Impact is the Key

Grimer · Post by **Grimer** » Mon May 18, 2009 11:00 am

Earth Reaction Simulation

Some people find it difficult to realise that when they are standing on the earth they are being continuously accelerated up towards the stars. They mistakenly think that they can take the earth as a absolute reference for velocity and linear acceleration. Unfortunately Newton's first cock-up Law has made all reference points for linear motion and acceleration arbitrary so it ain't possible.

You are placed in a Einsteinian railway carriage with the blinds drawn which is standing on the earth. The carriage begins to accelerate up away from the earth under the action of a silent rocket at a rate which is small enough to be as imperceptible to your senses as the rotation of the earth, say.

As the carriage slowly moves away from the earth the speed of the rocket motor which is accelerating the box is slowly increased to compensate for the reduction in gravity. Consequently the force on your feet remains constant and there is absolutely no physiological sensation to indicate that conditions are any different from what they were when the box was standing on the earth.

The the blinds are opened and you see that you are rapidly approaching the planet, Jupiter say.

You'd have never thought it, would you.

The reality is that the only reference frame we can rely on in mechanics, the only one we have access to at present, is that for rotation. Linear velocity has to be seen as a boundary case of rotation and acceleration has to be seen as change in the radius of gyration. To do this one has to understand the motions that are taking place within a material. For instance, linear rotation has to be seen as balancing counter rotations within independent objects within a material.

Modern miracles such as microwave ovens and NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) not to mention their forerunner, X-rays should help us to realise that any material is a highly complex system which reacts to the various external impute with independent compensating motions at different scales.

We should try to understand what those movements of the material are telling us about the environments they are seeing. We should remember the Aesop's fable about the astronomer who fell down a well and look at the ground under our feet.

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Mon May 18, 2009 1:05 pm

Why twelve months John? By the way, you agree with pm then;

Yes Michael, I can.

John would you place a bet for me if I gave you a couple of hun. ?

John Collins · Post by **John Collins** » Mon May 18, 2009 2:40 pm

Why twelve months? Just a nice round number Michael.

No I don't really agree with you but I can't be bothered to debate it any more. We've been over this in detail privately and although I know that you have your opinion I can't help it if I disagree with it. :)

JC

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Mon May 18, 2009 2:44 pm

John you just said you can see the system running without the use of gravity. So I'm a little confused.

If you want to let it go though I'll stop talking with you about it for the time being.

rlortie · Post by **rlortie** » Mon May 18, 2009 3:48 pm

Sun May 17, 2009 23:12 Post subject: re: Impact is the Key

The bet is; 12 months from The above date a self-sustaining gravity wheel will be verified and announced on this forum. Mark your calenders.

I believe that gravity is the prime force and I will side with John on this bet!

However I do not condone the statement; 'without the use of gravity'... Without gravity there would be no source of energy or force of any form providing work. Even Bills example of a gasoline combustion engine requires gravity.

Ralph

Jim Williams · Post by **Jim Williams** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:37 pm

The absence of an external energy source is more perpetual than the presence of gravity. This was decided when convention accepted that zero exists around 1850 or so.

Grimer · Post by **Grimer** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:46 pm

greendoor wrote:
Michael wrote: In reality there are no closed systems.
And in practice there are no reversible processes either. Even the stress strain relations for a nominally elastic material such as glass that appear to be dead straight ...

... are in fact power law curves with the origin at the point of failure.

This means that if it were possible to measure the stress-strain accurately enough over the fist 10% of strain you would be able to predict the failure load without actually taking it to the point of failure

John Collins · Post by **John Collins** » Mon May 18, 2009 5:10 pm

Michael - "you know how a weight is used can you not see how the same or near similar setup can be used in a situation using something other than gravity?"

I misunderstood you (again) Michael. I thought you were asking me if the concept I understand is behind Bessler's wheel would also work with some other energy source - i.e. the wind.

Unfortunately my first sally into betting and my request for odds for the appearance of a working gravitywheel within twelve months was turned down. Presumably they think it more likely that the earth will be governed by aliens by 2010 or Elvis will reappear!

I have approached another betting organisation and will report back. Send no money Michael!

EDIT - I've just received a positive response from the other organisation, but we'll see.

JC

AB Hammer · Post by **AB Hammer** » Mon May 18, 2009 5:16 pm

Ralph

I would add "With in" >>12 months from The above date a self-sustaining gravity wheel will be verified and announced on this forum. Mark your calenders. <<

So I guess this makes me in on this one as well. LOL

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Mon May 18, 2009 8:12 pm

I misunderstood you (again) Michael. I thought you were asking me if the concept I understand is behind Bessler's wheel would also work with some other energy source - i.e. the wind.

That is what I meant, but in the form of springs or magnetism or something similar.

DrWhat · Post by **DrWhat** » Mon May 18, 2009 9:44 pm

I knew this web site would end up becoming a gambling site. LOL

The "Bessler Roulette Wheel" sounds like a good new name for BW.com!

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Mon May 18, 2009 10:27 pm

Ralph wrote:Even Bills example of a gasoline combustion engine requires gravity.

Ralph, that's cheating, you said you wouldn't be drawn into debate. What a pity you don't want to test the strength (or fragility) of what we hold to be true ;)

rlortie · Post by **rlortie** » Mon May 18, 2009 11:49 pm

Bill,

You know I am always up and ready for a debate on a down to earth topic.

As for testing the strength (or fragility) of what we hold to be true is right up my alley! Providing the topic is worthy or related to hands on research and not an on going debate about protons, photons and how fast is the speed of gravity compared to light.

IMO gravity is an attraction force not unlike a magnet, the attraction force is governed by the size and density of the mass attracting it. Earth is the mass and 32 feet per second 2 is the attractive force of the planet we live on. Saturn, Jupiter and Mars all have varying rate of gravitational velocity.

As for a aspirated combustion engine; without gravity there would be no intake stroke.

Ralph

ovyyus · Post by **ovyyus** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:01 am

Ralph, I try to be down to Earth :)

Do you still believe a magnet holding itself and your shopping list to the fridge door is doing work?

rlortie · Post by **rlortie** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:22 am

I have used the magnet on the fridge in the past as an example. Cannot say that it is doing any work other than the effort (force) to put it there and remove it.

On the other hand a fuel burning helicopter hovering in one place is not doing any work either but it sure is expending energy.

Now we are discussing the terminology of the word 'work' which I see no point in. The magnet is resisting the force of gravity. If I try to stick it on my sheet rock wall it will fall on my foot, then I can appreciate the force that gravity plays upon the magnet.

We agreed earlier about dropping a magnet down a conductive tube. It does not fall at a natural rate building in velocity. Would you agree that the magnet must be doing work resisting gravity? Otherwise it would fall straight through. Another case of the triad at work. A magnet, conductor and gravity.

Ralph