subject:"\[Vo\]\:\: RAR gravity engine"

The trade winds are driven primarily from the convection currents that 
take their energy from solar heating.  The corriolis force means that 
the convection currents do not just go in a north-south direction but 
swing to the east or west.  Given all this, at least some of the energy 
that drives a windmill sitting in the trade wind comes from solar 
energy.   I suspect that trying to work out what proportion (if at all) 
comes from the spin of the earth is an interesting 
maths/physics/engineering question.


I shall pass it to my son to look at.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 06:41, Bob Cook wrote:
A better scheme to extract energy from the Coriolis force is the 
spinning earth creates is to erect a windmill or your sailboat in the 
trade winds which are caused by this effect.

Bob
- Original Message -

*From:* Blaze Spinnaker mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, February 08, 2014 4:14 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Yes, some combination of that and tidal forces from the moon, perhaps.


On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.
hoyt-stea...@cox.net mailto:hoyt-stea...@cox.net wrote:

Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of the
earth, i.e.

Coriolis effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

( which as I look at it, is a fudge factor needed to account
for anomalies when you assume you're

in an inertial frame of reference, but really aren't due to
the rotation of the earth.).

One could extract energy from the earth by raising a weight
vertically, then letting it fall

whilst letting it's east-west tendency generate force X
distance.  For example if the

surface of the earth is moving at 1000 km/hour and you raise a
weight such that the speed is

now 1001 km/hour, as you let it fall you could extract 1
km/hour of kinetic energy from it.

I think that'd be a pretty small effect, hence the huge
machine to get anything useful.

It would be interesting to see if it's orientation was
north-south along its rotational axis.

Hoyt Stearns

Scottsdale, Arizona US

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com
mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Jed Rothwell
jedrothw...@gmail.com mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Actually, the person you want to convince is Terry Blanton.
He is our

 resident expert in magnetic motors. He says he looked at
some of them

 closely and found they did not work.

Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded
. . .

every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.

But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.




http://www.avast.com/   

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast!
Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

And the reply is that you cant change the total angular momentum of the 
system without reference to something external to said system (e.g. the 
moon) so a windmill (or an RAR engine) working within the system can 
take angular momentum from the earth (e.g. by spinning), but it will 
give it back when it stops, and the earth will be spinning at the same 
rate and will not have lost any angular momentum, so we wont have taken 
any energy from it.


If the RAR system is getting energy from the rotation of the earth it is 
doing something with the conservation of angular momentum that current 
physics cannot explain, and I would not expect that to come from a 
system consisting of 50 tons of ironmongery.


Nigel
On 09/02/2014 13:33, Nigel Dyer wrote:
The trade winds are driven primarily from the convection currents that 
take their energy from solar heating.  The corriolis force means that 
the convection currents do not just go in a north-south direction but 
swing to the east or west.  Given all this, at least some of the 
energy that drives a windmill sitting in the trade wind comes from 
solar energy.   I suspect that trying to work out what proportion (if 
at all) comes from the spin of the earth is an interesting 
maths/physics/engineering question.


I shall pass it to my son to look at.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 06:41, Bob Cook wrote:
A better scheme to extract energy from the Coriolis force is the 
spinning earth creates is to erect a windmill or your sailboat in the 
trade winds which are caused by this effect.

Bob

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has its 
apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra energy from 
the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth rotates out from 
beneath the original aim point.  A similar process must be happening to the air 
flowing due to wind.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Nigel Dyer l...@thedyers.org.uk
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 10:12 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


  
And the reply is that you cant change the total angular momentum ofthe 
system without reference to something external to said system(e.g. the 
moon) so a windmill (or an RAR engine) working within thesystem can take 
angular momentum from the earth (e.g. by spinning),but it will give it back 
when it stops, and the earth will bespinning at the same rate and will not 
have lost any angularmomentum, so we wont have taken any energy from it.

If the RAR system is getting energy from the rotation of the earthit is 
doing something with the conservation of angular momentum thatcurrent 
physics cannot explain, and I would not expect that to comefrom a system 
consisting of 50 tons of ironmongery.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 13:33, Nigel Dyer wrote:


The trade winds are driven primarily from the convection currents   
   that take their energy from solar heating.  The corriolis force  means 
that the convection currents do not just go in a north-south  direction but 
swing to the east or west.  Given all this, at least  some of the energy 
that drives a windmill sitting in the trade  wind comes from solar energy.  
 I suspect that trying to work out  what proportion (if at all) comes from 
the spin of the earth is an  interesting maths/physics/engineering question.
  
  I shall pass it to my son to look at.
  
  Nigel
  
  
On 09/02/2014 06:41, Bob Cook wrote:
  
  

A better scheme to extractenergy from the Coriolis force is the 
spinning earth createsis to erect a windmill or your sailboat in 
the trade windswhich are caused by this effect. 

 

Bob

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

Nigel Dyer l...@thedyers.org.uk wrote:

 And the reply is that you cant change the total angular momentum of the
 system without reference to something external to said system (e.g. the
 moon) so a windmill (or an RAR engine) working within the system can take
 angular momentum from the earth (e.g. by spinning), but it will give it
 back when it stops . . .


Yes. The only way you can reduce the spin of the earth is to have the body
taking the angular momentum not stop. For example, you launch a rocket to
the east, and the rocket never returns to earth, going to Mars instead. The
rocket become something external to the system. The earth slows down. If
the rocket orbits and then lands back on earth, you get back the momentum.

A space elevator might use the earth's spin to launch spacecraft. It would
raise the outbound spacecraft above geosynchronous orbit. Think of a
passenger riding a train up a space elevator. Leaving the earth, the
passengers feels their weight from gravity far above the ground, gradually
fading. It would be zero as the train arrives in the terminal station at
geosynchronous orbit. Then the passengers would get into another train with
the floor upside-down, and the ceiling facing earth. They would travel a
few thousand kilometers above the terminal, toward the counter-weight that
keeps the space elevator from falling to earth. At some point they would
feel weight again. From there, they would board a spaceship, which is then
flung into space with as much force as the person feels in weight. It would
stress the tower, slightly, and tower would pull on the earth, slowing it
down, slightly.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.

But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight tube, the tube
would experience a lateral force and if allowed to move

against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.

