Manipulating Momentum

[pequaide]

You might show us the experiment; considering that you are proposing that Newtonian Physics is false.

[Grimer]

+1 -

Not that I'm disagreeing with you necessarily - but I think pequaide has a legitimate point.

[Tarsier79]

Perhaps, but I would like to clarify, I don't think Newtons conservation of momentum laws are incorrect, just incomplete. As far as a newtons cradle is concerned, it is absolutely correct, but doesn't account for leverage as in the mechanisms that relate to Kirks proposal...

In a newtons cradle, when you lift three or four of the balls and release, upon impact, a single ball doesn't fly off the other side at three or four times the speed.... Why? Because it conserves both energy and momentum.

Kirks mechanism, (or my adaptation) attempts to use basically a lever to achieve what you cannot with a simple newtons cradle.

GTG, more to come?

[pequaide]

No one talks about heat loss in newton’s cradle. But many ballistics pendulums are also metal on metal collisions and then all the sudden they talk about over 90% heat loss. And of course the heat has never been measured.

[Fletcher]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Joule

Joule & Helmholtz would disagree in their theory of CoE & formulation of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Inelastic Collisions do not conserve Ke & momentum - deformation of materials leads to an increase of Internal Pe & Ke of atoms which is then released as heat slowly over time - they did extensive experiments to prove this.

The only Perfectly Elastic Collision is the example of satellite slingshots [gravity assists] & some behaviour of ideal gases i.e. adiabatic & isothermal changes conserving energy.

Perfectly Elastic Collisions don't have deformation of material therefore Ke & momentum are conserved.

The vertical wheel with tethered weight that is slingshotted is an example of an Inelastic Collision where the strain in the tether is tantamount to deformation of atoms in the tether & wasted energy slowly released as heat - exactly the same as ballistic experiments show that you don't create mechanical energy equivalent greater than you started with.

FWIW, I'd like to see Tarsier's pics of his experiment/arrangement to see what is happening before commenting on his results.

EDIT: due to a private mail query corrected use of Elastic for Inelastic etc.

[Grimer]

Good point.

Out of interest I googled CoE. I find that Liquidmetal has a CoE so high that one is not allowed to use it for making golf clubs without the material's CoE being attenuated.

I suppose Apple's interest in it is so that when you drop Pods and Pads they bounce.

[greendoor]

So if we made a Newtons cradle with balls of Liquidmetal, it would run for a lot longer, but still would not display OU.

I get what Pequaide is hinting at though - physics is quick to write off energy loss in a collision as heat when it suits to make both momentum and energy equations balance. And yet in a Newtons cradle, it's fairly obvious that Momentum is conserved pretty well without massive heat losses.

We still need to see an experiment where energy is actually created. A simple transfer of momentum to a smaller mass which gains velocity/height would clearly show this. Pequaide has demonstrated complete transfer of momentum to a smaller mass - but i'm not convinced we have seen a clear gain in energy.

IMO - understanding the issues at stake here are fundamental to solving energy creation, and I think Bessler's wheel ran on some application that exploited this principle somehow. Hammers and anvils, etc ...

Maybe, somehow, this allows us to tap into the inherent heat energy of the deformed material? As you say - when a mass is deformed, it slowly releases heat into the environment. Maybe, when a material is reformed after an elastic collision, it absorbs heat from the environment?

All a bit pointless to argue until we have a simple experiment that shows energy creation ...

Grimer - I liked your idea about a one-way clutch "half wave rectifier". Whenever I see the phrase "half wave rectifier" I always want to go to the next level; - a "full wave rectifier" .... like a 4 diode bridge that can turn AC into DC ... why waste any momentum ...

I have an idea involving one-way clutches in a mechanical analog of a full wave bridge rectifier ...

[Grimer]

Funny you should mention that. My son, Ben, who studied electronics along with his Computer Science degree also referred me to the 4 diode bridge.

I graduated the year before the first silicon transistor was produced by Texas Instruments in 1954.

Having the bounce absorbed by a flywheel as proposed here:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 5137#85137

might go some way towards the equivalent of a bridge.

[Fletcher]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_Collisions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_collision


Due to a private mail query I have put up the wikipedia definition of Inelastic & Elastic collisions for reference - thank_you Grimer.

[pequaide]

Massive objects can give all their motion to light objects and small objects can give all their motion to heavy objects. Conservation of kinetic energy only occurs when there is no mass change; as in newton’s cradle. If all mass interactions were represented as a line, with heavy to small on one side and small to heavy on the other; your energy conservation theory would only work for the tiny dot in the middle of the line.

[Tarsier79]

... First, Here is my Newtons Cradle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTwH7Gs8gCI

I understand glass isn't the best material for these tests, but it is cheap, so that makes it good IMO. I did look up the elasticity for glass, but cant remember the figure.

Below is a diagram of my setup. The heavier large weight(and short lever) compared with the longer lever, and has its COM 1/2 the distance from the pivot, and is twice the weight. The heavier weight falls, transfers its momentum to the point half way along the lever, so theoretically we should get the COM of the longer lever to be instantly accelerated to 2x the speed, which would give us COM lift in the system.

