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
