PM has no Equal in Nature!

[Sevich]

Bill...

Come on mate, when you use the word "G" I kind of feel that you are ashamed to say "GOD" ...why?

If that's the case, then you should use the term "power of nature" ?

You can be an aithest and at the same time refere "GOD" as "Nature"?

I could'nt really understand what the "G" meant when you first posted the "G" ..... I took a lucky guess that it refered to God ? ....maybe I was kind of lucky?

Come on Bro, let's get back on topic!


anton

[ovyyus]

Anton, you're nuts! G = Gravity

If I was going to use G in the sense you mean, it would be a small g :D


ROTFL

[Sevich]

Bill..

Well that's your fault then, because you are not clear in your commuication......how the hell can someone tell that "G" referes to "Gravity" ? ....oh come on!! ...give me a break mate!!!

In any case "G" is still the end result of God (nature)....as far as I'm concerned I've redeemed myself mate....balls in your court?

I've just noticed you came back with this attack of "G" meaning "Gravity".

If other's are reading into this , then they won't agree cause it's 4 posts too late mate...as per the following

wheeler, i agree that the earth nd man is a glorious end result of the power of "G" (GOD)

you can choose to come back after 4 posts later..but it's too late to argue the case mate! ....gotcha...YA!

[ovyyus]

Anton, what are you saying? I'm not interested in talking about your or anyone else's god on this forum - at all. Or haven't you picked up on that obvious little nugget well before this thread was even started. Given that fact, I think you need to re-read my posts without your filters in place - or are you just pulling my leg?

Man, you'd think it might be safe to use the term 'G' on a science related forum without some people interpreting it as a term for god. Have to laugh - lol

Here, let me make it real plain and simple - this is what I said 9 posts ago... "Not one example of excess energy creation from G is observed in Nature. Why?" Now, this is the enhanced version so that you can understand it..."Not one example of excess energy creation from GRAVITY is observed in Nature. Why?"

Duh :D

[Sevich]

OK Bill....whatever you say.......let's move on..................next please?

lol...


anton

[racer270]

hi bill,
i missed a few posts.

i was going to annser you it is "heat" , "water " ,and "pressure ",..ect..

but that could also be describing Ken's ....keyboard / and posts.......?

i dont think it is "PM" , but i do think it will last longer than i can /will....lol

ps dont take any offence ken ,
it is just in good fun.......................:)
gordy

[ken_behrendt]

An example in Nature where gravity does not appear to exert a "conservative" force? That's simple...one of Bessler wheels, of course. Oh, I forgot that is "mechanical" so it's considered, by most (not me!), as not being "natural".

How about this more natural example.

St. Francis of Copertino was a monk who on many occasions would levitate and rise several feet into the air. He was a a very devout and pious man who would enter a state of religious ecstacy upon hearing certain processionals and hymns. As a safeguard, his fellow monks often attached tethers to him so that, if he became airborne, he would not be carried away by the wind! The reality of his bizarre ability seems to an indisputable fact and is officially part of the history of the Roman Catholic Church.

Now imagine the following possible scenario involving a person who could, at will, levitate himself:

The person begins levitating and drops his effective bodily mass and weight down to a point at which he has positive buoyancy in Earth's atmosphere. He then floats up to a carriage near the 12:00 position of a Ferris Wheel. Once he has pulled himself into position in the carriage, he stops levitating and regains his normal mass and weight.

Now the Ferris Wheel is normally powered by an electric motor, but this motor has been shut off and will behave like an electrical generator if the Ferris Wheel can be turned by a torque. As our hypothetical autolevitator regains his normal mass and weight in the topmost car of the Ferris Wheel, he applies a torque to wheel and it rotates until he finds himself and his carriage at the 6:00 position of the Ferris Wheel. In the process of turning the wheel, he manages to generate some electrical power.

He now repeats this process again and again and, each time, causes the electrical generator attached to the Ferris Wheel to produce a pulse of electrical power that can, of course, be used to perform some useful work in the environment.

Now, the question is this...where does this electrical power come from? Assuming that electrical power is produced, then it would seem that, in such a scenario, gravity is not acting conservatively.



ken

[winkle]

in a fairy tale world any thing can happen

that's really desperate Ken

[ken_behrendt]

Well, St. Francis of Copertino was a real person and actually had this ability. The scenario I presented could have been tried with him if someone had thought of it at the time. Of course, they did not have electrical generators during his life so the Ferris Wheel might have been used to pump water into a tank on top of a tower which could then be used to hydrodynamically power some device at ground level.


ken

[winkle]

ok

Ken do we know how many calories did he burn to accomplish that feat

[winkle]

in my oppion a working gravity wheel will not produce excess energy

it may prove that gravity is not entirely the conservative force it is thought to be

that gravity can be used as a fuel source

Bessler said in order to gain more power build a bigger wheel and use heaver weights

a bigger wheel allows the fuel (gravity) to act on the wheel for a longer period of time

in a sense consuming more fuel

as for myself i am convinced nothing can be created from nothing

there is no free lunch

[ken_behrendt]

winkle asked:

Ken do we know how many calories did he burn to accomplish that feat

That's a good question. Actually, I think I read that after an episode of autolevitation, St. Francis would feel drained and require rest. Most likely, the physiological changes that took place in his body that created the levitation effect did burn off some extra calories as compared to his average waking metabolic rate.

But, he was reported to have remained airborne once for over an hour and that did not seem to tire him any more than his shorter levitations.

I suspect that if he used levitation to ascend to the top of a 100 foot diameter Ferris Wheel, he would have expended far less calories than would be done by a person with his normal mass and weight who had to climb to the top of the wheel.

as for myself i am convinced nothing can be created from nothing
there is no free lunch

I could not agree more. That is why I have suggested that Bessler's wheels were actually outputting energy they obtained by cannabilizing the mass of the weights that drove the wheels. Thus, with each wheel rotation, an incredibly minute amount of mass (only a few picograms) was lost from the weights as it was converted into the kinetic energy that accelerated the wheel and could perform external work to it.



ken

[winkle]

Ken not that it maters but i couldn't disagree with you more

any loss to the weights would most likely be because of oxidation

[ovyyus]

Ken, the question was, ..."Not one example of excess energy creation from GRAVITY is observed in Nature. Why?"

How can we observe a levitating St. Francis of Copertino? How can we observe the workings of Bessler's wheel? Do we know how either were accomplished? Both are obviously not examples of anything we can observe. Next we'll be discussing how many angels might fit on the end of a pin and how much work it took to get them there.


Gordy, good luck with your move.

[LustInBlack]

Ken, why there are no documented video of that guy who levitate!? ..


I don't think such phenomena exists.

Too much parano'rmal.