Terragravitic Induction

[Tarsier79]

Isn’t that weird? More energy ended up the same height?

No. The spring has a certain force and the weight is the same in both instances. There will be a balance point.

[Leafy]

But the instance of the balance point, the spring force both weights?

[Leafy]

I don’t know why people pass on the honor of the first PM maker. You get a lot of points to redeem stuffs. I’m just a caveman, no amount is enough for me.

[Senax]

The following quote from Barry Whyte's 2020 book is relevant to the extra energy generated by the cycloid path of decent compared to the straight path of decent.

Steorn was claiming that its specific arrangement of magnets around a
large rotating wheel wasn't necessarily pushing one magnet forward and
then giving it a kick on the way past to generate momentum. It was, the
company claimed, doing something much more complex: delaying the
magnetic field so that hm. one side the magnetic field was weak, and the
other was strong — an imbalance that somehow created a momentum that
pushed the spinning wheel and registered on the oscilloscope as a gain of
energy.
If that doesn't make sense, McCarthy had a tYpically folksy explanation.


Shaun McCarthy: Time Machines

Okay, well, what we had created here was a time machine ... Not in the N.G.
Wells 'Let's travel to 1870' sort of way, but conservation of energy has one
fundamental requirement: that the length of time it takes something to happen
doesn't affect the amount of energy exchange. In simple terms, if I push a glass a
metre across the desk, and if I do that in one second or a millisecond, the energy
exchanged is exactly the same. You can think logically about why that is: because
if you believe in the conservation of energy, if I lift a ball quickly and let it drop,
and I lift it slowly and let it drop, there should be some conservation of energy.
Time can have no part in it, yeah?
Believe it or not, the conservation of energy — thou shalt not create or destroy
energy — is not a commandment. It's based on a theorem from Emmy Noether.
And it's very simple: the laws of physics can't change in time — thc's a no-no —
otherwise, energy just can't-be preserved. The amount of time that's involved in
an energy reaction cannot change the amount of energy produced; otherwise,
conservation of energy doesn't hold.
But, actually, what Noether's theorem says is that the reason the conservation
of energy exists is that the laws of physics don't change in time, and the energy
interactions are time invariant.

What we discovered — or rather what we discovered that we'd discovered —
the push and pull — by walking up the hill slowly and running down, in Orbo
terms — we got a net non-zero result and the permanent magnet version, the
electromagnetic version and, ultimately, the solid-state version [of the Orbo device]
all worked on this principle. Once we understood what was really happening, we
could engineer it in difficult physical formats.
What we claimed to have discovered was a magnetic interaction that was time
variable rather than time invariant. When you boil it all down fundamentally, the
logical process after that is that you're creating or destroying energy.

[agor95]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steorn

Quotes from a non-existent company does not make it true.

Bessler hinted that a mass moving down could be fired up
resulting in a non-zero positive effect.

Your post implies the opposite that a mass fired down
and walk up generates non-zero positive effect.

Both have yet been replicated.

[WaltzCee]

But, actually, what Noether's theorem says is that the reason the conservation
of energy exists is that the laws of physics don't change in time, and the energy
interactions are time invariant.

That's an oversimplification.

Now if like begats like, and that applies to the very fabric of 4-d time/space then what happens way up the electromagnetic spectrum can have a mechanical manifestation in the material relam.

That is where light is held captive by electron clouds.

E = m c^2

E / c^2 = matter ; there's a little energy in every spec of dirt

[thx4]

Noether's theorem, says above all that the mp is impossible otherwise the world as we understand it would collapse...

[WaltzCee]

stop pulling my leg
here, pull my finger

[agor95]

Noether's theorem, says above all that the mp is impossible otherwise the world as we understand it would collapse...

Some hold on to the Anthropic principle to keep afloat.

Other modern theories rely on various symmetries and symmetry breaking.

These are used to make sense of patterns in data. It is also required as the foundation to mathematics. Without symmetry mathematics would collapse.

However Chaos theory and quasi-tessellation that show a non-symmetric micro structure. But a symmetric in the macro scale.

Even two figures appear symmetrical. But stick them up and you will see how different they are.

[Senax]

Steorn was claiming that its specific arrangement of magnets around a
large rotating wheel wasn't necessarily pushing one magnet forward and
then giving it a kick on the way past to generate momentum. It was, the
company claimed, doing something much more complex: delaying the
magnetic field so that hm. one side the magnetic field was weak, and the
other was strong — an imbalance that somehow created a momentum that
pushed the spinning wheel and registered on the oscilloscope as a gain of
energy.
If that doesn't make sense, McCarthy had a tYpically folksy explanation.


Shaun McCarthy: Time Machines

Okay, well, what we had created here was a time machine ... Not in the N.G.
Wells 'Let's travel to 1870' sort of way, but conservation of energy has one
fundamental requirement: that the length of time it takes something to happen
doesn't affect the amount of energy exchange. In simple terms, if I push a glass a
metre across the desk, and if I do that in one second or a millisecond, the energy
exchanged is exactly the same. You can think logically about why that is: because
if you believe in the conservation of energy, if I lift a ball quickly and let it drop,
and I lift it slowly and let it drop, there should be some conservation of energy.
Time can have no part in it, yeah?
Believe it or not, the conservation of energy — thou shalt not create or destroy
energy — is not a commandment. It's based on a theorem from Emmy Noether.
And it's very simple: the laws of physics can't change in time — thc's a no-no —
otherwise, energy just can't-be preserved. The amount of time that's involved in
an energy reaction cannot change the amount of energy produced; otherwise,
conservation of energy doesn't hold.
But, actually, what Noether's theorem says is that the reason the conservation
of energy exists is that the laws of physics don't change in time, and the energy
interactions are time invariant.

What we discovered — or rather what we discovered that we'd discovered —
the push and pull — by walking up the hill slowly and running down, in Orbo
terms — we got a net non-zero result and the permanent magnet version, the
electromagnetic version and, ultimately, the solid-state version [of the Orbo device]
all worked on this principle. Once we understood what was really happening, we
could engineer it in difficult physical formats.
What we claimed to have discovered was a magnetic interaction that was time
variable rather than time invariant. When you boil it all down fundamentally, the
logical process after that is that you're creating or destroying energy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIvZJ9x ... 588BD210AD

Though Shawn failed to produce a working model, Alsetalokin (a.k.a. Tinsell Koala) succeeded.

[Senax]

[agor95]

Hello Senax

You will notice they have the same kinetic energy in the end.

[Senax]

Bump.

[WaltzCee]

Hey Frank

[agor95]

Bump.

What you are pregnant!! :)