the methods I can thing of applying a system, then go on and on learning, getting stuck in a rut because you think you have the solution leads to failure too.
The merry go round
Moderator: scott
-
nicbordeaux
- Addict
- Posts: 2140
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:54 pm
- Location: France
re: The merry go round
From the University of Virginia:
I had a tenuous grasp at best on CF. Now....
"If something doesn't feel right, you're not feeling the right thing."
Huh?? "We feel it..." What are we feeling?An object traveling in a circle behaves as if it is experiencing an outward force. This force, known as the centrifugal force, depends on the mass of the object, the speed of rotation, and the distance from the center. The more massive the object, the greater the force; the greater the speed of the object, the greater the force; and the greater the distance from the center, the greater the force.
It is important to note that the centrifugal force does not actually exist. We feel it, because we are in a non-inertial coordinate system. Nevertheless, it appears quite real to the object being rotated. This is because the object believes that it is in a non-accelerating situation, when in fact it is not. For instance, a child on a merry-go-round is not experiencing any real force outward, but he/she must exert a force to keep from flying off the merry-go-round. Because the centrifugal force appears so real, it is often very useful to use as if it were real. The more massive the object, the greater the force. We know that this is true because an adult will have a harder time staying on a merry-go-round than a child will.
I had a tenuous grasp at best on CF. Now....
"If something doesn't feel right, you're not feeling the right thing."
Love it quick. You ain't gonna have it long.
Warning... sarcasm ahead.
CF is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. CF can be seen when the object is moving. CF disappears when the object stops. It is like a ghost. And ghosts are not real.
Likewise, the sun is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. The sun can be seen during the day. The sun disappears at night. Ovvyiously the sun does not exist at night. So it must be fictitious during the day.
End of sarcasm.
CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force. It is not fictitious. So why do otherwise intelligent people label CF as fictitious?
CF is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. CF can be seen when the object is moving. CF disappears when the object stops. It is like a ghost. And ghosts are not real.
Likewise, the sun is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. The sun can be seen during the day. The sun disappears at night. Ovvyiously the sun does not exist at night. So it must be fictitious during the day.
End of sarcasm.
CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force. It is not fictitious. So why do otherwise intelligent people label CF as fictitious?
re: The merry go round
Assuming that CF is a force, can a pendulum in motion NOT create CF? i.e. do they not go hand-in-hand?CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force.
If they do go hand-in-hand, how could Bessler have created a gravity driven wheel WITHOUT incorporating CF?
Love it quick. You ain't gonna have it long.
re: The merry go round
2 cents!
CF is the effect, or transformation, or dissipation, of a main physic cause, an applied force.
This means that CF exist - and depends - thanks - and connected - to a previous stuff, kind of power circuit.
This means also that CF is in total - mechanically - smaller than the cause, due to normal losses of this universe.
This is why I feel that CF search for a PM is waist of time, except for some OUs.
Best!
M
PS: formulas? Ask someone else!
CF is the effect, or transformation, or dissipation, of a main physic cause, an applied force.
This means that CF exist - and depends - thanks - and connected - to a previous stuff, kind of power circuit.
This means also that CF is in total - mechanically - smaller than the cause, due to normal losses of this universe.
This is why I feel that CF search for a PM is waist of time, except for some OUs.
Best!
M
PS: formulas? Ask someone else!
-
eccentrically1
- Addict
- Posts: 3166
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:25 pm
Re: re: The merry go round
CF is fictitious; it only seems to appear depending on the situation.Timothy wrote:Assuming that CF is a force, can a pendulum in motion NOT create CF? i.e. do they not go hand-in-hand?CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force.
If they do go hand-in-hand, how could Bessler have created a gravity driven wheel WITHOUT incorporating CF?
Mass resists change to its state of motion, either at rest or moving. If it's moving, it resists change also to its direction. The resistance to change in direction is what is experienced as "CF". You could say it is a property of mass (in a rotating frame), but not a force.