 

Hoyt

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has its
apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra energy from
the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth rotates out from
beneath the original aim point.  A similar process must be happening to the
air flowing due to wind.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Nigel Dyer l...@thedyers.org.uk
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 10:12 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

And the reply is that you cant change the total angular momentum of the
system without reference to something external to said system (e.g. the
moon) so a windmill (or an RAR engine) working within the system can take
angular momentum from the earth (e.g. by spinning), but it will give it back
when it stops, and the earth will be spinning at the same rate and will not
have lost any angular momentum, so we wont have taken any energy from it.

If the RAR system is getting energy from the rotation of the earth it is
doing something with the conservation of angular momentum that current
physics cannot explain, and I would not expect that to come from a system
consisting of 50 tons of ironmongery.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 13:33, Nigel Dyer wrote:

The trade winds are driven primarily from the convection currents that take
their energy from solar heating.  The corriolis force means that the
convection currents do not just go in a north-south direction but swing to
the east or west.  Given all this, at least some of the energy that drives a
windmill sitting in the trade wind comes from solar energy.   I suspect that
trying to work out what proportion (if at all) comes from the spin of the
earth is an interesting maths/physics/engineering question.

I shall pass it to my son to look at.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 06:41, Bob Cook wrote:

A better scheme to extract energy from the Coriolis force is the spinning
earth creates is to erect a windmill or your sailboat in the trade winds
which are caused by this effect. 

 

Bob

 

 

 

 



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, 
whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths 
it comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract 
energy from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external 
body.  You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths 
more difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the 
pole and the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not 
sure that 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my 
son to do it), and that is what may have happened with the RAR 
machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces 
and moments which made it appear that it was possible to extract energy 
from the earths magnetic field.


Nigel

On 09/02/2014 16:16, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:


But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight tube, the 
tube would experience a lateral force and if allowed to move


against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.

Hoyt

*From:*David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has 
its apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra 
energy from the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth 
rotates out from beneath the original aim point.  A similar process 
must be happening to the air flowing due to wind.


Dave

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Bob Higgins

I thought the justifications for these mechanical over-unity machines came
from some kind of non-conservation during JERK (the derivative of
acceleration) and the machines were designed to produce jerk.  Does anyone
else remember the justification based on non-conservation during jerk?

Perhaps during jerk, angular momentum can be exchanged with linear momentum
or something.  I don't remember the argument.

Bob

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Nigel Dyer l...@thedyers.org.uk wrote:

  As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote:
 I thought the justifications for these mechanical over-unity machines came
 from some kind of non-conservation during JERK (the derivative of
 acceleration) and the machines were designed to produce jerk.  Does anyone
 else remember the justification based on non-conservation during jerk?



Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com

7/7/13
to vortex-l
Grimer seems to think it work:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=112238#112238

Grimer:

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:52 pmPost subject:   Another Claim to a
Working Device

Grimer wrote:
I think I am beginning to grasp one of the essential requirements for
a gravity mill.

One must have a closed path for the weights on one side of the main axle but no
closed path on the other.

In other words we must have at least two centres of motion for the weights.

We probably need three but preventing structure as a whole moving relative
to the earth will possibly give us the third.

LOL. It's all to do with the conservation of energy.

Each energy derivative is conserved. The two familiar ones are of
course the first and second derivatives, Momentum and Force x
distance. We can think off these as velocity energy and acceleration
energy. We could add conservation of heat within an insulated space as
a third familiar conservation.

But all derivatives must be conserved since we are talking in all
cases of more and more complicated examples of the basic conservation,
the conservation of momentum.

So jerk is conserved, snap is conserved, crackle is conserved, pop is
conserved and all higher as yet unnamed derivatives are also
conserved. Heat covers a range of derivatives depending on the number
of independent particle motions involved.

To return to the subject in hand, if we have a simple closed path
which weaves in and out towards a single axle centre then though we
have plenty of change in acceleration towards the centre (jerk), the
positive jerk on the one side is necessarily balanced by the negative
jerkon the other and so there is no net gain in energy.

However, if we have a major and a minor centre and we loop around the
minor centre on one side but not on the other then we have more jerk
energy on one side than the other. So we can use the jerk vector to
unbalance the wheel - which is basically what Trevor is trying to do -
and the Boys from Brazil as well for that matter.

end quote

Extensive discussion in this thread.

end archive post

Grimer was a former member of Vortex-l.

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.

You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian
problems from dynamics 101 can be so

mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

of problems.

 

Hoyt 

 

From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 

As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You
can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult
(our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and the
equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15
years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and
that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides
a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it appear
that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 16:16, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:

But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight tube, the tube
would experience a lateral force and if allowed to move

against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.

 

Hoyt

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has its
apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra energy from
the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth rotates out from
beneath the original aim point.  A similar process must be happening to the
air flowing due to wind.

Dave

 

 

 



 

 



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Eric Walker

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

So jerk is conserved, snap is conserved, crackle is conserved, pop is
  conserved and all higher as yet unnamed derivatives are also
 conserved.


If anyone is unfamiliar with or a little incredulous at the use of these
terms, they appear to be more than ones that Grimer coined.  In order of
increasing derivative of the position vector with respect to time, there is
velocity, acceleration, jerk and jounce.  Beyond jounce, the facetious
terms snap, crackle, and pop have been proposed although not
necessarily adopted [1].

I feel I'm getting a little more entertainment out of the explanation about
the use of the jerk vector to obtain energy from the unbalanced wheel than
I should.

Eric


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jounce

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of the
earth.

harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.netwrote:

 You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian
 problems from dynamics 101 can be so

 mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
 maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

 of problems.



 Hoyt



 *From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



 As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

 Nigel

 On 09/02/2014 16:16, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:

 But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight tube, the tube
 would experience a lateral force and if allowed to move

 against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.



 Hoyt



 *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com dlrober...@aol.com]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



 You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has its
 apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra energy
 from the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth rotates out
 from beneath the original aim point.  A similar process must be happening
 to the air flowing due to wind.

 Dave












 --
http://www.avast.com/

 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! 
 Antivirushttp://www.avast.com/protection is active.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence.

harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of
 the earth.

 harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 
 hoyt-stea...@cox.netwrote:

 You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian
 problems from dynamics 101 can be so

 mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
 maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

 of problems.



 Hoyt



 *From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



 As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

 Nigel

http://www.avast.com/

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Eric Walker

I wrote:

I feel I'm getting a little more entertainment out of the explanation about
 the use of the jerk vector to obtain energy from the unbalanced wheel than
 I should.


