Why Gravity wheels don't violate the laws of Physics

[ovyyus]

Scott, debating the differences and similarities between religion and science can obviously be a sensitive subject. Stirring a hornets nest of distraction is simple not my aim.

[daxwc]

All I meant about the religion is people think science has all the answers so they stop thinking outside the box.

[scott]

Stirring a hornets nest of distraction is simply not my aim.

I know that. But what you call a "hornets nest of distraction" I call "the real deal."

-Scott

[ovyyus]

OK then :D

[rmd3]

Okay - my last observation on the science religion non-dictonomy (for me at least)...

My own lack of understandings often cause me to ask questions and seek answers.

Not trying to poke fun at all, but this sounds like a religious seeker, no?

...My opinion of science practice, in the form of empirical knowledge, is that it is based upon observation and measurement of physical quantities. Religious practice does not seem to require either.

The idea that "religious practice does not require observation and measurement" is itself a scientific theory. We need to observe and measure to find out if it is true.

If we mean the practice of certain rituals, for example, prayer, there are certain steps outlined in various religions which must be met correctly - we can easily observe and measure these. I don't think this is what was meant.

However, if by "religious practice" we mean the beliefs of a religion, then it goes back to each individual religion and what such beliefs are, and what their basis is. Then it would simply be a matter of deciding if the "observed and measured" constituted enough evidence for such beliefs.

My religion informs me to think about the physical world and how it works as evidence for my religious beliefs - sounds like your definition of science practice to me.

I submit that every question science has answered so far has only led to more questions. Please let me know when this pattern stops.

I agree science continually answers and raises questions about the physical world. Does this pattern stop with religious practice? Perhaps this part of the conversation is leading off-topic.

My religion says there are two types of seekers in this world and neither one's thirst will be quenched. They are those seeking the material things of this world and and those seeking knowledge. My religion confirms the idea that knowledge/science is an unending subject.

So if my religion supports your conclusion about science being unending (my religion doesn't stop the pattern), but you believe my religion isn't based on observation and measurement (and to be sure it does profess knowledge of unseen realities), how could such a truth come from such a religion? I don't know - I'll just take it on faith.

-------

Thanks for the digression... back to the matter at hand....

Where were we?

[ovyyus]

Thanks for your thoughtful comments Randall. Where were we indeed :)

[Fletcher]

Newton's Laws of the macro world encapsulated within an observation. So far I have seen no need to delve into quantum theory or STR to explain how gravity can power a wheel.

Gravity is a force - it is a gradient of potential - it wants to cause the motion of two separated body’s, which have mass, toward each other.

Assuming the body's are unrestricted & can move, as they begin to move, they acquire more velocity than they started with - this velocity translates into & can be measured as Kinetic Energy of motion [often called momentum] - this KE is a result of the body having an independent quality of Inertia as a result of the body having Mass - when measuring the KE of a moving object the relative velocities of the body & the measuring device must be considered - the force required to decelerate a body down to a stop [relative] is the exact same amount as required to speed it up [assuming no losses] - therefore if a moving body took X amount of KE to achieve a certain velocity it will require the same X amount of Energy to stop it again.

N.B. when locally the objects are restricted from moving together they still experience the pull of the potential/force - they in turn put pressure/force on whatever is restricting their movement, induced by the gravity field potential, & its called weight.

Is gravity force energy ? No, it’s the mechanism/initiator/potential that allows motion/acceleration to occur between body's & which can then be measured as energy by way of the body's velocity & inertia gained i.e. the body's have the Energy Quotient.

Do I need to know that Higgs bosons or gravitons exist to give mass, to atomic particles so that they can have inertia & KE, & therefore be impelled to be moved by gravity ? - Not really ! I just need to observe & make sense of, at the macro level, actions so that I can accurately anticipate/predict/have faith, to a very high order of confidence of repeatability, what the likely effects of a cannon ball falling on my toe will be.

[bluesgtr44]

I have seen this argument bantied about in other threads and it does leave me scratching my head. If I can, I would like to understand some of the things mentioned over the last few months in differing places. This has to do with gravity and KE/PE and all that crap.....so, bear with me please....

Potential energy

set-up 1. A running generator, connected to a switch 5 ft. off the ground, that when activated (switch) will energize a light bulb (performs work).

set-up 2. A weight sitting on a levered/hinged shelf 5 ft. off the ground, that when activated (levered/hinged shelf), the weight drops and smashes an aluminum can (performs work).

Now...what is the medium for the PE in each scenario? In the first is it the gas that powers the generator? the voltage that waits on the one side of the switch....the combo of voltage and resistance that produces the current that when released will energize the bulb? lol....in the second is it the gravity? Is it the weight that waits to be released from the shelf.....or the combo of the weight and the distance it has to travel to the can? lol


Steve

[Gregory]

Randall,

If you like pendulum devices, you can check some of my earlier experiments on them:
http://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic ... c&start=15

[daxwc]

LOL... believe me I do not want to delve into General Relativity, but to just state that matter and energy bend spacetime giving rise to gravity. So maybe gravity is a form of energy. Can the 4 forces require no energy input if they are not energy sources themselves?

