Big Troubles Brewing For The Theoretical Physics Smart-Set!!!

[eccentrically1]

http://atlas-conferences.com/cgi-bin/abstract/cbfv-96

Anyone?

[Grimer]

Interesting find.

Is there a mathematician in the house?

And thanks for pushing the posts along so we are back to normality.

[Grimer]

http://atlas-conferences.com/cgi-bin/abstract/cbfv-96

Anyone?

Here's another one I found in Google Scholar:

http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?sta ... as_sdt=0,5

A comparison of invariant energies for free-form surface construction
O Volpin, M Bercovier, T Matskewich - The Visual Computer, 1999 - Springer
... We derive several energy formulations, in- cluding Kirchhoff-Love plate energy, first- order energy
and jerk energy. ... The work is organized as follows: first the defini- tion of invariant quadratic
energies is given, in- cluding a new one as an invariant version of the jerk energy. ...
Cited by 7 Related articles BL Direct All 3 versions Cite

That's rather amusing. It means if anyone queries my use of the term "jerk energy" I can refer them to those two papers. That'll shut them up. quick.

[eccentrically1]

What do the papers say about it?
I can't view them.

[ovyyus]

Not all energy can perform work.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Grimer,

You are claiming a energy gain, are you getting a greater Height gain higher than the drop point? or even a greater distance traveled gain? if not then where is the energy gain, would the weight dropped to the floor have a better x time than the jerk? and would it do more work on impact?

Just some thoughts!

Regards Trevor

Edit, could you also use the correct name for it from now on, it is called a Velocity Shunt!

[rlortie]

Not all energy can perform work.

we seem to have a lot of proof in that established right here! :-)

[Grimer]

Grimer
I also did that experiment, once early in my journey on BW, and once recently to make sure my understanding of the physics was correct. My setup was no better than yours, in fact it was probably worse. The important thing is the end result, and the understanding of it.
...

I thought for a moment when I originally read you post that we were going to have an argument over who had claim to the crappiest set up. :-)

In fact I now realise that it was the crappiness of my apparatus that allowed me to claim I had demonstrated a PoP.

A bit like the penicillin story where crap flew in through the window.

By increasing the rigidity of the arresting mechanism I destroyed the very effect I was looking for and had accidentally discovered.

Consider the analogy of the Carnot Cycle. If the inertia of the piston and flywheel is too great then the pressure expansion will be insufficient to get the flywheel around to the compression start position. If on the other hand the inertia is too small then there will not be enough rotational energy to complete the compression isothermal.

The first builders of reciprocating engines must have had to grapple with this Erasmic problem of not too little - not too much - but just right.

By absorbing the initial generation of jerk energy by spring in the arresting mechanism and then releasing this energy into the later generation it should be possible to lift the weight above the 9 o'clock position. In other words to transduce the horizontal jerk energy into vertical gravity energy.

In effect one has three pendulums. The forearm pendulum holding the weight. The straight arm pendulum comprising the forearm and upper arm locked together in a straight line - and the arresting mechanism pendulum which is analogous to that large pendulum shown on the outside of the Bessler Wheels. These three are analogous to the temperature, pressure and volume Carnot rotations.

It is the interaction between these three pendulums which generates the energy. Whether one calls it jerk energy or gravitational energy is really a question of semantics. However, Jim Mich was probably right to stick to his guns on the matter of Ersatz (CF/CP) energy since it is a legitimate way of looking at things.

I'll now go and rebuild my experiment till I can transduce jerk to NG significantly beyond 9 o'clock.

Anyone who has managed to understand what I'm talking about is welcome to beat me to it. Not difficult in view of the fact I'm such a lousy experimenter.

[Grimer]

I have now rebuilt my experiment and confirmed that allowing the arresting bar to have some spring does increase the height to which the pendulum bob rises.

However, I haven't yet passed the 9 o'clock level so I will have to devise a means to incrementally control the input and output of elastic energy to the arrester bar so as to find the optimum.

If I can manage to get significantly past 9 it will be game over (as I'm sure you all appreciate ;-) ) since it will mean that jerk energy can be transduced into Newtonian Gravity energy.

[Grimer]

I've seen a good way of demonstrating that short pendulums abstract more power from the Newtonian gravitational wind than long pendulums.

Consider the diagram above.

If the long and a short pendulums connected by a string are allowed to fall from the horizontal then in the position shown the short pendulum will be pulling on the long pendulum and transferring energy to it.

This kind of relation between oscillators is quite general.

It explains for example the McGraw Science Encyclopaedia statement that intrigued me many years ago, namely, that one should not think of different bodies in contact as being at the same temperatures but as being at equilibrium temperatures. If we have a mixture of hydrogen and argon for example then the hydrogen atoms are analogous to the short pendulum and picking up more energy from the EM environment (Beta-atmosphere) than the argon atoms which are analogous to the long pendulum.

On a larger scale we have the well known of Brownian motion. The smaller the particle, the larger the energy picked up from the background field.

Another interesting aspect of different sized pendulums is that the jerk energy contained in the red short pendulum arm is greater than that in the blue long pendulum arm since on average the stress is greater.

[Grimer]

Another way of looking at the energy transfer is in terms of strain energy.

Tensile strain energy is greater in the short pendulum arm than it is in the long pendulum arm by virtue of its greater angular velocity. Coupling of the two pendulums together transfers some of this energy from the short to the long arm via the connecting string.

[Tarsier79]

You transfer energy from the inner to the outer and get an outer reset. The inner is then lacking energy and needs to be recharged from...

You have to prove an overall energy gain in the whole system. Good luck!

[Grimer]

Correct.

Just as in the Carnot cycle energy is transferred in the expansion leg and the system is reset in the compression leg.

Bessler did it so it must be possible.

[Tarsier79]

Not neccesarily. Only if you ASSUME he produced a gravity/momentum wheel, which is not proven fact. So far I have not found any shred of viable evidence for mechanical or electrical overunity.

[daxwc]

I agree Tarsier79. However, how Bessler fooled John Rowley, Master of Mechanics to King George 1, would have been his greatest feat. That Rowley believed for the rest of his life, after the examination, that perpetual motion existed is quite the testament. That said, it is also could be pretty good circumstantial evidence that maybe it does exist.