Question |
| Asked by: |
ravi |
| Subject: |
Newton's Laws and Gyros under peculiar conditions |
| Question: |
Please visit the entry @ http://relmachine.blogspot.com/2009/05/spin-angular-momentum-and-worldlines.html
for the whoe nine yards - but succintly,
a) rotation has relativistic effects
b) these effects are tiny but easily amplifiable and harnessable
c) because the effect is a relativistic one, only relativistic analysis will be successful in being simple.
d) i present the relativistic analysis, complete with ctc-x diagrams and space-time elements.
e) I show that according to such an analysis, a carriage holding a spinning wheelrequires TWO worldlines, centers of mass (COM), two sets of histories to be fully describable.
However, Newton's Laws, in fact all of classical mechanics has an implicit assumption that every object has only ONE center of mass.
The tricky part is that as long as no interactions happen across the z axis of the gyro, all is well. As soon as you twist the z-axis, all hell breaks loose and the lights go out - BECAUSE Newton's laws are not equipped to deal with COMPOUND OBJECTS (Objects with more than 1 center of mass).
This is an important theoretical construct because it tells us what we can expect to see when such a device does work successfully - the object will appear to perform an action without any identifiable external objet or energy that can be assigned the reaction - i.e, Newton's Laws will be flat out broken.
For a while I had toyed with the thought that perhaps there is a way that Newton's laws would continue to stand, but hunch, theory and finally, my experiments say they will be broken flat out.
However, there is no need for fear since the explanation for the phenomena is consistent in relativistic terms and such an anaysis leads to the right conclusions. |
| Date: |
7 May 2009
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/05/2009 08:13:51
|
| | I get so tired of this bull shit.
Stop trying to be cleaver, witty, wordy and flowerily.
Stop trying to impress.
The gyro is not space-time! No. And you are not Einstein.
The gyro is a very simple mechanical device.
You use the word ‘succinctly’. It means brief and to the point: expressed with brevity and clarity with no wasted words. Certainly you’ve done none of that.
Do you realize you did not explained a single thing you said?
And you make too many posts. Why don’t you stick to one for a while and add to it. That’s the way everybody who’s been on here in the last five years has done.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
ravi - 07/05/2009 12:45:19
|
| | :)
Hi Glenn, How are you?
:)
I'm sure I'll run out of stuff to say, soon.
Relativity has for too long been mistaken as applicable only to the astronomical realm, when in fact it seems now that it also has application in the analysis of rotational motion, under special conditions.
Take the Foucault pendulum for instance. Even though it executesonly partial rotations (what is the swinging motion of a pendulum is not the center-of-mass the tracing an arc, i.e. a part of a circle.? )
So if even partical rotation are so effective, it stands to reason that if we've
, it underdoes precession
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 07/05/2009 14:38:18
|
| | Dear raiv,
You are a swell kid and smart to come back like that. It is disarming. While I am sometimes an exacting person, I still know that you should express yourself and if I can’t add something helpful, or cordial I should shut up. I apologize. Go ahead and bring in the dual universe, the worm hole, dark mater and the black hole. It should be fun. Just kidding you, post away and I will read it.
Best Regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 09/05/2009 13:39:25
|
| | Hi Ravi,
Your writing is fascinating and I will continue working to keep understanding it completely until you say you have presented all you can.
From a more mundane perspective, it is perplexing that all who have claimed any degree of success in producing gyro-propulsion (thus far) have failed to provide a video or any credible demo to prove their success.
I suspect even smart people can become stuck on the simpler aspects in a challenging effort. A fellow called EDH who at one time posted in this forum, claims that his device actually hovers. However, he had a number of excuses for not presenting a working video.
It would have been easy for EDH to cover the working parts of his invention and show only an external box hovering.
Also it should not matter if some viewers respond negatively to video of demos, it is still better than not demonstrating what is claimed at all (a demo is an intricate part toward building credibility around claims that are hard to believe any way). EDH’s claims seemed premature at best.
Here are a number of ways to demonstrate any degree of successful sustained propulsion (no matter how small).
1) For example a balance-scale with equal or slightly lighter weight on the opposite side of the scale would certainly demonstrate limited propulsion when the device is operated.
2) A raft floating on the surface of a calm swimming pool will demonstrate horizontal motion.