No double entendre intended.  The scheme just sounds so wishful and
fanciful that it's hard not to be a little amused by it.  That is not to
say it might not be getting at something interesting.  I'm equal parts
smirking at it and mystified by it.  Maybe there is a way to do an end run
around one of the third- or fourth-order derivatives of the position vector
in order to get the RAR to work.  Terry has pointed us to the description
of a fellow named Grimer; I do not recall if we have seen RAR's own
description of the theory behind their contraption.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Bob Cook

Nigel and Hoyt--Bob here--

I would say the trade winds are a good example of the extraction of energy from 
the rotation of the Earth.  Heat certainly is generated and Man has used these 
winds to cross the oceans for years.  
Nigel, what is the external body in the case of trade winds that is present for 
the extraction of energy from the Earth's rotation?

Bob
- Original Message - 
  From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 11:15 AM
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


  You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian 
problems from dynamics 101 can be so

  mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear 
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

  of problems.

   

  Hoyt 

   

  From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
  Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

   

  As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, 
whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it 
comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy from 
the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You can 
come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our 
gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and the equator was 
particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15 years later my 
brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and that is what may 
have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the 
analysis of the forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to 
extract energy from the earths magnetic field.

  Nigel

  On 09/02/2014 16:16, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:

But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight tube, the tube 
would experience a lateral force and if allowed to move

against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.

 

Hoyt

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell that has its 
apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is not given extra energy from 
the earth, but instead travels in a free path.  The earth rotates out from 
beneath the original aim point.  A similar process must be happening to the air 
flowing due to wind.

Dave

 

 

 

  

 

   




--
  This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus 
protection is active.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Oh, now I get the point.
You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation of
the earth then you put into the mechanism.

On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than generate
useful energy, then
such a mechanism would be considered useful.

:- /

harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence.

 harry

 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of
 the earth.

 harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net
  wrote:

 You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian
 problems from dynamics 101 can be so

 mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
 maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

 of problems.



 Hoyt



 *From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



 As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

 Nigel

http://www.avast.com/

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

The momentum borrowed by the pendulum will be returned once the pendulum comes 
to rest.  At that time, the earth will spin faster as required to keep the 
total angular momentum constant.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 3:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence. 


harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of the 
earth. 


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net 
wrote:


You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian 
problems from dynamics 101 can be so
mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear 
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
of problems.
 
Hoyt 
 

From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 
As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, whatever 
system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it comes up 
with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy from the 
rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You can come up 
with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our gyroscopes on 
railway tracks travelling between the pole and the equator was particularly 
'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15 years later my brain is still 
up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and that is what may have happened 
with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the 
forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to extract energy 
from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Solar heating sets up a set of convection cells - very simplisticly ; 
air rises at the equator, falls at approx 30 N rises at 60 and falls at 
the poles.   Without coriolis these would just go north-south.  With 
corriolis they end up with a substantial Westerly component; see 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_wind_patterns. The energy that 
drives this system is solar radiation from the sun heating the earth and 
causing the convection currents, and it is this that blows ships and 
windmills.


But, you will then ask, what drives the 300 mile an hour winds on 
Jupiter which is so much further from the sun?   It turns out that we 
dont really know, but it appears some people think that thermal energy 
from within the plant might be driving them.


Nigel

On 09/02/2014 21:32, Bob Cook wrote:

Nigel and Hoyt--Bob here--
I would say the trade winds are a good example of the extraction of 
energy from the rotation of the Earth.  Heat certainly is generated 
and Man has used these winds to cross the oceans for years.
Nigel, what is the external body in the case of trade winds that is 
present for the extraction of energy from the Earth's rotation?

Bob
- Original Message -

*From:* Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. mailto:hoyt-stea...@cox.net
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Sunday, February 09, 2014 11:15 AM
*Subject:* RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple
newtonian problems from dynamics 101 can be so

mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre
non-linear maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds

of problems.

Hoyt

*From:*Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on
this, whatever system you come up with, when you actually go
through the maths it comes up with the same answer, and that is
that you cannot extract energy from the rotation of the earth
without reference to some external body.  You can come up with
complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our
gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and the
equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure
that 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my
son to do it), and that is what may have happened with the RAR
machine. Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the
forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to
extract energy from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

On 09/02/2014 16:16, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote:

But if the shell is instead constrained inside a straight
tube, the tube would experience a lateral force and if allowed
to move

against an energy absorber, one could extract that energy.

Hoyt

*From:*David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 8:35 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

You make an excellent point Nigel.   Even an artillery shell
that has its apparent path diverted by the coriolis effect is
not given extra energy from the earth, but instead travels in
a free path.  The earth rotates out from beneath the original
aim point.  A similar process must be happening to the air
flowing due to wind.

Dave







http://www.avast.com/   

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast!
Antivirus http://www.avast.com/ protection is active.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


 You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry.  The two are not 
interchangeable.

Dave

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Oh, now I get the point.
You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation of the 
earth then you put into the mechanism.


On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than generate 
useful energy, then 
such a mechanism would be considered useful.

:- /


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence. 


harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of the 
earth. 


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net 
wrote:


You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian 
problems from dynamics 101 can be so
mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear 
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
of problems.
 
Hoyt 
 

From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 
As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, whatever 
system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it comes up 
with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy from the 
rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You can come up 
with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our gyroscopes on 
railway tracks travelling between the pole and the equator was particularly 
'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15 years later my brain is still 
up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and that is what may have happened 
with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the 
forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to extract energy 
from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the
rotation of the earth.
It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.

Harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

  You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry.  The two
 are not interchangeable.

 Dave


  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  Oh, now I get the point.
 You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation
 of the earth then you put into the mechanism.

  On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than
 generate useful energy, then
 such a mechanism would be considered useful.

 :- /

  harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a
 consequence.

  harry

 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

  Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation
 of the earth.

  harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 
 hoyt-stea...@cox.net wrote:

  You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple
 newtonian problems from dynamics 101 can be so
 mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
 maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
 of problems.

 Hoyt

  *From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

 Nigel
  http://www.avast.com/

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread Brad Lowe

The Gilman machine appears aligned North and South.
The building it is housed in is parallel to 600 East Rd.

https://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8client=firefox-aq=1793-1795+N+600+East+Rd,+Gilman,+IL+60938ie=UTF-8hq=hnear=0x880daff58a57d933:0xe98a8990679a2e17,1795+N+600+East+Rd,+Gilman,+IL+60938gl=usei=RaxIUvHcGYqo2wWnoYBAved=0CCsQ8gEwAA

This is from looking at Foto Oficial 07.
The back of the machine is on the East wall, lengthwise (and
longitudinally) running N-S.

