Gravity Assist

[greendoor]

http://www.gravityassist.com/

Wow ... I had never thought about it this way before ...

Prior to 1961, it was believe that man could never explore the whole solar system, because we couldn't carry enough energy to fuel a rocket. Nuclear rockets were considered, but they could engineer them - and still haven't.

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

Surely this provides a clue that gravity can indeed be exploited as a free energy source.

[ovyyus]

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

The spacecraft's momentum increase is proportional to a decrease in the planet's orbital momentum (doesn't work with a stationary planet). The maneuver is "planetary momentum transfer", but I guess that didn't sound quite as catchy as "gravity assist" ;)

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

http://www.gravityassist.com/

Wow ... I had never thought about it this way before ...

Prior to 1961, it was believe that man could never explore the whole solar system, because we couldn't carry enough energy to fuel a rocket. Nuclear rockets were considered, but they could engineer them - and still haven't.

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

Surely this provides a clue that gravity can indeed be exploited as a free energy source.

Hi Greendoor,

Welcome to the real world, wherein gravity can be use as fuel.

A few years back when the Patent Office told me gravity cannot be use as fuel I advised them if that was the case why was NASA using it to propel space craft (Gravity sling shots), there answer was that it could not be used on earth! My answer was what about Hydro and tidal energy, there answer was that it was the input of water that was doing all the work, my answer was that water is weightless with out gravity, so gravity had to be doing the biggest part of the work.

The moral of the storey is, a well designed gravity wheel will work, a Bad designed gravity wheel will not work.

The question is, has any of the well designed wheels been lost to physics bull S**t, because of this BS a lot of people will not take the subject seriously, so the people who should be looking into it are not.

Regards Trevor

Edit, spelling,

[FunWithGravity2]

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

The spacecraft's momentum increase is proportional to a decrease in the planet's orbital momentum (doesn't work with a stationary planet). The maneuver is "planetary momentum transfer", but I guess that didn't sound quite as catchy as "gravity assist" ;)

does this mean if we keep launching things into deep space our planet will eventually stop moving?

[ovyyus]

No, it means the orbit of a planet decays slightly every time a spaceship robs it of momentum via a "gravity assist" maneuver.

[pequaide]

When you transfer the motion of the plant (large object) to the spacecraft (small object) you can not conserve both momentum and energy. As you stated; momentum is conserved. So it is something to think about.

[Grimer]

http://www.gravityassist.com/

Wow ... I had never thought about it this way before ...

Prior to 1961, it was believe that man could never explore the whole solar system, because we couldn't carry enough energy to fuel a rocket. Nuclear rockets were considered, but they could engineer them - and still haven't.

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

Surely this provides a clue that gravity can indeed be exploited as a free energy source.

Very interesting. Thanks for that.

It seems to me that if you can do it with rockets you must be able to do it with other bodies in closer proximity to the earth. We also have a three body problem - Newtonian Gravity, Ersatz Gravity (CF) and the earth's reaction force which is not generally in line with NG (example - body rolling down a slope). It also shows us where Bessler's energy comes from doesn't it - change in the earth's momentum - which removes an intellectual barrier to the idea of getting energy from gravity.

Good find. Very intellectually stimulating. Thanks again.

[Grimer]

http://www.gravityassist.com/

Wow ... I had never thought about it this way before ...

Prior to 1961, it was believe that man could never explore the whole solar system, because we couldn't carry enough energy to fuel a rocket. Nuclear rockets were considered, but they could engineer them - and still haven't.

But due to the work of Dr Michael Minovitch, we now use gravity to propel spacecraft anywhere we want to go - with unlimited free energy.

Surely this provides a clue that gravity can indeed be exploited as a free energy source.

Subsequent to extending the analysis of a swing's conservation of momentum vividly illustrated by this Grinnell clip,

http://www.grinnell.edu/files/video/clip5_lb.mov

I can now see that it doesn't just provide a clue, it solves the problem.

There is no difference in principle between a close encounter with the Newtonian gravity field of a heavenly body and the Ersatz Gravity field of a rotating wheel though there is obviously a vast difference in scale.

========================================================================================


These two fields are the inverse of each other in the same way that fractions are the inverse of numbers.

1, 2, 3, 4...... go on the infinity

1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 ..... go on to zero.

They are hierarchical mirror images of each other the the forward slash acting as the mirror.
========================================================================================

I'm off to mass at Spanish Place shortly so I'll expand on this later.

Anyway, very well done Greendoor. I would click your greenie but for the fact that I seem to have done so already and one isn't allowed second helpings.

[mickegg]

Spooky coincidence.....

Having just looked at the patent that interested Jim , this thread was next on my list of unread posts.