When you look at the videos, the important thing, is if we were to achieve this transfer, the longer lever would at least reach the same angle as the short levers start point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKLUYNUKW34
This sim is set to "perfect world" settings(0 friction). The white circle's weight is negligible. The sim is a simplified version of the COM of my setup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDjShXXBuUE
I did get a better result than this vid, but not on camera. There was a failure shortly after this footage, and I have not reassembled.

This is by no means the be-all and end-all of the matter, I look forward to seeing Kirks progress.

Edit: Also notice, the closer the heavier weight comes to a complete stop on impact, the better the transfer.

[greendoor]

Manipulating momentum: basically, a fixed mass with a fixed velocity has a fixed amount of momentum. We can't really manipulate it, but we can transfer it to another mass by way of impact/impulse - which I think is the crux of this issue.

We know that momentum is a conserved quantity, so we can't expect any gains in momentum by doing this.

Transfering momentum to an equal sized mass is easy but pointless. Output velocity = input velocity, less losses. Momentum and energy close to unity.

Transfering momentum to disimilar masses is where it gets interesting, but problematic. During the Impulse, force is shared equally for equal time but due to the differing mass, each mass will accelerate at different rates leading to differing velocities.

The problem i've been looking at solving is how to transfer all the momentum from a heavy flywheel to a lighter one - in order to get a dramatic increase in velocity, and therefore a calculated energy gain.

The reference to a 4 diode bridge rectifier might offer a solution. These are familar to anyone who makes AC-to-DC power supplies. A simple diode is a half wave rectifier. It is the same as a one-way valve for water, or a one-way clutch for a flywheel.

If we are comparing AC & DC electricity to momentum, AC is like a pendulum oscillating back and forth at a frequency. DC is like a flywheel spinning in the same direction.

As we see in the video above - a pendulum that has gained momentum tends to want to oscillate back and forth after hitting the target. What we need is a way to convert that oscillating motion into motion in the same desired direction.

A one-way clutch would prevent it moving backwards - but that means half the time the force is being diverted somewhere else - usually to earth.

My belief is that in a running Bessler wheel, the force of gravity acting on a falling mass is not permitted to be diverted to earth, but is used to accelerate the wheel.

If four one-way clutches were configured just like a full wave bridge rectifier - I believe we could have a situation where a vibrating pendulum could turn a flywheel with each stroke, regardless of direction.

FWIW - I think this is useful for transfering momentum between masses that would not ordinarily maintain contact due to their acceleration in different directions. Thus allow complete transfer of momentum when needed.

I acknowledge that Pequaide has demonstrated methods of using yoyo devices to transfer all momentum. This is another method, in my opinion, that just might be easier to engineer.

[pequaide]

The problems with one pendulum transferring its motion to another pendulum are the mass of the rod and flex. I am guessing that a great deal of the motion is used up to move the rod and to flex the rod.

Both of these problems can be eliminated by using an inflexible vertically mounted wheel.

Hang a weighted string over the circumference of the wheel and see how much force is needed to bring the wheel to a rotation of 60 rpm. Then add a ring mass of 5 kg (or 2.5 kg draped over both sides of an inside wheel) at one fifth R. Then see how much additional force needs to be added to the weighed string to bring the wheel to the same acceleration. The added suspended mass is accelerating the ring and the original suspended mass is accelerating the wheel itself. In this way the mass of the wheel drops out of the equation. And it cancels out the bearing friction as well.

Then replace the five kilograms with a one kilogram ring on the circumference. See if the one kilogram ring at one radius accelerates the same as 5 kilograms at one fifth radius.

[Gwheel]

Maybe I'll get laughed at for this, I'll just try to laugh along too. I prefer to think about focused or directed momentum in a rotating system. Is focused or directionalized (my slang) momentum important? Use as a mental picture a K.O. punch. The boxer has focused energy (momentum) into a roundhouse swing in a particular direction to impact the jaw of his opponent.

Transfering momentum to an equal sized mass is easy but pointless.

On my wheel, I would be happy to transfer momentum to an equal sized mass if it's motion was in the opposite direction.

Bessler stated that his weights were in continuous motion (momentum or kinetic energy). At this point, I am not concerned with absolute quantities of momentum or energy, but with effect. For example, what result would be obtained if momentum was speedily redirected during a transfer from 11:30 clock position to 12:30 clock position on a wheel?

I would like to express my appreciation to the contributors of this Manipulating Momentum thread. It is highly instructive on the subject of momentum. Of course, I need to be aware of the forces while considering the mechanical configuration of my wheel. To me, the physics works, it's the mechanics of the solution that I see as the challenge. It seems a lot of energy is added to this system (the forum) (grin), in discussion of the pure physics, when I believe I should be directionalizing, or focusing my energy toward a solution of the mechanics.

Regards,
Chris

[Art]

I agree Gwheel,

All of my experiments indicate to me that ANY change in momentum leads to friction and loss of the wheels momentum precisely because it is a vectoral quantity (ie has direction ) .

Momentum change is ' force by acceleration ' and since force is a vectoral quantity , then so also is momentum .

Skew the momentum changes, - thats what I'd like to do : ) .