- Brad

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:37 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the
rotation of the earth.
It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.

Harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry. The two
are not interchangeable.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Oh, now I get the point.
You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation
of the earth then you put into the mechanism.

On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than
generate useful energy, then
such a mechanism would be considered useful.

:- /

harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a
consequence.

harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation
of the earth.

harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.
hoyt-stea...@cox.net wrote:

You're undoubtedly right. It makes me wonder if these simple
newtonian problems from dynamics 101 can be so
mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
of problems.

Hoyt

*From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
*Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths
it
comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole
and
the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse. I'm not sure that
15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do
it),
and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine. Its complexity
hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
field.

Nigel
http://www.avast.com/

[Vo]:Re: [Vo] RAR gravity engine

2014-02-09 Thread MJ



The other machine built here in my city seems to be not aligned 
North/South.


http://goo.gl/maps/UOXzY

Mark Jordan


On 09-Feb-14 20:55, Brad Lowe wrote:

The Gilman machine appears aligned North and South.
The building it is housed in is parallel to 600 East Rd.

https://maps.google.com/maps?oe=utf-8client=firefox-aq=1793-1795+N+600+East+Rd,+Gilman,+IL+60938ie=UTF-8hq=hnear=0x880daff58a57d933:0xe98a8990679a2e17,1795+N+600+East+Rd,+Gilman,+IL+60938gl=usei=RaxIUvHcGYqo2wWnoYBAved=0CCsQ8gEwAA

This is from looking at Foto Oficial 07.
The back of the machine is on the East wall, lengthwise (and 
longitudinally) running N-S.


- Brad

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Strange as it may seem, any activation force or torque is going to result in a 
reaction that keeps the total momentum in balance.  When a bullet is fired from 
a gun momentum is conserved since the gun is driven backwards with an amount of 
momentum equal to that carried away by the bullet.  The gun is much heavier 
than the bullet so it recoils at a far lower velocity.  In this case the energy 
imparted upon the bullet is much greater than that delivered to the gun since 
energy is proportional to velocity squared.  That is a good reason to have a 
heavy weapon. :-)

Angular momentum works in a similar manner.  The key thing to remember is that 
both linear and angular momentums are conserved.  Any force you generate is 
matched by a reaction force of equal and opposite magnitude.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 5:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the rotation of 
the earth. 
It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.


Harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry.  The two are not 
interchangeable.

Dave

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Oh, now I get the point.
You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation of the 
earth then you put into the mechanism.


On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than generate 
useful energy, then 
such a mechanism would be considered useful.

:- /


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence. 


harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of the 
earth. 


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net 
wrote:


You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian 
problems from dynamics 101 can be so
mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear 
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
of problems.
 
Hoyt 
 

From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 
As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, whatever 
system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it comes up 
with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy from the 
rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You can come up 
with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our gyroscopes on 
railway tracks travelling between the pole and the equator was particularly 
'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15 years later my brain is still 
up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and that is what may have happened 
with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the 
forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to extract energy 
from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Yes, but those laws do not prohibit the Earth's rotation from being slowed
(or quickened) by means located only on the Earth. (e.g. on a smaller scale
a satellite's spin can be slowed by using the built in control thrusters.)
Those laws only say it is impossible to generate useful energy from the
Earth's rotation by means only located on the Earth.

Harry

On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Strange as it may seem, any activation force or torque is going to result
 in a reaction that keeps the total momentum in balance.  When a bullet is
 fired from a gun momentum is conserved since the gun is driven backwards
 with an amount of momentum equal to that carried away by the bullet.  The
 gun is much heavier than the bullet so it recoils at a far lower velocity.
 In this case the energy imparted upon the bullet is much greater than that
 delivered to the gun since energy is proportional to velocity squared.
 That is a good reason to have a heavy weapon. :-)

 Angular momentum works in a similar manner.  The key thing to remember is
 that both linear and angular momentums are conserved.  Any force you
 generate is matched by a reaction force of equal and opposite magnitude.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 5:37 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the
 rotation of the earth.
 It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.

  Harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

  You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry.  The two
 are not interchangeable.

 Dave


  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  Oh, now I get the point.
 You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation
 of the earth then you put into the mechanism.

  On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than
 generate useful energy, then
 such a mechanism would be considered useful.

 :- /

  harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a
 consequence.

  harry

 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

  Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation
 of the earth.

  harry


 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 
 hoyt-stea...@cox.net wrote:

  You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple
 newtonian problems from dynamics 101 can be so
 mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear
 maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
 of problems.

 Hoyt

  *From:* Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk]
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this,
 whatever system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths 
 it
 comes up with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy
 from the rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.
 You can come up with complicated systems that makes the maths more
 difficult (our gyroscopes on railway tracks travelling between the pole 
 and
 the equator was particularly 'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that
 15 years later my brain is still up to it, that why I get my son to do 
 it),
 and that is what may have happened with the RAR machine.   Its complexity
 hides a mistake in the analysis of the forces and moments which made it
 appear that it was possible to extract energy from the earths magnetic
 field.

 Nigel
  http://www.avast.com/

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

As you say, the rotation rate of the Earth can be modified by devices located 
on the earth.  The issue is that whatever you use to modify that rotation must 
not change the overall angular momentum of the system which includes the Earth 
and that device.   For example the bullet fired by the gun below could change 
that rotation rate until it comes to rest again on the Earth.  Of course, the 
rate could be changed if the bullet does not return to the exact same location 
as it began if you really want to get technical.  Remember, it is angular 
momentum that is conserved, not rotation rate alone.  The location of the 
bullet at rest might lead to a different moment of inertia for the system.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 8:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



Yes, but those laws do not prohibit the Earth's rotation from being slowed (or 
quickened) by means located only on the Earth. (e.g. on a smaller scale a 
satellite's spin can be slowed by using the built in control thrusters.) Those 
laws only say it is impossible to generate useful energy from the Earth's 
rotation by means only located on the Earth. 