-
nicbordeaux
- Addict
- Posts: 2140
- Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:54 pm
- Location: France
-
eccentrically1
- Addict
- Posts: 3166
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:25 pm
re: The merry go round
CF doesn't make the weight move to the edge. Centripetal acceleration pushes it to the axis, and the resistance to being pushed to the axis is seen as CF.
Absolutely correct, Jim. Momentum is indeed a very real force.jim_mich wrote:Warning... sarcasm ahead.
CF is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. CF can be seen when the object is moving. CF disappears when the object stops. It is like a ghost. And ghosts are not real.
Likewise, the sun is fictitious. Fiction. Not real. The sun can be seen during the day. The sun disappears at night. Ovvyiously the sun does not exist at night. So it must be fictitious during the day.
End of sarcasm.
CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force. It is not fictitious. So why do otherwise intelligent people label CF as fictitious?
The trouble is the the word "Force" has been high-jacked for one particular derivative of position with respect to time which means that pedants will not allow any other derivatives, any other actions, to be seen as forces. One is not allowed to call jerk a force for instance even though it obviously is far more forceful than "force" as any mechanic knows from personal experience.
As for higher derivative such as snap, crackle and pop these must never be mentioned in polite society.
There is a hierarchy of conservation actions. Second derivative "force" is one member of that hierarchy.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
re: The merry go round
Grimer, what you call higher derivatives of "snap, crackle and pop" do not exist in the real world. They only exist in you mind.
What I think you call a 1st derivative is simply a force between a stationary object (such as the Earth) and a moving object. Such a force produces less and less work as the speed becomes greater and greater between the stationary object (Earth) and the moving object.
What I think you call a 2nd derivative is simply an inertial momentum force transfer between two moving objects. Such a force produces a constant amount of work transfer based upon the relative speeds of the two objects. Thus such a transfer of energy and force is much greater than what you call a 1st derivative.
The are no higher derivatives such as "snap, crackle and pop", even though you might imagine them in your mind.
What I think you call a 1st derivative is simply a force between a stationary object (such as the Earth) and a moving object. Such a force produces less and less work as the speed becomes greater and greater between the stationary object (Earth) and the moving object.
What I think you call a 2nd derivative is simply an inertial momentum force transfer between two moving objects. Such a force produces a constant amount of work transfer based upon the relative speeds of the two objects. Thus such a transfer of energy and force is much greater than what you call a 1st derivative.
The are no higher derivatives such as "snap, crackle and pop", even though you might imagine them in your mind.
re: The merry go round
This has been hashed and rehashed many times over the years.
There is no such thing as centripetal acceleration, Cp or Cep is physical it is what keeps things from flying off the wheel. It is not a force but a physical restraint. It can be compared to a magnet stuck on the fridge. it does not perform work.
It appears and vanishes only in a pendulum that is osculating, it does not vanish within a wheel turning 360 but becomes constant based on mass and circumference speed.
There are many physics related links on the internet showing pendulums attached to scales, measuring not only the CF but the loss of mass at peak amplitude.
A pendulums maximum CF is created at six o'clock. Unfortunately it is rather difficult to utilize since it is pulling straight down on the axis, that is unless you attempt to capture it in the Milkovic manner.
As Jim points out; Cf is nothing more than inertial momentum, the force or energy source creating the momentum can vary, if gravity is used then Pe maintaining a supply of kinetic force must accompany it.
Ralph
There is no such thing as centripetal acceleration, Cp or Cep is physical it is what keeps things from flying off the wheel. It is not a force but a physical restraint. It can be compared to a magnet stuck on the fridge. it does not perform work.
It may not sound right but basically that is what happens, when in a radial path it will wish to go straight which brings it to the rim or any physical barrier or restraint which is considered Centripetal.I take it that a weight placed on a wheel near to axis moves towards the edge of wheel upon it rotating because it is refusing to change direction. And taking the path of least change of direction ? That doesn't sound right
CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation. CF is simply inertial force caused by inertial momentum. Momentum is a very real force.