Dr.Michael Minovitch has been a busy lad!

Regards

Mick

[Grimer]

Spooky coincidence.....

Having just looked at the patent that interested Jim , this thread was next on my list of unread posts.

Dr.Michael Minovitch has been a busy lad!

Regards

Mick

Gosh! I hadn't noticed that.

And it's obviously the same person too, not some namesake.

A very spooky coincidence indeed - although I suppose Jim could have been looking up the author of Gravity Assist which is how one might get to such an exotic invention.

Well spotted, Mick.

[Grimer]

http://www.grinnell.edu/files/video/clip5_lb.mov

In the above video clip the Grinnell lecturer provides an invaluable demonstration of the fact that swing action can be accounted for by the conservation of angular momentum.

But there are three centres of rotation, three rings, not just the two he implies. The hierarchy of three rings is shown in the diagram below




The rider swings clockwise. This angular momentum is passed to the bent piece of the chain which swings anticlockwise as it straightens out at 6 o'clock and bends the other way as it moves to the top of the arc. This anti-clockwise angular momentum is passed on to the red ring which swings clockwise.

Now when one finds a hierarchical structure the natural question that arises is:

Are there any other members of the hierarchy.

It took me some time to see it but eventually I realised that there was an elephant in the room. The grayish colour that I had chosen for the background helped.

Given the clue that there is an elephant in the room I wonder if any other members can see it.

[Grimer]

http://www.gravityassist.com/

If you read the website right to the end it's evident that Dr. Minovitch is very pissed off (and rightly so it would appear) that he isn't given the credit due to him.

Judging from the history it seems that he was very junior and, as is often the case, senior people like to take the credit for the work their juniors do. The scientific world is just as unethical in these matters as business or the military.

One of the difficulties his seniors faced of course was it made them look so damn foolish for not having thought of it themselves.

"When Minovitch presented (his theory) to JPL in the form of 47 page technical paper dated August 23, 1961, it was dismissed by the head of JPL’s Trajectory Group as impossible. How could a young graduate student in mathematics and physics who never studied the problem of space propulsion, space travel or astrodynamics before the summer of 1961 ever invent a completely new theory of space travel that could not only be fundamentally different from the classical theory based on reaction propulsion which all of the professionals took for granted as the “only possible theory� but far surpass it in terms of what it could achieve?"

And anyway, hadn't "Professor Hermann Oberth, actually proved mathematically that the exploration of most of the Solar System would not be possible."

The following passage from Minovitch's site is particularly relevant to the Bessler Wheel.

"During this process, Minovitch became interested in a much more difficult trajectory problem that was still unsolved at that time. It was the problem of determining the exact three-dimensional approach trajectory of a free-fall space vehicle approaching some target planet (Mars) such that the effect of its gravitational field, acting simultaneously and continuously with the gravitational field of the sun, will deflect the vehicle’s trajectory without rocket propulsion onto a new trajectory ..."

Minovitch was dealing with two independent gravitational fields. Bessler was also dealing with two independent gravitational fields, Newtonian and Ersatz gravity - though obviously he didn't think of it in those terms or make the connection with a spacecraft gaining energy from the slingshot effect.

Speaking in the third person Minovitch continues:
"What he discovered is that relative to the sun centered reference frame, the vehicle’s orbital energy after the planetary flyby will always be different from the vehicle’s pre-encounter orbital energy which can be very large depending on the distance of closest approach, and the mass of the flyby planet."

This is the crucial bit as far as energy gain is concerned. Translated into Bessler-speak it means that the energy exiting the Ersatz Gravity field can be greater than the energy entering the field. It can also be less but we are not interested in burying angular momentum in the earth but mining angular momentum from it. In contrast the space boys are interested in the braking potential of Minovitch's discovery.

Well that's enough for this post. I wouldn't want to give anyone mental indigestion.

[alexjrgreen]

The Earth is rotating on its axis and, together with the Moon, is in orbit around the Sun, which is itself orbiting the Galactic centre, etc.

Or were you referring to something else?

[Grimer]

I should have added this attachment to an earlier post but I was timed out.

Sorry about that.

[Grimer]

The Earth is rotating on its axis and, together with the Moon, is in orbit around the Sun, which is itself orbiting the Galactic centre, etc.

Or were you referring to something else?

Well done. There is a whole hierarchy of rotations. Congratulations for not stopping at the first elephant, the angular momentum transmitted to the earth, but going on to include the other elephants standing on top.



Of course, the momentum transmitted to the earth is so absolutely minuscule that it tends to get ignored. If it is ignored in practice by forgetting to make sure that the swing's A frames are firmly pegged down then the rider will eventually get bashed on the head by the top of the frame when he swings high enough. My builder claimed it happened to him.