Harry  


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

Strange as it may seem, any activation force or torque is going to result in a 
reaction that keeps the total momentum in balance.  When a bullet is fired from 
a gun momentum is conserved since the gun is driven backwards with an amount of 
momentum equal to that carried away by the bullet.  The gun is much heavier 
than the bullet so it recoils at a far lower velocity.  In this case the energy 
imparted upon the bullet is much greater than that delivered to the gun since 
energy is proportional to velocity squared.  That is a good reason to have a 
heavy weapon. :-)

Angular momentum works in a similar manner.  The key thing to remember is that 
both linear and angular momentums are conserved.  Any force you generate is 
matched by a reaction force of equal and opposite magnitude.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 5:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the rotation of 
the earth. 
It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.


Harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 5:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 You need to be thinking of momentum instead of energy Harry.  The two are not 
interchangeable.

Dave

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Oh, now I get the point.
You can't build a mechanism which extracts more energy from the rotation of the 
earth then you put into the mechanism.


On the other hand, if the goal is to lengthen the day rather than generate 
useful energy, then 
such a mechanism would be considered useful.

:- /


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:09 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

...and the rotational speed of the earth will descrease as a consequence. 


harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 3:06 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


Focault's pendulum could be used to extract energy from the rotation of the 
earth. 


harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net 
wrote:


You're undoubtedly right.  It makes me wonder if these simple newtonian 
problems from dynamics 101 can be so
mind blowing, what's the chances of analyzing these bizarre non-linear 
maxwellian/relativistic/quantum mechanical kinds
of problems.
 
Hoyt 
 

From: Nigel Dyer [mailto:l...@thedyers.org.uk] 
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 
As I found out some years ago when I spent a couple of months on this, whatever 
system you come up with, when you actually go through the maths it comes up 
with the same answer, and that is that you cannot extract energy from the 
rotation of the earth without reference to some external body.  You can come up 
with complicated systems that makes the maths more difficult (our gyroscopes on 
railway tracks travelling between the pole and the equator was particularly 
'interesting' to analyse.  I'm not sure that 15 years later my brain is still 
up to it, that why I get my son to do it), and that is what may have happened 
with the RAR machine.   Its complexity hides a mistake in the analysis of the 
forces and moments which made it appear that it was possible to extract energy 
from the earths magnetic field.

Nigel

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

So if you could extract useful energy from the earth's rotation it would
mean it is possible to violate the conservation of angular momentum.

Harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 8:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 As you say, the rotation rate of the Earth can be modified by devices
 located on the earth.  The issue is that whatever you use to modify that
 rotation must not change the overall angular momentum of the system which
 includes the Earth and that device.   For example the bullet fired by the
 gun below could change that rotation rate until it comes to rest again on
 the Earth.  Of course, the rate could be changed if the bullet does not
 return to the exact same location as it began if you really want to get
 technical.  Remember, it is angular momentum that is conserved, not
 rotation rate alone.  The location of the bullet at rest might lead to a
 different moment of inertia for the system.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 8:09 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  Yes, but those laws do not prohibit the Earth's rotation from being
 slowed (or quickened) by means located only on the Earth. (e.g. on a
 smaller scale a satellite's spin can be slowed by using the built in
 control thrusters.) Those laws only say it is impossible to generate useful
 energy from the Earth's rotation by means only located on the Earth.

  Harry

 On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Strange as it may seem, any activation force or torque is going to
 result in a reaction that keeps the total momentum in balance.  When a
 bullet is fired from a gun momentum is conserved since the gun is driven
 backwards with an amount of momentum equal to that carried away by the
 bullet.  The gun is much heavier than the bullet so it recoils at a far
 lower velocity.  In this case the energy imparted upon the bullet is much
 greater than that delivered to the gun since energy is proportional to
 velocity squared.  That is a good reason to have a heavy weapon. :-)

 Angular momentum works in a similar manner.  The key thing to remember is
 that both linear and angular momentums are conserved.  Any force you
 generate is matched by a reaction force of equal and opposite magnitude.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 5:37 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the
 rotation of the earth.
 It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.

  Harry

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


So if you could extract useful energy from the earth's rotation it would mean 
it is possible to violate the conservation of angular momentum.

Harry, are you trying to set a sneaky word trap?  Closed system is the key 
phrase here.  You can borrow angular momentum from one portion of the closed 
system to give to another portion but the overall angular momentum of the 
system is conserved.  Therefore, you can not take angular momentum from a 
closed system and turn it into heat.  You can take angular energy that is 
typically available in a rotating closed system and convert that into heat such 
as with a braking device.  That is different.  The RAR device might somehow 
borrow angular momentum from the Earth for a period of time, but the complete 
system momentum will be conserved.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 9:02 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


So if you could extract useful energy from the earth's rotation it would mean 
it is possible to violate the conservation of angular momentum.


Harry




On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 8:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

As you say, the rotation rate of the Earth can be modified by devices located 
on the earth.  The issue is that whatever you use to modify that rotation must 
not change the overall angular momentum of the system which includes the Earth 
and that device.   For example the bullet fired by the gun below could change 
that rotation rate until it comes to rest again on the Earth.  Of course, the 
rate could be changed if the bullet does not return to the exact same location 
as it began if you really want to get technical.  Remember, it is angular 
momentum that is conserved, not rotation rate alone.  The location of the 
bullet at rest might lead to a different moment of inertia for the system.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 8:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



Yes, but those laws do not prohibit the Earth's rotation from being slowed (or 
quickened) by means located only on the Earth. (e.g. on a smaller scale a 
satellite's spin can be slowed by using the built in control thrusters.) Those 
laws only say it is impossible to generate useful energy from the Earth's 
rotation by means only located on the Earth. 


Harry  


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

Strange as it may seem, any activation force or torque is going to result in a 
reaction that keeps the total momentum in balance.  When a bullet is fired from 
a gun momentum is conserved since the gun is driven backwards with an amount of 
momentum equal to that carried away by the bullet.  The gun is much heavier 
than the bullet so it recoils at a far lower velocity.  In this case the energy 
imparted upon the bullet is much greater than that delivered to the gun since 
energy is proportional to velocity squared.  That is a good reason to have a 
heavy weapon. :-)

Angular momentum works in a similar manner.  The key thing to remember is that 
both linear and angular momentums are conserved.  Any force you generate is 
matched by a reaction force of equal and opposite magnitude.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 5:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


The initial momentum of the pendulum does not have to come from the rotation of 
the earth. 
It could come from some chemical energy such as a muscle or a bomb.