It appears and vanishes only in a pendulum that is osculating, it does not vanish within a wheel turning 360 but becomes constant based on mass and circumference speed.
There are many physics related links on the internet showing pendulums attached to scales, measuring not only the CF but the loss of mass at peak amplitude.
A pendulums maximum CF is created at six o'clock. Unfortunately it is rather difficult to utilize since it is pulling straight down on the axis, that is unless you attempt to capture it in the Milkovic manner.
As Jim points out; Cf is nothing more than inertial momentum, the force or energy source creating the momentum can vary, if gravity is used then Pe maintaining a supply of kinetic force must accompany it.
I believe you are holding your text book upside down!CF doesn't make the weight move to the edge. Centripetal acceleration pushes it to the axis, and the resistance to being pushed to the axis is seen as CF.
Ralph
re: The merry go round
Ralph:
So now ask yourself, how a physical restraint is going to produce energy. I see only two possibilities, it helps beat height for width or it steals energy off another rotating object such as earth. Other than that Ralph is right it is just a friction hungry physical restraint that at best can conserve energy.It is not a force but a physical restraint.
What goes around, comes around.
re: The merry go round
CF is fictitious; it only seems to appear depending on the situation.
CF is a very real force that appears and vanishes depending upon the situation.
So.....this fictitious thing (or real) that only seems to appear (or may actually appear) and then vanishes (but not in a turning wheel)....must it appear (or seem to) in a pendulum driven wheel? If yes, the question remains was CF seeming to appear, vanishing or constant in Bessler's wheel? If it was constant, then Jim is correct that G and CF (fictitious or otherwise) must be utilized in duplicating the achievement.It appears and vanishes only in a pendulum that is osculating, it does not vanish within a wheel turning 360 but becomes constant based on mass and circumference speed
(Quickly before it vanishes!)
If the above makes sense to you....
Love it quick. You ain't gonna have it long.
re: The merry go round
Centripetal Force [Cp] is real - that is the 'restraint' that causes a curved motion.
N.B. a Force is only something that pushes or pulls something - because f = ma then there are two elements to a force i.e. an object with mass & an acceleration.
Centrifugal Force [Cf] only manifests if there is first Cp - they are a 'couple' - Cp diminishes then the Cf diminishes equally etc.
Cf is the result of an objects inertia, the behaviour described in Newtons Laws about an object resisting a change in its state of motion.
An acceleration is described in physics as a change in velocity [upwards or downwards] OR a change in direction.
N.B. a change in direction [like being forced by Cp to follow a curved path] can have the same speed [but not the same velocity] & a change in path is therefore an acceleration although the speed [m/s] doesn't necessarily change - the object is experiencing a force acting on its mass but that force is derived from Cp - if Cp stops acting the object will continue in a straight line tangential to the curved path - it can then exert its own force on something else in contact with it - IOW's it has Kinetic Energy.
It can not give greater Ke to another body than was supplied to it, once again as per Newton's inertia laws.
N.B. a Force is only something that pushes or pulls something - because f = ma then there are two elements to a force i.e. an object with mass & an acceleration.
Centrifugal Force [Cf] only manifests if there is first Cp - they are a 'couple' - Cp diminishes then the Cf diminishes equally etc.
Cf is the result of an objects inertia, the behaviour described in Newtons Laws about an object resisting a change in its state of motion.
An acceleration is described in physics as a change in velocity [upwards or downwards] OR a change in direction.
N.B. a change in direction [like being forced by Cp to follow a curved path] can have the same speed [but not the same velocity] & a change in path is therefore an acceleration although the speed [m/s] doesn't necessarily change - the object is experiencing a force acting on its mass but that force is derived from Cp - if Cp stops acting the object will continue in a straight line tangential to the curved path - it can then exert its own force on something else in contact with it - IOW's it has Kinetic Energy.
It can not give greater Ke to another body than was supplied to it, once again as per Newton's inertia laws.