3) An underwater video of a submerged device (a little harder but still doable), could also provide a good demo of the device rising when operated.
4) Others in this forum have suggested hanging the device from the ceiling to demonstrate horizontal propulsion through maintaining a less than vertical angle by the hanging device.
5) The use of an air-hokey table has also been pushed by some as the ultimate test bead.
6) Measuring weight loss is an old standby (but is very difficult to do on objects that produce erratic intermittent thrust).
The last 3 suggestions have issues because primitive devices are not refined enough to produce stable propulsion in one direction, thus causing motion in false directions etc and appearing to thrust randomly.
I suggest that any or all of the first 3 tests are necessary to assure what is being measured electronically is truly linear propulsion. A visual proof/demo is necessary because with so much vibration going on it is easy for the inventor to falsely assume the best possible results (and that can become costly by leading men to chase expensive shadows).
The added value of these tests is that they provide positive visual proof, which yields further inquiries and wider interest (and that can’t be bad).
Many before us have shouted eureka and then find out that their devices produce “displacement”, but not sustained propulsion. We have referred to this type of device as the “space inchworm” because it illustrates the behavior accurately (it stops at each cycle). This type of device has a cycle that depends on two types of motion (1) up-like-a-gyro, and (2) down-like-a-weight or like a rock etc…
The first part of the cycle REPOSITIONS a gyro-type mass (while causing only reduced opposite-reaction).
The second part of the cycle yields a primitive displacement that results from maintaining the device’s center of mass, while it moves the mass of an internal non-gyro object (naturally the motion of this primitive displacement comes to an end).
When a balance-scale is used to conduct the first type of test (1) on a “space inchworm” type of device, the “inchworm” is NOT able to maintain its side of the balance-scale raised consistently as it operates.
The “space inchworm” is the trivial solution, which most any enthusiast has accomplished; it may jump up at segments of the cycle but always falls back during each cycle; the same happens when submerged in a pool (or other means that provide buoyancy).
No matter how limited, truly sustainable propulsion will cause the device to rise consistently when the correct tests are conducted; the tests provided here are primitive but effective test.
When someone finally presents a video of successful gyro propulsion you bet people are going to want to see it real-time, and in person!
That can’t be bad for someone seeking investors!
Ravi I await your response.
Best Regards,
Luis G
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 10/05/2009 02:55:16
|
| |
The way to I. P. is what I discovered and explained here and named inchworm on this site years ago and I explained its limitations. I said by itself it cannot accelerate, but only maintain a slow progression, until it stops functioning, at which time it would stop dead still in space. It would refuse even to coast in countenance. No one had ever done it before and the proof of what I’m saying is here in these archives of old posts and threads. Ever so often the Mexican mentions the worm as if it had been conceived by everyone, everywhere all at once, but he know the truth of it. He always makes a point to say it can never accelerate. But it can. It can be made to constantly thrust gaining speed-- when given built-in assistance. It is the only thing I have seen that would. The thing is that I left the worm incomplete, presented only the tip of the iceberg, but I know exactly how to use it to build an apparatus to accelerated reasonably powerfully and constantly through space for years. Just because the Mexican doesn’t have the capacity to foresee how to use the principle to create a workable design doesn’t mean anything. He ought to leave my worm alone. Does he do it I wonder sometimes just to aggregate me, or is it to try to impress someone. Luis if you are going to discuss my work give me credit for it even if you don’t see a design use for it. Come on. Stop acting like a jerk.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Rahul Manandhar - 11/05/2009 04:18:49
|
| | You might have some pt Ravi but the validity is questionable as I do not know for sure and I rather do not like to get into assumptions.
However, there is some significance of "anti-gravity" effects due to highly spinning superconducting disks that is still under experimentation. This is advanced propulsion systems in research
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
ravi - 11/05/2009 05:35:46
|
| | what can I say, Luis? You said it all. I agree with you 100%.
rahul, you're too nice.
you dont agree. fine.
see ya.
thanks
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 14/05/2009 00:00:26
|
| | Ravi,
Thank you for the strong vote of confidence.
As you can imagine I don’t have time or inclination to argue about nationality or other foolish matters.
I am off to Copenhagen where my trip starts.
I will miss the gyro quest until I return next month.