Harry

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

I am not sure what we are arguing about here.

Harry


On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:41 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:


 So if you could extract useful energy from the earth's rotation it would
 mean it is possible to violate the conservation of angular momentum.

 Harry, are you trying to set a sneaky word trap?  Closed system is the key
 phrase here.  You can borrow angular momentum from one portion of the
 closed system to give to another portion but the overall angular momentum
 of the system is conserved.  Therefore, you can not take *angular
 momentum* from a closed system and turn it into heat.  You can take *angular
 energy* that is typically available in a rotating closed system and
 convert that into heat such as with a braking device.  That is different.
 The RAR device might somehow borrow angular momentum from the Earth for a
 period of time, but the complete system momentum will be conserved.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 9:02 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  So if you could extract useful energy from the earth's rotation it would
 mean it is possible to violate the conservation of angular momentum.

  Harry

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.

Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of the earth, i.e. 

Coriolis effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect 

( which as I look at it, is a fudge factor needed to account for anomalies
when you assume you're

in an inertial frame of reference, but really aren't due to the rotation of
the earth.).

 

One could extract energy from the earth by raising a weight vertically, then
letting it fall

whilst letting it's east-west tendency generate force X distance.  For
example if the

surface of the earth is moving at 1000 km/hour and you raise a weight such
that the speed is

now 1001 km/hour, as you let it fall you could extract 1 km/hour of kinetic
energy from it.

 

I think that'd be a pretty small effect, hence the huge machine to get
anything useful.

It would be interesting to see if it's orientation was north-south along its
rotational axis.

 

Hoyt Stearns

Scottsdale, Arizona US

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

 

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Jed Rothwell 
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 

 Actually, the person you want to convince is Terry Blanton. He is our 

 resident expert in magnetic motors. He says he looked at some of them 

 closely and found they did not work.

 

Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .

every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.

But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Jones Beene

From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 

Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of
the earth, i.e. 
Coriolis effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect 

Hoyt,

Do we know the alignment of the structure which is housing the device? Your
explanation only works as a longitudinal effect, correct? I like the
explanation, because it does seem to require the large mass - and the device
undoubtedly is asymmetrical in one vector. The crankshaft would need to be
on the West facing wall.

It would be amusing if this were true and builders did not realize it - so
that the one in Brazil works, but the one in Illinois was not aligned
correctly :-)

According to Wiki the Eötvös effect would be the change in perceived
gravitational force caused by the change in centrifugal acceleration
resulting from eastbound or westbound velocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B6tv%C3%B6s_effect


attachment: winmail.dat

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Jones Beene

Pretty good explanation

http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/eotvos.php

Here is how close it cuts. At 60 degrees latitude, any object co-moving with
the Earth has its weight reduced by about 0.08 percent, thanks to the
Earth's rotation... snip... but you only can capture half of that on paper,
less friction, so the difference for 10,000 kg weight due to this East-West
asymmetry is about 4 kg in measured weight, or perhaps about 400 ppm. 

Very doubtful a gain of 400 ppm will cover the losses due to friction and
windage.


From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. 

Perhaps the energy is coming from the
rotational energy of the earth, i.e. 
Coriolis effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect 

Hoyt,

Do we know the alignment of the structure which is housing
the device? Your explanation only works as a longitudinal effect, correct? I
like the explanation, because it does seem to require the large mass - and
the device undoubtedly is asymmetrical in one vector. The crankshaft would
need to be on the West facing wall.

It would be amusing if this were true and builders did not
realize it - so that the one in Brazil works, but the one in Illinois was
not aligned correctly :-)

According to Wiki the Eötvös effect would be the change in
perceived gravitational force caused by the change in centrifugal
acceleration resulting from eastbound or westbound velocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B6tv%C3%B6s_effect


attachment: winmail.dat

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.

But it's not the reduction in weight I'm referring to, it's the velocity
increase of the mass as it rises ( rω ) which absorbs energy from the earth.

Hoyt

_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 8:05 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Pretty good explanation

http://www.cleonis.nl/physics/phys256/eotvos.php

Here is how close it cuts. At 60 degrees latitude, any object co-moving with
the Earth has its weight reduced by about 0.08 percent, thanks to the
Earth's rotation… snip… but you only can capture half of that on paper, less
friction, so the difference for 10,000 kg weight due to this East-West
asymmetry is about 4 kg in measured weight, or perhaps about 400 ppm.

Very doubtful a gain of 400 ppm will cover the losses due to friction and
windage.

From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.

Perhaps the energy is coming from the
rotational energy of the earth, i.e.
Coriolis effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

Hoyt,

Do we know the alignment of the structure which is housing
the device? Your explanation only works as a longitudinal effect, correct? I
like the explanation, because it does seem to require the large mass - and
the device undoubtedly is asymmetrical in one vector. The crankshaft would
need to be on the West facing wall.

It would be amusing if this were true and builders did not
realize it – so that the one in Brazil works, but the one in Illinois was
not aligned correctly :-)

According to Wiki the Eötvös effect would be the change in
perceived gravitational force caused by the change in centrifugal
acceleration resulting from eastbound or westbound velocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%C3%B6tv%C3%B6s_effect

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection 
is active.
http://www.avast.com
attachment: winmail.dat

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread a.ashfield

Jed Rothwell 
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Jed+Rothwell%22 
Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:00:37 -0800 
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20140207


a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:


Let it run for a long time on a glass table.

There is always some claim.  It has a battery hidden in it etc.



It is easy to eliminate that objection. Weigh the entire device and compute
how much energy it could hold if the entire device is a battery.

I am not sympathetic to inventors who will not make such an obvious
demonstration and evaluation because they say there will be objections
like this. It is easy to overrule such objections.


The ultimate claim is that the observers are all paid and in on the 
fraud. For example, I have read that the Elforsk test of the Hot Cat 
can't be believed because (a) Levi is a biased friend  (b) power was 
surreptitiously run to the device.  (c) the heat measurements were in 
error.  (d) the report was not peer reviewed.


The fact remains, the Elforsk test should have been enough to persuade 
other scientists that LENR was real but it hasn't.  DOE still have not 
changed their policy.  No government organization is talking about LENR 
being the solution but just about funding ITER, solar power and wind 
turbines.   I haven't seen one article in the mainstream press that 
states categorically LENR is proven.  I tend to believe Rossi's comment 
that it will only be accepted after commercial units are out in the 
market place.