[rmd3]

Gregory,

I couldn't follow the link - it would just go back to the main forum page. Actually, I was just using the pendulum as an example. I did once post a pendulum to the private forum once - it made it's way into the wiki by someone. But as it stands now, I'm exploring mechanisms that shift force around without allowing any kind of overt oscillation. I'm still curious about your experiments if you can fix the link.

-Randall

[Fletcher]

Hi Steve .. I can only give my opinions here [I'm no electrician] but the analogy of electromagnetic force is quite a good one imo - in a nut shell there is a major flaw in drawing these analogies & that is that one requires a physical medium of transmission & the other does not, so they are hard to compare accurately in a way that makes intuitive sense.

I have seen this argument bantied about in other threads and it does leave me scratching my head. If I can, I would like to understand some of the things mentioned over the last few months in differing places. This has to do with gravity and KE/PE and all that crap.....so, bear with me please....

Potential Energy

set-up 1. A running generator, connected to a switch 5 ft. off the ground, that when activated (switch) will energize a light bulb (performs work).

set-up 2. A weight sitting on a levered/hinged shelf 5 ft. off the ground, that when activated (levered/hinged shelf), the weight drops and smashes an aluminum can (performs work).

Now...what is the medium for the PE in each scenario?

In the first is it the gas that powers the generator? - the voltage that waits on the one side of the switch....the combo of voltage and resistance that produces the current that when released will energize the bulb? lol

The gas powered generator turns a dynamo which creates a electrical potential - this potential has no where to go or discharge until a circuit is created for it to find entropy. N.B. The gas & motor is required because there is a resistance in the generator to turning, that the magnetic flux creates, which must be overcome to generate any electrical potential - so we are adding joules into the system to create electromagnetic potential energy - this is not an isolated system.

The electromagnetic potential can not flow until the switch is activated, then the potential can find entropy & 'flow'. Its rate of flow will be determined by its mediums [the wires] resistance & cross sectional volume [this would be similar to air resistance in the other scenario].

So the medium for the PE is the physical wire - without it the current could not flow & the energy from the gas joules would remain as stored electrical potential with no physical means to get to the bulb. Yes, you could use Tesla's induction etc but that is outside the scope of your scenario's & doesn't address the fact that it is not an energy isolated system.

In the second is it the gravity? - is it the weight that waits to be released from the shelf.....or the combo of the weight and the distance it has to travel to the can? lol

There is no apparent medium here & that is the difficulty with gravity to a large degree. The object placed on the shelf has PE because of its separation distance from the next biggest attraction source [the earth where the can waits patiently]. You are the catalyst that releases the hinged shelf & the object now has no resistance to it changing its PE into KE at the expense of the separation distance between them. N.B. there will be some resistance due to air friction etc which is similar to the electromagnetic wire resistance.

That's the thing with gravity - it doesn't require any physical medium to conduct it - & as soon as you remove the resistance it will cause objects to move. Without a medium it is better described as a field rather than a source of energy per se - & btw this system is isolated requiring no further energy input once released.

[rmd3]

I thought generators did't create potential until the circuit is closed.

You can spin it til the cows come home it will even spin very easily, and at best you'll get a potential that's very tiny due to tiny leakage current through the air (in essence a tiny closed circuit). The potential (or rather potential difference) is created upon closing the circuit and the generator will have to do more work.

If the potential isn't created until the circuit is closed, then how can we determine the PE? You'll have to go back to the torque of the generator, I guess.

PE seems to be a relative concept anyway (move the experiment from 5 ft to 10 ft ) and so I have a hard time associating it with the generator idea (doesn't matter where it is in height).

I don't think I understand the value in comparing these two situations (and especially with respect to conventional PE), but that may be my weakness. But my weakness may be that I can't subscribe to the PE=Fxd=KE concept (which is relative to a certain reference point). I had to forgo my doubts years ago back in Physics 101 to pass some tests, but I'm free to doubt these concepts now. ...and feel like I understand physical phenomena better because I left that concept behind. Whether I really do or not is another matter!!!

-Randall

[Fletcher]

My apologies if I got that bit wrong Randall - like I said I'm no electrician - & I haven't actually run a generator with the circuit open & then compared it to the closed circuit situation to see if it had just as much back torque or not ?

[rlortie]

Randal,

I thought generators did't create potential until the circuit is closed.

If a turning generator has either an excited rotor or stator and is not connected to a closed circuit, it will show a potential as per Lenz law.
It becomes saturated and from then until the circuit is closed, it is free spinning. Not unlike a centrifugal water pump with both inlet and outlet closed, it just sits there and spins with no load upon it. In both cases the potential is there to be put to work. Until then it is considered a no-load situation.

Ralph