Best Regards,
Luis G.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
ravi - 14/05/2009 00:19:50
|
| | luis, enjoy your trip.
keep visiting my blog as i'm adding new stuff
the prototype's coming along well.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
patrick - 18/05/2009 00:57:48
|
| | can u just explain how a turbo charger works,caus maybee it enspired me wrong
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
shahriar - 16/06/2009 08:35:04
|
| | Hi Ravi
Here is our website introducing new rotative device (motor and brake) which doesn't obey Newton's third law. (Action and reaction law):
www.gyroscope-motors.com
Notice that the invented device is not a gyro-propulsion, but this is the first rotative motor & brake that the action torque delivered from its rotor is 5 times more than the reaction torque comes back to its stator in the same direction.
Note that the site maybe with error and doesn't work for few next days because of IRAN election.
Good luck
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ravi - 24/06/2009 13:27:04
|
| | Shahriar,
Thank you.I wish you best of luck in pursuing your chosen invention.
How are you?
It seems that you are doing some advanced research. What is the current state of your research? Are there any business/commercial partners working with you to coomercialize your invention?
Ravi
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
shahriar - 28/06/2009 08:35:12
|
| | Hi Ravi,
I have made a real prototype of my invention and I presented it to the world in IENA Germany 2008 and palexpo Geneva 2009 invention fairs.
I'm looking for sponsors for commercializing this invention now.
I wish luck for you too.
Gyroscope has unknown world still today.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ravi - 29/06/2009 12:54:41
|
| | Shahriar, Might I ask: If you work for Iran Khodro, Iran's largest automobile manufacturer, it seems you are well placed to work with them to develop your invention. Yet it seems you are looking for other sponsors?
Regards
Ravi
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
shahriar - 30/06/2009 12:19:59
|
| | Dear Ravi,
My invented Motor is not suit for car power train application.
in fact, it is best to use in marine or aero-space machines which are in suspend position with no protect with rigid fixed structure.
So Iran khodro is not a good sponsor.
Might I ask you, how did you know I am in IRAN KHODRO?
Could you enter to my site?
it still is unable in Iran.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 01/07/2009 16:22:20
|
| | Hi Shahriar,
New concepts for motors are always interesting. Would not two, ½ size electric motors, or gasoline engines welded side by side, pointing in the same direction, but rotating oppositely perform the same in space as I believe you meant, without an anchoring magnesium, i.e. earth, air, water, or massive body? You understand all new devises must have an advantage over older and existing devises in order to be useful. What advantages does you motors have? In what way, and over what existing ways? What do you mean ’no protect’? Can I help you with descriptions in English, which is my native tong?
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
shahriar - 02/07/2009 10:59:35
|
| | Hi Glenn
If we attach two motor side by side or coaxial but in opposite direction in rotation, we have two motor. If we going to merge them, so we have to couple them with gear wheel, belt or… consequently the merged unique motor doesn't work as reaction free motor. You can try it. I did it
’no protect’ I mean "with no need to screw and connect the motor to a rigid fixed body like heavy structures, earth …
Can you enter and see the website: www.gyroscope-motors.com ?
I explain its advantage over older and existing motors and its new application in this site.
Best regards,
Shahriar yazdani
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 02/07/2009 17:41:35
|
| | Hello Shahriar yazdani,
I see three pictures and five headings at www.gyroscope-motors.com, but nothing happens when I click to open them. What can be the matter?
Best Regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
shahriar yazdani - 04/07/2009 08:31:52
|
| | Hi Glenn ,
i'm sorry. my website has been hacked and became unavailable three weeks ago.
but i think it will repaire in two or three days later.
thanks
shahriar
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ravi - 04/07/2009 21:51:38
|
| | Shahriar, No. I was not able to. But I did do a google search of your name. the google search synopsis included words like working for Iran Khodro Company ... living in Karaj-Iran ... or words to that effect.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Luis Gonzalez - 26/07/2009 16:49:27
|
| | Ravi,
You have probably guessed that I adhere to the classical rules of motion, so I am not partial to the word “antigravity”.
We know that a directed force produces acceleration indistinguishable from gravity. Therefore to me the important thing is to resolve the issues that are left after creating directed acceleration through action and equal-and-opposite-reaction.
This does not exclude my interest from your approach, which would in fact appear to produce the nearest thing to antigravity. I look forward to being disproved in this matter. Perhaps Sandy is also interested on this new unexpected force.
Best Regards,
Luis G
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