There is no scientific explanation for the RAR device.  Apart from being 
a spectacular machine that looks worthy of being in a museum, the only 
reason to believe it works is the thought that no one would build a 
second machine if it didn't.  We will just have to wait and see.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Jed Rothwell

a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

 The ultimate claim is that the observers are all paid and in on the fraud.
 For example, I have read that the Elforsk test of the Hot Cat can't be
 believed because (a) Levi is a biased friend  (b) power was surreptitiously
 run to the device.  (c) the heat measurements were in error.  (d) the
 report was not peer reviewed.


Objections such as these cannot be tested or falsified by ordinary means,
so they should be ignored. I meant technical objections.

The surreptitious power objection is a fantasy objection, not technical.
The skeptics cannot come up with an actual, testable scenario for this, so
we should ignore it.



 The fact remains, the Elforsk test should have been enough to persuade
 other scientists that LENR was real but it hasn't.


That is incorrect. Many scientists were persuaded -- or at le. So was the
management at ELFORSK. The people in North Carolina cited the test, so
evidently they were impressed.



   DOE still have not changed their policy.  No government organization is
 talking about LENR being the solution but just about funding ITER, solar
 power and wind turbines.


Government agencies will be the last to admit cold fusion is real. The DoE
in particular has gone out an a limb denying it. We do not need them at
this stage.



I haven't seen one article in the mainstream press that states
 categorically LENR is proven.


Again, they will be among the last to be convinced. The mass media never
takes chances or does controversial things, or things the may look foolish.
They did not even take sides in the recent debate over creationism between
Nye and Ham. They will not do that because a large fraction of the U.S.
population agrees with the young earth creationists, and the mass media
outlets cannot afford to alienate people and lose customers.



   I tend to believe Rossi's comment that it will only be accepted after
 commercial units are out in the market place.


Probably, but now that there is serious funding, it is more likely that
commercial units will be made.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread David Roberson

You have an interesting concept Hoyt.  Most of us are quite skeptical of a 
machine that generates work from out of thin air, but if the Earth's rotation 
slows down by the action of this device, perhaps so.

You need to estimate the amount of energy that could be extracted in your 
proposed method before assuming that you have the problem solved.  I like your 
idea of raising a mass upwards in the y direction and then dropping it.

It should be possible to calculate the amount of energy added in the x 
direction due to rotation of the Earth.  My gut feeling is that the extra 
energy is very tiny.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 8, 2014 8:18 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of the earth, i.e. 
Coriolis effect
( which as I look at it, is a fudge factor needed to account for anomalies when 
you assume you're
in an inertial frame of reference, but really aren't due to the rotation of the 
earth.).
 
One could extract energy from the earth by raising a weight vertically, then 
letting it fall
whilst letting it's east-west tendency generate force X distance.  For example 
if the
surface of the earth is moving at 1000 km/hour and you raise a weight such that 
the speed is
now 1001 km/hour, as you let it fall you could extract 1 km/hour of kinetic 
energy from it.
 
I think that'd be a pretty small effect, hence the huge machine to get anything 
useful.
It would be interesting to see if it's orientation was north-south along its 
rotational axis.
 
Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona US
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine
 
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Actually, the person you want to convince is Terry Blanton. He is our 
 resident expert in magnetic motors. He says he looked at some of them 
 closely and found they did not work.
 
Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .
every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.
But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.










This email is free from viruses and malware 
because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .
 every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.
 But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.

Just to give you an idea of how far we went, this assembly of spiral
magnet cost over $100k.

http://imgur.com/c4dGBtI

Exciting night when this puppy came in.  For scale, the machinist is about 5'4.

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Jones Beene

Was the clear fluid in the stemmed glasses and important part of the design?

Some kind of special lubricant, perhaps :)

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 

 Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .
 every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.
 But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.

Just to give you an idea of how far we went, this assembly of spiral
magnet cost over $100k.

http://imgur.com/c4dGBtI

Exciting night when this puppy came in.  For scale, the machinist is about
5'4.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread David Roberson

Terry, did you come to the conclusion that most if not all of these magnet 
motors operated by extracting the energy stored within the magnets?  Of course, 
that would imply that only a finite amount of total energy could be extracted.

I would be afraid to remain close to the motor pictured.  How much force is 
internally generated and could it self destruct?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 8, 2014 2:05 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .
 every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.
 But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.

Just to give you an idea of how far we went, this assembly of spiral
magnet cost over $100k.

http://imgur.com/c4dGBtI

Exciting night when this puppy came in.  For scale, the machinist is about 5'4.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:41 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
 Terry, did you come to the conclusion that most if not all of these magnet
 motors operated by extracting the energy stored within the magnets?  Of
 course, that would imply that only a finite amount of total energy could be
 extracted.

The only pure magnet motor used magnets in opposition and those would
rapidly deplete their strength.  You can also take a hammer and tap on
a magnet and accomplish the same thing.

All others used some type of electrical assist.

 I would be afraid to remain close to the motor pictured.  How much force is
 internally generated and could it self destruct?

It was a concern.  We had a prony brake in case of runaway.  Alas, we
never got it to run since we could not get the solenoid close enough
to the sticky spot due to the required size.

I was just an advisor and on-looker for the first 18 months.  I got
suspicious when the prony brakes showed much lower torque than the
$15,000 meter.  I got permission from the angel investor to work
without anyone present one weekend lifting weights with the motors;
and, well, none of them were OU.  You can't fool gravity.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
 Was the clear fluid in the stemmed glasses and important part of the design?

 Some kind of special lubricant, perhaps :)

We were exhausted after mounting that 600 lb monster in the frame.  It
kept jerking our chain lift out of our hands.  One metal hook actually
chipped the magnet.

We needed lubricating after that.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Blaze Spinnaker

Yes, some combination of that and tidal forces from the moon, perhaps.


On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.netwrote:

 Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of the earth, i.e.

 Coriolis effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

 ( which as I look at it, is a fudge factor needed to account for anomalies
 when you assume you're

 in an inertial frame of reference, but really aren't due to the rotation
 of the earth.).



 One could extract energy from the earth by raising a weight vertically,
 then letting it fall

 whilst letting it's east-west tendency generate force X distance.  For
 example if the

 surface of the earth is moving at 1000 km/hour and you raise a weight such
 that the speed is

 now 1001 km/hour, as you let it fall you could extract 1 km/hour of
 kinetic energy from it.



 I think that'd be a pretty small effect, hence the huge machine to get
 anything useful.

 It would be interesting to see if it's orientation was north-south along
 its rotational axis.



 Hoyt Stearns

 Scottsdale, Arizona US







 -Original Message-
 From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine



 On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:



  Actually, the person you want to convince is Terry Blanton. He is our

  resident expert in magnetic motors. He says he looked at some of them

  closely and found they did not work.



 Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .

 every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.

 But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.


 --
http://www.avast.com/

 This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! 
 Antivirushttp://www.avast.com/protection is active.

RE: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread MarkI-ZeroPoint

Geez Terry, three people standing around drinking white wine, while watching
one guy do all the work!
Can I get a job there??
;-)
-m

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 11:06 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .
 every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.
 But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.

Just to give you an idea of how far we went, this assembly of spiral magnet
cost over $100k.

http://imgur.com/c4dGBtI

Exciting night when this puppy came in.  For scale, the machinist is about
5'4.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:45 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
 Geez Terry, three people standing around drinking white wine, while watching
 one guy do all the work!
 Can I get a job there??

We had the worker and

Quality Inspector
Safety Officer
Project Manager
Trade Labor Foreman

Standard government project.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-08 Thread Bob Cook

A better scheme to extract energy from the Coriolis force is the spinning earth 
creates is to erect a windmill or your sailboat in the trade winds which are 
caused by this effect. 

Bob

- Original Message - 
  From: Blaze Spinnaker 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 4:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

  Yes, some combination of that and tidal forces from the moon, perhaps.

  On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net 
wrote:

Perhaps the energy is coming from the rotational energy of the earth, i.e. 

Coriolis effect

( which as I look at it, is a fudge factor needed to account for anomalies 
when you assume you're

in an inertial frame of reference, but really aren't due to the rotation of 
the earth.).

One could extract energy from the earth by raising a weight vertically, 
then letting it fall

whilst letting it's east-west tendency generate force X distance.  For 
example if the

surface of the earth is moving at 1000 km/hour and you raise a weight such 
that the speed is

now 1001 km/hour, as you let it fall you could extract 1 km/hour of kinetic 
energy from it.

I think that'd be a pretty small effect, hence the huge machine to get 
anything useful.

It would be interesting to see if it's orientation was north-south along 
its rotational axis.

Hoyt Stearns

Scottsdale, Arizona US

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 12:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Actually, the person you want to convince is Terry Blanton. He is our 

 resident expert in magnetic motors. He says he looked at some of them 

 closely and found they did not work.

Skeptical by experience.  We tested spirals, pulsed, shielded . . .

every configuration we could imagine and found them conservative.

But, I'm still open if someone has a new idea.

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! 
Antivirus protection is active.

[Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

RAR are progressing with the construction of their second gravity 
engine and posted four new photos today.
Presumably they have now had some operating experience of the first 
model yet continue to build the second one.

http://www.rarenergia.com.br/gilman%20oficial%2019%20eng.JPG

ref 
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ensl=ptu=http://www.rarenergia.com.br/prev=/search%3Fq%3DRAR%2Benergia%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3Dfmx%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

2014-02-07 Thread Mark Gibbs

Is there an explanation somewhere of how this machine is supposed to work?
Who's funding the projects?

[m]


On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 1:29 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

  RAR are progressing with the construction of their second gravity
 engine and posted four new photos today.
 Presumably they have now had some operating experience of the first model
 yet continue to build the second one.
 http://www.rarenergia.com.br/gilman%20oficial%2019%20eng.JPG

 ref
 http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=ensl=ptu=http://www.rarenergia.com.br/prev=/search%3Fq%3DRAR%2Benergia%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3Dfmx%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Mark,
Click on the second link.
Starting at image #53 (and later) there are some diagrams.  If you can 
understand how it works from those, or from the patent, please let me 
know ;-)

It is the brainchild of RAR Energia and funded by them

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

It is wonderful in a way, but why not build a desktop version? Even if it
produces only milliwatts excess, if it can overcome friction and keep going
it will convince everyone.

After the superconducting supercollider was abandoned, some Young Turk
physicists began to rethink the whole idea. I read that some of them have
come up with desktop-scale machines that accomplish some of the goals of
the supercollider. That's how you are supposed to do science. I wish Rossi
would scale down. His 1 MW reactor was, in its own way, as nutty as the RAR
megamachine or the supercollider.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

I wrote:

It is wonderful in a way, but why not build a desktop version? Even if it
 produces only milliwatts excess, if it can overcome friction and keep going
 it will convince everyone.


Maybe it can't overcome friction? Maybe the gadget resembles a Tokamak, as
in: You can't make a small one work. It's gotta be big. Or to paraphrase
the potato chip commercial, you can't heat just one.

You can make a small plasma machine. I don't recall why ITER has to be so
big. Is that the only size that can be self-sustaining, with a fully
ignited reaction? That is weird. I get that a star has to be big, but why a
Tokamak?

And why do they make laser fusion gadgets so huge? See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NOVA_laser.jpg

Note the person in the middle, looking up at the boxes. Question: What is
he thinking? Can anyone supply a punch line?

How about: It is true what they say. These things *do* look like Rossi's 1
MW reactor modules. You don't suppose?!?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Jed wrote:
It is wonderful in a way, but why not build a desktop version? Even if 
it produces only milliwatts excess, if it can overcome friction and keep 
going it will convince everyone.


They claimed they had a small model working first.  I think you need 
something bigger to be believed and attract attention.  There are 
several small magnet motors that the inventors claim work but no one 
believes them.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:


 They claimed they had a small model working first.  I think you need
 something bigger to be believed and attract attention.


Okay, but surely not THIS big!



  There are several small magnet motors that the inventors claim work but
 no one believes them.


Many people would believe them if they would perform a proper
demonstration. It is not difficult to define what constitutes proper in
this context. Let it run for a long time on a glass table.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine


Jed wrote:
Okay, but surely not THIS big!

Ah, but you missed the bit about getting attention.

 AA  There are several small magnet motors that the inventors claim 
work but no one believes them. 


Many people would believe them if they would perform a proper 
demonstration. It is not difficult to define what constitutes proper 
in this context. Let it run for a long time on a glass table.


There is always some claim.  It has a battery hidden in it etc.   If 
some recognized university would run a test they might be believed, but 
it is beneath their dignity or they don't want to be seen considering 
something contrary to mainstream theories.  LENR is a good example.

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine